The Schedule For The Next 10 Spider-Man Movie Reboots

For people over the age of 10, this year's Spider-Man movie reboot seems to have emerged rather quickly. Wasn't it just a decade ago that we got the last "first" Spider-Man movie? It was. Well, technically, it's been 3714 days, which is closer to 10 years and two months.

I'd like to tell you when the next 10 Spider-Man re-boots will be:

  1. Spider-Man (re-reboot) - September 3, 2022
  2. Spider-Man (re-re-reboot) - November 3, 2032
  3. Spider-Man (re-re-re-reboot) - January 4, 2043
  4. Spider-Man (re-re-re-re-reboot) - March 6, 2053
  5. Spider-Man (re-re-re-re-re-reboot) - May 7, 2063
  6. Spider-Man (re-re-re-re-re-re-reboot) - July 7, 2073
  7. Spider-Man (re-re-re-re-re-re-re-reboot) - September 7, 2083
  8. Spider-Man (re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-reboot) - November 7, 2093
  9. Spider-Man (re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-reboot) - January 9, 2104
  10. Spider-Man (re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-reboot) - March 11, 2114

The only thing more depressing than the prospect of there being 10 more Spider-Man movie re-boots is that I probably won't be alive to avoid seeing all of them.

There is, of course, some hope. You noticed, I'm sure, that this reboot happened way sooner than it needed to. Don't we usually go about 20 years between reboots and remakes? At least? We've gone 10 this time, which raises the possibility that maybe the Spider-Man movies will be released in the same in some sort of asymptotic, Xeno's Paradox-style quickening pace, each reboot happening in half the amount of time as we had expected, regardless of how our expectations happened. If this is the case, the next reboot won't happen in 10 years (3714 days, I mean). It'll happen in five years. The one after that will happen in 2.5 years. Etc.

I present to you a schedule of the next 10 Spider-Man reboots in what we can call the half-life method of movie reboots:

  1. Spider-Man (re-reboot) - August 3, 2017
  2. Spider-Man (re-re-reboot) - February 18, 2020
  3. Spider-Man (re-re-re-reboot) - May 28, 2021
  4. Spider-Man (re-re-re-re-reboot) - January 16, 2022
  5. Spider-Man (re-re-re-re-re-reboot) - May 13, 2022
  6. Spider-Man (re-re-re-re-re-re-reboot) - July 11, 2022
  7. Spider-Man (re-re-re-re-re-re-re-reboot) - August 10, 2022
  8. Spider-Man (re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-reboot) - August 25, 2022
  9. Spider-Man (re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-reboot) - September 2, 2022
  10. Spider-Man (re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-reboot) - September 6, 2022

Oh, I can't stop that list there. The next one (the 12th reboot, including this year's) would be on September 8, 2022. The 13th reboot would be on September 9, 2022. So would the 14th, 15th and the rest of them, Spider-Man re-boots would begin to occur within the same hour, then within the same minute, then the same second. We'd wind up with some sort of Spider-Man movie singularity.

Who's excited for more Spider-Man?

(This post would have been much harder to write without the date-calculating widgets of TimeAndDate.com.)


Comments

    people get paid to do this?

    Tim Burton's (godawful) Batman film came out at the end of 89
    Batman Begins came at the start of 2005. That's 15 years, but not a peep about "Too soon to reboot".

    You reboot when a studio and/or director have stuffed up a franchise. Spiderman 3: Electric Bugaloo was basically Sam Raimi's way of flipping the bird to Sony. It was terrible beyond measure, and had to be scorched from this Earth.

    Superman Returns was 06, I'm more than happy for the imminent reboot.
    Green Lantern came out last year, I'd be all for a reboot this year, that actually shows Hal Jordan as Hal Jordan, not some weird Hal Jordan / Kyle Rayner hybrid.

      "Tim Burton’s (godawful) Batman film came out at the end of 89"

      YOU WATCH YOUR MOUTH

        Thats because Batman Forever and Batman & Robin were so terrible that people were desperate for a Batman reboot.
        In actual fact, Batman Begins was widely overlooked at first. People had already turned their noses up at it before it even started.
        It ended up being a sleeper hit which turned into what it is today.

          I enjoyed Batman Forever immensely as a kid, but on a more recent rewatch it wasn't so hot. The first 2 films were great though. As for Batman and Robin, when I decided to pick up the older film series on blu ray I specifically bought them separately rather than in a pack, just so that I could not own that 4th film.

          Yup though I'm still dissapointed that the batman beyond movie pegged for 2001 didnt eventuate

      Tim Burton's Batman was actually a pretty good movie if you'd bothered to rewatch it, or experience it in a vacuum. Until Spider-Man 2 and X2 came out, it was still the yardstick for decent comic book adaptations.

      Tim Burton's awful Batman films?

      You need your movie watching license taken away from you.

      The Hulk was rebooted in just 5 years after a single movie (The '08 one with Ed Norton rebooted the '03 one with Eric Bana).

    My theory is they needed a new actor to play Spiderman in the Avengers 2.

      Your theory would be sound, except the reason this Spider-man movie got made is because Sony still hold the film rights for Spider-man, so Marvel can't do dick until those rights revert back or they pay a hefty sum to buy them back, neither of which is very likely :(

        Pretty much. Raimi, Maguire etc. were all on board for Spider-man 4, until disputes over the script caused them to drop out. Sony needed to still make a new Spider-man movie to keep rights to the franchise, and Amazing Spider-man was born.
        Sorry, no Peter Parker in Avengers 2. Marvel cannot use Spider-man in any films until Sony drop the rights to it. Same thing with X-Men and Fox.

