The new 'Spider-Man' movie gets an 'Amazing' title -- and a first look at Andrew Garfield in full costume

Sony Pictures announced today that its new Spider-Man movie — directed by Marc Webb ((500) Days of Summer) and starring The Social Network‘s Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker and the heroic web-slinger — will be titled The Amazing Spider-Man. The official moniker is an obvious hat-tip to the title of the 1963 comic book that launched the Marvel superhero, and could help further differentiate the feature film project from the much-maligned Broadway musical Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark. And it’s probably better than Amazing Fantasy, the 1962 anthology title where Spidey first appeared.

Sony also released the first official photo of Garfield in his full Spider-Man costume, making clear that — like in the comics (but unlike in the Sam Raimi/Tobey Maguire Spider-Man movies) — this version of Peter Parker did indeed invent his web-slingers. Check out the photo below: 


More on The Amazing Spider-Man:
‘Spider-Man’ first look at Andrew Garfield in his costume: Why so serious?
Andrew Garfield cast as the new Spider-Man
Emma Stone officially cast in Spider-Man…as Gwen Stacy!
Rhys Ifans to play villain in Spider-Man
‘Spider-Man’ reboot taps Martin Sheen to play Peter Parker’s Uncle Ben
‘Spider-Man': Denis Leary in talks to play Gwen Stacy’s dad
‘Spider-Man': C. Thomas Howell joins the reboot

Comments (148 total) Add your comment
Page: 1 2 3 4
  • Steph

    The “gloves” are slightly annoying, but the costume looks far better than in the set photos. So hopefully the entire movie will have the proper lightly,heh.
    I am glad that this version of Spidey created the web-slingers, so that’s good.

    • Quirky

      I know, it’s weird seeing a Spiderman with blue fingers.

      • Mcfly

        “The gloves are slightly annoying” Spoken like a true nerd.

      • RH

        To be even nerdier, it was weird having the writer of this article call Spidey’s web shooters “web slingers.”

    • Michelle

      Not sure why they are saying that is Andrew Garfield in costume. There is no way that is him, this guy is way too muscley.
      In the previous photo of him, Garfield has thin, slender arms.

      • Ethan

        Seriously, who are they fooling? Now way that is Garfield under the costume.

      • Harry

        Who knows? Maybe Andrew could have bulked up since that photo. Actors seem to be able to lose weight/put on muscle quickly and easily for their filming requires, unlike us normal human beings!

      • Rush


      • HM

        Hmm, good point, maybe the costume is padded like in the other movies

      • caleb

        just flex your arms like that your bicep defines like crazy when your wrists are extended and your shoulders are tensed up. thats probably him.

    • Rush

      What will be “Amazing” is how much money this movie will lose.

  • Evans

    costume is cool
    …. title is ehhh

  • Kiki

    Love the retro title. Still not sure why we need a Spiderman reboot so soon after the recent trilogy, but I’ll wait until I see a trailer to make up my mind.

    • Henri M.

      5 years isn’t that soon. I’m glad Sam Raimi stepped down.

      • Michelle

        Ummm yes 5 years is considered soon.

      • Anne

        5 years isn’t too soon… on what planet???? This “reinvention” or whatever you call it is a HUGE mistake.

      • JT

        Well Batman Begins was 7 years after Batman & Robin. If they do it right it won’t matter.

      • Richard

        Me because he compleatly wrecked the original story. He took his web shooters away, and spidy got bitten by a spider that was coming down and got caught in a radio active beam, then bit him in the hand. Not from a spider that got loose from a glass case, I mean come on…

    • Bgg

      They are trying to capitalize on the popularity of “The Amazing Spider Man” starring Nicolas Hammond! Raimi didnt have the guts to go there! It takes guts to use the title, knowing it could bring comparisons to the work of Hammond. And the pressure on Garfield to live up to Hammonds Spider Man could be unbearable! There is only 1 Nicolas Hammond and we shall never again see Spidey played with his brilliance! Garfield hopefully will just do what he can and not worry about not living up to Hammonds!

