Rumor Patrol: ‘Amazing Spider-Man 2′ Spoiler – Why Mary Jane Scenes Were Cut

Published 1 year ago by

Mary Jane Watson Amazing Spider Man 2 Rumor Patrol: Amazing Spider Man 2 Spoiler   Why Mary Jane Scenes Were Cut

WARNING the following post contains potential MAJOR SPOILERS for The Amazing Spider-Man 2. If you are avoiding story details for the film, turn away now.

As production on Marc Webb’s Amazing Spider-Man 2 draws to a close, there’s still a lot that we do not know about the film – especially considering all those behind-the-scenes snapshots the director shared through social media. Jamie Foxx is set to appear as Electro and Paul Giamatti will fulfill his lifelong dream of portraying The Rhino but rumors of an appearance by yet another villain and a possible ally for Spider-Man have left some viewers wondering if the sequel is already in danger of falling victim to the same problems as Sam Raimi’s notoriously over-stuffed Spider-Man 3.

Of course, that’s not including the addition of actress Shailene Woodley as a future love interest for Peter Parker, Mary Jane Watson, whose scenes were recently cut. The choice to remove Woodley from the picture was a controversial one, leaving some fans speculating that Webb had caved to unwarranted and dismissive criticism that the actress wasn’t the right person to play MJ. Fortunately, thanks to a new plot rumor, it sounds as though Webb’s choice to cut Mary Jane was in service of The Amazing Spider-Man 2 story – not external pressure or issues with Woodley’s depiction of the character.

NOTE: This is your last chance to avoid MAJOR SPOILERS for The Amazing Spider-Man 2. Turn away if you do not want to be spoiled.

Mary Jane in Amazing Spider Man 23 Rumor Patrol: Amazing Spider Man 2 Spoiler   Why Mary Jane Scenes Were Cut

-

-

-

Begin Amazing Spider-Man 2 SPOILERS

For anyone that has been following our coverage of the film, or is simply familiar with Gwen Stacy’s original comic book arc, the latest Amazing Spider-Man 2 rumor shouldn’t come as much of a revelation. However, assuming it’s not just an educated guess, the report lends support to a prior article that we posted – regarding the real reason that Woodley’s scenes were cut.

According to a Hollywood Life source, pushing Mary Jane to Amazing Spider-Man 3 was entirely a creative choice – to make sure the character did not distract from the death of current love interest Gwen Stacy:

Emma Stone’s character dies in the next film and that really would take a bunch out of the film if Spider-Man all the sudden starts dating a new girl so close to an important characters death. They were noticing this occurring as they filmed Shailene’s scenes. They want to make the death of Gwen Stacy really mean something and then it will leave room for Shailene to shine in the third film.

Gwen Stacy Death Amazing Spider Man 2 Rumor Patrol: Amazing Spider Man 2 Spoiler   Why Mary Jane Scenes Were Cut

As stated, Hollywood Life‘s source is merely confirming what many fans have already assumed – that Gwen Stacy will die in Part 2 (possibly by Spider-Man’s own web). That said, the real takeaway here is that, after shooting the scenes, Webb and the filmmakers had a change of heart about when it would be appropriate to introduce Parker’s (presumed) future wife. Obviously, fleshing out the larger Spider-Man movie universe is a major focus in the upcoming sequel – given that Norman Osborne and Harry Osborne are also going to play major roles. Yet, Webb is a smart enough storyteller to know that building-out the cinematic world to setup future installments should not come at the expense of the current storyline – especially one as emotionally impactful (and heartbreaking) as the death of Gwen Stacy.

The report also clarifies a few key points: Woodley is slated to appear in Amazing Spider-Man 3 (meaning there’s little merit to rumors that she might be recast) and that Emma Stone might make an appearance in future installments via Parker’s flashbacks/nightmares. The mention of Emma Stone returning appears in the second part of the report (which, sadly, had to directly addresses TMZ-like speculation that Emma Stone was too over-protective of her on-and-off screen boyfriend, Andrew Garfield):

There is no jealousy, this is definitely a creative decision and Emma was also told that she would have her character get the proper send off and probably would appear in flashbacks and nightmares in the third film. When you are a huge star like Emma you get things thrown to you even if you don’t ask or demand them.

