So here we go with the reboot. Seems that Raimi, the actors, the studio and Marvel all wanted a say on the 4th film and couldn't agree on anything. So Raimi will move on to Warcraft and Sony will start from scratch. I'm fine with a reboot but this soon after the trilogy?

That's a little messed up. I say let James Cameron run away with his version of Spidey. He was high on doing it back in the 90's and I'm sure Sony will want 3D for the next Spidey so who better?

Not exactly. Thought it was linked to in the articles mentioned above: Deadline.com

There were some imposed deadlines that Raimi couldn't meet; it was less of a creative conflict and more of a time issue.

lot's of reports about all this dropping everywhere. the script for 4 was apparently god awful. it included a spider-baby, no shit! and also had the Black Cat turning into the Vulturess at the end of the movie.

Anyways, the reboot script is already finished. Apparently, Sony was up to something and back during last fall when it was reported he was working on 5 & 6 scripts, he was actually working on this "reboot" script! underhanded, Sony, underhanded! It was for a backup plan, just in case things went south with Raimi, which they did.

This reboot is a trilogy, starting in high school again with a retelling of his origin. it's also suppose to be darker and has already been compared to Batman begins. It's set to drop in 2012.

Sounds like bull to me.

First of all Raimi couldn't meet the expected 2011 release. So what does Sony do? They reboot and schedule release in 2012. Does this make any sense? If they wanted to stick with Raimi they would have just let him move it back a year since they were going to do it anyway.

All the sources I've read say that Raimi and the studio were fighting over the villain. Raimi wanted The Vulture, the studio wanted Carnage. Either way this apparently was a big deal in SM3 and was what lead to Venom being added to the movie (which makes sense when you watch the movie because it appears he was thrown in as an afterthought).

It comes down to this: for Spider-Man 1 & 2 the studio let Raimi do his thing. Then for some reason in the third movie they started bullying their ideas down his throat. I have no idea why after the success of the first two movies other than merchandising (Venom is surely a cooler action figure than Sandman I guess).

Of course all of this could have been avoided if they just went ahead and let Dylan Baker become The Lizard as the villain. It gives Raimi everything he wants in his villain: Someone close to Parker who the audience can also feel for (Osborn and Dr. Octavius).

But nevertheless we'll never know. Sony is rebooting again. Honestly I can't see sitting through the origin again. And I certainly don't need Spidey to be another Batman Begins clone.

Here we go again...

Personally, I'm all for a "reboot" for ALL superhero films. These are characters that can survive their own history so I see no problem with other creative crews handling the reigns and think it's for the best as any long running series can use a shot in the arm from time to time (see: Bond).

However, Spider-man has never been dark and I fear Sony is taking the wrong cues from the success of "The Dark Knight." This is the perfect opportunity to tell a fun, fresh story with a young hero as the lead and a built-in audience that's already familiar with his basic origins. Why waste valuable time? Just get on with the story.

Peter Parker was a normal kid who became a superhero by accident, what I missed with McGuire is the playfulness the cartoon character had but not too nerdy, playfull but still convincing, Mc Guire wasn't bad at all but there was something missing.

And to me the Goblin outfit was so dissapointing, sSo bring on the good stuff this time, let's see if Sony can do better.

Spiderman isn't a dark hero, but he isn't a wimp either, a younger version of Sam Worthington or Matthew Fox , should do Parker, Less nerdy but not too mean.

Logan Lerman - The main lead from PERCY JACKSON & THE OLYMPIANS: THE LIGHTNING THIEF = your next Spiderman.

AICN

shooting begins later this year with a July 3, 2012 release date. also to be in 3D.

I never thought I'd say this...

I'd rather Tobey McGuire

I think I read somewhere 3rd June 2012

Andrew Garfield is Peter Parker
[align=center]

SONY PRESS RELEASE[/align]
[spoil]
[align=left]
After a comprehensive worldwide casting search, Andrew Garfield has been chosen to portray Peter Parker when Spider-Man swings back onto the screen in 3D on July 3, 2012. The new film will begin production in early December directed by Marc Webb from a screenplay by James Vanderbilt. Laura Ziskin and Avi Arad will produce the film from Columbia Pictures and Marvel Studios.

