‘Amazing Spider-Man 3′: Roberto Orci Uncertain About Franchise’s Future

Published 10 months ago by , Updated July 12th, 2014 at 8:19 am,

amazing spider man 3 Amazing Spider Man 3: Roberto Orci Uncertain About Franchises Future

It was previously thought that Amazing Spider-Man 3 would be the next Spider-Man movie to hit theaters, but about a month ago a report emerged, claiming that Sony now intends to release the film no sooner than 2017. It’s now starting to look more and more like there’s a fire behind all this smoke, as Amazing Spider-Man 2 co-writer/producer Roberto Orci has revealed that he’s currently not “officially involved” with TASM3 – even though Sony previously announced that he is part of the “brain trust” for the Spider-Man franchise (and was co-writing the third installment).

Orci is currently working on the script for the next Star Trek movie (which he is expected to make his directorial debut), in order to have the film ready to hit theaters by 2016 – the 50th anniversary of the Star Trek property. As such, it doesn’t come as a huge surprise to learn that Orci’s (as he told IGN) “not officially involved” with the third Amazing Spider-Man film right now, since his Trek duties are likely taking up the majority of his work schedule right now.

What is surprising, however, is that Orci doesn’t appear to know much about Sony’s plans in general for the future of the Spider-Man movies. As mentioned before, there’ve been rumors about the studio changing course a bit, with regard to its plans to build a Shared Film Universe around Andrew Garfield’s Peter Parker – in response to Amazing Spider-Man 2‘s lukewarm critical reception and, more important from a business perspective, the diminishing box office returns for the last two Spider-Man installments. At the same time though, as Orci told IGN, Spider-Man’s just too big an intellectual property to fall by the wayside entirely.

“I don’t know what their plans are for that franchise. I don’t ever want to say never, but we have to figure out what their scheduling is in terms of when they want each movie. I’ve read probably as much as anyone else. There’s a love for the Sinister Six, the idea of Venom — there’s an idea of Spider-Man’s going to be one of these characters that’s part of our business. He’s such a popular character. Spider-Man’s not going to go away any time soon. When it all happens and how and all that has yet to be determined.”

Sinister Six Amazing Spider Man 2 Amazing Spider Man 3: Roberto Orci Uncertain About Franchises Future

So, if not Amazing Spider-Man 3, then what may instead come next for the Spider-Man franchise? Well, Amazing Spider-Man 2 did lay the foundation for the villain teamup movie that is Sinister Six - a project that looks to be moving forward sooner than later (possibly shooting as early as January 2015), given that writer/director Drew Goddard recently stepped down as the show runner for Marvel Studios’ Daredevil series, in order to concentrate his efforts on the aforementioned Spider-Man spinoff.

As we’ve mentioned before, releasing Sinister Six before Amazing Spider-Man 3 is a move that could benefit both films, from an artistic perspective. The latter would thus be free to jump head-first into relatively unexplored story territory for a comic book movie (telling a tale about a bunch of super-powered villain trying to work together), while the latter wouldn’t have to be saddled with “shared universe building,” like its predecessors were. Indeed, just as rumor has it that Warner Bros. and DC are straying away from Marvel Studios’ film release strategy with the upcoming DC movie slate,  Sony would probably have a better shot at keeping up in the superhero movie game by changing its approach on the Spider-Man series.

May Preview Amazing Spider Man 2 Amazing Spider Man 3: Roberto Orci Uncertain About Franchises Future

Moreover, such superhero movie heavyweights as Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice, X-Men: Apocalypse, and Captain America 3 are all scheduled to arrive in the Summer 2016 Movie Season – meaning, Sony might feel it’s time to pull out the big guns and release an “event” film like Sinister Six than year, while saving the next Amazing Spider-Man movie for a later date, such as 2017 (or maybe the 2018 date that it currently has reserved for a Spider-Man film).

There’s also the Venom movie that’s in some stage of early development – from Amazing Spider-Man 2 cowriter/producer Alex Kurtzman - that needs to be taken into consideration here. In short: we hope to soon have some concrete information instead of speculation and relatively vague comments, regarding what Sony has in mind so as to allow Spidey and his “friends” to keep up with the other superhero characters out there (and their respective tentpoles).