Shailene Woodley Mary Jane Watson Amazing Spider Man Rumor Patrol: Amazing Spider Man 2 Spoiler   Why Mary Jane Scenes Were Cut

Fortunately, it sounds as though Webb (along with writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman) are positioning The Amazing Spider-Man 2 to tell the best possible story – instead of attempting to pack-in franchise story threads. While it would have certainly been exciting to see Woodley’s version of Mary Jane, her inclusion (even as a brief cameo) could undercut the impact of Gwen’s unfortunate fate – as well as distract from the guilt and pain Peter Parker will experience in the aftermath.

___

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 opens in U.S. theaters on May 2nd, 2014, followed by The Amazing Spider-Man 3 on June 10th, 2016 and The Amazing Spider-Man 4 on May 4th, 2018.

Follow me on Twitter @benkendrick for further updates on The Amazing Spider-Man 2 as well as future movie, TV, and gaming news.

Source: Hollywood Life [via CBM]

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: the amazing spider-man, the amazing spider-man 2, The Amazing Spider-Man 3

125 Comments

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

  1. There needs to be a canon where Gwen wins.

    • Agreed. There should be at leastone canon wwith Gwen alive

      • That’s like saying there should be a canon where Uncle Ben is alive; her death was important to Spider-Man’s development.

  2. still thinkts its an attempt at shoe horning in One More Day and Mephisto.

    • What makes you think they feel the need to exploit this much hated storyline?

  3. I’ve now decided to go see this movie. Good to see Mary Jane is still gonna be played by Woodley.

    • No it’s not, because it means MJ won’t really be MJ this time either.

      • in order to be MJ she needs to be a model bfg666 can masturbate to – just like he did to the comics, guys, it’s not that hard.

        • Please go educate youself before assuming too much.

  4. And they’ll rip his mask off as well…
    How come Peter never has a problem keeping the mask on in the comics but every other minute in the movies he has to take it off?
    I really don’t care what the story is as long as it’s true to the spirit of Spider-man which the Raimi ones were. Amazing Spider-man was the fourth best Spider-man movie, so this one doesn’t have too far to go to be better.

    • Are you kidding? He had his mask ripped off more times than I can count in the comics. Usually he saves himself by thwipping a wad of web over his face or by dodging and getting away before anyone could identify him. Sometimes though, it doesn’t work so well and a handful of villains has had the opportunity to see his face.

    • The raimi movies weren’t true at all to spiderman. It was a soup opera featuring spiderman

      • You might want to read the original 60′s comics before opening your mouth again.

    • Dude Spider-Man 3 was terrible your comment is a joke. Ebert ranked Amazing Spider-Man as the second best of the series (behind Spider-Man 2) – I’d probably agree with that.

  5. THe one thing that bothers me is that they’re rushing Gwen’s death. I almost don’t want to believe its true because it doesn’t make sense to me. The big reason her death was important and huge is that it was personal between Spiderman and the Green Goblin. They knew who eachother were but since the Green Goblin wont really be in this film, either Electro or Rhino kill her and the death wont have as much of an impact imo.She’ll probably die as a “casualty of war” than an act of revenge . Unless they’re going with the everybody knows who Spiderman really is again, which I can’t stand in super hero films. They have a secret identity for a reason! lol I would have wanted it to be Mary Jane becomes Peters friend in 2 while Norman becomes The Goblin at the very end of 2, Gwen’s death in 3 then MJ and Peter get together in 4 .

    OH well, I have faith in this film anyways. Hopefully its not true but they did have that funeral scene before production started

    • Youre misinformed, it’s been reported on this very site that GG will be the final baddie by the end of ASM2.