      • Joe

        Dude, most people watching this will very likely have no ideo who Hammond is.Doubt they would even be interested in the show. Besides i can’t say I’m impressed by him. Toby surprised me and did a fairly good job, even if the third movie kinda sucked, and I think Garfield will do just as good a job.

      • john

        seriously? the hokey 70’s Spider-Man series played by the soap opera reject. get over it. the show only ran for 2 seasons and was cut short. all you have to do is see is see the costume with that weird bracelet thing to know that show was made of fail.

  • mishpokhe mike

    If you know the answer to this, please let me know: why is Spider-Man spelled with a hyphen but Superman and Batman are not?

    • Brian

      It was included to distinguish the name from Superman.

    • Stickler

      Superman and Batman were created by DC Comics; Spider-Man was created by Marvel Comics. Marvel apparently prefers hyphens (Spider-Man, X-Men), whereas DC prefers to squish them together (Batman, Superman). However, neither is opposed to a space (Marvel’s Iron Man, DC’s Wonder Woman).

      • theduck

        For what it’s worth, in some of his very earliest appearances, Bruce Wayne was referred to as “The Bat-Man”. Didn’t last very long, though.

      • Brett

        Yeah, they had “Bat-Dog”, “Bat-Boy” and “Bat-Girl” as well, I believe.

    • Kiki

      Hehe…reminds me of a scene from “Friends”:

      Phoebe: Hey. Why isn’t it Spiderman? You know, like Goldman, Silverman.
      Chandler: Because, it… it’s not his last name.
      Phoebe: It isn’t?
      Chandler: No. It’s not like Phil Spiderman. He’s a spider *man*. You know, like Goldman is a last name but there’s no gold man.

      • G.R.

        “Oh… Maybe there *should* be a Gold Man!” lol

      • KC

        It’s comments like that that make me thankful Friends is off the air.

      • James D

        It’s comments like that that make me thankful Friends was on the air for 10 years.

      • Jack

        It is comments like that, that make me sad that Friends was on the air for ten years.

      • vader1013

        it’s reply threads like this that make me weep for humanity.

    • Sean C

      This was actually a conversation in Friends, something Phoebe asked and Chandle explained.

      Spider-man is a hybrid/ mutant of both a spider, and a human, a spider-man, but Batman is not a hybrid of a bat, nor is Superman a hybrid of Supers (confused myself there).

      However, in relation to Batman, he does have a villain named Man-Bat. Man-Bat is a hybrid of a bat and a man. In his human form, he is Dr Robert Langstrom.

      • Tito Esteves

        Isn’t it Kirk Langstrom?

    • Sean C

      As others have noted, similar situation to Friends.

      Anyway,Spider-man is a mutant, a combination of Spider and Human. Batman, and Superman are not.

      However, there is a villain called Man-Bat, who has faced off with Batman on quite a few occassions. He is a mutant, a genetic combination of Human and Bat. His human alter ego is Dr Robert Langstrom. As one can see, he has the hypen. He is a DC character.

      Another mutant from the X-men, Iceman, also does not have the hyphen. Simply because he is not a hybrid of ice and Human.

      • Stickler

        Fair point. Thanks.

      • Julie Anderton

        Spider-Man is NOT a mutant as defined by the Marvel Universe. I get your point, but he definitely is not a mutant.

      • topoopon

        Yes not mutant, technically in Marvel nerdspeak he’s an “altered human”. But some speculate he may have had something in his blood already that took to that radioactive spider venom.

    • S

      Spider-man is Marvel and Superman and Batman aren’t who knows

  • ILoveZacLevi

    The Amazing Spiderman? ehh…

  • Pat

    Bleh. I will not support this. Spider-Man needed a good sequel, not a total reboot… especially with the existing trilogy having been produced SO recently. Boycott this one, folks, please. No more reboots or remakes!!

