Andrew Garfield Talks ‘Spider-Man’, Web-Swinging & Character

Published 4 years ago by , Updated August 9th, 2013 at 1:16 am,

MTV recently caught up with Social Network star Andrew Garfield, who will of course be playing the new Peter Parker in director Marc Webb’s upcoming Spider-Man reboot.

In the interview, Garfield talked (more) about what it’s like being tapped to play one of the most iconic and recognizable superheroes in the world, how his web-swinging skills are fairing and how Marc Webb’s vision of Peter Parker / Spider-Man will be all about character.

Former Mary Jane Watson Kirsten Dunst recently gave a piece of advice to new cast franchise stars Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone (who will play love interest Gwen Stacy): Get your web-swinging skills in order. (OK, so I’m paraphrasing.) MTV asked Garfield if he was truly ready to heed Dunst’s advice and ride the web, and we’re not sure the actor understood the question correctly:

Andrew Garfield: I’m OK with swinging. I’ve been swinging since I was four. Wait, no, that can be misinterpreted!

Hey, if you can’t make a few jokes about “swinging” what good is it playing Spider-Man, am I right?

As for the challenge (and immense pressure) of playing iconic fanboy favorite, Spider-Man, Garfield had this to say:

AG: I was told by someone who should be listened to — I’m not going to say who it was — he said, “Don’t try and live up to it. Don’t think you have to live up to what that image and that symbol means to people.” And first I thought that was really reassuring. But then you go, “No, I really want to live up to that symbol.”

When I was 12-years-old I saw the struggle Peter Parker was going through to be of use to society, I wanted to live up to that. And I realized that even Peter Parker is trying to live up to that symbol of Spider-Man he’s created. That’s what makes him so special: he’s undeniably human and going through the same struggles as everyone else. So you try to live up to that symbol and then you have to be OK not living up to it, because not even Peter Parker can do it.

Finally, while answering a different question, Garfield addressed how Marc Webb is approaching this Spider-man reboot from the all-important angle of character matters first and foremost – an attitude that Garfield wholeheartedly supports:

AG: …I’m really excited for Marc Webb, because he’s a real stickler for that sort of stuff. He wants everything to come from Peter Parker’s dilemma, Gwen Stacy’s dilemma, Uncle Ben’s dilemma — everyone’s struggles, so that in those bigger sequences, it’s actually not just a cool fight, but there’s heart and specificity.

Garfield also talked about what it’s like acting in front of a green screen; the advice about Peter Parker given by Stan Lee; and finally, what Garfield learned about creating an effective comic book character onscreen while working with the late Heath Ledger on The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus. To read those portions of the interview, head of over to MTV.

Spider Man1 Andrew Garfield Talks Spider Man, Web Swinging & Character

When Andrew Garfield was first announced as the new Peter Parker I (like many Spidey fans) was scratching my head. But after seeing the kid act in The Social Network and his moving turn in Never Let me Go, I dare say we have one really talented rising star portraying the new Peter Parker. The fact that Marc Webb (who proved with 500 Days of Summer that he can be stylish, innovative and yet intimate and focused) is seemingly attacking this film from the right angle – character first – is also a very positive sign.

As former Screen Ranter Jamie Williams recently told me over on Twitter: based on the way this film is shaping up, and based on what the stars and filmmakers are saying, we shouldn’t be surprised if they end up titling this reboot Peter Parker: Spider-Man.

The Spider-Man reboot is slated to start filming in December and the film will be released in 3D on July 3, 2012.

Source: MTV

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to 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.


  2. this has to be the pits for this franchise, a reboot after just three movies and another origin story. they need to call this ULTIMATE SPIDERMAN… because its what is going to look like, this franchise continues to get worse and worse. i bet MARC WEBB is going copy the DARKNIGHT alot (see that fact that spidey’s parents are in movie) no wonder they are giving him only 80 million to film this. maybe the action and 3D will make up for it. however i highly doubt it will even be exicting at all…

  3. I have my reservations for this movie. I feel no excitement for it at all.

    • I understand exactly how you feel because I feel the same way. Spidey is one of my all-time favorite characters, but this film holds no excitement for me. Who woulda thunk it?

