Keep the ORGANICS or WEB SHOOTERS???!!!!

[spider-neil]

ShhHHhhHh! You wanna give Sony ideas?

By the way, I think that armoured van robbery in SM1 was the best part of all 3 movies. Unfortunately...

great scene and a great back somersault to punch out two guys at once

[craigaat]

Oh God, not this again.

It's such a stupid argument.

[Mach2Infinity]

I guess me referencing web shooters taking precedent has been lost on you. Praytell, what was the situation with webshooters pre-Raimi? Was it deemed a broken concept?

It hasn't been lost on me at all. I appreciate and understand the meaning of the web-shooters. I like that it represents Peter Parker's ingenuity and technological accumen - a great metaphor as Dangerous said (although not the only way). However, I feel strongly that a hybrid system is key. I think if things can be done differently which evolve a concept rather than be tacked on for appearance sake then yes try them. A wrist device which manipulates web excretion betters both the comic and film interpretations through it giving Spider-Man a bigger arsenal from the previous films but staying faifthul to the concept that a man bitten by an arachnid absorbs its characteristics 'fully'. It shows a man who has accepted and embraced his new existence by melding the two concepts in an ever more intricate fashion. Whilst Spider-Man can have a utility belt I'd prefer it if the wrist device took that role exclusively (he can point and shoot bugs or tracking devices for instance).

I'm certainly glad you've made my point for me. You clearly were not around message boards at the time of Raimi's first go-round at the character.I didn't need to be around for that long to recognise that given the thread author's limited 'brief' in his opening thread. This thread it seems was designed (at least in part) to provoke these sort of heated debates. Instead of discussing seriously, the merits of organic/artificial/hybrid concepts. We've given it to him on a plate. I'd rather tie this one off before we embarass ourselves further and waste even more virtual space.

I've only mentioned the precedence because you initially brought up the trilogy as defending their presence. This is all well and good, except I never proclaimed the audience would not like it. You seem to have agreed that both work, so you have reached a stalemate. Can you understand why I've been so dismissive of that "point" in the first place?I brought up the trilogy because I felt it showed how the fans after seeing the first film had no major problem with the organic concept. If something which contradicts 40 years and more of established lore, can be accepted after the first film. Then this has large implications. You say if something is not broken then don't fix it which applies to the films as much as it does to the comics. I don't prefer organic webbing because I feel the other is a faulty premise but simply because I feel it works perfectly fine on film. My view is that we should concentrate on what didn't work with Sam Raimi's Spider-Man films rather than draw a list of what we'd like to change, merely for stylistic reasons. Otherwise all these additions of which we'd like, will be lost due to sloppy storytelling.

Please stop playing with semantics. When you write "purposefully different", of course I'm going to read that as adversarial to the concept. You're not insinuating an innate nature of being dissimilar, but the volition of contradistinction.Don't blame me for your myopia. You attributed (and you alone) that I accused others of being contrarian. To me, there is a distinction between wanting to be different (i.e. stylistically) and being opposed or against an idea. I made no suggestion that those individuals for the artificial web-shooters were being polemic at all. You interpreted an innocuous comment as being more aggressive or even accusatory. I merely felt inititially there was a sentiment to change that specific detail for the sake of it because it is different (and not because they didn't like organic webbing).

I really don't care so as long people realize the design falters upon close inspection.I've already detailed my reasoning for the past preference of organics. To me, if I can accept a man bitten by a spider who then acquires the abilities that a spider possesses. Which requires one to suspend disbelief an awful lot. Then I don't see how I can oppose or dismiss the aforementioned idea without questioning how a man can receive spider abilities from an insect bite in the first place. Furthermore, I really enjoyed seeing the organic web-shooters because I instead expected it to be like the comics. So it surprised me but I felt it worked and so I eased into the idea. Because I've never questioned it since, I don't see why it should be changed. I'd only want to change it if I felt unsatisfied. I have no compunction to change. Do you understand?

Wall-crawling via hair-like fibers growing all over his body, superhuman strength via proportionate strength of a spider, and the spider-sense myth is based on an arachnid's fast reflexes to environmental vibrations. Even Stan had the strength of mind to exclude organic spider-webs, because he couldn't think of a plausible explanation for their existence on Peter's wrists. Hell, Raimi didn't even bother with it.Sam Raimi didn't bother with explaining anything beyond a genetically engineered spider transferring its powers to Peter Parker after biting him. So forget the "how would a spinneret-forearm work" when one has to explain how a genetically engineered/radioactive spider gives you its powers from a bite. You shouldn't separate the two. That's the whole point with Spider-Man. You do not need to explain all of it because we accept the whole premise fully. To me it seems absurd to separate one matter from others. It seems nonsensical. A criticism of "well it deviates from the comics" is perfectly fine although I don't agree with it (caveat: films tend to alter few details for thematic/dramatic purposes) but questioning organic web-production when you've already accepted everything else seems banal.


Now this has gone beyond petty and I think for the interest of keeping this thread going and with substance. It should move to what purpose would either concept have.

Artificial web-shooters:

a) does he have more than one type of web? (I know he does in the comics but this can evolve over the trilogy)
b) what gives him inspiration to develope the web formula?
c) perhaps Peter Parker performed a dissection of a spider in order to study its web-producing ability (before being bitten)
d) if Peter Parker creates his own web-formula, what's the reason not to patent it?

[The Lizard]

I'm shocked and appalled at the number of people who support organic webshooters... Stan Lee would vomit in horror. I thought mechanical would be the favourite by a land slide, instead I find that its barely the majority.

I think people feel less strongly about it these days due to the fact that:

A. They got used to the organics in the Raimi movies

B. The organics were used in the comics for a while (rather lamely, I might add, but whatever).

C. There are more young Spidey fans around now who didn't grow up seeing Spidey have mech-shooters only.


I'd prefer to see the mechs in the reboot of course, but I found I was able to ignore the organics pretty successfully after their brief introduction in the 2002 movie.

So I don't see the classic website "no-organic-webshooters.com" making a comeback for the new reboot. :woot:

[Mach2Infinity]

I think people feel less strongly about it these days due to the fact that:

A. They got used to the organics in the Raimi movies

B. The organics were used in the comics for a while (rather lamely, I might add, but whatever).

C. There are more young Spidey fans around now who didn't grow up seeing Spidey have mech-shooters only.


I'd prefer to see the mechs in the reboot of course, but I found I was able to ignore the organics pretty successfully after their brief introduction in the 2002 movie.

So I don't see the classic website "no-organic-webshooters.com" making a comeback for the new reboot. :woot:

Did Stan Lee air his opinion publicly on the organic/artificial debate?

Another thing people must bear in mind. There's bound to be a large number of fans who started to read the comics after they saw the Sam Raimi films. As other have said, despite their flaws they did set a benchmark and indeed gave us this new wave of superhero films.

[Nathan]

Did Stan Lee air his opinion publicly on the organic/artificial debate?

Honestly, I think he said why didn't he think of that. But just because the man gives his approval, doesn't mean I don't want to see the mechanical webshooters anymore. They are still one of my favorite gadgets in comics.

And they bring a lot more to the character than organics ever could.

[Mach2Infinity]

Honestly, I think he said why didn't he think of that. But just because the man gives his approval, doesn't mean I don't want to see the mechanical webshooters anymore. They are still one of my favorite gadgets in comics.

I didn't intend on using his name to prove a point, just a matter of curiousity. Perhaps it's a reflection of times where we can more easily accept the organic web-shooters. Precisely because comics and characters such as Spider-Man broke the mould.

And they bring a lot more to the character than organics ever could.

Well they add a different dynamic or element to the character. How great is such an element will vary from reader to reader. I think you mooted a possible hybrid device in one of these posts and I think it would be fantastic for the designers to come up with a device which shapes the organic web and has a lot of great features too. Which is why to me it seems the logical next step if we are desperate to evolve or adapt the organic concept. If a compromise can be reached then it should be done.

[The Lizard]

Did Stan Lee air his opinion publicly on the organic/artificial debate?

Stan never rocks the boat with any of the Marvel superhero movies. He just sticks to the PR script and generally supports them. He publicly stated he was fine with the organics in the films, but who knows what his actual opinion is.

[Dragon]

Did Stan Lee air his opinion publicly on the organic/artificial debate?

He said two things. In a TV documentary about the possiblity of Spider-Man being real, he said he hadn't thought of organics, but might have used them if he did.

Stan also said, just after the first film was released that he understood that Sam didn't think he could make the mechs work on film, but that he himself could have. This to wild applause from the audience.


Another thing people must bear in mind. There's bound to be a large number of fans who started to read the comics after they saw the Sam Raimi films. As other have said, despite their flaws they did set a benchmark and indeed gave us this new wave of superhero films.

