#Spiderman 3 full movie opening plus#
#Spiderman 3 full movie opening series#

Sony also announced that scripts for standalone movies starring Spidey antiheroine Black Cat and the long-awaited Venom were also in development. Meanwhile both Garfield and Webb indicated in interviews at the time that both were signed for a third film but not a fourth, further muddying the waters.

While the idea seems dubious, the Suicide Squad wound up workingвЂ¦ the second time. Reportedly, the Sinister Six movie wouldвЂ™ve been a heist film starring six Spidey rogues, although itвЂ™s unclear which. While all signs indicated that TASM3 would begin assembling the pieces of the Sinister Six for a potential showdown in a fourth film, Sony made things even more confusing by announcing that Daredevil showrunner Drew Goddard was going to write and direct a Sinister Six movie set in the same universe. There were also unconfirmed reports that Gwen Stacy would somehow be resurrected, although that too remained a sketchy proposition. It was never really ascertained who the third filmвЂ™s main villain would be (a restored Green Goblin was likely), but Paul Giamatti did confirm that he had signed to return as the Rhino.

#Spiderman 3 full movie opening plus#

Before this turn of events, the studio assumed success was already in the bag, and Sony had announced The Amazing Spider-Man 3 would release on June 10, 2016, and The Amazing Spider-Man 4 would follow on May 4, 2018.ДЇrom glimpses in the Oscorp lab of suits for Vulture and Doctor Octopus, plus a deleted scene in which the cryogenically preserved head of the supposedly deceased Norman Osborn (Chris Cooper) is shown to be alive, the implication throughout TASM2 was that plans to create the famous Sinister SixвЂ“a half dozen of SpideyвЂ™s most lethal enemies, all on one teamвЂ“were in motion for the future.

#Spiderman 3 full movie opening series#

Plus the overall box office of the series was headed in the wrong direction. But it barely crossed $200 million in North AmericaвЂ“a big, red, flashing warning sign for a movie and franchise of this size. Now, letвЂ™s be clear: $709 million isnвЂ™t chump change, and the film still turned a profit. It earned both the seriesвЂ™ lowest Rotten Tomatoes score (52 percent) and its smallest box office ( $709 million). The movie was subsequently dismissed as a mess by most critics and even some audience members. It also deliberately introduced characters and story beats only to leave them dangling as sequel bait. ItвЂ™s why The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is overstuffed with villains (Electro, New Goblin, Rhino), tangled up in plotlines, and how it could still find room to jam one of the most iconic moments in comic book history (the death of Gwen Stacy, played here by Emma Stone) into one film. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 was supposed to build on that, with Garfield established in the role and a slate of new villains designed to begin building out what Sony Pictures (then, as now, the rights-holders to Spider-Man and associated characters) hoped would become a Spider-Man Cinematic UniverseвЂ“even if it was based around one superhero (Spidey) and a whole slew of supervillains.Д«ut The Amazing Spider-Man 2 fell prey to the greedy kind of Hollywood thinking that prefers shared universes to spring up instantly instead of letting them slowly take root and grow.

The reasons why we never got The Amazing Spider-Man 3 are many, but perhaps the primary factor, as it always seems to be in Hollywood, was money.ДЄrriving five years after the end of the Tobey Maguire/Sam Raimi era of Spider-Man movies, which was capped by 2007вЂ™s critically divisive Spider-Man 3 earning a healthy $895 million worldwide, 2012вЂ™s The Amazing Spider-Man introduced Garfield as Peter Parker, retold the origin story yet again and managed to haul in a very respectable $758 million at the box officeвЂ“not as much as the Maguire movies, but still profitable and seen as a win considering it was a full-fledged reboot of the franchise.