What's new

Spider-Man: Far From Home Sequel (2021) (1 Viewer)

Josh Steinberg

Premium
Reviewer
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
20,040
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
Again, I just don’t understand this knee-jerk, it’s a terrible idea that shouldn’t even be up for consideration reaction when we have absolutely no context to understand this decision in. If making 23 successive critical and commercial successes in a row doesn’t buy the benefit of the doubt, what’s the point?

I get that people don’t like ASM2. I actually think that was the best Spidey movie prior to MCU Spidey, but I’m in the minority of folks that didn’t care for the Raimi versions. But putting that aside, we know for a fact that Feige didn’t like it, as evidenced by the leaked email from the Sony hack. We know that Feige warned Sony at the time that ASM2 as the studio made it would eliminate the possibility of that version of the character merging with the MCU. It would seem incredibly unlikely given all of that that Feige is suddenly about to make ASM3.

But I also don’t get the idea that ASM2 was accidentally the way it was. It seems clear that the filmmakers had a specific tone they were aiming for, and they captured it. It seems equally clear that the audience didn’t love it, but it didn’t come together that way by accident. There were deliberate storytelling and performance choices made, and Foxx delivered the performance that was asked of him, just as any good employee does the job as his supervisor lays it out. Foxx is an Academy Award winning performer with a history of varied and acclaimed roles. I have no doubt that he’s capable of delivering a performance appropriate to the film being made.
 

TonyD

Who do we think I am?
Premium
Ambassador
Joined
Dec 1, 1999
Messages
21,032
Location
Gulf Coast
Real Name
Tony D.
But I also don’t get the idea that ASM2 was accidentally the way it was. It seems clear that the filmmakers had a specific tone they were aiming for, and they captured it. It seems equally clear that the audience didn’t love it, but it didn’t come together that way by accident. There were deliberate storytelling and performance choices made, and Foxx delivered the performance that was asked of him, just as any good employee does the job as his supervisor lays it out. Foxx is an Academy Award winning performer with a history of varied and acclaimed roles. I have no doubt that he’s capable of delivering a performance appropriate to the film being made.

None of that makes sense to me.


That movie wasn’t accidentally the way it was? Huh?

I thought all filmmakers have an idea going in.
That guy who made The Room had an idea too and his actors had thoughts and direction.
They captured a tone for ASM2? What do you think that tone was?

You also think Foxx provided a performance that was asked of him.
Maybe but I can’t figure out what they were asking of him at all.
I had to check to see if you were talking about Anthony Hopkins or Jamie Foxx.

He's had a few really good roles and won an Oscar but I think your going a little overboard with him.

If an actor is in a bad movie he’s part of the reason. That’s not an accident either.

He is capable of giving a performance appropriate to the film and he sure did that in asm2.

Just don’t understand the reasoning behind taking just about the worst thing in all these SM movies and using it again.

Next we’ll hear that Topher Grace is back to play Venom.
That’s okay too because I’m sure he performed whatever he was directed to perform so he did just fine.
 

Chip_HT

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jun 28, 2004
Messages
642
Real Name
Chip
Even that feels different because they went out of their way to give Simmons a different look than he had before,

I wouldn't say they went out of their way to make JJJ look different in the MCU. It was more of a function of not having time to create a hairpiece for a quick cameo.
 

Jake Lipson

Premium
Joined
Dec 21, 2002
Messages
13,505
Real Name
Jake Lipson
I wouldn't say they went out of their way to make JJJ look different in the MCU. It was more of a function of not having time to create a hairpiece for a quick cameo.

I took that as a deliberate choice to make clear that he was not the same version of the character as we have seen before. If it was the same character, he would be working at a newspaper, not a "controversial news website."
 

Adam Lenhardt

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2001
Messages
23,666
Location
Albany, NY
I took that as a deliberate choice to make clear that he was not the same version of the character as we have seen before. If it was the same character, he would be working at a newspaper, not a "controversial news website."
Yes, definitely deliberate. Same actor playing the same character, but not the same version of the character.

Assuming the reporting about Foxx is accurate, it's yet to be seen if that is a similar situation, or if the movie will be delving into the multiverse and Foxx's Electro is dropped in from the Garfield-Spidey universe.

We've already got a situation where Sony's non-MCU films with Spider-Man IP are incorporating characters and referencing events from MCU movies, confusing the issue further. Back when The Avengers was in production, there were rumors that the Oscorp Tower from The Amazing Spider-Man would be included in that film's Manhattan skyline, but that obviously did not happen.

The advantage of confirming the existence of a multiverse in the Far From Home sequel is that it provides a mechanism for an in-story explanation should the relationship between Sony and Marvel Studios break down again in the future. The Holland Spider-Man and his friends/family can get yanked into a parallel universe where none of Marvel Studios's IP exists. In the MCU, one of the movies can have a throwaway line about how Spider-Man has disappeared.
 

