Thread Drift: Was Casting Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy rather than MJ a mistake?

[Kevinroc]

I guess that's what I don't understand: What is bad about buying Stone cast as anyone? For me, it just means that she is really talented and enjoyable. I'm not sure how it's a bad thing, as it relates to the movies...?

Because those movies infamously underperformed, to the point that Sony rushed off to make a deal with Marvel to save their sinking Spider-Man film franchise. We're discussing how Sony got themselves into this mess. If Spider-Man had performed as well as Sony wanted, there would have been no deal with Marvel.

So yes, casting Stone as Gwen was a huge mistake.

[Totoro Man]

Also Gwen is just a weak character from the comics. They made her into MJ to pull off making her so interesting. At any rate it is risky killing a top actor, especially when that actor's character is so developed. In this case, I too felt all interest in the franchise leave me when she died. Whats left to follow if not for Peter and Gwen? The parent story (bleh!) and a whole bunch of completely undeveloped characters.

And part of it is that they made her death no one's fault but her own. No story gravitas to that whatsoever. She died a modern woman, I guess, not as a damsel in distress. Maybe that was the goal.

Gwen Stacy didn't really become a weak character for me until after the death of her father AND when Stan Lee stopped writing her. they made her a moody, weepy clinger and she became a different character from the one we saw in her first appearances. she became a weak character when writers stopped knowing what to do with her and killed her off.

MJ was transformed as well-- the original MJ was really-- well, she was kinda annoying and superficial. she could also be callous and ruthless. she was an attractive character but not a very interesting or likeable character.... not for me. eventually they overhauled her character considerably and made her what she is today.

Gwen worked as well in the TASM franchise because they didn't base her on the original MJ. if they'd based her on THAT version of MJ people would dismiss her as a vain, manipulative, and superficial twit.

casting Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy wasn't a mistake in my opinion. I think the mistake was slavishly adhering to comics continuity when they should have simply done their own thing. there's no reason to kill of a character in a film just because that's how it was done in the comics. I felt like killing off George Stacy in the first film was a bigger blunder. spending so much time on Parker's parents was a bigger blunder still.

and part of the problem with TASM is that their version of Peter Parker isn't especially bright or thoughtful. if it weren't for the intervention of Gwen and George Stacy Spiderman would have evolved into a hero-- he would have been a Punisher-lite with super powers. he also would have been killed several times over before the second movie even happened. a fellow I knew joked, "well, now that both George and Gwen are dead there's no more Stacy's left to sacrifice themselves to overcompensate for how stupid Spiderman's been." it's a harsh assessment-- there were many things wrong with TASM1 and 2. but I don't think casting Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy was one of those things.

if all interest in the franchise vanished when they killed off her character that says that they didn't do their job properly. I mean, we should find Parker compelling and interesting enough in his own right that we want to find out what happens to him, right? how does he cope with this? but they handled it so badly that it became impossible to care. all that time wasted on the parents in TASM1 and 2 could have been spent on fleshing out the Stacy family more-- or Dr. Conners-- I'm rambling... while I enjoyed TASM in spite of it's flaws TASM2 was a trainwreck of a story for me.

[Frontier]

Because those movies infamously underperformed, to the point that Sony rushed off to make a deal with Marvel to save their sinking Spider-Man film franchise. We're discussing how Sony got themselves into this mess. If Spider-Man had performed as well as Sony wanted, there would have been no deal with Marvel.

So yes, casting Stone as Gwen was a huge mistake.

Or to be more specific casting Stone as a character intended to die eventually served as one of the death knells to the Amazing franchise, since killing off what had become a beloved character by audiences didn't leave the film much to continue from.

Stone, and her chemistry with Garfield, were one of the few (if only) elements of ASM2 that was received positively, and without that audiences had even less reason to care about another Spider-Man movie.

[Daniel22]

Or to be more specific casting Stone as a character intended to die eventually served as one of the death knells to the Amazing franchise, since killing off what had become a beloved character by audiences didn't leave the film much to continue from.

Stone, and her chemistry with Garfield, were one of the few (if only) elements of ASM2 that was received positively, and without that audiences had even less reason to care about another Spider-Man movie.

I see what you are saying. I am not sure how many viable alternatives they had, though.. I agree with Totoro Man in that killing Gwen was more of the mistake. It would have been a great, unexpected twist for hardcore fans to see her live. The couple tens of thousands (maybe) comic-reading fans who would have been upset would have been overwhelmingly outweighed by the fans who didn't have any idea who Gwen was going into the movie.