Yeah, and those people reading the comics would see that the webshooters were mechanical.

[Mach2Infinity]

Stan never rocks the boat with any of the Marvel superhero movies. He just sticks to the PR script and generally supports them. He publicly stated he was fine with the organics in the films, but who knows what his actual opinion is.

Well I think privately he probably would have preferred they stick to the original artificial concept. However since they worked in the films and I don't see any lasting repercussions. He's not going to mind if they use an organic web-shooter again. I think if someone suggested a hybrid device, he'd probably be receptive because I suspect even at this stage. He likes a character to evolve. Well clearly he does since the various comic interpretations have persevered.

[NinjaCarm]

Web-Shooters and scenes / flashbacks of Peter making his costume.

This is a reboot not a rehash (organics / costume out of nowhere, etc.)

[Ace of Knaves]

I wouldn't mind the web shooters. But they have gotta make it believable that this piss poor kid has the resourcefulness to invent these things on a tight budget.

I mean, he can barely afford to pay his rent, but he can invent web shooters?

[Mach2Infinity]

Yeah, and those people reading the comics would see that the webshooters were mechanical.

No the point is if one can accept everything they see on screen which sparks their interest in the comic character, then surely it is a sign of tacit approval. At the end of it, either concept works perfectly fine so whichever one they choose will not detract from the character. I simply feel happy with the way it was done on film. Others may not or simply would like to see the artificial web-shooters with which they grew up (because they're more accustomed to it). As someone has said Spider-Man has had organic web-shooters in the comics so it wasn't a completely alien concept.

[Mach2Infinity]

I wouldn't mind the web shooters. But they have gotta make it believable that this piss poor kid has the resourcefulness to invent these things on a tight budget.

I mean, he can barely afford to pay his rent, but he can invent web shooters?

"Necessity is the mother of all invention"

I don't have a problem with believing Peter Parker's socio-economic group would have trouble inventing some web-shooter/utility device. Particulary if this Parker Peter is a scientific man (which he is of course) and coupled with that interest/passion he would find a 'hardware' shop to buy all the necessary parts.

[Ace of Knaves]

Well yea there you go, they need to make sure his intelligence and resourcefulness shines through.

And not just go BAM poverty striken kid invents web shooters!

[Nathan]

I wouldn't mind the web shooters. But they have gotta make it believable that this piss poor kid has the resourcefulness to invent these things on a tight budget.

I mean, he can barely afford to pay his rent, but he can invent web shooters?

Web-shooters aren't exactly that impossible. It's simply a device that lets him shoot strings of web-fluid from a high pressurized cartridge. And people posted already several possible scenarios of Peter aquiring the web-formular without pulling it out of his ass.

[Mach2Infinity]

Web-shooters aren't exactly that impossible. It's simply a device that lets him shoot strings of web-fluid from a high pressurized cartridge. And people posted already several possible scenarios of Peter aquiring the web-formular without pulling it out of his ass.

He could be performing dissections of spiders. Analysing how they secrete and excrete their web. All in the lead up to him being bitten by one. He could even keep some as pets. As long as there's focus on him being a talented chemistry student (rather than physics) then I think it would work even more.

[Crook]

A wrist device which manipulates web excretion betters both the comic and film interpretations through it giving Spider-Man a bigger arsenal from the previous films but staying faifthul to the concept that a man bitten by an arachnid absorbs its characteristics 'fully'. It shows a man who has accepted and embraced his new existence by melding the two concepts in an ever more intricate fashion. Whilst Spider-Man can have a utility belt I'd prefer it if the wrist device took that role exclusively (he can point and shoot bugs or tracking devices for instance).
What you've described isn't all that impressive though. Certainly not a great representation of Peter's vast intellect. It's akin to a garden hose or shower-head settings. It only serves to filter the substance and alter the type of output. I much prefer your initial idea that Peter studies silk secretions (be it from himself or spiders), and gets the idea to use it as web shooters.

I didn't need to be around for that long to recognise that given the thread author's limited 'brief' in his opening thread. This thread it seems was designed (at least in part) to provoke these sort of heated debates. Instead of discussing seriously, the merits of organic/artificial/hybrid concepts. We've given it to him on a plate. I'd rather tie this one off before we embarass ourselves further and waste even more virtual space.I'm just correcting your original claim that this discussion hasn't been long battled. This is just a continuation of what was started nearly a decade ago in this very same place, whose original intention was to gauge fans' thoughts on Raimi/Cameron's new idea.

Don't blame me for your myopia. You attributed (and you alone) that I accused others of being contrarian. To me, there is a distinction between wanting to be different (i.e. stylistically) and being opposed or against an idea. I made no suggestion that those individuals for the artificial web-shooters were being polemic at all. You interpreted an innocuous comment as being more aggressive or even accusatory. I merely felt inititially there was a sentiment to change that specific detail for the sake of it because it is different (and not because they didn't like organic webbing). Let me give you a scenario: Everyone outside is wearing blue. I decide to wear red, because I prefer that color. That is a personal (stylistic) choice independent of outside factors. If I decided to wear red because I hated blue, or I did not want to follow the crowd, that is a conscious decision to go against the grain; i.e. purposefully different. The difference between the former and latter in decision-making is that the former does not have to consciously consider anything, as it happens naturally (e.g. I like red, I'll go out in red). You have suggested the latter, which is distinctively analytical.

I commend your resilience, but drawing this out is nonsensical. Either admit you misspoke in meaning, or that you're wrong. I promise you no one will hold it against you. I misspoke earlier (infer instead of imply), and you rightfully corrected me. I'm ok with that. We all make mistakes.

I've already detailed my reasoning for the past preference of organics. To me, if I can accept a man bitten by a spider who then acquires the abilities that a spider possesses. Which requires one to suspend disbelief an awful lot. Then I don't see how I can oppose or dismiss the aforementioned idea without questioning how a man can receive spider abilities from an insect bite in the first place. With all due respect, I do not care for you to explain your preference or your level of disbelief. These are both purely subjective and every person's right. To argue it is irrational. I've noted several times in this very thread if a person just says "I like organics", I will not contend it. When it extends to "I like organics, because logically it only makes sense..." -- that's when I'll butt in. That opens the door for expository dialog rooted in "logic" as it has been introduced.

Sam Raimi didn't bother with explaining anything beyond a genetically engineered spider transferring its powers to Peter Parker after biting him. So forget the "how would a spinneret-forearm work" when one has to explain how a genetically engineered/radioactive spider gives you its powers from a bite. You shouldn't separate the two. That's the whole point with Spider-Man. You do not need to explain all of it because we accept the whole premise fully. To me it seems absurd to separate one matter from others. It seems nonsensical. A criticism of "well it deviates from the comics" is perfectly fine although I don't agree with it (caveat: films tend to alter few details for thematic/dramatic purposes) but questioning organic web-production when you've already accepted everything else seems banal.His powers HAVE been explained. I listed them for you. One has to first suspend their disbelief that powers can be transferred from a spider to a human in the first place. That is your biggest hurdle. Once that's over with, the rest follow through pretty easily. Spidey's powers all fall within the bounds of fringe science. It stretches the limits of plausibility, but rational nonetheless. Organic webbing (in the way Raimi has presented it) stands out because it has no foundations under biological or scientific principle. I don't mean a little, or a sliver. None, whatsover.

I suspect you know this, because you have yet to successfully tackle the organics issue head-on. I've not read one statement backing up the concept, without relying on the inclusion of the other powers. That's not how one debates, that's circumventing the issue. So I'll make this real simple for you: can you debate the involvement of organics alone under semi-logical terms without referencing outside agents or inconsistent methodical explanations?

Artificial web-shooters:

a) does he have more than one type of web? (I know he does in the comics but this can evolve over the trilogy)
b) what gives him inspiration to develope the web formula?
c) perhaps Peter Parker performed a dissection of a spider in order to study its web-producing ability (before being bitten)
d) if Peter Parker creates his own web-formula, what's the reason not to patent it?a) That'd be up to how Peter configures the shooters. It's more than possible.
b) I'm personally not in favor of him solely developing it, as that does merit a great (albeit acceptable) amount of absurdity.
c) Prone to contrivances from a creative standpoint.
d) He's a superhero at that point. Either he risks exposing his identity, or you sacrifice the integrity of the character by seeking profits. It can be argued that the patent itself could solve all his problems while being a potential breakthrough technology for the world..but then you wouldn't have a Spider-Man

[Raiden]

I think organic web shooter is something that Raimi wanted which isn't consistent with Spider-man's origin, and for that result I think they should have web shooter in the reboot. It'd also send a powerful message that this is a REBOOT, not a sequel of Raimi's Spider-man movies.

