Andrew Garfield says his Spider-Man lies were “very fun”
"It was like this massive game of Werewolf that I was playing with journalists and with people guessing, and it was very fun,” he admits
Aux News Andrew Garfield
Andrew Garfield just won a Golden Globe for Tick, Tick…Boom, but his best performance from the past year was as “Guy who is definitely not in Spider-Man: No Way Home.” He pulled out all his dramatic chops to try to convince anyone who dared to ask about the Marvel movie that there was no way (heh) he’d be back in the Spidey suit.
In a new interview with The Wrap, Garfield likens the experience to a big round of the social deduction game Werewolf. “I placed myself in that position of, Well, what would I want to know?,” he said. “Would I want to be toyed with? Would I want to be lied to? Would I want to be kept on my toes guessing? Would I want to discover it when I went to the theater? Would I want to be guessing, guessing, guessing?”
To appease fans and not spoil the experience of seeing the three Spider-Men onscreen, Garfield said he realized it’d be best if he tried his best to keep it a surprise. “I would want the actor to do an incredibly good job at convincing me he wasn’t in it. And then I would want to lose my mind in the theater when my instinct was proven right. That’s what I would want.”
Those playing along with Garfield should’ve picked up on a hint he dropped during a May 2021 appearance on the podcast Happy Sad Confused. Speaking with host Josh Horowitz, Garfield used the same parlor game analogy: “I’m like ‘I’m not the werewolf! I promise you I am not the werewolf!’ and everyone’s like ‘You’re the werewolf! You’re the fucking werewolf! Look at him.” C’mon, everyone knows the werewolf is the one who has to do the most convincing that they aren’t.
Garfield’s extensive attempt at silencing rumors about his return as Spider-Man didn’t work very well, since images from the set leaked before the movie hit theaters. But we’ll give him points for keeping up the facade for so long.
121 Comments
Hot take: lying to prevent spoilers is bad, and spoiler culture is dumb.
Oh, fuck off.
Warm take: everything is terrible, and lying to keep fun plot details sorta-kinda secret is ok actually.
Lukewarm take: different people can have different opinions, and that’s okay!Also, no one believed him anyway and his lies accomplished exactly nothing.
Tepid take: agreed!Yeah, everyone knew he would be in it, but the theater I was in sure was happy when he showed up. His little white lie hurt absolutely nobody, and probably made the movie even more fun.
Besides more trendbait for the studios and journalists.(I do think it would been amazing if for once Garfield and Charlie Cox were telling the truth and it was all an elaborate and overly-hopeful hoax. Like the Grinch Leak.)
Tom Holland being the only Spider-Man in that movie would’ve been the funniest thing ever.
As in, there’s a multi-verse but he only bounces around in universes that don’t have a Spider-Man or the Raimi and ASM Spider-men are in the movie but they’re all played by Tom Holland, Orphan Black–style?
the lies accomplished a somewhat better viewing experience than if he had come out and said definitively yes he was in it and when you would see him come on screen
He didn’t have to say anything. He shouldn’t have said anything. Sony/Disney should’ve required interviewers not to ask him about it if it was that big of a deal.I knew he was in the movie. The set photos leaked months before the movie came out. It didn’t “increase” my enjoyment that he was lying about it.
I don’t understand fans like you, I have a coworker who lost his shit because “they really fucked up by not including the Spider-Men in the final trailer” and it’s like I just don’t fathom why you guys hate surprises so much. I swear it’s more enjoyable to be surprised while viewing the film, I feel like I’m crazy saying that. Woof.
I love to be surprised by movies. I didn’t want to see the set photos of Garfield in costume; it popped up in my feed (thanks, Al G. Rithm).I stopped following a few YT and Twitch channels because their content increasingly became “let’s analyze every frame of this trailer and spend 90 minutes speculating on where the franchise will go from here and get upset if our predictions don’t come true.” I’m annoyed by how many headlines in the blogosphere are, “ACTOR SAID THEY ARE WILLING TO PLAY FAMOUS ROLE AGAIN” or “ACTOR SAYS THEY HAVE NOT BEEN APPROACHED TO REPRISE FAMOUS ROLE.”But most of all, I think I hate this feedback loop that demands more and more advance content (set pics, trailers, commercials, first looks, interviews) and then gets offended when something gets spoiled. I know part of that is that different people have different things they consider “spoilers,” but I’ve seen people lose their shit because they found out the smallest detail in advance. I don’t understand fans like that.
