New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

I also can't help but think that the brand is going to be diminished even further as Sony unrolls their plans to create their own interconnected universe with spin-off films from Spider-Man. The version of the character they currently have and the world he occupies isn't interesting or solid enough to shoulder multiple, separate films with shared characters, and as much as I'd like to see a Sinister Six movie, I don't think there's enough demand or goodwill on the part of the audience for it to succeed the way that Marvel's Phase One and Phase Two have.

Bruce Hall: The interesting thing here is that Sony's original Spider-Man deserves a great deal of credit for re-energizing the super hero genre in the first place (Fox's X-Men, of course, being the other big winner). But five movies in, the web slinger’s adventures feel more rote than revolutionary. Sony has to keep making Spider-Man films or the rights will revert back to Marvel/Disney, who would no doubt be pleased to take back the reins.

So now Sony is playing catch up, hurriedly forging ahead with plans to expand the Spider-Man universe into spinoff franchises, a-la the Marvel/Avengers model. This is fine, but it feels like bandwagon movie making, instead of a realistic attempt at something enduring. Once you spot something that works, fire up the assembly line and start spitting out expensive, less ambitious copies. And speaking of assembly lines, don’t even get me started on how the same damn writers get recycled to write everything these days.

But what do you expect? We’re talking about a results oriented business and artistic merit usually takes a back seat to carefully produced variations on the same lukewarm formula. And there’s nothing inherently wrong with that, unless you happen to like movies that are worth watching more than once.

Felix Quinonez: My perception of Spider Man is the same perception I've had for 20 years, Spider Man RULES. I loved the Raimi movies and now I love the Webb movies. I felt that Raimi's films touched more on the Stan Lee/Steve Ditko Spider Man. And now I feel like the Webb series really has a more Ultimate Spider Man by Brian Michael Bendis feel to it. And maybe the next series will even bring Miles Morales into the mix. (Wishful thinking, I know) But the point is there is a reason why Spider Man is still relevant 50 years after he was introduced. That's because he's a timeless character that will always resonate with people. All they have to do is put a fresh new coat of paint on it and make some minor superficial updates every time they want to restart a new film series and I will be there. And so will millions of other people who love Spider Man almost as much as I do.

Kim Hollis: I enjoyed all three of the Sam Raimi Spider-Man films a great deal, and that’s despite not really having a keen interest in the character. I’d say that Spider-Man 2 stands alongside The Dark Knight and The Avengers as one of the greatest superhero films ever. But I’ve never had the slightest interest in The Amazing Spider-Man or The Amazing Spider-Man 2. I didn’t see the first film and I don’t know that I ever will, and the same goes for the second movie. I think my reaction isn’t an unusual one. For whatever reason, this reboot was met with a bit of a shrug comparatively, and the declining quality of the films has impacted the franchise in a pretty significant way. I think the most interesting thing that could be done would be to integrate the character into a Civil War story with the Avengers, but I doubt that happens any time soon.

Continued:       1       2       3       4