[BillyZaned]

I think organic web shooter is something that Raimi wanted which isn't consistent with Spider-man's origin, and for that result I think they should have web shooter in the reboot. It'd also send a powerful message that this is a REBOOT, not a sequel of Raimi's Spider-man movies.

not as powerful as having him have an organic web shoot that shoots from his butt!!!!

[Raiden]

not as powerful as having him have an organic web shoot that shoots from his butt!!!!

It's hard to aim when you have to stick your butt in the air, though. :cwink:

[BillyZaned]

It's hard to aim when you have to stick your butt in the air, though. :cwink:


he'd be more like a spider though...

ass shooter.... away!!!!!!!

[david icke]

For me, the only reason I'd prefer the mechanical web shooters is so that they could have some moments when he runs out of web fluid at important moments, or they get jammed up or damaged through misadventure. So if i had to choose one right now, I'd choose mechanicals.

[Mach2Infinity]

What you've described isn't all that impressive though. Certainly not a great representation of Peter's vast intellect. It's akin to a garden hose or shower-head settings. It only serves to filter the substance and alter the type of output. I much prefer your initial idea that Peter studies silk secretions (be it from himself or spiders), and gets the idea to use it as web shooters.

I couldn't think of a greater compliment to Peter Parker's intellect than an invention which fuses his own biology with experimental technolgy. The very idea that a man can design an intricate device which interacts with his own complex biology (one which is unique) and manipulate it so deftly is something which in my view would be more technologically advanced than mere artificial web-shooters alone. To say such a concept "isn't all that impressive" is rather bemusing.

I'm just correcting your original claim that this discussion hasn't been long battled. This is just a continuation of what was started nearly a decade ago in this very same place, whose original intention was to gauge fans' thoughts on Raimi/Cameron's new idea.I don't recall stating that this issue hasn't long been battled at all, nothing to correct. In fact I acknowledged that due to the heated nature of the debate in the past. The thread author must've known such a debate would be re-ignited with equal volatility. My comments explicity referred to my perceived intention of the thread author. Who gave no brief or set of questions from which to base a serious and involved discussion. That's not to say he intended to incite others to argue but one motive may have been to see such arguments. Certainly he gave no clear direction for any discussion.

Indeed all he said was:

This thread was bound to be birthed, so....

Indicating a certain familiarity with the subject (and in my view its polarising effect).

It seems from reading the bulk of posts here that most people would not mind if the organic web-shooters were kept in place. Even by many who favour the artificial web-shooters. This is key if one is to appraise the viability of continuing the idea of organic web-shooters. Do they take away anything from the character? Can they be improved?

If I decided to wear red because I hated blue, or I did not want to follow the crowd, that is a conscious decision to go against the grain; i.e. purposefully different.I cannot put my position more clearer. My comment was in reference to my perception that many who preferred the artificial web-shooters did so to fit a stylistic change or brief. I.e. it's a new film, everything must change for the sake of it because it's a different continuity. The only analogy I can use is that there's option A and option B. To me it seemed people thought "well we've had option A so let's try option B. Scenario: "Why? What's wrong with option B?" "Nothing, it's just an alternative and I want to try it because it's never been done." Ergo there is no animosity if you will towards option A. It fits the mandate that one should change every detail simply because a re-telling of a story will happen.

I commend your resilience, but drawing this out is nonsensical. Either admit you misspoke in meaning, or that you're wrong. I promise you no one will hold it against you. I misspoke earlier (infer instead of imply), and you rightfully corrected me. I'm ok with that. We all make mistakes.You're the who's drawn it out because you insist on fixating on a very innocuous comment. If you're going to insist on my words having a certain inflection which is against what I said (in my view you are twisting and contorting them) then of course I will 'defend' my position. You should simply accept my words and not attempt to be imperious by asserting you know better. It would be supine and disingenuous of me to 'admit' that I got it wrong. Because I think someone is being utterly pedantic on my chosen phrase and enlarged it into a quantum of great proportions.

With all due respect, I do not care for you to explain your preference or your level of disbelief. These are both purely subjective and every person's right. To argue it is irrational. I've noted several times in this very thread if a person just says "I like organics", I will not contend it. When it extends to "I like organics, because logically it only makes sense..." -- that's when I'll butt in. That opens the door for expository dialog rooted in "logic" as it has been introduced.Well I do not care for you to explain either and I will not solicit such comments. If someone came to me and said "I have an idea for a character. He's called Spider-Man and he gains spider abilities from being bitten by a specially endowed spider." If he were to go on and say "he can crawl walls, jump high, run fast, has hyper-reflexes bordering on precognition and he excretes web." To me they're all equally fantastical which is why I make no distinction among whether a certain power is more plausible or not. Simply because the central conceit that a man receives spider abilities from a spider bite is the only leap of faith one must make in accepting the character. Everything else is mere colouration. Which is why I said "logically..." because a spider secretes and excretes web. The way in which a man would do it would alter drastically of course but one doesn not need to get into the mechanics of it.

His powers HAVE been explained. I listed them for you. One has to first suspend their disbelief that powers can be transferred from a spider to a human in the first place. That is your biggest hurdle. Once that's over with, the rest follow through pretty easily. Spidey's powers all fall within the bounds of fringe science. It stretches the limits of plausibility, but rational nonetheless. Organic webbing (in the way Raimi has presented it) stands out because it has no foundations under biological or scientific principle. I don't mean a little, or a sliver. None, whatsover.I never questioned Spider-Man powers, indeed I accept them wholeheartedly. Which is why I have no difficulty whatsoever in embracing the organic web-shooters. To me they feel as a natural complement to a man's arsenal who incidentally is called 'Spider-Man'. There's nothing rational about a man acquiring spider characteristics from a spider bite. If we were referring to genetic manipulation or 'gene therapy' (a precise science) then you could give a human being virtually any ability (a spinneret would not be the most extreme one could include).

I suspect you know this, because you have yet to successfully tackle the organics issue head-on. I've not read one statement backing up the concept, without relying on the inclusion of the other powers. That's not how one debates, that's circumventing the issue. So I'll make this real simple for you: can you debate the involvement of organics alone under semi-logical terms without referencing outside agents or inconsistent methodical explanations?
First of all I will debate how I deem fit. I do not debate within the confines or parameters that others set. To demand such of someone is rather arrogant and myopic. In addition, it is absurd to separate one particular power from others. Considering these are abilities that are quite inherent and natural to a spider. It's ludicrous to try and apply "logic" to explain how a man's biology can specifically accommodate web-production when one must also explain the changes in physiology and anatomy that allows Spider-Man to do the other things he does. All of his abilities are inextricably linked since he received them from the same source. To question this reality is to bring everything into question and not simply one facet of his powers. However, since you think it is implausible that Spider-Man would have web secretion/excretion abilities (since typically a spider uses its abdomen) then I shall present this article (based on fact):

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5386524.stm)

I shall post key points:

Scientists have shown how spiders made to scale vertical glass surfaces will secrete a fibrous "glue" to anchor themselves down and prevent a fall.
Arachnids are known to use claws to negotiate difficult terrain, and they also have tiny hairs that can form weak electric attractions with a surface.

.....

"We have discovered that the tarantula has a third attachment mechanism, which depends on fibres exuded from nozzle-like structures on its feet."

.....

"These fibrous secretions function as silken tethers and, when laid down on glass plates, appear as 'footprints' that consist of dozens of fibres with diameters of 0.2-1.0 [millionths of a metre]."

.....

The team studied how zebra tarantulas (Aphonopelma seemanni) from Costa Rica managed to hang on to vertical glass plates.

.....

Generally, spiders will extrude a silk from abdominal structures known as spinnerets. This fine thread is used in a range of activities from capturing prey to providing protective shields for developing young.
The team wonders which of the adaptations - foot silk or abdominal silk - came first; or, indeed, if they evolved completely independently.

The implication is that if certain species of spider's are known to excrete web from their legs (they have no other limbs). Then it increases the 'plausibility' that if a man inherited the spider's abilities, he would be able to shoot web from his limbs as this particular spider does. Now a film doesn't have to explain where ever single web-nozzle is located on Spider-Man body does it? Only where it is relevant.

[Mach2Infinity]

For me, the only reason I'd prefer the mechanical web shooters is so that they could have some moments when he runs out of web fluid at important moments, or they get jammed up or damaged through misadventure. So if i had to choose one right now, I'd choose mechanicals.

I understand that it would add a potential level of danger or dramatic tension to the plot. Although if he were to employ hybrid web-shooters then there would be room for it. Moreover, even organic web-shooters are bound to have a finite supply of web (which should strongly be indicated in the film) and so he can run out. I'd like to see how these abilities affect his metabolism and how he needs to eat more etc.

[Nathan]

He could be performing dissections of spiders. Analysing how they secrete and excrete their web. All in the lead up to him being bitten by one. He could even keep some as pets. As long as there's focus on him being a talented chemistry student (rather than physics) then I think it would work even more.