    • Kevin

      Considering how much I hated Toby Maguire as Spider-Man, I’m all for the reboot.

      • jackoff

        how could he nail parker and not spiderman? he was in a COSTUME. it’s like saying robert downey jr didn’t nail iron man. you cant see their face. douche.

    • Jana

      I didn’t like Tobey as Spider-man either. He nailed Peter Parker…Spider-man not so much.

      • Brian

        I thought he made Peter way too depressed, especially in 2 and 3. Peter’s an eternal optimist, not emo.

      • john

        no peter was never the whiny self depricating, schmuck as depicted in the films. He’s always had an iron will and the ability to triumpuh in spite of adversity when other men would have failed. THAT is what makes the character so iconic.

    • jackoff

      you will support this. you’re too much of a fanboy to pass this up. douche.

  • Buddymoore

    Hasn’t The Amazing Spider-Man always been the title or was it just assumed to be the title, but just not official?

    • Tye-Grr


    • Cammie

      lambchopxoxo on December 11, 2010 ive never had a tranier but i talk to them sometimes and theyre awesome and also have decent educations. most have a minimum undergrad and many have a masters degree. i love working out. its *life*

  • J. Jonah Jameson

    It’s crap. I’ll pay 300 for the pic, Parker. That’s a standard freelance fee!

    • Shea

      To whoever wrote this comment — Thank you for making my crappy day a whole lot better.

      • Marcos

        It contains two dvds: 1) the Spider-Man cseeiwrden special edition, and while I’m not going to go into it in this review, it is a great movie and a great dvd; and 2) Stan Lee’s Mutants, Monsters & Marvels, which I’ve reviewed under the dvd, so I won’t go much into this dvd here. But it is a very informative interview. These two dvds pretty much make the gift set worth the price. It also comes with a few collector’s items’ which I leave to you to decide if they make it worth picking up the gift set or just buying the dvds. There’s a reproduction of the Amazing Fantasy comic that first introduced Spider-Man. It’s monetary value is null, since it is a reproduction, but it is nice to get a copy of our favorite web-slinger’s first appearance. A bit juvenile, but valueable for the Spidey-fan. There’s a piece of artwork by John Romita Sr, nice but doesn’t add much to the set. And finally there is a film cell from the movie (when Spider-Man is dodging Goblin’s bats in the burning building). Also nice to have, but I found these collector’s items don’t add much to the enjoyment of the dvds. I’d say the gift set is only valuable to the hard core fan. Otherwise, just pick up the dvds.

    • Alex

      Jonah, you got a laugh. Thank you.

    • jay

      hahaha!!! great comment and I agree. I hate the subtle changes to the costume.

  • Jmag

    What a horrible title! Whoa, one of the worst ever seriously

    • Liana

      Then you must think all of the titles have been terrible, considering the series has been referred to as ‘The Amazing Spider-Man’ since the 1960s.

      • john

        The original series title was “the amazing spider-man”, (barring the first appearance in amazing fantasy 15), but over the years there have been other titles that ran alongside ASM, spectacular…web of…sensational…and just plain spider-man. why have one comic twice a month when you can put out 6 comics per month for one character.

    • LuG

      Spider-Man and the Snaggle-Toothed Whore

      • Jamaaliver


  • Brian

    Love the title!
    That’s also the first truly badass pic of the suit I’ve seen so far. I think I finally get what they were thinking when they redesigned it: it’s a mix of the classic suit and Ben Riley’s Spider-suit. Still not crazy about the suit redesign, but at least it CAN look good.
    Still though, I really hope this movie can get Peter/Spider-man right. Raimi came close in the first movie, but Peter stopped being an optimist (and funny and confident while Spidey) in the sequels. Though he’s “born” out of guilt, Peter should never be emo or overly depressed. He does like being Spidey, even though it disrupts his life a lot.