  4. I’m NOT seeing this movie. This guy looks like a TOOL. I don’t care if The Lizard is the villain or not, I refuse to see this movie. I will stick with the original 2 and half movies.

  5. i just want to see the lizard, more doc ock, and the scorpion. and the real symbiotes. also would love to see a remake to the x-men since they are not doiing x-men 4 and 5 back to back.

  6. I’m hesitant but I’m willing to give the dude a chance.

    • yyh same

    • yah i agree.. we must atleast give him a chance.
      I mean everyone needs an opportunity.

  7. What will the suit look like? They can’t use the same one…

    • I think they willuse the same suit. I hope not..

      • Nope, it’s a new suit. I know the guy who designed it. It’s more or less sticking to the classical design, but with some elements of “2099″ incorporated. Kind of a strange route to take.
        And just as proof so when the costume debuts, the colours have opposite elements in them, so the red can turn to blue when lit differently, and vice versa.

          • Thanks for the info Grace!

            • I wish I could show you all the pictures, sadly my friend and I would be sued out of house and home by Sony if we did! Not sure how long the wait will be, though.
              As for the 2099 thing, it’s only certain elements- around the gloves, certain patterning along the legs, that remind me of the series. The costume as a whole does remain fairly traditional.

                • They really needed to do concept art for Spider-Man????

                  • “Oh my goodness, what the suit gonna look like?”

                    “Oh probably like the Spider-Man suit”

                    (I really hope that conversation DIDN’T happen)

        • Just when I thought this film couldn’t get any worse for following the “Ultimate” route, it becomes despicably rotten with the costume possibly taking elements of “2099″.

          Typical PHONY SONY.

          • Actually I have no problem with them going the “Ultimate” route. I´d like to see Spider-Man developing his web-shooters… And you can´t deny that Bendis did a good job with SM´s 21st century origin…

            • @ scapegoat1

              Thanks for the link. It is a cool picture. I appreciate & respect your opinions on “Ultimate” & “2099″. The “2099″ costume looks ULTRA cool, but I haven’t read the Bendis books. I’ll take your word that they’re good. I might actually check it out at my next comic book store visit. :-)

              I’m assuming the “2099″ SM is either some one related to Peter Parker or a new character all together.

              I’m probably in the minority here but The “Ultimate” universe is something I have never taken a liking to. I tried by purchasing the titles for a while BUT soon grew weary of them. They simply aren’t the same characters I grew up with and love. Strange perhaps but I love the original MARVEL universe more.

              I feel that the “Ultimate” universe would have been better served with entirely brand new characters. Stretching my imagination further for new re imaginings and alternative universes modifying popular mainstay super heroes just doesn’t cut it for me anymore.

              I have been reading MARVEL since I was ten years old in 1975, so I guess that makes me old school. There are a few of the original mainstream titles I still buy. “Amazing Spiderman” is one of those and I suppose that is why I’m so intent in seeing a true & faithful adaptation of Spiderman as a mature hero in adulthood. :-)

              • SM 2099 is not realted to Parker. His Name is Miguel O´Hara. You should read the wikipedia article on him. It sums up the whole Story. It´s interesting.

                And I was sceptic too, when I first heard about the Ultimate Universe. But I started reading Ultimate X-Men and Mark Millar proved that this “reboot” worked. It was a lot more mature than the mainstream X-Men (at least at their beginning). I don´t read single comic books anymore since I was 17 or so. From time to time I buy trade paperbacks. It´s cheaper (especially in Germany), and you can read a whole arc in one rush. You should really read the Ultimates 1 and 2. The stories are great and the art is fantastic. But DON´T READ the most expensive toilet paper of all time, Ultimates 3!