Until we hear otherwise, though, The Amazing Spider-Man 3 remains tentatively scheduled to hit theaters on June 10th, 2016.

Source: IGN

Follow Sandy Schaefer on Twitter @feynmanguy
Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


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. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. Getting the Spider-Man and Fantastic Four rights back could be what it finally takes Marvel to go up to making three or more movies a year.

  2. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: give the Web-Head back to Marvel so they can put him on Netflix.

    • Yes, yes and yes!!

  3. If I where Disney, and I just got the right back for Spider Man. the first think I would do is go direly to that Disney Vault. and lock all right to Spider Man in their for like 50 years, or more and thin reboot.

    • And the award for the most incomprehensible comment goes to……

    • Dude… (scratching my head)…umm.. What???

      • You guys are kidding, right? I’ve translated far worse than his comment. It’s not that hard to fix the grammatical errors and spelling mistakes for this post.

        In summary: joehkoo would make sure to never again sell the movie rights to Spider-man if he were in charge and had gotten the rights back.
        As I’m sure Marvel will not sell movie rights again, considering how they’ve been wanting them back for a while now.

  4. Robert Orci is death to any project he is on. I will not put money down if his name is attached.

  5. ASM made $757 million worlwide. ASM2 made $704 million worldwide . A slight drop.
    If I were a Sony exec, I would re-planned the whole third movie.

  6. Excuse me! Any movie in this day and age that makes back its budget and a clean profit is more than what can be asked for. In this case both movies did exactly that. So I’d think twice before calling it a flop.

    • Never said ASM2 was a flop. I typed a slight drop.
      I blame audience weariness of CBM.

      • I don’t think people will wear out of CBM. Because they’re not all one thing. You can’t say: Now I’ve seen Spider-Man, Iron Man and Thor, so I am not gonnna see Captain America. It wouldn’t make sense because they’re simply different characters in different movies of a certain genre. You might at well get tired of sci-fi movies all together then.

        But I do think an individual franchise could wear out. After all ASM2 was the 5th Spider-Man movie in 12 years. And many people already thought that the reboot was too soon.

  7. The question is the drop specific to AS2 or just the box office as a whole?

    It could be we have hit the peak of the superhero, SF and fantasy spectacle films. People now have got used to those films and 3D and IMAX and waiting a bit for the digital releases, BD and such is more appealing than ever.

    It’s not that they don’t do very well they do but they also cost a lot. DOFP is apparently the most expensive film from FOX outside Avatar but even at a $731M take it is a bit disappointing. They must have been hoping for that magic 1B.

    Maybe Avengers was the peak. If A:AOU doesn’t exceed, match or come close to the first then their will be a cascade effect on film budgets. Imagine the horror at Disney if EP VII “only” makes $700M.

    • @Ryan, this might be true until Avengers 2 and Bat vs Supes comes out.

    • True, but both Days of Future Past and Cap2 both did exceedingly well and spread a good word of mouth. Even Transformers 4 had enough returns to guarantee a Transformers 5.

      When your studio franchise-superhero-summer-blockbuster movie comes in dead last among the other current summer blockbusters, AND does not make back the money it was expecting AND is generally seen as “crap” story, it’s time to re-evaluate the franchise.

  8. IS it time for Christopher Nolan to rescue this franchise ?
    That would be super interesting. High rise building action with True imax camera… and tension filled action above instead of CGI laden snooze fest.

    • “CGI laden snooze fest.”

      Oddly Avengers was CGI laden and was one of the biggest hits ever. I wish people would get past this rather weird idea that CGI is driving people away. Without CG and the wider scope of digital film-making these films don’t exist.

      Most of the time I don’t even know what people think is CGI anyway. Tell people the truth about the Star Wars prequels and how CG is only one element of those films VFX which are one of the greatest sets of practical effects in film history and they can’t take it in. I get great pleasure in telling people who despise all the CG is this movie or that movie that they are hating on practical effects and don’t even know it. That wasn’t CG at all.

