My Plan to Save: The SPIDER-MAN Franchise

My Plan to Save: The SPIDER-MAN Franchise

The second article in my Editorial series where I lay out my plan to save a critically panned or a financially waning franchise. Click the title to see how I plan to save the Spider-Man film franchise.
SPOILERS FOR THE SPIDER-MAN FRANCHISE!!! AND JUST ABOUT ANYTHING SPIDER-MAN!!!

Editorial Opinion
By HenshinRider - Oct 15, 2014 12:10 AM EST
Filed Under: Spider-Man

SPOILERS FOR THE SPIDER-MAN FRANCHISE!!! AND JUST ABOUT ANYTHING SPIDER-MAN!!!

Hello all you beautiful people, I am Henshin Rider and I am here to tell you my plan to save the Spider-man film franchise! And before I start, let me just nip this one point in the bud. I bet a lot of you are thinking “Just give the rights back to Marvel – that would save it” and my answer to that is yes that would help save this franchise – but this would be a very short and boring editorial otherwise. I like to challenge myself when coming up with these ‘plans’ to save a franchise. I have a set of rules I like to follow. Allow me to pull the curtain back and allow you to see one of my rules, quite possibly the important rule for me. One rule I definitely stick to, no matter what, is that I try to suggest something that is plausible to the situations I am commenting on – such as when I wrote the Transformers editorial I tried not to suggest anything that was too out of the realm of possibility – similarly I will do this with this article, I will try to work with what is laid out before me. And I must say that, in my opinion, the Amazing Spider-man franchise has a lot of fantastic pieces for me to play with. I don’t think the public at large is aware how rich and great the potential this franchise has. There are so many pieces that are flushed away by the people in charge that have no fricken idea how to play with them. I’m looking at you Avi. Sony really hit a gold mine with Stone and Garfield. I don’t care what you say – but in my opinion, Garfield is the perfect Spider-man and Stone is the perfect Gwen Stacy. The chemistry between the two is absolute magic, I get swept up in it and am completely on board for the emotional rollercoaster. I think it was a big mistake to kill Stone off in ASM 2 – I think the next film (if it ever happens) will have a massive Emma Stone sized hole in it. Also before I start I’d like to say right off the bat that I really like ASM and thought ASM 2 was a flawed film with a good film in there somewhere after you take out all the superfluous stuff. So, with that tangent out of the way, let’s get to my suggestions to save the Spider-man film franchise.

Drop the parents
The whole parent mystery and sub plot did not pan out at all. I think this subplot is one of the main reasons ASM 2 fell short. So much time was dedicated to a mystery that all in all did not matter or interest the audience. There is nothing intriguing about this sub plot. I don’t care why Osborn ordered the Parker’s death – I don’t care about the conspiracy. I think the future of the franchise would be so much better if this silly baggage was just swept under the rug. And thank God the return of Peter’s dad at the end was cut. It was so stupid (despite fantastic acting from Garfield). It makes no sense and ultimately comes off as horrible fan fic.

You can still have the parents have some sort of role in the plot however. Such as their technology coming back to create the villain. If you wanted to introduce venom this would be the way to go in my opinion. But ultimately the parent sub plot (which was meant to span the whole trilogy by the way) really fell flat and bogged down ASM 2.


 

There is no such thing is too many villains – only lack of focus
Spider-Man has the greatest rogue’s gallery next to Batman. The problem is that the rogues gallery is so rich that there is a knee jerk reaction to just cram them all in to sell toys to all the kiddies. Ahem… Venom.

Also it doesn’t help that Sony is planning a shared universe solely centred on the villains. Anyway – my point is that there needs to be a central focus in the film. It is okay if there are three villains or even one hundred, as long as they mostly have the same goal and their plot converges together into one cohesive narrative. The problem with ASM 2 (and Spider-Man 3) is that the villains do not have a single through line that tie them all together. Goblin and Electro work together out of necessity and only for one portion. Venom and Sandman only team up to take down Spider-Man. There is no cohesive end goal for these partnerships. In fact that is one of the make or break point for a Sinister Six movie, the villains need a singular goal and work together to get this goal or at least there needs to be a through line that is followed until one of the other member’s agenda kicks in. The goal could be something simple as kill Spider-Man. I can hear you now, “but Henshin Rider, I thought you told us that was the problem with Spider-Man 3?!” Yes that is true, but hear me out. That was Venom’s goal, his end game. Flint Marko was more along for the ride – I, to this day, do not know why Sandman teamed up with Venom other than simple revenge.

Alright let’s look at it this way and let me lay some storytelling 101 (aspiring writers get your notepads out). In Spider-Man 2 we know Doc Ocks plan, he wants to complete his fusion reactor that he is too blind to see it will destroy the city. At the end he is trying to finish the fusion reactor and Spider-Man comes to stop him from achieving his goal. Spider-Man 3, Venom’s goal is to defeat Spider-Man while Sandman’s is revenge – kind of. The revenge only comes from the fact that Spider-Man kinda killed him but didn’t. The villains have no goal that is presented throughout the narrative, hence why many people see it as villain overload. There is no such thing as villain overload – the feeling of disjointedness comes from the wonky narrative and lack of clear goals.