That's not really a good idea. Too much of a coincidence don't you think? Studying Spiders, keeping Spiders as pets, clearly showing a certain fascination with them and then gets bitten by a Spider and receives Spider like powers? Nah.

[david icke]

I understand that it would add a potential level of danger or dramatic tension to the plot. Although if he were to employ hybrid web-shooters then there would be room for it. Moreover, even organic web-shooters are bound to have a finite supply of web (which should strongly be indicated in the film) and so he can run out. I'd like to see how these abilities affect his metabolism and how he needs to eat more etc.

I haven't seen it , but they did that on the old Flash tv show, had him stuffing his face all the time because of the superpowers, they did it with him in Smallville too.

I think it would be more interesting and funny to see him banging about on his mechanicals in his room trying to get them to work again, and moaning about how he needs money for materials than having a very hungry Spider-man rubbing his tummy all the time. 'My Spider-sense is tingling' would be getting replaced with 'My Spider-belly is rumbling'.
Naw, if they wanted to have the idea that his webs run out and he has problems over that, mechanicals are the way to go I think. We've already seen that work very well in the books, I don't want to see anything like what was done with the Flash in that regard.

[SpeterMan3]

Shooters. They add another element to Spidey (brains, inconvenient refills, etc.). They would be a nice change from Raimi's ovies anyway.

[david icke]

That's not really a good idea. Too much of a coincidence don't you think? Studying Spiders, keeping Spiders as pets, clearly showing a certain fascination with them and then gets bitten by a Spider and receives Spider like powers? Nah.

Yeah, I wouldn't want to see anything like big coincidences like that either.
At most I wouldn't mind seeing him studying spider's webs after he got bit if he was developing mechanicals. It doesn't have to say it in the film explicitly, but you could no-prize it that his already keen scientific mind is more inspired or attuned to synthesising(sic) his own Spiderwebs after his dna was merged with one's qualities.

[Mach2Infinity]

That's not really a good idea. Too much of a coincidence don't you think? Studying Spiders, keeping Spiders as pets, clearly showing a certain fascination with them and then gets bitten by a Spider and receives Spider like powers? Nah.

The thought did cross my mind as it can be too contrived but is it any more contrived than a genetically-engineered/radioactive spider that happens to be in the right place at the right time? His hobby could be spiders and perhaps a visit to Dr. Curt Connors' lab might expose him to a super-spider of sorts. I don't know, some serum for limb regrowth (taken from a spider) has unusual properties. I would at least like Peter Parker to study a spider before he gets bitten. Perhaps in class conducting a dissection. So that if he does have artificial web-shooters then the seed has been planted.

I haven't seen it , but they did that on the old Flash tv show, had him stuffing his face all the time because of the superpowers, they did it with him in Smallville too.

I think it would be more interesting and funny to see him banging about on his mechanicals in his room trying to get them to work again, and moaning about how he needs money for materials than having a very hungry Spider-man rubbing his tummy all the time. 'My Spider-sense is tingling' would be getting replaced with 'My Spider-belly is rumbling'.
Naw, if they wanted to have the idea that his webs run out and he has problems over that, mechanicals are the way to go I think. We've already seen that work very well in the books, I don't want to see anything like what was done with the Flash in that regard.

Well invariably there will be a drain on his body due to the added strain of these powers. I think some reference to it would be good. It doesn't have to be overt to the point of 'spider-belly' nonsense. Simply something which alludes to this new found development of his.

There's always the possibility that artificial web-shooters can contain specialist web as I've said earlier. Where for certain villains he'll need to develope web that has special properties. Fire retardant web being one example.

Lastly, there's the scenario of gradual mutation. Where Spider-Man doesn't receive all his abilities at once. If he were to have organic web-shooters then they could develope in the second or third film maybe?

[david icke]

Well invariably there will be a drain on his body due to the added strain of these powers. I think some reference to it would be good. It doesn't have to be overt to the point of 'spider-belly' nonsense. Simply something which alludes to this new found development of his.

Yeah but what could make it interesting, more interesting than the funny little problems he runs into with the mechanicals? If the organic webbing problems are handled too subtle, it's not as interesting as the mechanical situations he gets into in the books, and if you make a big deal out of it, like they did with the Flash on tv shows, you're adding a part onto the Spider-mythos that could be somewhat obtrusive and not so good. That's why i made the 'My spider-belly is rumbling' joke, because if you make a big deal out of it it would be like a whole new thing you'd be attaching to the character, which could be ridiculous.


There's always the possibility that artificial web-shooters can contain specialist web as I've said earlier. Where for certain villains he'll need to develope web that has special properties. Fire retardant web being one example.

Yeah, this has been done in the books, where he developed a more fire retardant webbing, I don't know what else it could be developed into though, it's already water-proof, durable, sticky, can be shaped into different moulds etc.


Lastly, there's the scenario of gradual mutation. Where Spider-Man doesn't receive all his abilities at once. If he were to have organic web-shooters then they could develope in the second or third film maybe?

I don't really see the point in that, folk would just ask, why was that power held back? unless they were going to go with the extra arms story where he mutates further.

[Nathan]

The thought did cross my mind as it can be too contrived but is it any more contrived than a genetically-engineered/radioactive spider that happens to be in the right place at the right time?

I like to deal with one conicidence at a time. Being fascinated by Spiders and then getting Spider powers is a bit much.

His hobby could be spiders and perhaps a visit to Dr. Curt Connors' lab might expose him to a super-spider of sorts. I don't know, some serum for limb regrowth (taken from a spider) has unusual properties. I would at least like Peter Parker to study a spider before he gets bitten. Perhaps in class conducting a dissection. So that if he does have artificial web-shooters then the seed has been planted.

Or you could simply show that Dr. Conners and his team are also working on a way to artificially recreate Spider silk, since they are already experimenting with genetically altered Spiders. And Peter, since he's also supposed to be one of Marvel's bright minds, just has that sudden spark and he knows what exactly is missing in the formular. He'd be testing it out, but keeps the sudden revelation to himself, because people might guess who Spider-Man is, because he'd be using the artificial Spider-silk.

[Chris B]

I think they should keep the organics but include the 'regulators' or whatever they were going to be called to help with aim and accuracy.

[Reikowolf]

doesn't matter, so long as he spins a web, any size... in order to catch thieves, just like flies.

[Crook]

I cannot put my position more clearer. My comment was in reference to my perception that many who preferred the artificial web-shooters did so to fit a stylistic change or brief. I.e. it's a new film, everything must change for the sake of it because it's a different continuity. The only analogy I can use is that there's option A and option B. To me it seemed people thought "well we've had option A so let's try option B. Scenario: "Why? What's wrong with option B?" "Nothing, it's just an alternative and I want to try it because it's never been done." Ergo there is no animosity if you will towards option A. It fits the mandate that one should change every detail simply because a re-telling of a story will happen.

You're the who's drawn it out because you insist on fixating on a very innocuous comment. If you're going to insist on my words having a certain inflection which is against what I said (in my view you are twisting and contorting them) then of course I will 'defend' my position. You should simply accept my words and not attempt to be imperious by asserting you know better. It would be supine and disingenuous of me to 'admit' that I got it wrong. Because I think someone is being utterly pedantic on my chosen phrase and enlarged it into a quantum of great proportions.
My god, dramatizing a bit much there. I asked you to clarify your original statement, and all you've done is say something completely different. I'll make this real short: being purposefully different (your words) does not correspond to choosing upon preference, which happens to be different. That is all.

To me they're all equally fantastical which is why I make no distinction among whether a certain power is more plausible or not. Simply because the central conceit that a man receives spider abilities from a spider bite is the only leap of faith one must make in accepting the character. Everything else is mere colouration. Which is why I said "logically..." because a spider secretes and excretes web. The way in which a man would do it would alter drastically of course but one doesn not need to get into the mechanics of it.Of course you don't need to get into the mechanics of it. But we're exploring it anyway because this discussion has progressed into how well each ability holds up under a critical eye. You assumed his other powers were just as implausible, and I explained to you (twice now) that was simply not true.


First of all I will debate how I deem fit. I do not debate within the confines or parameters that others set. To demand such of someone is rather arrogant and myopic.I didn't demand you to do anything, slick. I asked you if you could. Stop pointing fingers.

In addition, it is absurd to separate one particular power from others. Considering these are abilities that are quite inherent and natural to a spider. Uhm, did you not ask me previously to explain his other powers? I did so. Each and every power, works independently of the rest. There is a logical basis for their existence that relatively works under biological principle. I ask you to do the same, and now it's absurd? Come on.