        • Sorry dude. If you ever watch one of the Prequels with the commentary on, you’ll hear the words “miniatures”, “matte painting”, and “built sets” many, many times.

          CGI was only used as another tool, not as the dominant one.

          • I just want to add that even in this day and age it’s probably also cheaper and faster to make models, sets etc. than to build everything with CGI beceuase of the levels of details required.

        • “as far as i know, not a single miniature was built to be filmed for the Star Wars prequels! but these are the visuals that tie the human brain to susspention of disbelief!”

          This is exactly what I mean. All that “CG” that you didn’t believe was model after model and miniature after miniature plus mattes, plus sets, plus props of ships etc etc plus puppets and of course CG enhancements various CG creatures of course.

          I would like to direct you to the Star Wars 365 book by John Knoll where you can see hundreds of pages of all the practical effects that some people profess to love so much.

          This whole thing where people can tell CG from “practical” is nonsense because outside of the very, very obvious like creatures you can’t really tell, the point is that it’s all fake in the first place. So the idea that you can tell one fake from another without pre-knowledge is nonsense.

          You can almost always tell when a creature is CG because that it is a puppet is also as obvious. In neither case is it about “reality” because each are “fake.”

          Each SINGLE PT movie has more miniatures than the ENTIRE OT combined. Largest miniature in Star Wars history was Mustafar which was a combination of models, miniatures, sets, live action plates, matte painting etc etc.

          • I’ve no doubt that there were many models and matte paintings used in the prequels, and I probably wouldn’t always be able to tell the difference between those effects and the computer-generated ones. However, I don’t think that leads to your conclusion that the films aren’t too reliant on CGI.

            My understanding is that not a single physical costume was made for any of the Clone troopers in Episodes II or III. This seemed fairly obvious to me as I was watching it and contributed to the general sense of phoniness. I thought it was distracting and odd, especially since the characters are ostensibly human. If they were a legion of bizarre aliens (like the baddies at the end of the Avengers or, closer to home, the bug guys in the Coliseum in Episode II) I would understand a bit better. But it’s odd to have all of the Clone Troopers be CGI, when they’re just humans in armor, especially when our minds are directly comparing them to the non-CGI Stormtroopers of the original films.

            It would be a bit like making an entire movie where Darth Vader is CGI but the human Imperial officers and Stormtroopers he interacts with are not. It would just look strange and force the human eye to make comparisons and notice the difference, when none of that is necessary. I can understand making some troopers CGI- for example, troopers in a large scene that are in the background- but ALL of them just seems lazy.

            I also disagree that both CGI creatures and puppets are equally “fake”. To me the difference is obvious: A puppet is a physical object that exists in space during the actual shooting process. It allows for the actors to perform with something of the same size and appearance of the character on set. This oftentimes leads to a more natural performance.

            Also, when Luke reaches out and touches Yoda in Empire Strikes Back we are aware that he is actually touching physical material. When Obi-Wan hugs the multi-armed CGI dude in the diner scene of Episode II my mind doesn’t accept that he’s touching anything at all and it takes me out of the film in a way that puppets do not.

            I agree that neither process is completely without it flaws (it’s weird to act with puppets, for example, because you hear the “voice” of the character coming from far away, which is later made to sound like its coming from the puppet in post-production) but it seems to me your more likely to get a natural performance from an actor when they’re able to interact with physical objects. On the most basic level, it helps with eyeline so rather than worrying about “where to look” the actor is concentrating simply on their lines and emotion.

            Another thing, and this is where I think the Red Letter Media reviews of the prequels are spot on: in many instances it appears that the actors had no idea what the animators were eventually going to put in the scene. A great example is when Obi-Wan doesn’t react to General Grievous twirling a couple lightsabers a foot away from his face. It’s not too big a problem in isolation, but when you have a lot of instances like this it all adds up to the film feeling fake and this removes any real tension and makes it hard to really be invested in what’s taking place on screen.

