SPIDER-MAN: HOMECOMING Star Tom Holland Hits Back At Kirsten Dunst's Criticisms Of The Reboot

SPIDER-MAN: HOMECOMING Star Tom Holland Hits Back At Kirsten Dunst's Criticisms Of The Reboot

Kirsten Dunst recently dismissed Spider-Man: Homecoming without even seeing it and now Tom Holland has responded to that. What does he think about the original Mary Jane Watson's comments? Find out here...

By JoshWilding - Aug 01, 2017 01:08 AM EST
Filed Under: Homecoming
Source: Movie’n’co UK
Spider-Man: Homecoming is the sixth solo movie for the wall-crawler and Tom Holland is the third actor to suit up as the character. The movie has been a critical and commercial hit but someone who has no interest in the reboot is Kirsten Dunst. In fact, it was just a month or so ago that she said: "We made the best ones, so who cares? They’re just milking that cow for money. It’s so obvious." Ouch!

Well, Tom Holland has now shared his thoughts on Dunst's comments and it's clear he's not particularly happy about the way the original Mary Jane Watson dismissed the movie without even seeing it. 

"You know, she’s entitled to her own opinion and I’m not one to judge at all," he explains. "I definitely am not doing this movie for the money. I mean, it’s a job that I think anyone would do regardless of what you were getting paid, you know? All I know is I had the greatest time on this movie and I absolutely loved it and if she doesn’t want to go and see it, I don’t really care. I don’t dislike her in any way for what she said and she’s entitled to her own opinion, so it’s all cool."

That's a very diplomatic response and much kinder than Holland had to be. Dunst never seemed particularly enthusiastic about her role in Sam Raimi's Spider-Man movies and her constant role as a damsel in distress was one of the trilogy's biggest issues. She is, of course, entitled to her opinion but do you think she went a tad too far here? And what do you guys make of Holland's response? 
SPIDER-MAN: HOMECOMING Nets Lowest Re-Release Box Office Yet As Spidey's First MCU Movie Returns To Theaters
Related:

SPIDER-MAN: HOMECOMING Nets Lowest Re-Release Box Office Yet As Spidey's First MCU Movie Returns To Theaters

John Leguizamo On Missing Out On Vulture Role In SPIDER-MAN: HOMECOMING: Another Actor Would Have Sued
Recommended For You:

John Leguizamo On Missing Out On Vulture Role In SPIDER-MAN: HOMECOMING: "Another Actor Would Have Sued"

DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]

ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

1 2 3 4 5
Coolkid
Coolkid - 8/1/2017, 1:43 AM
All I'm seeing is a Respectful and a Mature reply. Where exactly is he hitting back at Kirsten Dunst as the title says.??
Floke
Floke - 8/1/2017, 1:44 AM
"We made the best ones, so who cares? They’re just milking that cow for money. It’s so obvious"

Am I bad for first thinking that was what Holland said about Kirsten?
Highflyer
Highflyer - 8/1/2017, 1:45 AM
Good response.
VictorMancha
VictorMancha - 8/1/2017, 1:45 AM
Dunst said this several months ago, so why is he reacting to it now?
And she is right too (although a bit sour), if youre actually thinking they make any of these movies for the fans you need to grow up, they just care about money.

it ranks like this:
Money
Professional criticism
Fan criticism
Himura
Himura - 8/1/2017, 2:00 AM
@VictorMancha - ALL movies are made to make money. Not just "these" ones.
Ragnarocknroll
Ragnarocknroll - 8/1/2017, 2:07 AM
@VictorMancha - He's reacting to it now because it was brought up in an interview with him only now. It's not like he went out of his way to react to what Dunst said. Also, by your logic, even the Raimi movies were made for the money alone, so that makes Kirsten Dunst hypocritical as [frick].
IctyoSapien
IctyoSapien - 8/1/2017, 8:06 AM
@Himura - there is a lot of independent cinema made mostly for art ratjer than monetizing.
Hawknaba
Hawknaba - 8/1/2017, 10:34 AM
@Himura - Not art house movies or vene most of whats produce on non-advertisement platforms like BBC movies
SisterSunday52
SisterSunday52 - 8/1/2017, 11:59 PM
@Hawknaba - Nope. Even these movies are done for money. Now, that may not be the primary reason the director or writer did them But every movie you have seen, that's not on YouTube or some social media post, was done because the distributor believed they could make a profit from it. Now there are movies like The Emoji Movie, or whatever, that were made almost exclusively for that reason. "_______ looks to be in right now. I bet if we make a movie about that, we will rake in the dough." But every movie that you have paid to see, was done so it could make somebody money.
Hawknaba
Hawknaba - 8/2/2017, 3:28 AM
@SisterSunday52 - That's my point, Art house films are movies i can very often watch for free at a film festival and movies like those made for BBC tv (BBC don't run ads in UK), they make their money through tv licensing fees.
1 2 3 4 5
View Recorder