I believed him and had the exact surprised feeling he was aiming for when I saw it in theatres. So you’re wrong.
lol
Fuck you idiot.
lol triggered
Despite all the rumors, I was glad I didn’t “know” definitively that the other SM actors were showing up and so it was as surprising and delightful as possible, given the realities of how things work now. So, yeah. Thanks, Andrew, for fighting the good fight.
When did you see the movie though? I knew before the movie was released, though I didn’t seek out the info. I didn’t mind. I wasn’t in a rush to see it (though I did enjoy it). & I don’t think the information hurt my enjoyment in any way. It’s the premise of the film. Is that the level we’re using for spoilers now?
Reheated take: Fuck! Ah! That’s really hot! I just burned my goddamned fingers! Shit! Fuck!
Tepid take: I don’t much care either way. Although when JJ Abrams lied about Cumberbatch playing Khan in Into Darkness, it was so transparently a lie and he stuck to it so completely that I felt like my intelligence was being insulted. Didn’t help that the movie sucked.
Steaming take: Garfield’s lies were just as transparent. But to your point, No Way Home was much more fun than Into Darkness.
Frozen take: Let it go.
Well, Abrams wanted to make sure he was insulting your intelligence to the same degree the movie itself eventually would.
“Hmm, that ‘My name is Khan’ line already lands with a thud, but is there anything I can do to make it land with a resounding thud?”
My favorite thing about the Into Darkness thing was all the cast members taking jabs at it during the press tour. Especially John Cho who took every opportunity to talk about how awesome Khan was as a smart badass villain of color and how he couldn’t wait to see J.J.’s take on it during some future movie.
I’ve come to the personal decision that Into Darkness is 50% a decent movie with decent ideas that got woven into a return of Khan for no reason other than Abrams clearly taking too much shrooms one night. I’m not gonna reopen that can of worms that is the Lost finale, but I’ve come to realize since the first Cloverfield, I really don’t like much of Abrams work anymore. Just like you, I feel dumber after seeing any of his work, even if he’s just the executive producer.
I watched it the other day. The protocol that all high ranking officers meet up at the same place in the event of a n attack/ disaster is pretty silly.
Yes and no.A person tells you they haven’t seen a certain tv show and you respond, “really? Oh man, you should totally see it. At the end of it so and so totally stomps the one guy and then gets trapped in this building and you don’t know if he dies or not” then that’s a dick move and a huge spoiler.Someone tells me “oh hey, did ya see they’re bringing back Andrew Garfield for the new Spider-Man movie” and i’m all “dude! Spoilers!” then it’s me that’s being a dick. If knowing who is in a movie and the basic plot of it is considered a spoiler then no one would own or rewatch movies. Way to spoil the movie for me, movie, now you’re ruined. Thanks, Obama.
Plus…ETA: Under the Banner of Heaven? Awesome! I mean the story’s all kinds of fucked up, but…awesome!
I read Into the Wild and Into Thin Air in the late 90’s but for some reason have forgotten all about Krakauer since 2000 or so. Thanks for reminding me of how great a writer he is. Also, way back in the day his pieces for Outside magazine were immediate go-to reading.
Yes, for most movies/shows spoilers don’t really matter.
I deliberately try to steer my algorithms away from franchises I like, but when the rare few headlines slipped into my news feeds that said “Garfield denies involvement in Spider-Man” that was enough for me to believe. I felt surprise and delight when he showed up, and I appreciated him keeping it secret. It’s not a “lie” in that respect to tell someone you’re not throwing them a surprise party when you are; it’s a favor.
I much prefer this to the bait and switch marketing we got with The Force Awakens
The people fueling the hype machine around new superhero movies are generally the same people who complain when that hype machine churns out a spoiler. Superhero movies aren’t necessarily juvenile, but the culture of consuming them absolutely is.
If hot is a synonym for dumb, yes
What the fuck ever. What was he supposed to say? He’s got three options when the dipshits asked if he was in the movie: Yes, which spoils it, no comment, which means yes, or no, which is a lie.
He can do literally whatever Tobey Maguire did.
Tobey Maguire didn’t have a movie to promote, therefore no reason to talk to the press. Garfield did, so it was inevitable.
Poor Tobey.
