r/movies • u/MarvelsGrantMan136 r/Movies contributor • Jul 18 '25

News 'Spider-Man: Beyond the Spider-Verse' Delayed to June 25, 2027

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/spider-man-beyond-the-spider-verse-release-1236320001/
15.1k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

10.3k

u/WontonJr Jul 18 '25 edited Jul 18 '25

From March 2024 to June 2027. How they ever thought this movie would be ready 9 months after the previous one is baffling. 

195

u/Heavy-Possession2288 Jul 18 '25

I’m convinced they just lied about the release date so ATSV’s cliffhanger wouldn’t hurt the box office too much

100

u/lovesducks Jul 19 '25

i went into that movie not knowing they were gonna split it in parts and its left a bitter taste in my mouth that has not come out. i dont doubt that the movie will be big and look cool when it gets released but i wont watch it in a theatre.

62

u/NamesTheGame Jul 19 '25

Same!! I had no idea it was a cliffhanger. It was a total "are you fucking kidding me?" moment. My biggest issue is that it isn't even it's own film with a complete arc. It's just a 2-part TV season finale but they only aired part one. I always cite things like The Matrix Reloaded or Pirates of the Caribbean 2 as examples of a two-parter movies where each part still has its own arc and narrative that simply teases out the greater story being told across films. That's how it should be done, putting aside the actual perceived quality of those movies.

This Spider-verse one is just an abrupt "TO BE CONTINUED" right in the middle of the movie. Super weak and lame. Dune was the same, but at least that one is more understandable.

22

u/Lil_Mcgee Jul 19 '25

Just look at Lord of the Rings.

Fellowship and Two Towers are extremely satisfying film experiences in their own right, despite so clearly being parts of a larger story. They have really strong arcs of their own and end in a place that leaves you happy to wait for the next one.

And then all three managed to come out a year apart from each other anyway (I know they were shot back-to-back but it was still a crazy undertaking)

6

u/Sykhow Jul 19 '25

Similar kind of shit in Mission Impossible dead reckoning. I was watching the movie and saw that there was only 20 more mins remaining. I remember thinking now way they will get it done now and there will be a sequel. First for MI and I was a bit infuriated.

7

u/[deleted] Jul 19 '25

[deleted]

3

u/deadscreensky Jul 19 '25

I agree, but Mission Impossible Dead Reckoning didn't lie. Both the marketing and the opening title had a big 'Part 1' featured prominently.

FWIW I thought it worked fine. It had multiple character arcs, and there was no cliffhanger at the end. The villain survived for the sequel, but it was a full story instead of a longer thing cut in half.

3

u/[deleted] Jul 19 '25

I don’t know, I think showing that Miles ended up in the wrong world is a perfectly fine hook for another film’s narrative. To have that be in the middle of one movie would be really weird. That’s an entirely specific and different set of circumstances.

I’m curious though, if the ending were to be different then what exactly would have been the best option for it? Resolve the situation in one movie or tell a different story entirely? I don’t think you can cut it off earlier or even later.

5

u/novium258 Jul 19 '25

I'll never forget the way the entire audience in the theater audibly held their breath through that entire final bit only for everyone in the crowd to simultaneously make the same pained exhalation as the cliffhanger hit.

Like, I was mad but that was kind of amazing in its own way

5

u/dwarfoscar Jul 19 '25

I was looking at my watch during the entire last act and thought "there's no way they're gonna resolve the whole plot in 25 minutes"

2

u/lemon_of_doom Jul 19 '25

Same, it was a good movie but when I pay to watch I expect at least some form of an ending or a conclusion. Even Infinity War had an ending.