  6. Does no one else find it to be a little disconcerting that MJ was supposed to be a super-model? Why are they casting actresses that cannot fulfill the basics of the character. It was a major failing in the first SM movies, and it appears they are going to do it again. The discontinuities just keep piling up. Paul Giamatti is a great actor, but they are going to need a mech-suit, or totally cover him in CG to pull that one off. Kind of a waste of his talents. He would probably be a better Electro, and Foxx a better Rhino.

    Aside from that – If casing Kahn with Cumberbatch is being called White-Casting, is Foxx as Electro, Black-Casting? Just want to make sure what qualifies.

    • MJ is not a supermodel in the Ultimate comics, which these movies borrow a lot from. Raimi did his own thing, separate from any previous version of SM.

      Also, Rhino had a mech suit in the Ultimate comics, it actually looked kinda cool… I hope they do that version justice in the movie.

      I personally look forward to seeing what Foxx can do with a minor character like Electro, and I don’t care that he’s a black man playing a typically white character.

    • The difference is that there is a tragic lack of black characters for black actors to play. It’s a sad reality in American film in general, but even more so in blockbuster films that are widely consumed. People always say things like “BUT WILL SMITH,” when really if you look at the numbers it’s a despicable disparity.

      So, yeah, white-casting is a thing because taking a black character and making them white non-so-coincidentally already fits into a system that minimizes the visibility of people of color in Hollywood. When you “black-cast”, you might be going against canon or altering a character for (what some might call) the worse, but it’s always also adding to diversity. Nothing positive like that can be said for white-casting, especially since that’s already been a standard practice for decades and inevitably is related to a history of racial discrimination. Not saying anything about this specific choice, just commenting on the realities and rhetoric that surround race in Hollywood.

      • I suppose most of these comics were started in a time where racism was much more prevalent, so there are fewer non-white characters in comics than there would be if a character was created today.

        Putting that together with solid performances from Idris Elba as Heimdall (and everyone wants him to be John Stewart in a potential Justice League, apparently) and Laurence Fishburne as Perry White, I think we can be sure that if the actor/actress is good enough, skin colour doesn’t matter. I can’t claim to have seen every Jamie Foxx film, but he’ll probably do alright here.

        With DC’s New 52, we’ve had a gay Green Lantern and an Arabic Green Lantern. Ultimate Marvel has an African American Spider-Man. Baby steps, obviously, but comic books are becoming more ethnically diverse. As long as it’s not a rubbed-in-our-faces ‘LOOK HOW MODERN WE ARE’ publicity stunt, it’s progress. We hope.

        Doubters of Shailene Woodley should watch The Descendants.

        • The problem with Shailene Woodley is not her talent but her physical ability to play a supermodel. Since she’s staying after all, they’re probably going to modify her character once again, like Raimi did.

          • Firstly, Shailene Woodley isn’t exactly ugly. There are some unflattering pictures out there, but similar photos exist of most people. Mila Kunis got voted as the world’s best looking woman in a few different polls but there are pictures of her looking a little rough. On film, however, they always look their best.

            Secondly, I get that one of Peter Parker’s endearing features is that he’s a slightly geeky guy that really feels empowered by his abilities and it’s kind-of a nerd’s fantasy – the introverted shy guy becomes a hero. The idea that he then dates a supermodel is a little bit out there. I know, I know, we’re talking about a spider bite giving someone superpowers, but it’s still a bit out of place. I can see why they changed it in the Ultimate universe.

            Thirdly, people complained about Megan Fox and Rosie Huntington-Whitely in the Transformers films, two actresses that (according to general opinion) were cast for their looks. Rosie Huntington-Whitely *is* a supermodel. Would you prefer her as MJ?

            • I never said she was ugly, just that she’s no supermodel material. She’s more of a girl-next-door cutie, just like Kirsten Dunst.

              I don’t see how Peter dating the supermodel is out of place, it’s just the nerd’s fantasy continued. Every geek out there has wet dreams about getting the hottest chick around.