            I’m pretty sure that if Ewan McGregor really understood what the animated Grievous would do, or had an actor in front of him doing the same movement that eventually ended up on screen, that McGregor would have reacted by dropping into a more defensive stance or whatever. It just looks odd in the film and it’s just one example of when the actors are just generalizing their performance because they don’t completely understand what their “scene partner” is doing. Improvisation and more specific, interesting blocking and performance can result when you actually have some physical stuff to play off of. Maybe Ewan would have come up with some interesting stuff to say or do in that scene if he could see a physical puppet or actor playing Grievous. As it is, he is limited.

            I suppose this “not knowing what will eventually be animated” thing isn’t necessarily a problem, as long as the director is extremely clear about what is happening in the scene and the actors are good at using their imaginations. This often fails to come together, though, especially in the prequels.

            And some of the backgrounds really do look bad, especially on Coruscant. There are many scenes where characters are walking and talking and pretty much everything around them, besides the floor that they are walking on, is added in post. This includes the “extras” walking around. It just lacks any real weight or depth and it also hampers the actors. If Hayden Christensen wanted to lean against a “pillar” in one of these scenes, because the mood struck him as an actor, he wouldn’t actually have anything there to lean on. In reality, the world is completely empty.

            Anyway, some stuff in the movies look fine. A lot of it looks very fake. Much of that is a result of CGI and some isn’t. I would never argue that CGI is the main problem with the prequels (the script, direction, and performances are the main culprits here) but I think there are some clear instances where CGI was unnecessary and actively takes away from the experience.

            Just my two cents. Thanks for listening.

      • dear lord, do we have to get every villain shoved down our throats due to “universe building”? did we not learn from spiderman 3 that a s*** tonne of villains does not a good movie make?
        i’ll start with the rhino reference(sequence) that took way to long! coll for fans but get to the meat of the story already. the electro story was cool enough, but after the initial encarceration, leave it at that!but no! we have a 45 minute battle with an ultra powered electro that leaves me wondering “where in the h#ll do they go with his powers in a follow up movie? so spidey defeats electro and as much as i am ready for this movie to be over(even though i know it’s not)along comes the green goblin!
        i’ve just dealt with 45 minutes of ecssesive electro fight scenes, i now have to invest in another twenty minutes build up to the “death of Gwen Stacey”? of all, the sudden appearance of a green goblin, who, up until 45 minutes ago was just a disenfranchised, silverspoon snot with a ressesive gene! don’t get me wrong, Gwen’s death was heart breaking! i would be satisfied leaving the theater on a downer wondering if the mantle of spiderman would be taken up again….
        but no! i had to deal with another fifteen minutes of the worst tripe of time lapse of parker suffering over a grave and then…(lord, did i really see this?) the dumbest itteration of a rhino suit, just to tie the movie together!i just want to go home!

        i don’t know the actuall run time of this movie, but when left the theatre, it felt at least two and a half hours! i had no desire to see a follow up movie!

        perhaps instead of cramming all this crap down our throats all at once to develope a universe, ease up and give us a decent movie every two years.

  9. I agree with the Shoveler I’ve seen Hunger Games so I don’t have to see Divergent i’ve seen
    Pacific Rim so I don’t have to see Godzilla. CBM are the highest grossing movies of all time they make more money in 1 year than Academy Awarded movies throughout 4 years make haha I’ll never get tired of them because there’s like 50,000,000 heroes and 45,000 stories to tell. I’m not tired of Iron Man I could definitely go for a 4th

  10. I still don’t understand the idea of a Sinister Six standalone movie. Is Spider-man still going to be in it? If not why would anyone watch it? And if Spidey is in it, won’t that technically make it Amazing Spider-man 3?

    • Those are key questions.

      The main reason seems to be that Sony wants to build a cinematic universe too. And the basic idea of having a cinematic universe is that instead of having each character confined to his (or her) own string of movies, they can cross-over and meet in each other’s movies.

      They do that all the time in the comic books, so it does make perfect sense. And it also allows studios to make more movies.