It's ludicrous to try and apply "logic" to explain how a man's biology can specifically accommodate web-production when one must also explain the changes in physiology and anatomy that allows Spider-Man to do the other things he does. All of his abilities are inextricably linked since he received them from the same source. To question this reality is to bring everything into question and not simply one facet of his powers.Which I did. None of his comic book powers require significant physiological or anatomical alterations. They are all enhancements of the human body. If you perceive this to be wrong, then feel free to chime in. I am open to new comments.

However, since you think it is implausible that Spider-Man would have web secretion/excretion abilities (since typically a spider uses its abdomen) then I shall present this article (based on fact):

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5386524.stm)

I shall post key points:

Scientists have shown how spiders made to scale vertical glass surfaces will secrete a fibrous "glue" to anchor themselves down and prevent a fall.
Arachnids are known to use claws to negotiate difficult terrain, and they also have tiny hairs that can form weak electric attractions with a surface.

.....

"We have discovered that the tarantula has a third attachment mechanism, which depends on fibres exuded from nozzle-like structures on its feet."

.....

"These fibrous secretions function as silken tethers and, when laid down on glass plates, appear as 'footprints' that consist of dozens of fibres with diameters of 0.2-1.0 [millionths of a metre]."

.....

The team studied how zebra tarantulas (Aphonopelma seemanni) from Costa Rica managed to hang on to vertical glass plates.

.....

Generally, spiders will extrude a silk from abdominal structures known as spinnerets. This fine thread is used in a range of activities from capturing prey to providing protective shields for developing young.
The team wonders which of the adaptations - foot silk or abdominal silk - came first; or, indeed, if they evolved completely independently.

The implication is that if certain species of spider's are known to excrete web from their legs (they have no other limbs). Then it increases the 'plausibility' that if a man inherited the spider's abilities, he would be able to shoot web from his limbs as this particular spider does. Now a film doesn't have to explain where ever single web-nozzle is located on Spider-Man body does it? Only where it is relevant.
Of course the nozzle location is important. It's existence has to be justifiable. Spiders secreting the substance from their limbs makes sense for obvious reasons. Humans have digits, so if there were any similar secretion, it would be there. Placing it on the wrists is stupid, can't be rationalized, and is only accepted because people are so used to Spidey shooting it from there.

This is what I mean by the pick-and-choose method. The reference article is great as a starting point. But anyone that wants to attempt applying logical foundations in fiction should take as much care with how it is presented. Otherwise, why even bother? You took a scientific case of silk secretions taking place other than the abdomen (:up:), but then completely threw that out when related to Spidey (:down).

Why is it so hard to stick with "I like organics"? No one's pressuring you to go through such lengths in trying to justify it purely because of it's unrealistic nature. Well...unless you bring it up, that is.

I like Supes, Nightcrawler, Flash, and a plethora of other fantastical heroes. You won't see me phased because some of their powers are completely unexplainable. I still wouldn't change them, in spite of that acknowledgment.

[Mach2Infinity]

Yeah but what could make it interesting, more interesting than the funny little problems he runs into with the mechanicals? If the organic webbing problems are handled too subtle, it's not as interesting as the mechanical situations he gets into in the books, and if you make a big deal out of it, like they did with the Flash on tv shows, you're adding a part onto the Spider-mythos that could be somewhat obtrusive and not so good. That's why i made the 'My spider-belly is rumbling' joke, because if you make a big deal out of it it would be like a whole new thing you'd be attaching to the character, which could be ridiculous.

I know, I simply felt the artificial web-shooters wasn't the only way of having a scenario where Spider-Man would run out of web. Even though it would translate easier than the organic web-shooters in that regards. It depends where they want to go with the character. A common criticism of the previous films is that Spider-Man did not show enough of his humorous side. The quips he often delivers (especially towards the villains) were mostly absent. Perhaps in the minds of the film-makers they don't want to turn Spider-Man into a clown but don't know how to convey the wisecracking hero. In regards to the hunger scenario. They can simply show him eating larger portions and have comments from people who notice it. You can weave that sort of thing into the story without signposting that he needs to keep his energy up. It's obviously not necessary it's simply a possibility along with the artificial web-shooter woes.

I don't really see the point in that, folk would just ask, why was that power held back? unless they were going to go with the extra arms story where he mutates further.

Well that's what they can do. Mutate him further and he struggles to counteract this mutation. Perhaps at the end when he's found a solution and changes back to 'normal'. He discovers he's retained that abililty.

Or you could simply show that Dr. Conners and his team are also working on a way to artificially recreate Spider silk, since they are already experimenting with genetically altered Spiders. And Peter, since he's also supposed to be one of Marvel's bright minds, just has that sudden spark and he knows what exactly is missing in the formular. He'd be testing it out, but keeps the sudden revelation to himself, because people might guess who Spider-Man is, because he'd be using the artificial Spider-silk.

That's a good idea. You know the limb re-growth route is not a bad one. Since as we all should know. Dr. Connors' research into limb re-growth is how he turns into the Lizard in the first place. It would only be logical for him to look at all species that are able to re-grow limbs. Spiders are among them. I think a radioactive (gamma radiation?) genetically engineered spider would work and again fuses both the film and comic concepts. The one thing that did bother me though about the first Spider-Man film. Is how in a controlled environment where they're looking at spiders all the time. Someone was careless and did not realise a spider was missing.

[The Slang]

If they were to use a hybrid of the two ideas, I would suggest that Parker creates the mechanical web shooters, but a major component of the 'web fluid' is a substance from his own body. Maybe in his sweat?
Parker could have already been experimenting with chemicals and air rifles before the spider-bite. Say he was trying to create a miniture version of the MI6 foam gun for Oscorp or Stark industries. Then after he gets his powers, he makes his costume and becomes an entertainer. One day he spills his experimental compound on his costume but -being in a hurry- is unable to clean it. He goes to an underground fight club, breaks up a sweat, and notices that he is developing underarm webbing. He puts two and two together, combines the compound with the silk protein in his sweat and then creates the webshooters.

This would explain why he can't patten the formula... it comes from him. It would mean being studied and 'milked'. And he could never provide enough for mass-production.
But really I don't think the patten thing is an issue at all. Without superhuman strength the webshooters wouldn't be nearly as useful.

[Crook]

That's a good start, but instead of sweat I'd instead borrow from Mach2Infinity (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=61949)'s article with the fluid being secreted from parts of the body that would be used for crawling (i.e. fingers and feet). There are a variety of ways they could approach the inception of his experimental process, the important part is it makes sense.

See, we're getting somewhere. Looks like the application of scientific sensibilities has actually gone a long way in solving many of the fallacies found in his origin. Great job. :up:

[Artistsean]

He could have organic web shooter, or inorganic, whatever they want wont bother me.
But I would like to see the belt, light, and trackers. But still, if they don't I wont loose any sleep. It would just be cool.

[Mach2Infinity]

My god, dramatizing a bit much there. I asked you to clarify your original statement, and all you've done is say something completely different. I'll make this real short: being purposefully different (your words) does not correspond to choosing upon preference, which happens to be different. That is all.

What do you expect? I've explained, rather needlessly to the n ͭ ʰ degree what I meant by that original statement. I don't know how many times I tried to expound on what I said in order to give a clearer meaning. The context to which I referred was that I detected a certain mood/trend among some pro-'mechanics' to choose web-shooters because it hasn't been used (i.e. anything that hasn't been used, use it. Regardless of what it is). Since you're being dense with this matter. I will give a very terse example: a bag of cubes. 10 cubes. "We've used five of them." "Right, let's use the remaining five in the bag." "Why?" "Simply because I like to use anything that hasn't been used."

A wholesale rather than selective change. Really it's not only organic/artificial web-shooters but the rest of it too. Costume: including colours and insignias, J. Jonah Jameson and so forth.

There is a frame of mind in some posters here who believe that a total new pallette is needed for the character. A complete new aesthetic if you will. Where one is concerned with making something look different for the sake of being different (so it's more distinct) regardless of what the object is in question. Rather than incorporating what has been shown to work or isn't problematic.

Here's the crux of the matter for me: If people prefer artificial web-shooters because they are much more accustomed to the idea; for whatever reason. Fine. If the sole/big part of their rationale is simply to choose a different tool because it is different (unused) rather than because they like it then I question it.

Of course you don't need to get into the mechanics of it. But we're exploring it anyway because this discussion has progressed into how well each ability holds up under a critical eye. You assumed his other powers were just as implausible, and I explained to you (twice now) that was simply not true.Well of course they're implausible given the context: receiving spider abilities through a spider bite. Would it be easier to confer increased strength, agility, adhesive qualities and precognition than web-production? Yes. Does that make them more plausible? No simply because the alterations to Peter Parker are at a genetic level. His very DNA is changed and for us to do it would require intricate knowledge of the human genome (which I do not believe we have yet fully mapped). Once we do map it all, any of the changes we've discussed would in theory be plausible. If we were to discuss strength and agility improvement. Well there's serums once could conceivably manufacture. These would only in practice be stimulants since one would require something far more permanent.