 

More examples: Amazing Spider-Man 1, Lizard wants to change the world into Lizard people, Spider-Man needs to stop him. Amazing Spider-Man 2 Electro just wants to be noticed. So he does this by battling Spider-Man in a secluded power plant where nobody will see him. Goblin is just crazy cos he felt slighted by Spider-Man for being such a tool and not giving his blood, but it’s clear at that point that it probably was a good idea considering Harry could’ve died (IE Amazing Spider-man 2 is a victim of lack of clear motives and goals from the villains). Loki wanted to invade Earth. Loki wanted to please his father by killing the Frost Giants. Iron Monger wanted Tony’s empire. Whiplash wanted to avenge his father. Joker wanted to show Gotham for what it truly was and plunge the city in chaos.

Look, I could go on and on – but you get the point. A villain needs a goal that they need to attain and the hero needs to stop the villain from achieving said goal. A villain cannot simply be a bad guy just cos – even the most cliché villains have a goal of some kind that they want to attain. The more understandable goal the better, if you sympathise with an understandable villain then the writer has done their job right. I feel as if this was the attempt for ASM 2, but there was something lost on the way. The original vision was compromised, leading me to my next point:

Executives, leave the film-makers to make films
This point is pretty self-explanatory. Execs aren’t film-makers and their meddling hands can seriously compromise a film. One name comes to mind when I think of a meddling exec and that is Avi Arad. Look, I have nothing against the guy and I’m sure that he had the best intentions – but please just step back. We didn’t need Venom in Spider-Man 3, despite what focus groups said would sell toys, and we didn’t need all the crap shoved into ASM 2 to help branch out a shared universe. All this didn’t help the films whatsoever. In fact I believe Sam Raimi had an agenda to make Venom the worst part of Spider-Man 3 and put no effort in him due to the fact he was forced to shoehorn the character in. The problem is in a film like ASM 2 there is no singular vision and the film is pulled and tugged in different directions. ASM 2 is the product of several think tanks that were all pulling different directions. There is the writers (Orci and Kurtzman) who laid the basic blueprint for the film, the soul of it. Then you have the movie the producers want to make – a movie close to what the director and writers vision are, but more commercially viable. Then you have the movie the Executives want to make – IE FRANCHISE, SPIN OFFS, SPIDER-UNIVERSE! Then all the way in the back you have director Marc Webb who wanted to make a love story with a misunderstood loner at the centre of it. So In one ear Webb is hearing “SEQUELS! FRANCHISE! SET UP SINISTER SIX! SPIDER-MAN CINEMATIC UNIVERSE!” and his creative integrity is telling him another. Webb wanted to make a certain type of movie, the executives wanted to make a different kind of movie and what you are left with is a hodgepodge of what could have been a fun movie. You hired these people to make a film – trust them to make it and just leave them to do what they do. If all you want is a figure head so that you can tell them what to do, then be prepared to get slammed by the critics.

Make Sinister Six Amazing Spider-Man 3 in disguise
There is no way I could conceivably see a Sinister Six movie working without introducing the characters beforehand. I cannot believe that you can introduce all these rogues, play off like they are bad guys and also show that they are kind of good as well in one movie. There is only one way I can see a Sinister Six movie working and that is if they adapted a Superior Foes of Spider-Man type idea and had a cast of lovable losers not even on Spider-Man’s radar. A team filled with jobbers like Shocker, Rhino (in the ASM universe), Kangaroo, the Spot, the Looter and Boomerang etc etc.

But they obviously won’t go that route – so the next best case scenario in my opinion would be to make Sinister Six basically Amazing Spider-Man 3 under a different name. It would take a greater mind than me to juggle a singular Sinister Six movie that has the origins of potentially three or more new characters and also make most of them sympathetic. I just can’t see any way that could be good. It just makes more sense to have them as outright villains that are out to get Spidey and maybe one or two of them aren’t really that bad and this comes through by the end of the movie. But, I could be wrong. Drew Goddard is writing and directing – the man is talented and I trust him to do the best job he can. So this film could potentially be the dark horse that surprises us all – or it could be a mess. I want to believe the former.

Make the films more stand alone
These need to be snippets – parts of Peter Parker’s life. There needs to be a larger world, but not everything should interwoven in a multi film intricate web (ha!). Take a note from the MCU, the main issue most people had with phase one is how the films felt like Avengers: the prelude. So what did they do? In phase two they made standalone films that take place in the same universe, but can also be enjoyed without interlinking together. The ASM franchise needs to do this. They need films with an A to B main plot that moves forward and is resolved in one film. Sure you can add in small sub plots or snippets to foreshadow new characters (Smythe is a great example of this), just don’t bring up a major plot point and tell me “AHA! You have to wait another two years before you get an answer!” As it is I entered this movie with the burning question of what secrets are behind Mr. Parker’s new origin. I want to say that I was let down by the answer. There was so much build up and hype for something that turned out to be wrote, mundane and rather predictable. So my suggestion would be to create a standalone story that works first before adding in all the little references, Easter eggs and threads to expand the growing universe. This way you ensure that the main focus is on the story and not the next story.