          You'd think that with the metric fuck-ton of money that The Avengers made that Sony would be more than happy to licence Spiderman back to Marvel for the next Avengers movie in exchange for a cut of the action.

            actually marvel could use spider-man in an avengers film if they make a deal with sony. sony would be idiotic not to let marvel use spidey in an avengers film imo.

            there's a rumour going around that they did make some sort of deal and that the oscorp building from ASM was going to appear in the skyline of avengers but there wasn't enough time to implement it.

            Maybe, but what does Spider-man really bring to The Avengers? Sony aren't going to do it for free and The Avengers have zero use for him (both the team and the movie franchise).

            I always thought it'd be funny to see Spider-man show up in The Avengers 2 (where they promptly say 'what the hell? You're like eight. Go home, kid' and kick him out) but I actually sort of think it'd ruin the movie to include him in any capacity that would justify the extremely high cost. They'd be better off getting Superman. =P

        I wonder if Marvel are thinking about it? I mean, Avengers made a boatload of money, and they've got Disney's backing as well. Someone at Marvel must have at least raised the idea. What would Sony charge, though? 500 mill? They'd want it to be worth the same amount as multiple potential Spider-Man films.

          Well if it doesn't expire unless they are using it it would be worth several billion I would believe

          It's already made 120 million + whatever they score from the video game tie in and then whatever they get for the DVDs.

          If the most recent movie had been a flop. Marvel could have tried to buy it back. Since Sony wouldn't be able to argue that they have a trend of making good money off it.

          Unless there is a clause dictating price most likely Sony would want enough money to cover them putting them out for the next 10+ years(especially since they have already signed some of the actors for more movies, meaning they are already financially on the hook for a sequel even if they don't make it

      Sony would just pump out another Spider-Man to retain the rights. There's a reason why Fox makes an X-Men film every few years after the end of the trilogy, if they didn't then the franchise would return to Marvel. It's shamelessly greedy but can still produce a decent movie (First Class).

    This article is annoyingly cynical.

    Why post this? Why even think about it this much? Do you have that much spare time?

    I'm sorry Stephen, but no one really cares about Reboots and when the happen to soon.

    I care about whether or not they are good movies and that are entertaining to watch. I couldn't care less how much time passed between reboots because frankly, Hollywood is full of Reboots, Sequels and Book Adaptations anyway.

      Check out the RLM review of Amazing Spider-Man. The more Hollywood pushes out these same, tired scripts and characters, they're encouraging audience apathy. As mentioned, compare the diminishing returns on the Police Academy movies, whose Budget:Profit ratios approached 1 the more they made them.

      Is 5 years between reboots too short? Yes. I don't want to see yet another, different guy try Spider-Man in 2017. Though the producers will still say the same bullshit we've heard before: THIS time, we got it right! THIS is a dark, gritty reboot! THIS one truly deals with character! You can only fool us so many times. There's a case to be made for rebooting a struggling franchise (ie. Superman Returns, Batman and Robin), but Amazing Spider-Man hits exactly the same tropes as the (successful) previous ones. Same Peter Parker, different idealistic scientist pushed to the brink and goes mad.

      Disclaimer: I enjoyed Amazing Spider-Man, despite the creative bankruptcy that spawned it.

        I don't care if reboots are close, as long as they're fresh. This new Spiderman is so similar to the previous one it's ... jarring. Nolan's Batman however doesn't intrude on Burton's vision. If they made a Spiderman 2 years from now that flipped the formular I might be interested.

        Thigh the biggest issue with the superman movies is that they essentially get too tied up in what the original superman done.

        And instead of doing some truly awesome things with him they come down to the same tired crap because superman is too powerful.

        So you either give him a normal enemy with some kryptonite to weaken him but essentially kill the opportunity of any decent fight scene(which is what superman was really missing, face looking and throwing people into the sun)

        It's annoying to hear people blame it on Brandon routh when it was the entire script that failed from day 1

    I thought it was a great film.
    Waaaay better than the Sam Raimi series.
    And I'm looking forward to Amazing Spiderman 2. Without spoiling anything, anyone who has seen it, theories on next villan based on after credits scene?
    Alot of internet buzz for ol' fish bowl head, that would be cool :)

    Slow news day aye?

    Oh ha ha ha ha, this is so funny to read. It was worth my time.

    I'm sorry, i'm usally all for silly articles, but this seems like such a dumb idea for an entire article. take the piss all you like out of the movie franchise, but this is really a waste of tour time writing this.

    The funny thing if there were multiple spiderman reboots is that in an effort to not repeat villains from the previous films they'd have to start scraping the bottom of the barrel for lesser known ones in order to remain unique.

    i liked the movie, and also - go fuck off and write something that takes more than 5 minutes. I'd rather you went and found some LSD and wrote about that. Did you get burned by Sony? Or did you like seeing Toby dance and cry for 2 hours

    The comments are far more interesting than the article.

    Personally I feel like film are getting closer to the way modern comics operate, before long i wouldn't be surprised to see concurrent versions of spiderman/xmen/batman etc that are based more upon a director's vision/interpretation of the character and original stories from the comics rather than endless re-boots where the first movie HAS TO BE an origin story. That's the beauty of the comics, you can experience the same character done differently.

    As for the latest Spidey film I saw it last night and loved it, sure it's done similarly in terms of his origin, but it stands up on it's own much better and is very similar in tone to Batman Begins, which reflects people's tastes now. With the technological advancement, much better production values and trends of television etc audiences won't settle for cheap, kiddy style stuff anymore (compare the old hercules series to game of thrones, or batman and robin to batman begins) they want gritty, real depictions that deal with more issues and are better filmed/written/designed.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now