Today's confirmation culminates what has been one of the most eagerly anticipated casting announcements in recent memory. Bloggers, pop culture speculators, and everyday fans have pored over and analyzed every conceivable online rumor in an attempt to discover the identity of the next actor to play Peter Parker. Garfield will immediately begin preparing for the coveted role.

The Spider-Man franchise is one of the most successful in film history and the three previous motion pictures have collectively grossed more than $2.5 billion in worldwide box office.

On selecting Garfield, director Marc Webb said, "Though his name may be new to many, those who know this young actor's work understand his extraordinary talents. He has a rare combination of intelligence, wit, and humanity. Mark my words, you will love Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker."

Commenting on the announcement, Amy Pascal, co-chairman of Sony Pictures Entertainment, and Matt Tolmach, President of Columbia Pictures said, "Spider-Man is a classic superhero -- a young man who balances his responsibility to serve humanity and crush evil with the shyness and normalcy of someone struggling to find himself. The role demands an extraordinary actor. You need someone who can magically transform himself from Peter Parker into Spider-Man. An actor who will depict the vulnerability of youth and the strength and confidence of a legendary figure at the same moment. We have found that actor in Andrew Garfield. From the first time we saw him in the upcoming film The Social Network, to his glorious screen test, which floored all of us, we knew that we had found our new Peter Parker."

Producer Avi Arad added, "I'm incredibly excited about Andrew Garfield. In the Spider-Man tradition, we were looking for a smart, sensitive, and cool new Peter Parker who can inspire us and make us laugh, cry, and cheer. We believe we have found the perfect choice to take on this role and lead us into the future."

Producer Laura Ziskin said, "We are thrilled to have Andrew Garfield for this new incarnation of Spider-Man under Marc Webb’s direction. We were fortunate enough to meet with a group of fantastically talented young men. In the end, we all agreed that in addition to being an extraordinary actor, Andrew had the right mix of humor, youth, and pathos, along with an underlying sense of strength and power necessary to bring Peter Parker and Spider-Man to life on screen."

The selection of Garfield was revealed at a press event in Cancun, Mexico for international journalists attending a media tour promoting upcoming films from Sony Pictures Entertainment.

Garfield is fast becoming one of the most respected and sought-after young actors working in the industry today. In a short career, spanning only five years, he has already been directed by, and starred alongside, some of the greatest names and received a BAFTA for a role that won him international praise.

Garfield most recently worked with director David Fincher on the upcoming film The Social Network. He previously starred for Spike Jonze on his robot love story I'm Here, which premiered at Sundance this year. He plays the lead male opposite Keira Knightley and Carey Mulligan in Mark Romanek's Never Let Me Go, due for release later this year.

Other notable screen credits include Terry Gilliam's The Imaginarium of Dr Parnassus playing opposite Christopher Plummer, Johnny Depp, Colin Farrell, Jude Law and the late Heath Ledger, Robert Redford’s Lions For Lambs, where he starred alongside Redford, Tom Cruise and Meryl Streep; Revolution Films' "Red Riding Trilogy – 1974" directed by Julian Jarrold, where he lead a stellar cast including Rebecca Hall and David Morrissey, and his unforgettable portrayal of a young ex-con in John Crowley's "Boy A," for which he earned the best actor BAFTA in 2008.

Garfield’s career began in theatre and in 2006 his performances in "Beautiful Thing" (Sound Space/Kit Productions), "The Overwhelming," and "Burn / Chatroom / Citizenship" (Royal National Theatre) won him the Milton Shulman Award for Outstanding Newcomer at the Evening Standard awards and the Jack Tinker Award for Most Promising Newcomer at the Critics Circle Theatre Awards. Other notable theatre credits include "Romeo and Juliet" (Manchester Royal Exchange) and "Kes" (Manchester Royal Exchange), for which he received the Most Promising Newcomer Award at the Manchester Evening News Awards 2004
[/align]
[/spoil]

Not what I expected but I'm glad they went with an unknown and I'm sure he'll at least look the part when they begin to shoot. Anyone else getting a slight Robert Pattinson vibe from him in these photos?