              Why do you even mention Megan Fox and What’s-her-name? It’s not because they are lousy actresses that all bombshells are as well. And there are a fair number of good actresses who could easily fit the character’s description. Also, never trust Michael Bay to get a good performance from his actors. The guy can do big ‘splosions but hardly anything else.

              • Peter dating a supermodel seems a bit too much of a stretch for me. I thought that this new post-Nolan batch of superhero films was about having an abstract concept (multibillionaire makes crazy gadgets and fights crime, smart kid gets spider powers, hairy chest alien saves people etc.) and treating them realistically. When I think back to my school days, there were girls that were really, really, really ridiculously good looking (yes, Zoolander reference) and not in the Facebook, “You should totally be a model!” b/s. But dating an actual model? Hmm.

                I mention the Transformers actresses/leading ladies/hood ornament hotties because they were, if I remember correctly, models at one point or another. If you want a model cast in your film, they’re out there doing that sort of thing. Neither actress really became well-liked for their character unlike, for example, the army guys Lennox and Epps.

                Casting for looks can backfire spectacularly, especially if it’s merely for the difference between ‘girl next door’ (which, among all Mary Janes in the Marvel… multiverse? Is it called a multiverse in Marvel like it is in DC sometimes? Anyway, it’s the quintessential MJ description) and ‘model.’

                • I don’t see any stretch in Peter dating a supermodel – she actually started her modelling career quite a while after getting involved with him, if I remember correctly. In fact, it’s good that you’re talking about realistic treatment because in real life, it’s not uncommon for bombshells to date seemingly unlikely men. I can’t count the number of times when I found myself thinking “Jeez, what is she doing with THAT?!” while crossing paths with a mismatched couple. The thing is, for many women, humor, brains or wealth are just as sexy, if not even more, than looks. And when I think back to MY school days, I vividly remember a few teenage hotties who puzzled everyone by dating some random Parker. Of course, at this early age, most were after the king of the playground, but not all of them.

                  Also, I don’t understand your beef against casting for looks. Like I said, there are more than a few gorgeous actresses who can deliver strong acting AND make credible supermodels at once, there’s no need to hire actual models who would lack the ability to act. There’s also probably some models out there who can act. In short, gorgeousness and good acting are not mutually exclusive. And I’m sorry but if you’re gonna cast someone for the role of a model, looks will necessarily play a huge part in your pick.

                  By the way, yes, the Marvel universe is a multiverse. This is not a DC trademark but a generic word designating any universe made of alternate realities. According to Wikipedia, “the term was coined in 1895 by the American philosopher and psychologist William James.” And of course, strictly speaking, MJ is literally Peter’s girl-next-door. But you know as well as I do (or you should anyway) that this expression has a quite different meaning in common language, and MJ definitely qualifies more as “bombshell” than “girl-next-door”. Or at least she should if the screenwriters stayed true to her character. Unfortunately, it seems like it won’t be for this time around either.

                  • I didn’t mean girl-next-door literally – it sort-of sums up MJ’s entire character. Whether MJ’s a model as in the mainstream Marvel universe of a photojournalist (OK, I googled that one) in the Ultimate universe or whatever, she’s always got that girl-next-door appeal.

                    Basically, I can handle MJ as not being a model as long as her character isn’t completely ruined. In some cases, a job change would be awful – imagine if J. Jonah Jameson was a competing intern for Peter at the Bugle! – but MJ will hopefully remain recognisable.

                    My fear with casting someone that looks like a supermodel would be that they weren’t that great at acting and having a sub-par lead actress wouldn’t make for a great film. If someone started as a model and then went into acting instead of just trying to be a successful actress, they might not be as good (or as ‘into it’) as a hardcore ‘devout’ actress.

                    • I thought I didn’t have to give you a detailed explanation but apparently I do after all… The common meaning of a “girl-next-door” is a girl who is cute but not gorgeous, as in “the everyday girl you could actually meet around the corner.” MJ is gorgeous, star-like gorgeous, therefore she doesn’t qualify as girl-next-door unless you use the expression literally (since she did live next door to Peter).