                • @ scapegoat1

                  I had a look at Wikipedia in relation to “2099″. It is interesting. I didn’t know there were several “2099″ titles. Also had a look at “Spider-Man 2099″. I have always enjoyed Peter Davids’ work.

                  Sorry, but the purist, and cynic in me is still wary of the “Ultimate” universe but hey you never know, I might revisit Ultimates 1 and 2 one day.

                  “……the most expensive toilet paper of all time, Ultimates 3!” LOL, classic comment. :-)

                  • Yeah, that´s all it is. Expensive TP. That story could have been written by a 12 year old fanboy. And the dialogues are just… I don´t even have a word for this. Ultimates 1 and 2 were “realistic”, well written stories with an ultra detailed art, and then comes Jeph Loeb and turns it into a cartoon with so many continuity errors and plot holes. The only reason I bought the paperback was Joes Madureira´s art. But what can you expect from the guy who was responsible for that Onslaught fiasko in the 90s..?

              • Magnetic I’m a little surprised you would say they are not the same characters you know and love. My experience with the Ultimate comics is that the characters are essentially exactly the same. Minor tweeks here and there but the personalities don’t really change. All they are doing is telling the same stories with a modern update and changing a few of the more extreamly cheesy aspects of the regular comics trying to make the books make a little more sense by cutting out alot really poor quality stuff from the early years. Something DC should try especially with Batman I’d love to read a bat comic where his history doesn’t involve bat mite or really cheesy dialogue and poor story crafting batman could really use ditching the 60s.

                Personally I like the Ultimate books or sone of them at least. Didn’t like Ultimate Spiderman that’s the only character that I think they actually changed the core personality to. Spiderman ultimate isn’t even close to amazing spiderman just a shadow of him self. I enjoyed Ultimate xmen for awhile but around like Volume 8 or so it started getting as convoluted as the regular contanuity xmen. Ultimate Ironman was good but moving along slow because Orson Scott Card is very bust though amazingly gifted.

                • Daniel, I disagree. Some of the ultimate characters are very different from the regular Marvel characters. Wolverine is a selfish d**k who tried to kill Cyclops, because he wanted Jean Grey. And the regular Captain America would never kick Banner in the face and crack a joke. But this is what I like(d) about the Ultimate Universe. New twists on old characters. Until Jeph Loeb came along and ruined everything that Millar and Bendis built.

                • @ Daniel f

                  Yeah I definitely agree on “Ultimate Spiderman”. With the other titles though, whilst I loved the art work I found I just couldn’t relate to the tweaks and personality changes I felt were present.

                  I guess I terribly old school and extremely nostalgic and find re imaginings and alternative universes harder to accept. :-) Strange but true for a comic book reader. :-)

                  I quite fond of the early MARVEL titles from the early 60′s. I own so many, even DC titles from that period and I would associate the cheesy aspects and poor dialogue more with some of the DC stuff, especially Batman & JLA. Not having a go at DC, just my perception of books from that period.

                  Overall I think there was good and bad quality comics from both companies. The fact that I own so much MARVEL makes me a little biased. :-)

                  • Magnetic I think your being a little marvel biased there. Honestly both companies suffer from the very very cheesy aspects and poor dialogue in the early years. Personally I can’t read a comic from before the 70′s anymore and half the 70′s stuff I can barely read. They didn’t care about crafting good stories or taking the comics serious and they still treated it like it was just for little kids. Not like they are now. I think the Ultimate comics is a nice way to touch on the early years with out that bad story telling that existed before also it’s a nice way to tell the early stories to younger fans who want a story that makes sense, but lets face it Marvel and even DC continuity really doesn’t make sense any more it’s so convoluted and impossible to follow these days after decades of stories and multiple eras.

                    All that said I finally found my Avengers #24 from the 60 the one I thought my ex had stole. So now I can finally try and sell it.

  8. They’re not makin a X-men 4?

    • They already did, it was called Wolverine!