Jake Lipson

Premium
Joined
Dec 21, 2002
Messages
13,505
Real Name
Jake Lipson
Assuming the reporting about Foxx is accurate, it's yet to be seen if that is a similar situation, or if the movie will be delving into the multiverse and Foxx's Electro is dropped in from the Garfield-Spidey universe.

Two things: If they go with the multiverse thing, and Foxx's Electro is dropped in as you say, then they would have to go into the plot of ASM2 to get him. He died in the end of that movie, so his entire time as Electro occurs over the course of that film. They would essentially have to reference ASM2 and have some sort of multiverse portal open up during a scene from that movie to bring him into the MCU before he dies in the Garfield movie. Also, that would make ASM2 canon. I doubt they're going to want to do that. But then I didn't think they would ever want to bring him back in this role either, so what do I know?

I think Jamie Foxx is a terrific actor, and he has been in several movies I really like. I would like it better if they just brought Foxx aboard in a different MCU role that is not connected to Spider-Man, instead of using him as Electro again. There is more he could do well in the MCU than returning to the character that didn't work for him.

I also find it unusual that THR is the only trade reporting this news. So far, it has not been run by other sites like Deadline, Variety, or The Wrap as far as I have seen. If it was 100% a done deal, I'm sure they would all pick it up. So maybe THR got their wires crossed somehow? I mean, they're usually pretty accurate, but there has to be a reason that the other sites aren't getting in on the story yet.
 

jayembee

Supporting Actor
Joined
Mar 29, 2020
Messages
994
Real Name
Jerry
Generally speaking, I'm with you, Josh, but...

I get that people don’t like ASM2. I actually think that was the best Spidey movie prior to MCU Spidey, but I’m in the minority of folks that didn’t care for the Raimi versions.

I didn't dislike ASM2 as much as most, but it went wrong in throwing too many villains into the stew in the same manner as SM3 (my vote for worst Spidey film, and even that I didn't wholeheartedly hate) and a couple of the 90s Batman films. On the other hand, I still prefer Garfield to Maguire as Peter/Spidey, and his chemistry with Emma Stone's Gwen to Maguire's with Kirsten Dunst's MJ.

And my choice for best Spidey film -- not just best pre-MCU Spidey film -- goes to Spider-Man 2.
 

Sam Favate

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
9,711
Real Name
Sam Favate
On a day, a week, a month and a year when the news comes fast and is often bad, this one jumped out at me. I fail to understand how anyone thinks this is a good idea. Nothing against Jamie Foxx - he's a great actor (his performance in Ray is superb) but he was a poor choice to be Electro. ASM2 wasn't a good movie, and no one needs to be reminded of it.
 

Malcolm R

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2002
Messages
19,251
Real Name
Malcolm
This is the single big issue I have with this. I didn't hate ASM2 or anything, but retro-actively bringing in old movies that clearly were not designed as part of the MCU just seems very wrong and puzzling to me.
The majority of the mass audience does not think about or worry about such things. Many probably do not even understand what people mean when they talk about "canon".
 

dpippel

Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems
Premium
Joined
Feb 24, 2000
Messages
9,689
Location
Sonora Norte
Real Name
Doug
The majority of the mass audience does not think about or worry about such things. Many probably do not even understand what people mean when they talk about "canon".

Exactly. So why bring him back at all? What's the point? I'd MUCH rather see Marvel do another take on Doc Ock than see Electro shoehorned into the MCU in the form of Jamie Foxx.
 
Last edited:

Sean Bryan

Sean Bryan
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 30, 1997
Messages
5,105
Real Name
Sean
Jamie Foxx made this Instagram post which he has subsequently deleted.

The photo is FAN ART, but the sentiment behind it is obvious. I just hope they are laying the foundation for this but that it will be something for after Spidey 3. Spiderverse seems too big to do while at the same time addressing Peter being outed.

1601679235951.jpeg
 

Jake Lipson

Premium
Joined
Dec 21, 2002
Messages
13,505
Real Name
Jake Lipson
Well, this is better news than Jamie Foxx.

Benedict Cumberbatch will appear in Spider-Man 3. If the current release schedule holds, it will be before his own sequel.

 

Sam Favate

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
9,711
Real Name
Sam Favate

Jake Lipson

Premium
Joined
Dec 21, 2002
Messages
13,505
Real Name
Jake Lipson
I really hope not. I love what the MCU has going with Holland. If they go too heavily into the multiverse and bring all these other iterations back into play, I'm worried that the movie will break overstuffed and lose its focus on Holland's Peter's journey. Both Maguire's Spider-Man 3 and Garfield's Amazing Spider-Man 2 suffered because they were overstuffed with too many characters (mostly of the villain variety, but still) and too much going on. I really don't want that to happen with this film as well.
 

Jake Lipson

Premium
Joined
Dec 21, 2002
Messages
13,505
Real Name
Jake Lipson
I'm not saying he hasn't. I'm just saying it makes me slightly nervous. Of course I'm going to see the film and will get excited about it in due course. It's possible to be excited and slightly nervous at the same time.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum Sponsors

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
345,996
Messages
4,762,805
Members
141,626
Latest member
Sur
Top