      Sony is trying to do it with villains because they only have 1 hero, and that is obviously a little weird. Especially with the Sinister Six because those villains only got together after having lost to Spider-Man again and again.

      But it might work. One could argue that it makes sense to dedicate an entire movie to the origin of the Sinister Six instead of cramming it into the next Spider-Man movie. It would then be a sort of prequel movie and it could end with a cliffhanger as they’re off to face Spider-Man together.

      A movie about Venom might also work because they’d need to completely re-write his origin anyway if he isn’t supposed to be Spider-Man’s dark suit before he becomes a villain. And I do think it’s the only way they can use him in a movie. I did hate his origin in Spider-Man 3 where he just sort of fell to earth. I do understand that they couldn’t include the entire story of the Secret Wars for many, many obvious reasons (all though, some day, I’d love to see a live action adaption of that one) but then they should have left him out or come up with something more along the line of the origin of Ultimate Carnage.

      Also, Venom is a conflicted character that could become a sort of anti-hero who’s out for revenge against some other bad guy.

      If they make them, I’ll watch them.

      I don’t think a Sinister Six or Venom movie that also has Spider-Man making an appearance at some point would technically be ASM3. Because the whole idea of having a cinematic universe is that the movies don’t have to be a sequal to this or that particular character’s solo movie.

      In fact the Sinister Six movie would need Spider-Man around. The story could show us the origin of each member and their first individual face-off with Spider-Man. After losing and probably getting humuliated too, they’d find each other and form the team. And then we’d get the big fight in ASM3.

      Sorry about the long answer. My brain just started gushing out thoughts ;)

      • They wouldn’t go with the alien symboite, it would be the lab created version from the ultimate universe, like many of the villains and story tropes for the current run of Spider-man movies…

        • My point excactly when I wrote this:

          “…or come up with something more along the line of the origin of Ultimate Carnage.”


    • When I think of a Sinister 6 movie I think of Goodfellas and Godfather movies. Lots of intriguing characters who are selfish and most of them bad yet you root for them.

      If done right, Sinister 6 movie should try to humanize major villains of spiderman’s universe so that we kinda root for them so that by the time it gets to Spiderman 3 the movie is more intriguing with Spidey vs Villains.

  11. Its okay Gerard, we’re all scared and confused. I feel like we are the litle siblings moving to a different state for the first time and Mommy and Daddy(Sony) is just moving for the heck of it not even bothering to tell us why. Sinister Six will bomb to fans like us it might sound cool and fresh but to average movie goers it’ll sound like a low budget horror film
    “Hey Jeff what ya wanna see tonight, Wolverine 3 of some movie called Sinister Six?”
    “uhm babe I’m not in the mood for a horror film we just got married 12 hours ago”
    “ok Hun we’ll see Hugh Jackman slice and dice and ignore that low-budget-sounding horror film”
    “okay. Babe?”
    “yes, Buttercup”
    “I’m pregant”
    *runs out of house*
    *girl turns around*
    “uhm, Babe?….”

  12. Here’s the thing. Nobody is going to give a crap about the Sinister Six movie if they don’t care about the characters that make up the Six. We were introduced to three villains that make up the Sinister Six (Electro, Green Goblin, and Rhino). Electro had a sudden character shift from stalker fanboy to arch nemesis in the course of five seconds. Why? Simply because the story needed him to. Green Goblin/Harry Osborne’s character development begins and ends with Daddy Issues and shows up to do the spoilery thing and vanishes. Rhino was shoe-horned in for kicks and giggles and really served no purpose other than universe building. I’m intrigued at the idea of a Sinister Six movie, but there definitely needs to be some fleshing out of characters first.

    • I agree.

      I would assume that a Sinister Six movie would do just that, because it’d be devoted to these characters full-time without any (or only a little) interference from our friendly neighborhood spider.

      I get why they keep going back to the classic villains (Batman’s got the joker, Superman’s got Lex Luthoer and Spiderman’s got the Green Goblin) but I am hoping they’ll skip Doc Ock and Sandman (in the name of variation) and move on to villains like Vulture, Mysterio and Kraven.