                      MJ’s gorgeousness is essential to her character, much more than her job (her modelling career was actually rather short and she did other jobs). Her exceptional beauty defines a fair share of her personality. Making her “only” a girl-next-door is indeed changing the essence of the character. I hope they’ll still make her interesting in the forthcoming movies but I would’ve liked an accurate portrayal of her for a change and I’m somewhat disappointed that it still won’t be the case. Then again, I can’t say I’m surprised. This reboot has been a rollercoaster of excitement and disappointment since day one.

                    • @bfg666 I can’t reply to your comment directly…

                      A ‘girl-next-door’ isn’t just a cute, everyday girl. She’s, “cute, kind, unassuming, and honest,” according to Wikipedia. My understanding of it was more along the lines of good looking and kind hearted. Wikipedia says that it’s a contrast to, “flashier, more provocative,” women, which seems odd to me. Maybe Wikipedia isn’t the most accurate source of information. Who knew?

                      Overall, having a girl-next-door appeal is probably better than ZOMG SUPERMODEL because one is liking the person and the other is a knee-jerk, “You’re hot!” The former is a more solid foundation for a relationship. However… if they did have someone that looked like a supermodel, I’m sure that a ‘certain line’ would have more impact.

                      If the first time we (and Peter) see her face is when she says, “Face it, tiger. You just hit the jackpot!” and she looks like a supermodel… yeah. That would work very nicely. It could still work with Shailene Woodley if they had Spandau Ballet’s True playing in the background. Maybe. OK, not as well…

                    • Yeah, the sub-levels of replies are limited.

                      I wasn’t aware of any personality trait implied by this expression. All I know is that it was coined to distinguish “realistically” cute girls vs. those bombshells that the average Joe has so little chance to ever meet in real life that they become somewhat unreal in our minds.

                      The interesting thing with comics-MJ is that there’s so much more than meets the eye. The first reaction to meeting her is precisely this “You’re hot!” you mentioned but then, when you scratch the surface, you find out she’s just as pretty on the inside yet far from the goody-two-shoes a la Gwen Stacy. The. Perfect. Girl. Presumably one of the most complex female characters written in a superhero comic book. Her striking beauty takes part in this complexity and making her more physically “mundane” lessens it to some extent. That’s why I’m so insistently advocating for a truly gorgeous actress to play her.

                      And yes, the jackpot line would be somewhat awkward in Woodley’s mouth, yet it’s a staple of the Spider-Man mythos, just like Wolverine’s “I’m the best at what I do” line, and doing without it would surely displease a fair number of fans.

              • You are aware that is exactly what MJ is, right? she is the hot girl next door. shes lived next door to peter! how much more obvious does it need to be? Also, there are plenty different kinds of models out there used for different types of modeling work, theres print models, and runway etc.. and as a juxtaposition to your argument, there are plenty of models who arent very attractive, but just have a desired ‘look’ based on their body frame and are chosen for their ‘unconventional’ looks. would you rather one of THOSE models played MJ? be thankful for who was chosen, Woodley is a very good looking classical girl next door (way better than dunst btw) and can act. grow up dude.

                • I take it that you didn’t read my quite long comment from yesterday, then… Also, reading the one just above from a few minutes ago will help you understand my point of view and realize that my stance has nothing puerile and is actually fully justified. I don’t want a bombshell to play MJ only to drool over her. I can watch porn for this purpose.

                  • You know modern supermodels don’t look like MJ from the comics – in fact Woodley is probably closer to that than they are. You’re just upset you’re not attracted to the character.

                    • Again, this has nothing to do with me, stop putting words in my mouth. If I’m upset, it’s because MJ’s essence will be thrown down the drain this time too. But in such a disrespectful franchise, it was to be expected.

