Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon MOVIES : The Amazing Spiderman series - Extended to four films, Shailene Woodley cut from upcoming sequel


    Enable Dark Mode!

  • What's HOT
  • Premiere Calendar
  • Ratings News
  • Movies
  • YouTube Channel
  • Submit Scoop
  • Contact Us
  • Search
  • Privacy Policy
Support SpoilerTV
SpoilerTV.com is now available ad-free to for all premium subscribers. Thank you for considering becoming a SpoilerTV premium member!

SpoilerTV - TV Spoilers

MOVIES : The Amazing Spiderman series - Extended to four films, Shailene Woodley cut from upcoming sequel

20 Jun 2013

Share on Reddit
Sony has set release dates for its third and fourth Amazing Spider-Man films, which hit theaters on June 10, 2016, and May 4, 2018, respectively.

The move sets the course for the marquee superhero franchise for the next five years. The threequel had been mentioned, but never a fourth film.

The Amazing-Spider Man 2, which will see Andrew Garfield return in the role of Peter Parker, is currently in production in New York and rolls out in theaters May 2, 2014.

“ Spider-Man is our most important, most successful, and most beloved franchise," said Sony Pictures vice chairman Jeff Blake, "so we’re thrilled that we are in a position to lock in these prime release dates over the next five years.”

Source: THR


Shailene Woodley will not appear in Sony’s The Amazing Spider-Man 2, and neither will her character, Mary Jane Watson, THR has confirmed.

Woodley’s appearance in Spider-Man 2 always was intended to be brief – the actress only worked three days and shot around three scenes – but sources say director Marc Webb decided to streamline the story.

"I made a creative decision to streamline the story and focus on Peter and Gwen and their relationship," said Webb. "Shailene is an incredibly talented actress, and while we only shot a few scenes with Mary Jane, we all love working with her.”

The plan now is for Watson, one of Peter Parker/Spider-Man’s iconic love interests, to be introduced in the third movie.

"Of course I'm bummed," Woodley told Entertainment Weekly, which first reported the news. "But I'm a firm believer in everything happening for a specific reason. … Based on the proposed plot, I completely understand holding off on introducing [Mary Jane] until the next film."

Source: THR

13 comments:

  1. 'Cmon guys! You are still on time to cast Molly C Quinn as MJ... Woodley is a great actress, but she's nothing like MJ.


    When i first saw Castle, i tought "This girl would make a great MJ if they reboot the series someday"

    ReplyDelete
  2. Briefly, Woodley is definitely not cut out for the role of MJ...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Nicolás Caballero Mühlbach20 June 2013 at 11:57

    Molly C Quinn is too cute to play MJ. MJ has to be explosive besides of pretty.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Kaalyn Johnson20 June 2013 at 12:21

    Woodley's been stuck on the worst TV show run by the worst writer in modern TV history, but she well and truly proved her acting chops in The Descendants.



    Molly Quinn fits visually, but MJ is fierce and Quinn has only ever played ingenue characters.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yes, she was really good in "The Descendants" but of course, some roles are not suitable even for the best actors/actresses.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sounds like Sony saw her brief scenes and will now be recasting.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Molly C Quinn is not a good choice and Woodley is definitely more talented.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Kaalyn Johnson20 June 2013 at 15:22

    I'm just not sure winking at Spider-Man proactively and saying "Hi, Tiger" is one of those roles.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Yes, it's also debatable but in terms of physical appearance, Woodley isn't suitable for the role in my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  10. So, BIG spoilert alert... Gwen will die on the second film.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Remenber that this reboot is based on the Ultimate comics... So Molly or Jane Levy are better choices, more juvenile and not that MJ that was a Super Model, a redhead beyond any other...

    ReplyDelete
  12. On one hand I think Sony has so far done really right by Spiderman. The first trilogy movies vary from great to decent (and for a series of movies that's good IMO) and the new franchise started out really really strong. So more of that sound fine to me.

    On the other hand I would have liked to see what Marvel would do with the character, and I for one am a little disappointed Peter might never get Whedon-written dialogue for the big screen...

    (the Stark bike on set though gives me hope both studios might be trying to come to a deal for some kind of crossover... maybe.... hopefully...)





    RE Mary-Jane: if it was a throw away cameo/limited appearance I get why they might have had to cut it. Sad to hear about a possible recasting though... we'll see what happens.

    They can see what they're gonna do with that if they monitor the reactions from the deleted scenes, if the DVD comes out before they begin working on #3 and considering the Mary Jane scenes will be included in the DVD-BluRay, of course.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Nicolás Festa8 April 2014 at 03:08

    My personal favourite to play MJ would be Karen Gillan, the one i see perfect for the role, alongside Gardfield... But Molly Quinn or Jane Levy would fit the role too.

    ReplyDelete

NOTE: Name-calling, personal attacks, spamming, excessive self-promotion, condescending pomposity, general assiness, racism, sexism, any-other-ism, homophobia, acrophobia, and destructive (versus constructive) criticism will get you BANNED from the party.