      • Agree with you guys about making sure characters are well developed.

        A Sinister Six movie doesn’t just have to have the 6 villains of the team. They could do a lot of villains interwoven into a mobster like tale where a bunch of Spidey villains are part of 1 of 2 powerful factions or mobs. Or maybe 1 large mob and the other faction is Harry’s empire. Either way, 2 opposing factions.

        I picture a movie with a bunch of villains who are really fleshed out and humanized so we see their good side, bad side, and what makes them tick. Think Goodfella’s, Casino, Road to Perdition, and Godfather movies. Those movies had a bunch of characters who made a lot of bad choices and were corrupt but we also felt for many of them.

        Heck we don’t even have to know who the Sinister 6 are until the end of the movie. Harry becomes head honcho / ruler of both factions and chooses who his 6 followers will be. Many of the villains can evolve through the story. Some can get arrested. Some can be framed by each other. Some can even die. Ex. Doc Ock can start off as an innocent scientist but becomes corrupted by working for a faction.

        • I get the idea of having more villains around and then finally chosing the six.

          But they should start out as individual ‘lone wolves’ imho. If they already exist in factions, that would take away what’s special about forming the Sinister Six.

          If you want factions or empires, you could of course introduce Kingpin. He’s also been known to hire villains now and then, so he’d provide some of that which you crave ;)

          But the Sinister Six needs to be something that wasn’t there already. To make it a really unique threat.

          • Agree. I should have clarified. I meant that we could have some minor villains who are already part of the factions and need less explaining and some who are lone wolves who become part of the 2 factions. Maybe leaders of the factions manipulate things to make the “lone wolf” characters choose a side. Below are some of my examples of what I think could work…

            The plot could set up that Spidey has been missing for awhile. We find out Peter Parker has secretly been kidnapped, trapped and sedated by one of the factions. (throw in Garfield cameo unconscious as lab subject.) Could be that Harry is responsible. OR maybe it is Chameleon who has him kidnapped. (either way, as audience we are all gonna wonder where Parker is throughout the movie)

            FACTION 1
            Harry and new girlfriend / assistant(Black cat) lead Rhino. Characters like Vulture, Molten Man, and Doc Ock could be Osborns lab scientists (maybe they know nothing of Parker being kidnapped OR maybe they do). These characters can all start as good scientists questioning the ethics of their research. Osborn bribes or forces them. Osborn says he will help with their ambitions which would be fleshed out throughout the movie. Black cat’s role is to steal stuff from labs and from the rival faction. There could be a scene where Chameleon (as Spidey) breaks into the lab causing a malfunction leading to Vulture and Ock fusing to their tech. Or Parker could wake up and escape causing problems for scientists or causing them to fuse to their tech. Either way they both blame Spidey

            FACTION 2
            Chameleon could lead the other “underground” crime faction. Leading guys like Hammerhead and Tombstone as his enforcers. Smythe is his research scientist. Chameleon and his thugs steal tech from Osborn. This could lead to creation of Shocker. Maybe Shocker gauntlets are stolen from Osborn and perfected by Smyth. Maybe Shultz (shocker) is a new immigrant to America who needs money for his family or is in debt with Chameleon. Chameleon offers him a deal to be Shocker and Chameleon will take care of his family financially

            As for a guy like Mysterio:

            1. Quentin Beck (Mysterio) could be shown as an aspiring magician not able to get a gig or get a break. To make ends meet he works on a movie set where MJ also happens to be acting. Chameleon (disguised as Spider-man) swings onto the set and something goes wrong. Beck is blamed and fired and thus begins his hatred of Spidey.

            2. OR Beck finally gets his big break and is performing a magic act at a high end venue for a bunch of rich New York elites. Chameleon disguised as Spider-man and his thugs bust in and steal wallets and jewelry. This event ruins Becks career.

            All throughout the movie we also have Jameson running stories that villain-izing him. Eddie brock is Jameson’s go to journalist.

            At end of movie, the crime war/competition between factions reaches its peak. Action ensues, chameleon dies and his empire crumbles, Osborn’s company has now wiped out competition. He gathers some of the villains we’ve seen.