You haven't explained the science of why bestowing greater speed, strength, awareness and surface adhesion is more plausible. You've only put forth your opinion. I've at least tried to substantiate my opinion with scientific fact.

I didn't demand you to do anything, slick. I asked you if you could. Stop pointing fingers.Let's see what you said, son:

That's not how one debates, that's circumventing the issue. So I'll make this real simple for you: can you debate the involvement of organics alone under semi-logical terms without referencing outside agents or inconsistent methodical explanations?Whilst you don't demand anything in express terms, you deliberately dictate how one should answer according to what you feel is the appropriate way to answer. I interpret this as mere reductionism. Since you're trying to limit the scope in which one should answer. If I or others feel that an "outside agent" by that I mean referenced material should not be used. Then we're simply going to be parrying opinion back and forth. If I can inject some fact based element then I will do so.

Uhm, did you not ask me previously to explain his other powers? I did so. Each and every power, works independently of the rest. There is a logical basis for their existence that relatively works under biological principle. I ask you to do the same, and now it's absurd? Come on.I never asked you to detail what are Spider-Man's powers. I merely asked you to elucidate on how gaining his special abilities were plausibe or rather the way in which he does is plausible. I've already mentioned gene therapy. I find it odd that one has trouble with the notion that if a spider can transfer or confer its abilities to a human with web-production being key that this would not work within the reality of Spider-Man. You ask why does he need to excrete web? He doesn't but it's a handy by-product of an accident which did not involve any precision.

Which I did. None of his comic book powers require significant physiological or anatomical alterations. They are all enhancements of the human body. If you perceive this to be wrong, then feel free to chime in. I am open to new comments.Right, our closest relative is the chimpanzee (some say it's the orangutan) with whom we share approximately 96% of our DNA. That's a four percent change on the genetic level and yet we differ so much by appearance alone. Therefore any change to a human being's DNA (even one percent) will have vast significance and go much further beyond physiological and anatomical alterations. What happens to Spider-Man is not simply an 'upgrade package' but major changes to his cellular make-up and of course his DNA.

Of course the nozzle location is important. It's existence has to be justifiable. Spiders secreting the substance from their limbs makes sense for obvious reasons. Humans have digits, so if there were any similar secretion, it would be there. Placing it on the wrists is stupid, can't be rationalized, and is only accepted because people are so used to Spidey shooting it from there.As I said, only where relevant. You'll note I was careful in always (or most of the time) mentioning organic webbing and not being too specific on whether it should be on the wrists, elbows or wherever. Personally I would move the 'spinnerets' to the base of the palms since one would use one's entire hand to grip and not simply fingers. I never said that Sam Raimi's placement of the organic web spinneret was good or bad. Merely the concept was fine. It can be improved by placing it on the base of the palm. A subtle change but one that will not register with the average cinemagoer.

This is what I mean by the pick-and-choose method. The reference article is great as a starting point. But anyone that wants to attempt applying logical foundations in fiction should take as much care with how it is presented. Otherwise, why even bother? You took a scientific case of silk secretions taking place other than the abdomen (:up:), but then completely threw that out when related to Spidey (:down).Then you didn't understand my reasoning, which ought to be clear. Some may believe that 'genetic transference' from the spider to Peter Parker should not involve the transference of a web-producing ability. Simply because of where all spiders are perceived to excrete their web; the abdomen. If actual research has shown that some spiders excrete web through their limbs. Then it makes it more believable for an audience to suspend their disbelief as a facet of a character has some loose basis in reality.

Why is it so hard to stick with "I like organics"? No one's pressuring you to go through such lengths in trying to justify it purely because of it's unrealistic nature. Well...unless you bring it up, that is.Well of course I'm going to bring it up if you and others question. If I can find a way to convey that ideal which as much 'reason' as I can, then I will do so. Moreover without such articles as the above one, who would have known that spiders could secrete web in their legs? Since it is now reality. This can only strengthen the position of those who support organic web-shooters. Especially as there is a large disparity between the web-shooter concept (deeply enshrined in comic lore) and organic webbing (whose excretion through limbs were hitherto less appealing). You may say it's levelling the playing field.

I like Supes, Nightcrawler, Flash, and a plethora of other fantastical heroes. You won't see me phased because some of their powers are completely unexplainable. I still wouldn't change them, in spite of that acknowledgment.Neither would I. Which is why I completely accept the reality that is presented to me. I accept a Spider-Man with either organic/artificial web-producing capabilities. Simply because the events and mechanics of the story in which he takes part allows myself and others that luxury.

[Mach2Infinity]

But I would like to see the belt, light, and trackers.

I too. I'd like to see a scene akin to Peter Parker visiting a 'radioshack' type story and buying all these electronic components and have him assemble them to be electronic bugs, tracking devices, camera and the 'spider signal'.

[Crook]

:doh:

I'll fast-forward straight to what just made the majority of this debate practically futile:

As I said, only where relevant. You'll note I was careful in always (or most of the time) mentioning organic webbing and not being too specific on whether it should be on the wrists, elbows or wherever. Personally I would move the 'spinnerets' to the base of the palms since one would use one's entire hand to grip and not simply fingers. I never said that Sam Raimi's placement of the organic web spinneret was good or bad. Merely the concept was fine. It can be improved by placing it on the base of the palm. A subtle change but one that will not register with the average cinemagoer.

Why you never brought this up is beyond me. The combination of the organics with the wrist placement are the sole factors that completely turn me off to the concept. I've lost count how many times I've specifically attacked that point in this debate, but you wait until we've filled up 2 pages to reveal that you weren't actually defending Raimi's method?

As seen in my previous post, I'm obviously not opposed to the use of organics, but in a way Raimi hasn't utilized. The term is universally known here as to refer to "organic webshooters from the wrist". When a person brings it up and argues for it, I'm going to assume that's exactly what they're referring to, unless otherwise noted.

[Mach2Infinity]

:doh:

:spidey: (migraine) :cwink:

I'll fast-forward straight to what just made the majority of this debate practically futile:No discussion is ever futile (since it's given us ideas how to evolve/adapt the 'web-shooters') but it could've done with more clearer language from the both of us. Which I think you'll agree.

Why you never brought this up is beyond me. The combination of the organics with the wrist placement are the sole factors that completely turn me off to the concept. I've lost count how many times I've specifically attacked that point in this debate, but you wait until we've filled up 2 pages to reveal that you weren't actually defending Raimi's method?I thought you attacked the Sam Raimi organic web-shooters as part of an aversion to the whole 'organic' concept rather than solely the wrist placement. It should have been clear that I was vindicating the 'organic concept' numerous times. I never said anything to the effect of "Sam Raimi's wrist shooters were a brilliant idea!" I'm sure I emphasised much more the concept to be sound. I'll admit I should have paid much more attention to your last post. In particular since you stressed the placement of it. I interpreted your criticism as part of an overall criticism and not a more focused one.

As seen in my previous post, I'm obviously not opposed to the use of organics, but in a way Raimi hasn't utilized. The term is universally known here as to refer to "organic webshooters from the wrist". When a person brings it up and argues for it, I'm going to assume that's exactly what they're referring to, unless otherwise noted.When I joined the debate. The title only read (and still does obviously) "organics or web shooters" which would make one think it's a discussion on the concept rather than 'placement'of web-shooters. I know you've gone to great lengths and I admit I should have considered what you said more but I felt there was an uneven feel to the debate. Which is why I felt compelled to strongly interject later on here which obviously led me to overlook certain details. Sam Raimi's adaptation of the web-shooters should certainly be changed if Sony will go for the organic/hybrid web-shooters. I think it can be bettered with what I suggested (the base of the palm) and so it's evolving the wrist web-shooter to be more practical. If the audience will more willingly believe the palm rather than wrist web-shooters. Then it's one less distracting detail and it helps to keep the audience further ingrained in the fantastical reality to which they experience.

I try to be as precise and concise with my language as I can. So if I've expressly used the term "organic web-shooters" continually then I mean precisely so. Although I'll be careful to use such distinction if it's the status quo.

[craigdbfan]

Nostalgia.

[Mach2Infinity]

I think if they are to have Spider-Man using mechanical web-shooters. They should show him experimenting with foam fire extinguishers. Particularly if he likes to work in a laboratory quite often. Perhaps that can be the basis for how Spider-Man devises his gadgets. He sees things around him which he adapts. I know he needs to invent certain things but it's nice to see how he look at objects around him, take them apart and apply his scientific mind to augment them to suit him.

[Crook]

No discussion is ever futile (since it's given us ideas how to evolve/adapt the 'web-shooters') but it could've done with more clearer language from the both of us. Which I think you'll agree.
Absolutely. Which is why I said the majority of it was, because we could've cut down a whole lot of the back-and-forth had that simple point been clarified.

