Is "The Amazing Spider-Man" a cheat for "Spider-Man 4"?

Early this year, it was huge news out of Hollywood that Sony would be rebooting its Spider-Man franchise by canceling "Spider-Man 4" and ridding themselves of Sam Raimi, Tobey Maguire, and everyone else involved in the three previous films, collectively.  Along with this, it was announced that Peter Parker would be returning to his high school roots as the new franchise would focus on our young superhero tackling real life, coming of age issues. Getting rising filmmaker Marc Webb certainly endorsed this notion as his film debut, (500) Days of Summer, exemplified his ability to show young adults dealing with the difficult journey we all call life. 

Then, just over a month ago, something strange happened.  After months of speculation over what 18 to 20 something actor would play the adolescent Peter Parker/Spider-Man -- from Anton Yelchin, to Logan Lerman, to Josh Hutcherson -- Sony announced Andrew Garfield had landed the role.  While most fans were quick to ask, who is that?  Their second question most likely was, isn’t he kind of old?

To be correct, Garfield is 26 years of age and will turn 27 in less than a month.  While the talented actor looks extremely young for his age, the internet caught fire wondering why Sony would go with someone, on a psychological level, over a decade out of high school to play someone in high school?  Talk backers were quick to get an answer as multiple reports have been confirming that Sony has decided to change the new Spider-Man’s setting from high school to college due to Garfield’s age.  Now here’s where things get fishy.

First off, the previous Spider-Man franchise, started with Peter Parker in high school and ending with him somewhere in his 3rd, maybe 4th year of college.  So now Sony is basically putting their new Spider-Man back in almost the same position their old one was, give or take a few years?  Does anyone think Sony had a plan all along to scrap the Sam Raimi franchise so they could start over with all the characters, yet at the same time, keep their superhero in the same position he would have been anyway?

Let’s look at the comparison between films here.  "Spider-Man 4" would have had a 2-3 year, out of college Peter Parker/Spider-Man with Mary Jane Watson, played by actors well beyond their character’s ages, along with having no Harry or Norman Osborne, Green Goblin, Doc Ock, Eddie Brock, or any other character that had appeared in the previous three films. 

Then we have the new Spider-Man film, or lets call it "The Amazing Spider-Man".  We’ll have a college bound Peter Parker, again with an actor older than his character’s age, yet have the freedom to reuse any character from the old franchise.  Uncle Ben, MJ, Harry, Norman, Green Goblin, Doc Ock, all of them.  Not to mention, what’s the difference in the Peter Parker character’s age from "Spider-Man 4" to "The Amazing Spider-Man"?  5-6 years tops? 

Sounds like Sony was thinking more with their wallets than treating moviegoers to their “intentions” to deliver a quality Spider-Man film based on creativity, not greed.  Yeah, not in today’s world.

Comments

[Kryptonian]

I still think it's a reboot. Just looking at the Josh Hutcherson audition tape it's pretty apparent that they're starting a high school setting.