On Tuesday, Sony announced that Tom Holland will play Spider-Man in the next big screen adventure of this comic book webslinger. But will this English lad, who proved himself to be a good actor in reel life in “The Impossible,” find it impossible in real life to rescue the “Spider-Man” franchise?
Our forum posters have been furiously debating this hot topic. Join in their fiery fight here after reading a sampling of their comments below.
KyleBailey: The franchise would have been so much better if they just stuck with it. I think more people are annoyed that it is being rebooted AGAIN rather than it being continued. I think people were ok with the first rebooting because the whole team wanted to depart from it but this time around Andrew Garfield still seems like he was on board for more. It’s kind of a slap in his face too.
Tye-Grr: Marvel will save this franchise. Holland will get a huge career boost and perhaps prove himself worthy when we actually see him, but no way will he be the reason why the franchise makes it or breaks it. If I had to choose whether I think he will be good or bad in the role, I say good.
GloFish: Does anyone even want another Spider-Man movie? Like who could possibly care after five previous entries and the last three being totally mediocre if not outright bad. Despite the last one costing $400 million ($250 budget + $150 marketing), it was perhaps the worst one yet. And another Brit! If every role is going to be filled by some random actor from Britain why not just set the story in the UK rather than have to suffer through another poor try at an American accent.
AMG: I think Tom Holland can inject something fresh into the series. The reason why a Brit got the job was because out of those who auditioned, he was the best one – and he can probably do a decent American accent. I have faith in Holland, especially after a fantastic performance in “The Impossible,” and his work on the stage as “Billy Elliot.”
Do you think Holland is well cast as the caster of webs? Have your say HERE.