I thought you attacked the Sam Raimi organic web-shooters as part of an aversion to the whole 'organic' concept rather than solely the wrist placement. It should have been clear that I was vindicating the 'organic concept' numerous times. I never said anything to the effect of "Sam Raimi's wrist shooters were a brilliant idea!" I'm sure I emphasised much more the concept to be sound. I'll admit I should have paid much more attention to your last post. In particular since you stressed the placement of it. I interpreted your criticism as part of an overall criticism and not a more focused one.
Yeah, looking back at it now you did focus a lot on the concept rather than method. But considering how much I referenced the wrists, and with you not particularly dismissing it, I had assumed that was no big deal to you. Which it still might not, hell, it's not to me either. But I prefer concepts and ideas to be as fully thought out as possible rather than using "it's fantasy!" as a crutch.

When I joined the debate. The title only read (and still does obviously) "organics or web shooters" which would make one think it's a discussion on the concept rather than 'placement'of web-shooters. I know you've gone to great lengths and I admit I should have considered what you said more but I felt there was an uneven feel to the debate. Which is why I felt compelled to strongly interject later on here which obviously led me to overlook certain details. Sam Raimi's adaptation of the web-shooters should certainly be changed if Sony will go for the organic/hybrid web-shooters. I think it can be bettered with what I suggested (the base of the palm) and so it's evolving the wrist web-shooter to be more practical. If the audience will more willingly believe the palm rather than wrist web-shooters. Then it's one less distracting detail and it helps to keep the audience further ingrained in the fantastical reality to which they experience.

I try to be as precise and concise with my language as I can. So if I've expressly used the term "organic web-shooters" continually then I mean precisely so. Although I'll be careful to use such distinction if it's the status quo.
Truth be told "organic web-shooters" should only indicate as much as it sounds; silk secreted naturally, not necessarily where. However, Raimi's team coined the term, it's sparked heated debates amongst the community for the past decade, so the term is intertwined with wrist placement on a 'its understood' basis.

I should have pointed it out much earlier in the discussion, but the whole aversion to Raimi's method, for me, was it added just one more tick to the "This doesn't stand up too well under criticism" list. One isn't much, of course. But it does add up if other concepts fall to the same analysis. Evidently the idea hasn't had caused ruckus outside the fandom, but regardless as a fan I appreciate when the director goes out of his way to apply as much logic and meticulous craftsmanship to his project. Webshooters are a big staple for the character, so I think it deserves some time from the creative team.

[Dangerous]

If they adopt such a mentality then they will undoubtedly miss out on the important elements that marred the previous films…

What makes you think that?
The other issues are just as important if not more so-

-Spidey’s wise cracks
-PP being cast/portrayed correctly
-MJ’s or any of the main characters being portrayed correctly etc etc

But the webshooters are up there too. Of course they are not going to miss the rest of the important stuff, but I’m saying they will also, stylistically want this spider-man to be as distinguishable from the Raimi-Spider-Man as Bale-Batman was to the Batman of the 1990’s film franchise. Like I said this stuff is easy to understand, we are not discussing nuclear fusion.


I and I'm sure plenty of others would disagree. Quoting a statistic from this forum and it relying on it for your argument is rather flimsy.

Heheh, I was not relying on the poll results for my arguments validity. I was merely citing them as a glance at the opinions of a small, yet random percentage of fandom. My argument needs no one else’s acceptance to validate it. It is valid through me reading SM comics for the past 20 odd years. ;)


As I have detailed earlier, which shows my sincerity in discussing the topic despite some reservations. There is a compromise. Spider-Man can still develope a device which attaches to the wrist and can be used to make different shapes and sizes from the web which is excreted organically. ……

I’ll stick w/ the Stan Lee/Steve Ditko version.
Y’ know, - how it’s supposed to be.

I get it- you prefer organics, I don’t. I prefer mechs.
You prefer the idea of a hybrid system device that Spidey creates, I don’t.
I prefer Spidey crafting actual mechanical webshooters and whipping up the web fluid himself, the stuff that disintegrates after an hour.

One of the main reasons mechs are better is because the web fluid/cartridges often run out at the least desirable times making Spidey think on his feet in dangerous situations. That’s aside from the visual metaphor for his scientific abilities, it being how he was originally designed, if it ain’t broke don’t fix it & and it would please the longtime fans. Meaning fans prior to the 21st century.


Well it's a minor detail in the grand scheme of things. I'm sure many weren't keen on the idea of organic web-shooters but it didn't seem to bother many once the films were released. Changing details which are really for aesthetic value does not quantify as a meaningful and necessary change.

I have already explained numerous times that one of the main reasons mechs are better is because of them representing a limited ability which in effect is a slight weakness thus making battles more interesting.


I'm sure it'll please some hardcore fans at least. Peter Parker can still have 'limited webbing' by having organic web-shooters. One can imagine with his new found abilities, his metabolism will quicken and such traits as web-production can drain his body of certain nutrients. There's vulnerability right there.

Sounds lame, heh.


I will ask you. Once you're sitting in the cinema, watching the film and Spider-Man on-screen of course. After seeing him shooting web and if they are organic. Are you really going to spend the rest of the film upset because he's excreting web from his body? No, you'll be more concerned with how the plot is unfolding. Whether the characters and villains have been written properly and whether the right man was cast as Peter Parker.

Of course Ill be disappointed, but yes I will be more concerned with who’s playing the leads, how the characters are written, how Spidey’s costume looks etc. Yes, all those other things combined will be more important than the webshooters alone.

So what?

We could swap the webshooters with anything from the list of stuff that needs fixing like ..say, the origin, and pose the question- Are you going to spend the rest of the film upset if they don’t fix the origin (Ben died at home not in the road), but everything else inc- correct characterization, wise cracks & webshooters are fixed?

Well, no again, I’m gonna be happy that the majority of stuff is fixed.
What does that prove? NOTHING. The point is,- having mechs this time instead of organics is just as important as all those other issues.


So how many comic book stores across the UK have you visited?

Every six months I’ll frequent-

2x Liverpool
2x Manchester
3x Leeds
1x Chester

Conversations either overheard or that I have been part of have indicated a general preference of mechs in Spidey talk.


It's facile and obtuse to say "well opinions on the internet, this poll etc say this and that." They will only give you a sample. They may give you the correct sample but you cannot know simply from assuming that you're correctly judging by the limited sources of information from which you've based your opinion. I suppose next you'll be telling me you've been visiting comic book stores in the USA?

It’s neither facile nor obtuse.
I never said these small pools of opinions have provided me with the opinion of the entire planets worth of Spidey fans, you just seem to have inferred that. I said that all internet polls and comic store talk I have witnessed has pointed toward mechs as the popular choice.

Not visited any comic stores in USA since 2008.


I think you're the one who isn't quite..."dealing with it." Grow up, son.

This sounds like your ego talking.
I don’t wish to battle with it.
That’s spiritual unconsciousness.
Read ‘The Power of Now’, it’s freakin awesome!

[TheWatcher]

If they Wanted to have Web Shooters,They could say That Richard Parker Made the Webbing in massive amounts for a project(NOT Venom,He's Alien).He also left the formula behind.That is the only way of having The Shooters.

I dont Care though....

[Darkness Falls]

I'm gonna say web shooters for the reboot

[Agent 194]

This is fun. Just like the old days.

[ModestMr.Green]

I can't imagine how it would matter. I don't know about the comics, but I'm watching Spectacular Spider-Man episodes on Youtube right this minute, and there have been a few instances wherein he ran out of web, flipped in a cartridge, and kept on chugging. Didn't really add to or subtract from the plot...but I guess I'll go with web shooters, since it's in line with the original character.

[Nathan]

The Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon didn't explore the webshooters too much. There wasn't any of the special web mixing that he sometimes did in the comics. There was only one point in the cartoon where he cleverly used a cartridge of the webshooters to escape from the Vault cell.

[Mrpaul]

Web shooters. Cause there is so much he can do with them. Like alter them to his liking or change chemicals to fit certain needs

[Vaportrail]

I think organic works better in the movies so far. In comics, you can build up tension in certain issues if his mechanical ones are broken, but in a movie if he were to break them, he's screwed.
He can't just magically fix them to have them be used to the rest of the final battle if they're broken at some point.

Although, I do love what he did with them when he was captured by Silvermane.
I don't suppose I'd mind either way. I don't think they need to change it though. Organic works just fine.


I'm mostly worried about the webbing on his costume. RAISED WEBBING IN 2012!!

[E-Man]

It doesn't matter to me. There can be good stories told from both. I think organic shooters are more natural, and they're easier to explain. Mechanical shooters are a big part of Spider-man's history, so there are places you can go in regards to them as well.