He's too old. Late 20's. He's supposed to be a teenager. Whatever.

That's what I don't get. Sony keeps saying they want high school Parker and then hire a guy who will be damn near 30 when the movie comes out.

To me he looks more like Peter Parker than Tobey Maguire.

For me the best realization of Spider-Man in live action thus far is that teaser trailer for the first movie, where the crooks rob the bank and during the getaway, their helicopter is yanked backwards and trapped in a giant web between the World Trade Center. Then you see Spider-Man swinging through the city with some pumping rock song playing. The actual movies never delivered the sheer awesomeness that trailer promised.

I remember watching that trailer over and over again thinking, holy shit - THAT'S SPIDER-MAN.

Then 9-11 happened and the trailer was pulled because of the twin towers in it. Shortly after that, I got to work on the Dr Pepper ad tie-ins with Columbia, so I was really involved with the first two films.

I recently was telling my kids about that trailer because we were listening to "Leave You Far Behind" by Lunatic Calm. I explained what it was like to anticipate an actual Spider-Man film and how fun it was to work on the promotional stuff a year before the release, but that nothing had the initial impact on me like that damn trailer.

Let's hope that they do this new Spider-Man saga for all the right reasons folks.

I too remember seeing that trailer before 9/11 then after that you never saw it again, or even saw that in the film which is a bit of a bummer.

Do you recall if the Twin Towers trailer made it to any of the DVDs or Blu-Ray as an extra? I'm just asking because I'm too lazy to look.

I think it's on the DVD, been awhile since I've actually cracked the first Spider-Man open though so can't say for sure. You can check out the original teaser on YouTube:

[flash width=640 height=385]http://www.youtube.com/v/gEmESFKmBRA&hl=en_US&fs=1?rel=0&hd=1[/flash]

I'm still kind of put off by them rebooting this series so shortly after the first trilogy ended with disappointment. Unless the trailers and design blow me away, I don't see myself caring.

If the Studio was clever they'd title the film: "The Amazing Spider-man" or "Spectacular Spider-man" to change it up, but I don't see that happening.

I blame the fact that Spidey brings in a ton of dough, not to mention they're probably planning the films to be in 3-D as well.

Well, I enjoyed Marc Webb's previous film, "500 Days of Summer," so I'm holding out hope for Spidey.



HBO's been airing the first "Spider-Man" ad nauseam lately and it's got me thinking whether or not Sony plans on adding Harry and Norman Osborne to the mix again. I mean even if they aren't going to revisit the Goblin saga no one can deny the importance the Osborne's played in Parker's early years.

Josh Hutcherson's Spider-Man 2012 Audition (download: joshtestspiderman01.mov)

[spoil][video width=540 height=450]http://bitcast-b.bitgravity.com/latinoreview/joshtestspiderman01.mov[/video][/spoil]

Above a is self-produced audition video by one of the top Spider-Man 2012 candidates "Josh Hutcherson". The video basically re-enactes the cafeteria scene from Spider-Man 2002. In the video Rivers Cuomo defends his half-japanese dressed-up-as-a-schooldgirl girlfriend from bullies.

Both Spider-Man movies have been airing on TV. I watched Spider-Man 2 the other night and it was a lot better than I remembered. I was overall less cynical towards it.

My favorite part of any Spider-Man movie is still the very brief moment during the train fight sequence in SM2 when Spidey is flung into the train and swings on the handrail to the shock of the passengers. Something about that is absolutely mind-blowing to me. James Franco is also really good in 2. He's goofy at points (not like in the other two, however), but overall pretty relatable as a character. And he's got this great James Dean vibe going for him. What a waste the third movie was.