  9. And yet I still don’t want to see it. I think it was Bad casting and while Webb is talented he isn’t really familar with action. Not to mention another origin story and going with ultimate spidey?

    Not even gonna bother with it at the 1$ theater.

    Also making Lizard the first rogue Is a mistake you have the build the Conners Parker relationship before bringing in the lizard he should of been saved for part 2.

    • I know nothing of Webb. What I do know is this: casting a Brit for an American Comic book Icon is just bad. Before all of you jump on my back and cry Batman…I’ve never liked Bale in that role either. DSB if you’re out there no offense mate :)

      • How about Robert Downey Junior as Sherlock Holmes? Is the reverse okay?

      • Ben Kingsley (a british actor) played Ghandi (an indian icon), and no one had an issue with that. Hell, he even won an academy award for his performance. It’s called “acting” for a reason.

      • Anthony, I don’t take any offence but surely it should just be the right actor for the role regardless of where they are from?

        I can’t say I’m looking forward to this film, I fail to see how it could possibly be any worse than Spiderman 3, and I think I’d give the lead actor a chance, I hate slamming a film when I’ve not seen a single frame of footage.

        • Hugh Jackman is from Australia and he played a canadian Wolverine… No one complained about that either. Or Patrick Stewart (british) as an american Charles Xavier. British actor Ian McKellan playing a polish Magneto… The list goes on and on…

          • Exactly. I really don’t care about the actor’s nationality. As long as he/she captures the essense of the character.

      • Have no problem what so ever with casting a Brit. I’m not sure why anyone would as ling as they can do an American accent and are good actors I see no problem.

    • You have a $1 theater????????

      • Yea I got a $1 theater. It’s like an in between of regular theater and DVD release. Usually 3-4 months after a movies release it shows up in there. It’s a buck to get in but the snacks are not any cheaper 4 bucks for a soda.

  10. I have no interest in this film what so ever

  11. I’m going to revise my statement from earlier, I will see the new Spiderman movie series WHEN and IF they have Felcia Hardy a.k.a The Black Cat. Until then the answer is No.

  12. It’s pointless to comment how you have no interest at all in this. If you took the time to browse the article and to type a comment obviously you care somewhat. It’s the million people not commenting at all who truly have no interest.

    • I have an interest in Spider Man. So, of course, I’ll read just about any article regarding everyone’s favorite web slinger. And, I’m completely put off by this ‘re-boot’. COMPLETELY. So of course, being a Spider Man nerd reading Spider Man articles on Screen Rant, I have to express my nerd outrage in the comments section. In my own microscopic way, I want the world to know how much I think this stupid and unnecessary this film is. Rant over.

    • This PHONY SONY franchise is about milking the cash cow for all it’s worth. I have an interest in the original mainstream, best selling flagship title “Amazing Spiderman” a very different character to what Raimi presented in his version and what appears to be presented here. So yeah I care a lot.

      Okay , so this is a reboot and it’s not following any of the MARVEL continuity, BUT the original mainstream source material “Amazing Spiderman” issue #28 (Sept. 1965) featured Peter’s graduation from High School.

      Marvel moved on 45 years ago after only 2 and a half years of High School and Peter began attending Empire State University in #31 (Dec. 1965), the issue which also featured the first appearances of friends and classmates Gwen Stacy and Harry Osborn.

      Obviously PHONY SONY isn’t following that original continuity but I’m still interested in a Spiderman movie one day that portrays a mature hero in adulthood.

    • I have no interest in seeing this movie either. But I have nothing better to do with my life than read about it…

  13. I hate everything about this ‘re-boot’. Marc Webb can take his Spider-Tween emo crap and shove it straight up his goblin hole.

  14. how can people say that Andrew is old. He’s on his mid-20′s while Tobey was born on the year 1975. duh!!! pls let’s give Andrew the credit. Judge him when the movie comes out.
    ive never been a fan of Spider man but knowing dt andrew will take the role then i think i wud be more enthusiastic to watch the film