TV, Film, and Entertainment News Daily

The Amazing Spider-Man Sequel Set For May 2014 Release

Although The Amazing Spider-Man doesn’t open for another 11 months, Sony is wasting no time in setting a date for the sequel to director Marc Webb’s franchise reboot. The studio, which put screenwriter James Vanderbilt to work on the script in March, announced this morning  that the follow-up will open on May 2, 2014, kicking off the summer movie season.

The first movie, which hits theaters on July 3, 2012, stars Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Rhys Ifans, Martin Sheen, Sally Field, Irrfan Khan, Denis Leary, Chris Zylka, Campbell Scott, C. Thomas Howell, Julianne Nicholson and Annie Parisse.


  • pDUB

    well at long as they are cranking them out the property may revert to marvel faster than if they spaced them out more.

  • TheCommander

    Keep clutching to those rights Sony.

  • Shifty

    Shouldn’t they wait to see if this movie does any good BEFORE plotting a sequel?  I mean, that’s how you end up with Batman & Robin or Fantastic Four 2 or Spider-Man 3 or X-Men 3.

  • Mars Bonfire

    I was under the impression that as long as Sony never leave Spider-Man in “development hell”, they have the rights in perpetuity otherwise it would revert back to Marvel/Disney. So we will be seeing a Spider-Man reboot every 10 years or so. The same thing for Fox and X-Men.

    No in one in their right mind from Sony or Fox would hand over a movie/merchandising revenue stream to a competitor, would they?

  • Brian from Canada

    You’re semi-right about Sony: they need to produce a film every few years or the rights revert back to Marvel — both for Spider-Man AND Ghost Rider, which explains the sequel starring Nicholas Cage. (Had one not gone into production, Columbia would have lost the rights.)

    But you’re wrong about Fox. Fox owns the rights to Fantastic Four, X-Men and Daredevil in perpetuity, along with ancillary characters like Elektra and Silver Surfer. The only way for Marvel to get THEM back is for Disney to buy the rights from Fox.

    Not that they would want to at the moment. For one thing, Fox produces the films and that saves Marvel some money while they develop other properties (i.e., Avengers, Dr. Strange, etc.). For another, equally important reason, Fox saw the increased royalty rate Marvel got for Spider-Man and matched it, keeping the profit level high for Marvel.

  • Brian from Canada

    Um… all three of those examples followed well-performing previous films. The only sequel to follow a poor performance premiere is The Punisher, and War Zone’s failure has led to Marvel getting back the rights to Frank Castle to make their own version.

    Besides, if poor performance were so important, we wouldn’t have WB telling us Green Lantern 2 is on its way, would we? 

  • Bigntalljj

    That’s funny because other then avid comic readers most do not know who Green Lantern is. The fact that it still made the money that was put into it shows that people want to know more about it, hence Green Lantern 2. Not to mention it was one of few that actually stayed pretty true to the comic itself which Marvel obviously has an issue with. Plus they did not mention Green Lantern 2 coming out until after it left the box office. 

  • Used Sneakers

    Sony is obviously a bunch of idiots! It’s too soon for a reboot as it is
    (I waited 3 movies for Sam Raimi’s version of the
    Lizard), and the new suit sucks (in my humble opinion), and
    watching the trailer, the new origin doesn’t look too promising. Now
    they’re planning the sequel before the first movie fails. I hope they
    can spare the millions they’re gonna lose. What am I thinking? Of course
    they have the millions they’re gonna lose! 

  • Z-

    Another good example of cashing you’re check before the ink has dried. So certain the reboot is not going to be a flop? Even with Marvel branding, nothing is guaranteed.