I like Spider-Man 2 for the things it does well. I know the "raindrops" scene is absolutely silly (as is the cake scene), but I believe that the thing that works the most is the Peter Parker wanting to have a life without Spider-Man. Of course I think they could have saved that storyline until the 3rd movie because we spent pretty much the first half of "Spider-Man" just with him learning his powers. Shouldn't the second movie been more about how much he LOVED being Spider-Man that he was ignoring his Peter Parker life?

It just seemed that they rushed to the "I hate having to be a superhero" a little too quick. Anything would have been better than the dark Peter we got in the 3rd movie.

Emerging teen comedy star Emma Stone takes MJ Watson role.



I think this is a great casting call. Stone is a very, very likeable female lead - see: Superbad - and from looks alone, seems to be in the same league as Garfield. There's potential that they have pretty good chemistry.

This is a positive development, but I'm still very skeptical about this project.

I spoke too soon. It seems as though Emma Stone was cast as Gwen Stacy. So they take a feisty actress and perfect looking MJ and cast her as the less feisty Gwen Stacey?

I don't get it.

I get it.

It's Sony.

The LIZARD is the villain and Rhys Ifans will play the part. He is known for his role opposite Keanu Reeves in the Replacements as the drunk Irish kicker for the team.

Martin Sheen cast as Uncle Ben.

I believe this was relatively recently announced, i just saw the headline didn't read much of article but I think that is actually a great choice if not going for an unknown actor.

Gidget (Sally Field) is in talks to play Aunt May.

First Official Image



CAST

Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker & Spider-Man
Rhys Ifans as The Lizard

Martin Sheen as Uncle Ben
Sally Field as Aunt May (Rumor)

Campbell Scott as Richard Parker, Peter's Father
Julianne Nicholson as Mary Parker, Peter's Mother

Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy
Denis Leary as Gwen Stacy's Father (:what:)

Chris Zylka as Flash Thompson
Irrfan Khan as Nels Van Adder who turns into the villain named Proto-Goblin (:what:)

web shooters spotted! now just confirm the Lizard and we'll be all set!

I don't like the new look of the suit. I think Maguire's suit looks a lot better.

I may not have been the biggest fan of the spider-man trilogy, but one thing I felt the design team nailed was the costume. It was a perfect movie adaptation of the classic suit.

The lack of the belt design and the awful wrist flames are mind-numbing decisions.

Mechanical shooters are a huge plus - I just hope the plot uses them to great effect or it won't matter.

New Spidey, new look I suppose. It is what it is, I just hope the costume isn't indicative of the final film product as a whole (i.e. trying to be different just for the sake of being different). In a way, it sort of reminds me of the Spiderman 2099 costume.

On set pics with the mask on:



[align=center][flash width=645 height=385]http://www.youtube.com/v/m9hpP7d2-wo??fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0&hd=1[/flash][/align]

I'm not a fan.

If the lenses are red, that's flat out stupid. If the boots actually end up looking like basketball shoes, that's even more dumb.

It may just be a reflection since the car in the second pic has a bit of red bouncing off the front end.

It actually almost looks like a some fan's cospaly version of the Spidey outfit.

It's a reflection from the brake light off a car.

You're right, you are even more dumb.

can't stand the shoes. and it looks like the eyes are transparent though this might just be for stuntwork.

Don't really like the scaling on the spider on the back there, it feels way too small to me. I think I preferred the Raimi costume, purely because it looked so much like the traditional comic book version.

Allright dammit! WTF is this shit?? they're trolling the fans now. Spidey has a black codpiece!

Benovite's post has been upgraded with even more shots and in case you didn't get enough here are some more.





The suit has been airbushed to for filming purposes: abs and muscle definition etc.

THE AMAZING SPIDERMAN
(official name as of today)

The suit still looks ugly

I don't think the new suit is terrible, but those new shoes certainly are. In fact, notice how his feet are mysteriously bathed in shadow in that latest promo pic.

HI-RES 2104x3120. The film, which is now in production and is being shot entirely in 3D, will be released on July 3, 2012 (deadline.com):



As of right now it should be called 'The 30-Year Old Teenager'. Personally I would rather the film called "Peter Parker - The Spectacular Spider-Man". Parker would be in his late 20s and perhaps maybe using the black costume.