            BUTTON SCENE: Kraven (chameleon’s half brother) enters looking for revenge for his brothers death. Harry (responsible for Chameleons death) lies to Kraven and says it was spiderman. Kraven joins Harry’s group.

            • a. I don’t really think we need to explain where Spider-Man is in this movie. He could still be around. He could show up in the news now and then and he could swing by on the way to something else. He’s a busy guy.

              It’s already like that in the comic books. We’re just not following that side of the stories. When Spider-Man isn’t fighting this or that villain, he (the villain) must be doing other stuff too. Perhaps planning the next big fight.

              And that’s excactly what a guy like Green Gobling could be doing in this movie. Making plans. Casting villains.

              So this time, we’d see things from the villains perspective. That would be the point of the movie. Spider-Man doesn’t have to be away. He’s just not there all the time because it’s not his story.

              I think Spider-Man could be around to defeat some of these villains the first time they suit up. Like he defeated Sandmand in Spider-Man 3 when they first met. Those types of initial fights where the villain is still learning and Spider-Man could sort of humiliate them only giving them all the more reason to want to defeat him next time.

              b. I never liked the idea that Sandman was involved in the death of uncle Ben. Again, why do they need to relate everything to everything? I think the first Spider-Man, which was also the original background story from the comic books, handled it fine. Because it was never a mystery who the guy is and Spider-Man did catch him. Unlike Batman he isn’t fighting crime because it’s the symbol of a mystery killer from his past. He’s fighting crime because he has the powers to make a difference. That’s the lesson of uncle Ben’s death. When you’re the one who can make a difference, you gotta step up and make a difference. But when he caught that guy, he also decided what kind of hero he wanted to be.

              I think they’re trying to fix something that wasn’t broke, when they mess with that.

              c. I hope they won’t do Sandman and Doc Ock (again). I know this is a different storyline, but it would still feel like recycled villains to me. I’d much rather have them do Vulture, Kraven and Mysterio.

              d. I do get that you want the two factions and a war to get a story going besides the individual origin stories. But it sound a little too complicated to me.

              I’d suggest that the Sinister Six is a team without Green Goblin. They’ve already tied the Lizard, Electro and Rhino to him. Vulture is an electronics engineer that could also be/have been an Oscorp employee. And the other 3 could also have a past with Green Goblin one way or another. What I’m getting at is that they’d turn against Green Boblin and their first big fight together could be against him.

              Without him I also think they’d be a more sympathetic group of villains that are not all bad and potentially could be anti-heroes under the right circumstances.

  13. ASM2 was terrible in my opinion. Electro killed it for me, he was so lame and the fight scenes were not done well. When Spiderman is fighting one of these villains I’m looking forward to more Doc Ock vs Spider Man fight scenes.

  14. Technically only Four of the sinister siX has been introduced so they’d need to do ASm 3 before Sinister Six

    • Only if they must be introduced in an ASM movie and can’t possible get an introduction in the Sinister Six movie.

    • We don’t know for sure who the 6 will be either. It is possible that GG puts the group together so he doesn’t count.

      Current possibilities teased…

      Doc Ock
      Black Cat (who I don’t think will be a member)

      I think Kraven and Mysterio will be added by the end of the Sinister six movie

    • The amazing spider-man 2, was simply that amazing.
      I think were getting spoiled,to the point where we are taking these movies for granted.

      I started going to comic book movies in 1978 .
      I am a huge fan of Spider-man and Superman and others.
      I read the above and Iron man , Captain America and The X-men.
      I stopped reading Comics when Superman Died and returned and Spider-man got Married.
      Captain America quit and was then replaced by super patriot.

      of course the returns on the box office are the Non Diehard fans are losing interest after 4 spider-movies.
      They would have at this point regardless.

      Hollywood needs to stop milking them before they poison the fan base.

  15. To my knowledge, Uncle Bens killer, the guy with the star tattoo on his wrist was never caught right?

    The star on the killers hand should be a clue. The only 3 representations I can think of are:
    1. The killer will become Sandman because the star represents the night when the Sandman myth works.