Don’t be afraid to expand the universe
There are two points to this. The first is something that I would have thought impossible a month ago. A cross franchise crossover between the Spidey-verse and the MCU. I think that this would be a unique idea and hard to pull off. It is a risk, but risks are what Sony needs! The idea of their Spidey joining Avengers 3 or even be a part of Cap 3 is just too rich to resist. This could point eyes to Sony and re-invigorate the audiences who are no doubt receiving Spider fatigue. The obvious issues with this are that it would be hard to keep a consistent character between the different studios – not to mention the storylines! Also Marvel or Sony would have to make concessions for this deal to be pulled off. So the possible negative detractors for either party would be enough to stop either of them to make this monumental deal.

The next point is also about risks. Avi seems to be against certain risks, having recently said that Peter Parker is the only Spider-Man and that they will never replace him. There are so many stories to be mined with replacement Spider-Men. This could do so much with safe guarding Spidey’s future. You could introduce Miles Morales as a sidekick and then have him take over when Garfield’s contract is up. Just write him out of the films to be a family man with the occasional appearance here or there – somewhat similar to the clone saga. Speaking of clone saga you could also throw in Ben Riley as a clone that is not 100% identical to Garfield leaving the option for another actor to take the mantle.  Miguel O’Hara is also a must for his own spin off franchise as the 2099 timeline is just such a weird not to touch. This way you expand the universe as well as creating a rich dynasty making Spidey a legacy character – this is nothing ever seen before in film. Sony could really re-invigorate interest by taking story telling risks that audiences have not seen yet as well as secure their universes without the need to re-cast. This also opens a door to a potential mega Spider-Man film with all generations of Spider-Man teaming up to take on an evil.  That would be gloriously amazing (punintended). I can picture it now the Amazing Spider-Men!

Wrap Up
Look, Sony’s gonna do whatever it’s going to do and we can’t do much about it. Just keep an open mind with the future films. Sony is trying – they are actually trying to get something to work and I think they may be a little misguided with their direction. I just don’t want them to waste what they have. Garfield is the perfect modern day Spider-Man. There is no doubt that the character that has been in the books for the last twenty plus years is what Andrew Garfield is portraying. Sure Spidey never skated or was a skater boy – but people have to remember that was ONE aspect of the character and only in the first movie. It just pains me to see casting this good wasted on what could potentially be the most disappointing franchises around today. So what do you think? What are your suggestions to save the Spider-Man franchise? Did you agree with my points? Let me know and sound off below. If you liked this editorial have a look at my other articles, I’m sure you’ll like them. Also don’t forget to hit that red glove to tell everyone that you liked this editorial. Go on… Do it… You know you want to.  Until next time – Ta ta for now!

Two More Spidey Variants Could Swing Into Multiverse Saga As SPIDER-MAN 4 Is Compared To DEADPOOL & WOLVERINE
Related:

Two More Spidey Variants Could Swing Into Multiverse Saga As SPIDER-MAN 4 Is Compared To DEADPOOL & WOLVERINE

RUMOR: Tobey Maguire And Andrew Garfield Will Return For SPIDER-MAN 4
Recommended For You:

RUMOR: Tobey Maguire And Andrew Garfield Will Return For SPIDER-MAN 4

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

kong
kong - 10/18/2014, 5:24 AM
Bad time to post. Good article
nuyhm7ai
nuyhm7ai - 10/18/2014, 10:39 AM
i agree with everything you said but the miles morales part because the development is too soo since there is a bunch of things you can explore with peter parker that has been taken from the comics and just introduce characters from peter's life like betty brant, ned leeds, j jonah jameson, mary jane watson, eddie brock, norah winters, radny robertson, robbie robertson, glory grant, debra whitman, jessica jones, carlie cooper, etc. including villains like doctor octopus, venom, carnage, mister negative, tombstone, scorpion, white rabbit, grizzly, trapster, shocker, mysterio, vulture, sandman, etc. also you need to improve on andrew garfield's character of peter parker and spiderman making it feel more true to the character and the mythos. end garfield's appearance at the end of maybe Cap 3 or Avengers 3 part 1 and start with dylan o'brien. seriously i believe garfield is an incredible actor and would capture peter parker and spiderman brilliantly. i don't want him to get screwed over with him being accused of a dick, hipster, emo, or compared to tobey magurie. andrew has that and he needs better material as peter parker/spiderman.

miles would come in like a few more years probably like during season 5 or 7 of the spiderman television series.
View Recorder