I don’t know why but that made me chuckle
Why do people use “hot take” when they could just be honest (since you seem to be all about honesty) and say “here’s a dumb thought”…?
Sure. Here’s a dumb thought: spoiler culture.
So, we agree – you’re saying dumb shit.Let people engage with stories as intended, and on their own terms – not yours. Don’t be such a dick about getting to flex your “I saw it first” douche-muscle.
I don’t know where you got that I flex “I saw it first” douche-muscles. When talking about movies online, I tend to find spoiler spaces where everyone commenting has already seen the movie, and when I talk to people IRL I ask them if they’ve seen the movie first. I don’t really talk about movies on social media so I’ve never had an issue spoiling movies or TV there.The reason I’m deriding spoiler culture is because I think increasingly, more and more things are becoming considered “spoilers.” In my opinion.So, whatever makes you feel like you “won,” go for it.
If he tells the truth, he gets raked over the coals by his employer and the internet. If he lies, he gets raked over the coals by the internet.
“lying to prevent spoilers is bad”
Why?
Because lying is bad and it was a dumb lie no one believed anyway?
Precisely. Now when he makes his appearance, the audience thinks: “Hey look! Andrew Garfield! He’s that liar!”
lying is bad
Unless you’re coming at this from some sort of mortal sin angle I can’t imagine how lying about being in a movie is bad in any kind of meaningful or measurable way for anyone involved. At worst it’s pointless.
Yes, it’s pointless
Which is different from bad.The only people actively making things worse for everyone in this case are the ones asking actors to give out plot details, setting them up for a no-win situation. Spoiler culture may be stupid, but it’s not as if beat entertainment reporters hounding actors for gossip and inside info have a long and proud tradition of contributing to culture either.
That’s a tautology. Why is lying about being in a movie bad?
I didn’t say lying about being in a movie is bad. For example, I’m in Spider-Man: No Way Home. That’s a lie. But lying to prevent spoilers is bad, for the simple fact that it perpetuates this silly sensitivity about getting spoiled. Sometimes things get spoiled. It happens. If it really ruined art, we’d never rewatch/reread/replay things because we already know what happens.
But his lie was “I’m not in Spider-Man: No Way Home”, which is lying about being in a movie. Why is that bad?
I explained why already. Feel free to disagree and move on.
You certainly didn’t, but I will indeed move on.
it perpetuates this silly sensitivity about getting spoiled. Sometimes things get spoiled. It happens. If it really ruined art, we’d never rewatch/reread/replay things because we already know what happens.
I believed him and my mind was blown when I saw the film. Do you consider everyone who believes in Santa Claus to be dumb as well? You must be fun at parties.
The people at the parties I go to don’t believe in Santa Claus.
Beige take: all I know is, my gut says maybe.
Medium Take: Marvel fans kind of deserve it. More people should lie to them.
oh c’mon the guy is having fun. get over yourself.
I like to have fun by lying too. But spoiler culture is dumb.
Spit take:
Nah it’s fine, I promise. No spiders were harmed in the making of these interviews.
Thank Anansi
That’s not my name, stop lying
It’s okay when I do it.
Haha! You’ve taken enough hits in this thread, I digress. …or do I?
I don’t care.
OR DO YOU?! You’ve become an unreliable narrator, like Andrew Garfield!
He hadn’t.
Some blame National Lampoon, but I blame George Lucas (Blue Harvest, srsly?)
That and whoever invented printing scripts in that red print so they can’t be photocopied.
Toy with me, Andrew Garfield! I bid ye TOY WITH ME!!!
So we’re done with the whole, “Oh, poor Garfield had to lie to us,” routine? I’m glad to hear he hates the media as much as I do
Weird how he seems to be getting more love for his appearance in NWH then he did for his own Spiderman movies.
Still haven’t seen NWH. But it’s probably because that movie is a lot more fun than his two Spider-Man movies.
That’s because the Spider-Man movies he was in were pretty bad.
And his version of Peter was pretty unlikeable. They made him much more appealing this time around.
That’s the opposite of weird.
he’s loveable!
Thanks a bunch! It’s not like there isn’t a deadly virus keeping people from being able to go to a theater or anything. Or those people having avoided discourse while waiting for a safer time to go.
A) The fact that Garfield is in the movie can’t possibly be reasonably considered a spoiler at this point.B) You don’t have to look at the AVClub.
Is Jon or Odie in the movie too? How about Nermal?
