Third Time Lucky? Spider-Man and Cinematic Reboots

The last ten years have seen three different iterations of Spider-Man on the big screen. Each with a different actor donning the mask and tights. Each displaying different characteristics of the comic book character. Each able to generate over $700 million per film at the box office. Yet two have been discontinued for a character reboot. In this post I shall explore the reasons behind this, as well as  the effects rebooting the character has had, before examining why rebooting or recasting is a potential problem for today's major superhero franchises.

First let's look at how the current iteration of Spider-Man came about. It all started with the Sam Raimi directed series, starring Tobey Maguire in the lead. After three (mostly) successful films the team started development on Spider-Man 4. This turned out to be a lengthy process and by 2010 Sony, the studio behind the films, was getting impatient. It had been three years since Spiderman 3 (2007) and Raimi felt unprepared to make the film in time for a summer release that year, so Sony announced that they would be rebooting the franchise. This led to The Amazing Spider-Man in 2012, followed by The Amazing Spider-Man 2 in 2014, Andrew Garfield taking the role. Meanwhile the Marvel Cinematic Universe (or MCU), Disney and Kevin Feige's creation, was well underway and proving hugely profitable. As fans may know, Spider-Man is a Marvel creation, however the rights for it to be developed on film were sold to Sony for Raimi's Spider-Man (2002). At this point the masked vigilante could not legally appear in a MCU film as Feige didn't have the rights to the character. However, after the mixed response to Garfield's second outing (Rotten Tomatoes give the film a score of 52%, based on 285 critic's reviews), Sony made a deal with Feige, allowing the character to be rebooted again - this time as a part of the MCU. And thus the Spider-Man we have today was conceived, played by Tom Holland.

Now, it's all well and good stating what happened, but the question is what effect did it have on audiences, and what does this mean for the future of the on-screen hero? Well, people still went to see all of the Spider-Man films - be them reboots or not (hence the box office success, mentioned above). Furthermore, Rotten Tomatoes' audience scores actually suggest that, rather than the reboots, it has been the disappointing sequels prior to them that have generated viewer dissatisfaction. The Amazing Spider-Man beats Spiderman 3's audience score by 26%, and likewise Spider-Man: Homecoming sits 24% higher than The Amazing Spider-Man 2. Indeed, Homecoming also earned over $100 million more than it's predecessor at the box office. From this it can be inferred that audiences embrace reboots if they follow on from let-downs, so long as they are superior to them. In fact, returning to Spider-Man, some even believe we've finally arrived at the perfect iteration of the character. Good thing, as now that he's tied to the MCU, Holland will likely be keeping the role for the foreseeable future. To date, even despite Thor: The Dark World's (2013) mixed reception, no major character has been recast or rebooted in the franchise.

Robert Downy Jr. with the Iron Man suit - could anyone else wear it?

But as well as a blessing, this could turn out to be a curse. What if Tom Holland decides to quit the role? He's now a part of a shared universe, so simply rebooting or replacing him with a new actor would create major consistency issues. Indeed, though Holland doesn't look to be leaving anytime soon, other key players such as Robert Downy Jr. - very much the face of the MCU as Iron Man - and Chris Evans - also a major contributor, as Captain America - are reportedly looking to depart from their roles in the near future. Downy expressed interest in walking away from the role after next year's Avengers: Infinity War. From this it could be inferred that Iron Man shall see closure in the film, removing both the actor and character. But Feige doesn't seem to think this necessary, saying, in an interview with Entertainment Weekly, that "I see no reason why Tony Stark can’t be as evergreen as James Bond, Batman, or for that matter, Spider-Man.” Each of these characters has been recast or rebooted successfully in the past, but none within a shared cinematic universe. To date, only a supporting character - James Rhodes from Iron Man - has ever done this, in fact, and that was after appearing in only a single film. Could the same be done with a major character after eight or nine films? I certainly couldn't see it sitting well with audiences.

What's more is, this issue isn't just posing a threat Marvel's future. Warner Bros. are rumoured to be having similar problems with Ben Affleck as Batman and Jared Leto as The Joker - both possibly leaving in their roles within the DC Extended Universe. Could this spell the end of these super-hero franchises as we know them? Only time will tell. Perhaps, as with Spider-Man: Homecoming, audience's will accept whatever changes are made to the characters just so long as the films themselves are good enough.