          • Because an actress’ talent is nowhere near as important as her physical appearance? And tell me in what universe is this considered ugly?: http://www.magxone.com/uploads/2010/05/Shailene-Woodley-Seventeen-4.jpg

            Christ, one bad picture and suddenly people act like she was beat with an ugly stick. And given the general appearance of most fanboys, you are the last people who should ever criticize a person’s appearance.

            • Maybe you should actually read the full discussion before pointlessly chiming in…

              Also, do you know every fanboy in the world to make a statement on their looks?

  7. I’m guessing they’ll add the scenes back as after-credit sneak peeks. Just a gut feeling.

  8. In the comics they are just friends and in a moment of grief over Gwens death Peter lashes out harshly at Mary Jane who starts to leave because her feelings are hurt but then she stays anyway because she realizes Peter wasn’t just being cruel, he’s in pain and he needs someone.

    This is really the moment where human being behind her party girl persona finally shows and is in a sense where Peter and MJ really begin. She shows her real strength in that moment. But it is just a moment. Really a perfect moment to end that story on.

    It wouldn’t take anything away from the relationship with Gwen earlier in the film or feel like Peter was immediately moving on. It’s basically two people grieving and how one shows strength when the other is feeling their weakest.

    • Exactly.

    • Here’s the thing though – the comics worked because the audience didn’t know what would happen. Now and days the audience knows MJ ends up with Peter. Could you still do it? Yes, maybe if that plot was its own movie – but with all the action and action-related plot and other characters (this is shaping up to be a huge movie), I don’t think they could’ve done it here.

      • Even with only 5 minutes’ screentime tops, they could have made her relevant in the core group of highschool friends, especially since Harry is thrown in the mix.

  9. I am so glad they took Shailene Woodley out. They need to recast her with Jane Levy instead

    • Feeling sorry much, now?

  10. To tell the truth I wouldn’t mind if they left out Mary Jane altogether. Her introduction was the end of Spiderman as the nerdy, hardluck hero that made him unique.

    He threw away his glasses, bought a motorcycle, forgot about his career as a scientist and just became the same old blowdried hero stereotype as other heroes.

    Everything that Steve Ditko did o make him different from other heroes was taken away by hack John Romita.

    • I guess it’s been a loooooooong time since you’ve actually read a Spidey comic.

  11. Just as a minor quibble. Emma Stone is a “huge star”.

  12. Shailene Woodley as MJ

    MJ: Tiger, you just win a jackpot !
    Peter: **tch please, did you see my previous one ?

    Its a good move to say bye bye to her. We need good looking and able to act actress, thats all. MJ is strong individual, brave AND beatiful. And I want the damn phrase in the movie!

  13. So if Gwen Stacy dies at the hands of Green Goblin in the comics, and we already know that Rhino and Electro are going to be major villains, and we also know the Osbornes are important, can we assume that Osborne will be continuing Conner’s research (post-title scene Amazing Spiderman 1) and (unintentionally (or not)) Set these villains free? Then be on the point of death he takes the Goblin formula and becomes the Goblin, of course going to punish Spiderman for something he did to him, kill Stacy, etc.

    My guess for the third film would be Spidey out for revenge against Goblin, Mary Jane helps him along? What do you guys think?

  14. Spider-Man is a “-@/$:$@/@/@/&$/$:;&;&@;”( awesome hero. He should have 9 girlfriends

  15. Isn’t it possible for people to, you know, rip a movie to shreds after they’ve seen it and not try to ruin it while it’s still in production? Wait til you’ve seen it before complaining about the plot you don’t know about, or how Woodley’s breasts aren’t disproportionately sized enough for the “character.” And if you want a movie just like the comics, tell you what, how bout buying the comic and using some damned imagination.

  16. I’m not sure why but this website is loading very slow for me.
    Is anyone else having this issue or is it a problem
    on my end? I’ll check back later on and see if the problem
    still exists.

  17. I think Arianna Grande should be the next Mary Jane Watson. She could play a great flirty Mary Jane but I’m not so sure she could play the smart one effectively because that one is boring (well not as much fun)’