Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Rotation Advertisements



We hope you enjoy your visit to this forum.


If you are reading this then it means you are currently browsing the forum as a guest, we don’t limit any of the content posted from guests however if you join, you will have the ability to join the discussions! We are always happy to see new faces at this forum and we would like to hear your opinion, so why not register now? It doesn’t take long and you can get posting right away.


Click here to Register!

If you are having difficulties validating your account please email us at admin@dbzf.co.uk


If you're already a member please log in to your account:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Sony's 'The Amazing Spider-Man 3' Could've Been Worse Film Than SM3
Topic Started: Jul 10 2017, 08:28 PM (142 Views)
+ QueenTD
Member Avatar
My Dear Melancholy,

Quote:
 
Thankfully, the entire idea was scrapped and Andrew Garfield’s lukewarm Spider-Man was disposed of. But potential plot details from the third installment, the (thankfully) canceled Amazing Spider-Man 3, reveal that Sony’s incredibly creative studio executives were just bursting with ideas.

The idea was to have Peter Parker invent some kind of serum that doesn’t just regenerate lost limbs, but actually brings people back to life. That’s right, a high-schooler that figures out how to regenerate the dead. Parker’s abilities seem to have reached extraordinary new heights ever since he figured out how to make weird sticky stuff shoot out his hands.

This wouldn’t just have been a silly idea, logic-wise, but would have retroactively destroyed the one scene Amazing Spider-Man 2 got right; the death of Gwen Stacey. For Parker would have resurrected his lost love, and her dad too, creating a monster that would have presumably joined The Sinister Six.

Ideas that Sony threw around also, somehow, involved Spider-Gwen, Gwen Stacey’s alternate-universe alter ego, where she was the one bitten by that radioactive spider and becomes a female web-slinger. Presumably, this concept was seeded in a writer’s room full of toddlers smashing Spider-Man figurines together.

However the final product would have looked, it’s pretty clear that Sony had no interest whatsoever in creating a compelling story and were motivated entirely by one simple concept – marketing.


Bruh....Sony was geekin hard. Sounds like a cluster.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/danidiplacido/2017/07/10/sonys-the-amazing-spider-man-3-couldve-been-the-worst-film-in-the-franchise/amp/
Posted Image
Spoiler: click to toggle
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Darker
Member Avatar
The Lord of the Dark

WTH?

The guy who made the article is pretty high aswell, Gwen Stacy's death was never nailed in that movie.
Posted Image

Piccolo: Just how many people have you sacrificed?!

Cell: Sacrifice? Hmph, rubbish! On the contrary, it is an honor to become a fraction of my power.
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
+ Steve
Member Avatar
Greetings. I will be your waifu this season.

The regenerating limbs thing hardly seems that far fetched assuming it'd be based on Dr. Connors' research.

Way to sensationalize it...


But yeah...no.

Could they not just pick a Spider-Man story and make it good rather than make some bulls*** up.
Posted Image


Definitely not a succubus, fear not
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
0 users reading this topic
« Previous Topic · Television and Films · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Theme Designed by McKee91