It seems like they were more the victims of their own success, i.e Stone being such a home run. I can't really call fantastic casting and a great acting performance a mistake. It left them with a lot to live up to, but that is a great "problem" to have. It's like criticizing Golden State for drafting Steph Curry, who just won a championship and an MVP; sure, technically, there's nowhere to go but down, but 29 other teams would love to have that problem.

[Kevinroc]

I see what you are saying. I am not sure how many viable alternatives they had, though.. I agree with Totoro Man in that killing Gwen was more of the mistake. It would have been a great, unexpected twist for hardcore fans to see her live. The couple tens of thousands (maybe) comic-reading fans who would have been upset would have been overwhelmingly outweighed by the fans who didn't have any idea who Gwen was going into the movie.

It seems like they were more the victims of their own success, i.e Stone being such a home run. I can't really call fantastic casting and a great acting performance a mistake. It left them with a lot to live up to, but that is a great "problem" to have. It's like criticizing Golden State for drafting Steph Curry, who just won a championship and an MVP; sure, technically, there's nowhere to go but down, but 29 other teams would love to have that problem.

Considering Sony made a deal with Marvel to reboot the franchise after the two lowest grossing Spider-Man films, is it really a case of being a "victim of their own success?"

[Confuzzled]

Gwen Stacy didn't really become a weak character for me until after the death of her father AND when Stan Lee stopped writing her. they made her a moody, weepy clinger and she became a different character from the one we saw in her first appearances. she became a weak character when writers stopped knowing what to do with her and killed her off.

MJ was transformed as well-- the original MJ was really-- well, she was kinda annoying and superficial. she could also be callous and ruthless. she was an attractive character but not a very interesting or likeable character.... not for me. eventually they overhauled her character considerably and made her what she is today.

Gwen worked as well in the TASM franchise because they didn't base her on the original MJ. if they'd based her on THAT version of MJ people would dismiss her as a vain, manipulative, and superficial twit.

casting Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy wasn't a mistake in my opinion. I think the mistake was slavishly adhering to comics continuity when they should have simply done their own thing. there's no reason to kill of a character in a film just because that's how it was done in the comics. I felt like killing off George Stacy in the first film was a bigger blunder. spending so much time on Parker's parents was a bigger blunder still.

and part of the problem with TASM is that their version of Peter Parker isn't especially bright or thoughtful. if it weren't for the intervention of Gwen and George Stacy Spiderman would have evolved into a hero-- he would have been a Punisher-lite with super powers. he also would have been killed several times over before the second movie even happened. a fellow I knew joked, "well, now that both George and Gwen are dead there's no more Stacy's left to sacrifice themselves to overcompensate for how stupid Spiderman's been." it's a harsh assessment-- there were many things wrong with TASM1 and 2. but I don't think casting Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy was one of those things.

if all interest in the franchise vanished when they killed off her character that says that they didn't do their job properly. I mean, we should find Parker compelling and interesting enough in his own right that we want to find out what happens to him, right? how does he cope with this? but they handled it so badly that it became impossible to care. all that time wasted on the parents in TASM1 and 2 could have been spent on fleshing out the Stacy family more-- or Dr. Conners-- I'm rambling... while I enjoyed TASM in spite of it's flaws TASM2 was a trainwreck of a story for me.

1) Gwen started to unravel as a character as soon as MJ arrived on the scene. Stan decided to reduce Gwen to goodie two shoes so to serve as the foil to MJ's happy-go-lucky 60's party girl, and that was the beginning of the end for Gwen. Regarding MJ's characterization, I keep repeating this because people keep forgetting, but she had absolutely no thought bubbles throughout the Lee/Romita run. All we knew of her was what she chose to present on the outside, giving later writers like Conway the perfect opportunity to reveal her superficial act as a facade.

2) Gwen wasn't necessarily based off the Lee/Romita MJ but she was definitely more similar to Ultimate MJ than to 616 Gwen herself.

3) The direction Sony chose to take in regards to the romance, was them forcing themselves into a corner. The only reasons Sony chose Gwen was because she was the best known alternative to MJ, who was already used in the Raimi trilogy, and because Gwen was the "girlfriend who died", which must have definitely seemed to Sony like a lucrative tale to milk at a time when "dark and gritty" was the catchphrase for superhero movies coming off the immensely successful The Dark Knight. Then they decided to cast Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy so as to ensure Gwen's death had the maximum impact. But what they failed to take into account was that the Mary Jane actress following her had to be even more charismatic and have more chemistry with Andrew Garfield's Peter Parker. An incredibly tall order indeed. That's what Kevinroc means when he says Sony casting Emma Stone as Gwen, the love interest who would die, was a major mistake, a mistake which ultimately ended the rebooted franchise because seriously, the romance was all that it had going for it.