Oddly none of them but the whole US Acres gang gets 45 minutes of screen time.
Spider Man Minus Garfield.
It’s a movie about J. Jonah Jameson (in the Amazing Spiderman continuity) losing his mind after obsessing about a spider superhero/menace that doesn’t actually exist.
Nermal shockingly dies in the first act, sucking Garfield back in on a mission of revenge. Oh, spoilers.
If he hadn’t been able to do the movie, their plan was to replace him with Chester Alan Arthur.
This would have required the help of Charles Guiteau.
How about Nermal?She shows up for one scene, in a blatant attempt to capture the Abu Dhabi box office.
I was Garfield was in the movie. “I hate Mondays.”
Sounds like you need a covid mask, but like .. for your eyes and ears or something.
You are legitimately such a waste of an opinion.
Pirate it like a normal person. There are some exceptionally good cams out there.
lol
Can’t wait for the ‘I’m not the werewolf’ meme to make a comeback when Warner Brothers inevitably greenlights a Marauders era sequel to Harry PotterThis man has been fancast unanimously as Remus Lupin so many times on tumblr that even he’s aware of it by now
The AV Club is really socking it to that Andrew Garfield guy again. He must work there or something.
At least he’s having fun; not like that miserable jerk, Affleck.
The image of Garfield as a booze-bloated, morose mess is kind of amusing.
All that “lasagna” was obviously a metaphor.
Good thing Mark Ruffalo was never Spider-Man.
I mean, Tom Holland managed not to spoil things, and he’s almost as big of a threat as Ruffalo…
I find it funny like I liked Toby’s movies way more than him but Andrew stole the damn movie from the other two Peters. He was great and I’m down for Sony giving him a 3rd movie (since why not they own Spider-man).
Bring him back for an ongoing Sonyverse Spider-Man show. 8 episodes per year. new villains. Get an MCU affiliated showrunner.
Marvel regained all television rights to Spider-Man a while back, so any Spider-Man show is going to be very MCU-adjecent.
Ironically, Sony holds no TV rights to the character…
This whole experience has cooled me off from caring too much about spoilers, because this whole movie has been spoiled for me SHRUG EMOJI
Meanwhile, Tom Holland again proves himself the worst for spoilers. I knew he was going to be in ‘No Way Home’ from the moment it was announced.
I’d still deny I was ever in it to the end of my days. Why stop now?
I really did not see the point of the whole denial campaign. Everyone knew he was in it. There were pictures of him making it. At some point his lying stopped being cheeky and started feeling disrespectful.
It was absolutely disrespectful. I don’t care one way or another about potential spoilers for this film, but I do form my opinions of public figures based on their public behavior.
Man, you’re going to hate it when you learn what actors do for a living.
Did you also fall for his lies about helping to invent The Facebook?
Yeah I didn’t even realise him not being in it was a thing. I thought everyone knew he was months ago. A friend asked me if I’d seen the movie yet as there are sooooo many spoilers, I wonder if this is what he meant.
You overestimate how much of the general audience knew or heard about him being in it. Sometimes we tend to forget, that us internet people are among a very tiny minority.They wanted to surprise the general audience. That’s why. I know many people(some of which I saw the movie with) who were pleasantly surprised to see him and Maguire, and didn’t hear a peep about the rumors and leaks at all because they don’t spend much time on pop culture sites and blogs, and don’t follow pop culture stuff on social media like us nerds.
Bingo. The people surfing Morning Spoilers threads every day for the duration of the film’s production, weren’t surprised. That’s, y’know, not a very scientific sample.
How dare someone act!
The reply “I don’t answer questions like that” is always available. This seemed like such a bizarre thing to hang his reputation on. Liars are known primarily for their lies, and Garfield seems young to make public dishonesty his personal brand.
Andrew Garfield’s appearances on various TV showsto deny his involvement in No Way Home is technically promotion for No Way Home, so I intend to sue the studio on the basis that the film was promoted as having absolutely no Andrew Garfield in it, and I would not have watched the movie had his presence in the movie not been wilfully and maliciously misrepresented to me. I have a right to choose what I spend my money on, and I do not, ordinarily, spend my money in things that have Andrew Garfield in them. I have been lied to and the studio has committed egregious acts of false advertising.
(I’m kidding, I haven’t seen that movie and I only know who Andrew Garfield is because of his memorable surname)
Yeah, he says that, but why should I believe him?