- HOUSE POINTS - #
Minnie 0
Donald 0
Goofy 0
Pluto 0
 
reply
new topic
new poll

 Tom Holland cast as Spiderman
Miss Mandz
 Posted: Jun 23 2015, 11:49 AM
QUOTE
is currently Offline.
crashin' the party ;; guess they lost my invitation

Mandy
Female
3540 posts

Group Icon

QUOTE
Tom Holland has landed the titular role in "Spider-Man," making him the latest actor to pick up the web shooters and the first to do so within the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, Holland will appear as a teenage Peter Parker in "Captain America: Civil War" as well as his own self-titled film in 2017. There have been longstanding rumors that the new Spider-Man would appear in the star-studded "Civil War" film, with this announce as the first confirmation that the web slinger will put in an appearance. However, it's unclear what the character's role will be.

Holland competed against several other actors for the role, including Asa Butterfiled, Judah Lewis, Matthew Lintz, Charlie Plummer and Charlie Rowe. He was selected after stealth test-screening in Atlanta on May 30, which took place with Marvel Studios president Kevin Feige, "Spider-Man" producer producer Amy Pascal and "Civil War" directors Joe and Anthony Russo. Yesterday, Holland posted a trio of videos to his Instagram account, demonstrating that he's taken the time to perfect jump flips in preparation for the role.

Holland's past credits include "The Impossible," a tsunami drama in which he played Naomi Watts' son. He takes over the role from Andrew Garfield, who appeared in Sony's "The Amazing Spider-Man" and "The Amazing Spider-Man 2." Tobey Maguire originally wore the mask for Sam Raimi's 2000 "Spider-Man" film trilogy.

Jon Watts has also been announced to direct the 2017 "Spider-Man" film.

"Spider-Man" is scheduled to open on July 28, 2017.


SOURCE: http://www.comicbookresources.com/article/...r-man-lead-role

--------------------
user posted image
• PM • EMAIL • WWW
^
Savannah
 Posted: Jun 23 2015, 12:13 PM
QUOTE
is currently Offline.
You're never too old to be young.

Savannah
Female
276 posts

Group Icon

A third Peter Parker movie in fifteen years is overkill.

--------------------
user posted image
• PM • WWW
^
Dust Keeper Girl
 Posted: Jun 23 2015, 10:29 PM
QUOTE
is currently Offline.
with a smile and a song

Jenna
Female
309 posts

Group Icon

I, too, am kinda irritated by there being THREE different Spiderman stories, but that isn't what's upsetting me the most about this.

They had the perfect opportunity, especially with the Miles Morales character (I know about this and I've never read a Marvel comic in my life), to turn Peter Parker into someone other than a white male. I understand that maybe they're trying to keep it as "canon" to the original comics as possible, but it's not like the movies haven't already twisted the material farther than the changing of appearance. Age of Ultron alone has had comic readers raising eyebrows.

Not to mention we already have two Spiderman movie series with white lead actors, covering similar areas of Peter's backstory. I have nothing against the third actor chosen to play Spiderman (I'm sure he's very talented and nice) but thousands of fans have been petitioning very vocally about making Peter a POC this time around, With the already disappointing lack of diversity amongst the main Avengers (5/6 of the team being white males, unless you count Director Fury), we need someone different. I believe the interesting backstory Peter Parker has that many can relate to can be made even more relative by making him a POC.

I'm sorry for getting so political on this thread but really? How many white brown-haired Peter Parkers do we really need on the big screen? They might as well have just kept Andrew Garfield.
• PM • EMAIL • WWW
^
Miss Mandz
 Posted: Jun 24 2015, 11:11 AM
QUOTE
is currently Offline.
crashin' the party ;; guess they lost my invitation

Mandy
Female
3540 posts

Group Icon

Yep. And really, I don't see why they didn't keep Andrew Garfield and make a deal with Sony to include their films as part of the MCU canon. That way, we wouldn't be dealing with another reboot, and Spidey would already be suited up and somewhat experienced before being thrown into the Civil War. I know Marvel will probably prefer to put their own movie out because that's cheaper and makes them more money, but even so.

--------------------
user posted image
• PM • EMAIL • WWW
^
Savannah
 Posted: Jun 24 2015, 12:30 PM
QUOTE
is currently Offline.
You're never too old to be young.

Savannah
Female
276 posts

Group Icon

Andrew Garfield didn't lose the role because of the MCU deal, he was fired because he skipped out on a huge event with the Sony CEO at the last minute. I liked him as Spiderman, but he was clearly over it, which gave Marvel the perfect opportunity to bring some much-needed diversity in and they didn't take it.

--------------------
user posted image
• PM • WWW
^
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
Share this topic:
« Next Oldest | Marvel | Next Newest »

topic options
reply
new topic
new poll


 


 



THIS SKIN WAS BROUGHT TO YOU BY KIERA OF WECODE, SHINE, ATF AND CAUTION with edits by MISS MANDZ.
Thanks to LIBBY of CC for assistance with the header coding!