[Mister Mets]

That's not what I'm talking about. What I'm talking about is doing the Gwen Stacy story was one of the things that ultimately killed this franchise. That's why it was a mistake. Casting one of the most popular actresses as Spider-Man's dead girlfriend was a mistake.

You said it yourself. You'd have loved Stone if she played MJ.

The Daniel Craig James Bond films did okay despite killing off Eva Green's character. The Nolan bat-films made a fortune even with the death of Rachel Dawes.

Constructing ASM with Stone as MJ instead of Gwen already changes the movie we got. Beyond the parents story. That probably stays in (unfortunately).

But I still believe it was a mistake to cast Stone as Gwen. And in hindsight, I don't understand how it can be argued that casting Stone as Gwen wasn't a terrible idea.

An ASM with Stone as MJ probably gets you Stone as the Ultimate MJ, which would still be a very similar character. The main difference would be in Captain Stacy, although I'm sure they could figure out a way to figure out an authority figure who doesn't trust Spider-Man.

[eSoldier]

I don't think casting Ms. Stone as Gwen Stacy was a mistake. Her performace and character was one of the better parts of the movies. I just wish that they hadn't killed her off...yet. She problablly would have made an equally good Marry Jane as well.

[David Walton]

The Daniel Craig James Bond films did okay despite killing off Eva Green's character. The Nolan bat-films made a fortune even with the death of Rachel Dawes.

I don't think the romance was as much a selling point for either of those franchises.

But to be perfectly honest, I still prefer the chemistry between Maguire and Dunst to Garfield and Stone.

[cyberhubbs]

I don't think the romance was as much a selling point for either of those franchises.

But to be perfectly honest, I still prefer the chemistry between Maguire and Dunst to Garfield and Stone.

I can't even talk to you right now, David. I...I need time to process just how wrong an opinion this is.

[Daniel22]

Considering Sony made a deal with Marvel to reboot the franchise after the two lowest grossing Spider-Man films, is it really a case of being a "victim of their own success?"

In the sense that Stone was a complete home run, I think so. The rest of the movies notwithstanding, the Stone and Stone/Garfield parts were widely liked and successful. They had to follow up on that, but I still think that's a good "problem" to have. It's certainly better than if they had cast a different Gwen, who was not as liked and did not connect as well as Stone did.

[David Walton]

I can't even talk to you right now, David. I...I need time to process just how wrong an opinion this is.

Great! You're a smart guy, that should give you time to realize how right I am.

[BlitheringToot]

I think Emma Stone would have been much better suited as MJ. She has that fiery personality that Gwen ... just doesn't. Plus, she looks better as a redhead.

That being said, I think having Gwen be Spidey's first love was a good idea ... but I would have cast a different actress in the role. But who would have been a better Gwen than Emma Stone? Bryce Dallas Howard was pretty much perfect in "Spider-Man 3," despite being woefully wasted in the unnecessary role, but she's definitely too old now. Honestly ... and please bear in mind that this suggestion comes solely from seeing the resemblance in J. Scott Campbell's lovely "Spider-Gwen" variants ... I could kinda see ... dear God, I can't believe I'm even saying this ...

*winces slightly*

... Taylor ...


... Swift ... ?


*recoils in shame*

[BlitheringToot]

I don't think the romance was as much a selling point for either of those franchises.

But to be perfectly honest, I still prefer the chemistry between Maguire and Dunst to Garfield and Stone.

Same here. And that's largely due to the difference in the male leads. Dunst went from "blah" in the first film to awesome in the second film to essentially whiny wallpaper in the third. Stone was a lovable firecracker in both films. But it was the two Peters who made the difference. As dorky as he was, you really felt for Tobey's Peter with every confusing, borderline-creepy word of badly-written love dialogue he spouted off. Garfield ... was simply too cocky. Which, of course, was kind of the point ... losing Gwen taught him a big lesson in humility ... but I just didn't care whether or not that Peter Parker got the girl.

[David Walton]

I think Emma Stone would have been much better suited as MJ. She has that fiery personality that Gwen ... just doesn't. Plus, she looks better as a redhead.

That being said, I think having Gwen be Spidey's first love was a good idea ... but I would have cast a different actress in the role. But who would have been a better Gwen than Emma Stone? Bryce Dallas Howard was pretty much perfect in "Spider-Man 3," despite being woefully wasted in the unnecessary role, but she's definitely too old now. Honestly ... and please bear in mind that this suggestion comes solely from seeing the resemblance in J. Scott Campbell's lovely "Spider-Gwen" variants ... I could kinda see ... dear God, I can't believe I'm even saying this ...

*winces slightly*

... Taylor ...


... Swift ... ?


*recoils in shame*

Taylor Swift as Gwen...and Katy Perry as MJ.