    • john

      the spider on his chest drips down to cover his pud…there is no redeeming quality in that redesign

  • markinnyc

    while I agree it is too soon, the way they retroactivly put the sandman as the killer of Uncle Ben in the third movie (so Peter Parker killed a semi-innocent man)… seriously needed a reboot.

  • Zayne

    I have zero loyalty to the first trilogy because I think Raimi did a generally not good job. This movie has me more excited every time I hear something new about it. Great cast, great director, and I think the suit looks awesome. Webshooters alone makes this movie a step up for purists.

    I think a reboot is absolutely justified because the previous franchise was too weighed down to pull back from the hole. Unless a trailer comes out and it’s just horrible, I’ll be there on opening day for this movie.

    • Charles

      If you go see the movie because spiderman has webshooters, then you’re a nerd to the point that its sad. I like my spiderman, but spidermans from new york, not england.

  • stephanie

    I like the fact that the title pays tribute to the original comic.

  • del taco

    howcome it takes 2 fingers to press down on the webshooter ?????
    I thought Spiderman was super strong?
    shouldn’t one finger on the button be enough ?????????
    Hmmm ????????

    • Brian

      It’s usually specially designed by Parker to require super-strength to activate the webs, so he doesn’t accidentally spin webs when he’s carrying anyone or anything and they’re pressed up against his web shooter.
      Plus, two fingers just makes a better picture than one.

    • Monty

      (Raises geek flag)

      Spider-Man needs to tap twice in rapid succession to make his web shooters shoot a line of webbing (with both fingers). This was done by design so he wouldn’t make it go off when he made a fist and punched something or grabbed soemthing with his hand. Over time, he modified it so he could creat different kinds of ‘spray’ webs (think like a completed web as opposed to a single stream of webbing). Later, the Scarlet Spider made further modifications to it so it could also shoot ‘impact webbing’ balls and ‘stingers’. The comic book writers explained that each function was triggered by a different combination of tapping on the triggers and different amounts of pressure.

      (lowers geek flag)

      • liz

        this just made my day.

      • Mike

        You are not a geek. That was interesting.

    • Ann

      And it has always been two fingers. That’s just the Spiderman pose. Besides, you try holding down just your middle or ring finger. Besides the lack of pressure you would get on the button, it is really uncomfortable to do and I don’t think any actor would want to hold that pose repeatedly.

      • Carl C

        If anyone here remembers the ’60s animated show, he would use all sorts of finger configurations to spin webs (middle/ring/pinky, middle only, or making a fist), but never with two fingers. I remember how two fingers looked weird the first time I read a comic, having only seen the series.

      • treeno

        what ann said. ring finger is a sexual suggestion, and its impossible to hold down your middle one without your ring finger moving with it.

      • vader1013

        it only takes one finger to shove up your a$$. go practice.

    • john

      its not a weight factor. its takes a doubletap, two taps in rapid succession. the reason being is so they dont go off from single taps such as incidental comtact, wall climbing, or making a fist.

  • StewyFan

    Smart move to slowly release pics of Andrew in the costume. This pic looks bada$$.

    • G.R.

      Agreed — I was kind of iffy on the project when I first heard it was being made, but I’m liking Garfield all the more each time I see him.

    • Michelle

      Except that is clearly NOT Andrew Garfield in the costume.

      Garfield is skinny, and the guy in that photo is not.

      • Rocky Munoz

        cannot prove that

Page: 1 2 3 4
Add your comment
The rules: Keep it clean, and stay on the subject - or we may delete your comment. If you see inappropriate language, e-mail us. An asterisk (*) indicates a required field.

When you click on the "Post Comment" button above to submit your comments, you are indicating your acceptance of and are agreeing to the Terms of Service. You can also read our Privacy Policy.

Latest Videos in Movies


From Our Partners

TV Recaps

Powered by VIP