Follow

Spider-Man

Character » Spider-Man appears in 9432 issues.

Peter Parker was bitten by a radioactive spider as a teenager, granting him spider-like powers. After the death of his Uncle Ben, which he could have prevented, Peter learned that "with great power, comes great responsibility." Swearing to always protect the innocent from harm, Peter Parker became the Amazing Spider-Man!

Why was the budget for spider-man was high as the avengers?

#1 Posted by moywar700 (2775 posts) - 9 months, 22 days ago - Show Bio

Both were about 200 million dollars. Spider-man was a street leveler while the avengers did an alien invasion.

another question, why didn't they make spider-man 4. Spider-3 wasn't great but wasn't bad as the legend of chun-li or catwoman.

#2 Posted by Tyrus (226 posts) - 9 months, 22 days ago - Show Bio

I actually saw the behind the scenes footage of The Amazing Spider-Man - from the looks of it, most of the fight sequences with the Lizard were entirely CG - But Avengers looks like it has more CG sequences, obviously because the Hulk and Chitauri...

#3 Posted by InfamousFish (352 posts) - 9 months, 22 days ago - Show Bio

Making movies takes some $. You have to realize everything that they needed (actors, equipment, etc.). And Spider-Man 4 would have been a horrible idea. The series needed a reboot, and I am happy with things they way they are. Sure the movie messed up in some spots, but with the start Amazing Spider-Man had, this series is going to be way better than the past one.

#4 Posted by Duke_Nasty (1017 posts) - 9 months, 22 days ago - Show Bio

I don't know but maybe it has something to do with making an entirely new movie. Avnegers could take the CGI, costumes etc of the solo movies and they already had most of the actors in place.

Still doesn't make any sense especially when you have RDJ, Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Sam L. and the other big names as opposed to Emma Stone, Denis Leary and a bunch of nobodies.

#5 Posted by moywar700 (2775 posts) - 9 months, 22 days ago - Show Bio

@Duke_Nasty said:

Still doesn't make any sense especially when you have RDJ, Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Sam L. and the other big names as opposed to Emma Stone, Denis Leary and a bunch of nobodies.

Those nobodies will become somebodies one day.

#6 Posted by Duke_Nasty (1017 posts) - 9 months, 22 days ago - Show Bio

@moywar700 said:

@Duke_Nasty said:

Still doesn't make any sense especially when you have RDJ, Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Sam L. and the other big names as opposed to Emma Stone, Denis Leary and a bunch of nobodies.

Those nobodies will become somebodies one day.

LOL yea just like that big hollywood star Toby MacGuire. Maybe Andrew Garfield will do a Seabiscuit reboot after hes done as Spider-Man.

#7 Posted by Brazen_Intellect (1089 posts) - 9 months, 22 days ago - Show Bio

Marvel sure got more bang for their buck with Avengers, I'm shocked ASM had that kind of budget after seeing it for myself, it was not that impressive by any means.

#8 Posted by Strider92 (11314 posts) - 9 months, 21 days ago - Show Bio

@moywar700: Well think about it. Marvel put some funding into ASM because they still endorse it but Spider-man also had all of Sony behind him where the Avengers only had Marvel Studios to back it. It probably had the same budget due to the fact both Sony and Marvel where pumping money into it. The Avengers had 1 studio ASM had 2 so its not really surprising the budget was the same.

@Brazen_Intellect said:

Marvel sure got more bang for their buck with Avengers, I'm shocked ASM had that kind of budget after seeing it for myself, it was not that impressive by any means.

I respectfully disagree.

I still love the Avengers and the first time I saw it I thought "Holy crap that film was awesome" but the second time I actually started to see the faults. The plot was very linear, had no real character growth (this could be attributed to the fact there were to many characters to really do anything about that) and they relied heavily on the "wow-factor." After seeing it the second time I would quite honestly rank both TDKR and ASM above it.

#9 Posted by nickzambuto (7809 posts) - 9 months, 21 days ago - Show Bio

@Duke_Nasty said:

I don't know but maybe it has something to do with making an entirely new movie. Avnegers could take the CGI, costumes etc of the solo movies and they already had most of the actors in place.

Still doesn't make any sense especially when you have RDJ, Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Sam L. and the other big names as opposed to Emma Stone, Denis Leary and a bunch of nobodies.

Denis Leary is a nobody?

As it stands, neither Garfield nor Emma Stone are A-listers, but I'm 99% sure that (so long as they don't get tight casted) by the end of their runs they'll have quite a reputation. They're both really amazing actors.

#10 Posted by cattlebattle (11099 posts) - 9 months, 21 days ago - Show Bio
@nickzambuto said:


Denis Leary is a nobody?

My thoughts exactly....the guy must of have been born after the 90s...Denis Leary was at one point the most successful comedian in the world, even though he did rip off Bill Hicks
#11 Posted by Vortex13 (10792 posts) - 9 months, 21 days ago - Show Bio

@Duke_Nasty: Emma stone I don't really think is a nobody. She has a pretty solid fanbase and film record, but you are right that they would probably not be as expensive to hire as most of the Avengers cast

#12 Posted by Avenging-X-Bolt (8915 posts) - 9 months, 21 days ago - Show Bio

Bunch of nobodies? Emma Stone is arguably one of the most popular actresses of the modern generation, Dennis Leary is a film veteran, an amazing comedian, and was the star of one of the hottest shows on tv until recently, Martin Sheen and Sally Field have awards coming out of their behinds......

#13 Posted by Sveppi (17 posts) - 9 months, 21 days ago - Show Bio

It probably includes a bunch of write offs for they failed Spiderman 4. Also, most of the actors aren't really getting a huge amount for The Avengers, so they can shave off cost there.

#14 Posted by Duke_Nasty (1017 posts) - 9 months, 21 days ago - Show Bio

@cattlebattle: I was saying besides Leary and Emma Stone it was a bunch of nobodies..

#15 Posted by Strider92 (11314 posts) - 9 months, 20 days ago - Show Bio

@Duke_Nasty said:

@cattlebattle: I was saying besides Leary and Emma Stone it was a bunch of nobodies..

Isn't that a good thing though? Giving new actors/actress's a shot? Give it another few films and i'm fairly sure not many of them will be nobodies anymore.

#16 Posted by Duke_Nasty (1017 posts) - 9 months, 20 days ago - Show Bio

@Strider92: I never said it was a bad thing, read the conversation.

#17 Posted by Deranged Midget (13022 posts) - 9 months, 20 days ago - Show Bio

It had a bigger budget? That's odd, some of the special effects were off TBH.

But to be truly honest, Avengers didn't utilize that much CGI until the final fight.

Moderator
Please Log In

This edit will also create new pages on Comic Vine for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Comic Vine users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.

Use your keyboard!

  • ESC