Some of you old enough (like my twenty-six year old elderly ass) recall Untold Tales of Spider-Man back in the mid-1990s?
I remember it cost a buck and change, and served as the sole salvation for us comic-fans having to endure the dreaded Clone Saga. What was interesting was how it was written and drawn like the original Stan Lee/Steve Ditko run on The Amazing Spider-Man comic-book series and set within its continuity. So everything gelled with events that happened, but they still found ways to have fun with the period.
According to this week's issue of Entertainment Weekly, that might be the plan for The Amazing Spider-Man, a film we all thought was going to be a 100% Grade-A certified reboot of the franchise:
"Exec producer Avi Arad says the film won't erase what came before but will try to weave a narrative that could take place within the framework of the earlier films. 'It's not a comeback,' he says. 'You have to look at it this way: Do you want to know more about Spider-Man? This movie is going to tell stories that you didn’t see in movies 1, 2, and 3."
That's an intriguing way to go. It could certainly explain decisions made like taking the web-slinger back to high-school, no Mary Jane-Watson or J. Jonah Jameson in the cards, Gwen Stacy as the love-interest (But then again...didn't he meet her for the first time in Spider-Man 3 or what that a little up-in-the-air?) and having the Lizard when he was noticeably sitting on the bench during the Sam Raimi/Tobey Maguire/Kirsten Dunst films.
It also sounds overly-complicated when it isn't necessary and kinda defeats the purpose of starting over this franchise. I always thought the best route going forward without Raimi/Maguire/Dunst was keeping the supporting players like J.K. Simmons, Rosemary Harris and Dylan Baker and treating the film's continuity in a vague fashion like the pre-Daniel Craig James Bond films and Batman Forever.