Even people who loved "The Amazing Spider-Man" wondered why we need to see the origin of the Web slinger all over again.
The 2002 "Spider-Man" showed us how Peter Parker became a super-powered hero in the first place. The only reason to tell the story again is pure, unadorned greed. Superhero films tend to make a mint.
The Washington Times' Sonny Bunch suggests there's more than studio balance sheets at play with these super-reboots.
Comic books are far from alone when it comes to being adapted over and over again.
Consider “A Christmas Carol.” Charles Dickens‘ classic has been adapted for screens large and small dozens of times. In just the past 20 years, there have been seven film adaptations of “A Christmas Carol,” including a version with the Muppets and a version in which Jim Carrey played both Scrooge and the ghosts who plague him....
Similarly, Shakespeare doesn’t get old. You’ll never see a critic write, “‘Romeo and Juliet’ — again?” Or “The Danish Prince still?” Or, “This Macbeth joker, always with the murders!”
So why Spider-Man and Batman 2.0? Bunch says these tales tap into something other films can't deliver - a conservative side of modern storytelling.
....Obviously, superhero pictures are filling a gap in the marketplace: Critical weariness of reboots aside, audiences love them. We are starved for tales of unambiguous heroism, the sort of film that gives us good guys and bad guys and resolution, self-sacrifice and self-reliance.