    2. What if the killer ends up being the Shocker. The alter ego is Herman Schultz. The actual Schultz family crest has stars on its coat of arms. Also, the tattoo was on the wrist where Gauntlets are worn.

    3. The star represents ambition and reaching dreams. What if he is Mysterio. The character from Amazing Spiderman 1 became a MYSTERY for Peter and also Mysterio’s alter ego has the dream of being a famous hollywood star.

    We still need to see Uncle Bens killer brought to justice (or not).


    • You can’t be serious, Maguire was probably one of the worst things to happen to Spider-Man. The man is a terrible actor, Not to mention he really wasn’t a Parker. Those Spidey movies only did really well because like X-Men there was nothing else like them on the market. These current runs are just fine.

      • I completely and utterly disagree that Tobey was such a bad Peter Parker, and that those movies only did well because there was nothing else on the market.

        But it’s all subjective, so let’s move on.

        I doubt they’ll go back and continue the storyline of the other movies. But I could also imagine this storyline falling apart. It’ll depend on all sorts of things.

        If they don’t make ASM3, I think they should simply make The Spectacular Spider-Man (just to get a title that’s neither). Not a reboot or a remake. They don’t need to tell us how he became Spider-Man one more time. Just let him be Spider-Man already. And tell a good story with a great fight against a new villain. They could leave us speculating if he’s supposed to be the first or the second incarnation, or a third one, but at the end of the day it wouldn’t matter if he’s just a classic Spider-Man.

        • You can disagree, however they brought in the numbers that they did because there weren’t a whole lot of super hero movies out there. It’s the same reason why the first 2 X-Men were so widely popular and successful back then was because there wasn’t a massive saturation of Super Hero movies on the market, let alone many with well done visual effects.

          Tobey was also a horrible Peter Parker, his being chosen for that role is almost as bad as the “spider totem” bull in the comics.

          I wouldn’t mind seeing that Spectacular idea you have though. Skipping an origin story for a 3rd outing would be nice.

          • Forget the numbers and your ideas about how they reached those numbers. Those movies was also well-received and are still considered some of the best CBM movies.

            Yup, I like the idea of them just making good standalone Spider-Man movies. I think it’s the only way the character will survive in the hands of Sony. If they go bigger and bigger, they’ll reach an end.

            I don’t know what you think of James Bond, but it’s a character that has survived for 23 movies. Characters like that can survive if you just keep them close to their basic nature.

  16. That means Sony will give up the film rights and revert back to Disney/Marvel so the Amazing Spider-Man 3 will be made under Marvel Studios. the cameos except Stan Lee will not appear by either Captain America, Iron Man or the rest of the Avengers or the Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.

  17. spiderman is one of the best superheros in marvel
    comics ,they should just go with the franchise

  18. I have been saying it for years: Sony is doing it WRONG. Sell SpiderMan to the studios that are doing at least a decent job (Disney, I’m talking to YOU, make this happen) so we can put him in WITH THE AVENGERS. Disney is more likely to breathe some new life into the character bc they won’t OVERLOAD THE MOVIE WITH POINTLESS VILLAIN STORIES. They will feel more like real movies, real films.

  19. “Orci is currently working on the script for the next Star Trek movie (which he is expected to make his directorial debut),…”

    Dear god, that ends any chance of a recovery from the fiasco that was STiD.

  20. I just went impotent, I will never get an erection again and will need big black bulls to satisfy my wife for me until this gets sorted out

  21. Spider-man character would be able to last longer if it went back to Marvel/Disney. Sony doesn’t understand the jig is up and we are tired of them hogging the rights to this character.

  22. So long as Sony hogs the rights to SpiderMan, they will keep hitting dead ends, and making reboots. If Disney had it, they would make ONE brand, and they wouldn’t have to do a reboot! They would plan it better, and execute on it patiently.

    Listen to me, Sony–YOU’RE DOING IT WRONG. Just give Disney the rights already!

  23. If a Sinister Six movie comes out, won’t Spider man be in it?