[Crook]

I think organic works better in the movies so far. In comics, you can build up tension in certain issues if his mechanical ones are broken, but in a movie if he were to break them, he's screwed.
He can't just magically fix them to have them be used to the rest of the final battle if they're broken at some point.
What's so special about that scenario that requires alteration or extra consideration when transferring between two mediums? This is the third time I've seen this type of critique and I'm wondering what I'm missing here.

[The Slang]

I think if they are to have Spider-Man using mechanical web-shooters. They should show him experimenting with foam fire extinguishers. Particularly if he likes to work in a laboratory quite often. Perhaps that can be the basis for how Spider-Man devises his gadgets. He sees things around him which he adapts. I know he needs to invent certain things but it's nice to see how he look at objects around him, take them apart and apply his scientific mind to augment them to suit him.

There already are non lethal restraint weapons that fire foam or adhesives. He doesn't need to base it on a fire extinguisher. Remember the foam gun used to trap Hulk in ang lees movie? I've seen real versions of those weapons used on people (with humurous results). Then there's net launchers and those things with two weights connected by rope that the indians would throw. These are the things he should be basing his web shooters on.

[SuperAl]

if they want it realistic it should shoot out of his butt like spiders lol

[Chris Wallace]

Want organic, expect mechanical.

[Rodrigo90]

Web Shooters. Give him the scientific mind from the comics,...proof is him creating 'actual' Web. It also helps if he has to create a cure for Doc Connors.

[spidermilk]

Organic powers with mechanical web shooters, it doesn't makes sense that he can shoot strands of silk out of his wrist at 200mph e.t.c.

[©KAW]

Want organic, expect mechanical.
Want mechanical, expect organic.

[spidermilk]

if they want it realistic it should shoot out of his butt like spiders lol
ahaha

[Deadfish95]

Just try web shooters for this, and then slowly change into organics

[©KAW]

Just try web shooters for this, and then slowly change into organicsRiiiiight, go from the source material back to crap. No thank you. :oldrazz:

[Agent 194]

I've always felt having webshooters grounded him a little more as a human being. Making him more one of us. Being able to stick to walls is not as odd to me as your body producing a sticky chemical that threads out your forearm.

[Golgo-13]

I've always felt having webshooters grounded him a little more as a human being. Making him more one of us. Being able to stick to walls is not as odd to me as your body producing a sticky chemical that threads out your forearm.

This.

I didn't mind organics at all but it made him seem more of a mutant to me.....

[Mach2Infinity]

Yeah, looking back at it now you did focus a lot on the concept rather than method. But considering how much I referenced the wrists, and with you not particularly dismissing it, I had assumed that was no big deal to you. Which it still might not, hell, it's not to me either. But I prefer concepts and ideas to be as fully thought out as possible rather than using "it's fantasy!" as a crutch.

I agree entirely. As I said earlier. If you can make the fantastical as believable as possible to the audience. Then they will not question these potential 'distracting' elements and therefore remain within the fantasy world. Which hopefully means they'll be further engrossed and absorbed into that very world. I agree that one shouldn't diminish material simply because it is based in ficticious reality. If I were to say "Well it's fiction" it would be a detail which doesn't need to be explained since a certain reality lends itself to making a certain fantastical element more credible.

As for the organic web-shooters concept. I have to be honest, before this debate I wasn't particularly bothered if the web was shot from the wrist or not. Now, I would prefer it if they used the base of the palm. That's if they decide to go down the organic route once more.


Truth be told "organic web-shooters" should only indicate as much as it sounds; silk secreted naturally, not necessarily where. However, Raimi's team coined the term, it's sparked heated debates amongst the community for the past decade, so the term is intertwined with wrist placement on a 'its understood' basis.

You can imagine the "organic.." term will catch out many that are not wary of how divisive this debate can be. I of course did not realise until I found myself being questioned. Besides the internet is full of ellipsis due to people's propensity by large to use abbreviations and acronyms. I try to avoid them particularly to minimise ambiguity and to be clear as possible!

I should have pointed it out much earlier in the discussion, but the whole aversion to Raimi's method, for me, was it added just one more tick to the "This doesn't stand up too well under criticism" list. One isn't much, of course. But it does add up if other concepts fall to the same analysis. Evidently the idea hasn't had caused ruckus outside the fandom, but regardless as a fan I appreciate when the director goes out of his way to apply as much logic and meticulous craftsmanship to his project. Webshooters are a big staple for the character, so I think it deserves some time from the creative team.

If they do decide to use mechanical web-shooters. I do hope they make a big effort with explaining how it works. How Peter Parker finds the material and tie it with some science work/hobby with which he's involved. I think it would be fascinating to have a scene where Peter is busy in his workshop. Assembling the mechanical web-shooters, experimenting with different fluid and so forth. Essentially 'troubleshooting' the device. Rather than show him quickly sticking bits together and within one hour he has a fully functioning mechanical web-shooter. A trial and error theme if you will can be introduced. I.e. he shoots the web to swing and so forth but finds certain faults during a battle. Then he has to go back to the drawingboard and fix the problem.

I greatly appreciate your candour in this whole affair. It's good to resolve things maturally. As too often heated arguments ensue and it becomes a mere spectacle or sideshow for the casual poster. Moreover the topic becomes lost in a milieu of ego-bashing and snide exchanges. Let's hope others will follow our good example :up:

[Mach2Infinity]

What makes you think that?
The other issues are just as important if not more so-

-Spidey’s wise cracks
-PP being cast/portrayed correctly
-MJ’s or any of the main characters being portrayed correctly etc etc

Well you pretty much repeated what I said:

"a lacklustre Mary-Jane Watson, a whinging Aunt May, a humourless Spider-Man (the jokes were bad), a visually disappointing Green Goblin, killing off supervillains, making the villains too closely tied to Peter Parker and sympathetic. Let's not forget the crammed affair that was the third film."

Context being these are the elements on which they'll need to improve for the next film series.

I meant that if one simply focuses on technical detail alone (i.e web-shooters, costume colours, webbing under arm pits, size of eyes, spider symbol etc) then one may dismiss or overlook the more critical elements. To which I've already alluded. Of course they'll want to distinguish the next incarnation of Spider-Man from the previous one. It's so patently clear that it needs no mention. What I'm saying is not everything has to be changed for the sake of being different (regardless of whether one approves of the changes or not).

But the webshooters are up there too. Of course they are not going to miss the rest of the important stuff, but I’m saying they will also, stylistically want this spider-man to be as distinguishable from the Raimi-Spider-Man as Bale-Batman was to the Batman of the 1990’s film franchise. Like I said this stuff is easy to understand, we are not discussing nuclear fusion.Well of course the Christopher Nolan interpretation of Batman followed a formula. To ground the character in a more 'real' reality which is how they catered all of his gadgetry to fit such a reality. If the film makers decide they want a more technically gifted Peter Parker (compared to Sam Raimi's) then fine incorporate the mechanical web-shooters. It would then make perfect sense. To simply change things to be different because they're 'new' to a certain medium (in this case film) seems silly and lacks the precision of mind one would expect when drawing up a new reality for a character with an extensive lore and one which has been in existence for decades. Stylistically speaking, the most obvious place to start is the costume. It won't be hugely different of course but enough to differeniate it from the previous one. The symbol on the back for instance (which is rather obvious). For something which does not have the complexity of nuclear fusion, it can easily be overlooked by those whose focus is in the wrong area :cwink:

Heheh, I was not relying on the poll results for my arguments validity. I was merely citing them as a glance at the opinions of a small, yet random percentage of fandom. My argument needs no one else’s acceptance to validate it. It is valid through me reading SM comics for the past 20 odd years. ;)You certainly used the poll results try and strenghten your argument and if they were not so important to you as you state. Then I think you would not have bothered mentioning it in the first place. I did smile however when previously you said "Me, and PLENTY of other Spider-fans" but then above you say "the opinions of a small, yet random percentage of fandom." So you state there is a large/considerable consenus of opinion which supports your view yet they represent a very small number of the fan-base. So in effect they're meaningless and rather inconsequential?


I’ll stick w/ the Stan Lee/Steve Ditko version.
Y’ know, - how it’s supposed to be.Although the films successfully deviated from the Stan Lee/Steve Ditko interpretation (and publicly Stan Lee stated he didn't mind). Besides it's not the only way so it shouldn't be definite (your statement implies there is not much room to 'manoeuvre' away from that position).

I get it- you prefer organics, I don’t. I prefer mechs.
You prefer the idea of a hybrid system device that Spidey creates, I don’t.
I prefer Spidey crafting actual mechanical webshooters and whipping up the web fluid himself, the stuff that disintegrates after an hour.Righto, you didn't need to re-tread over these things since we had established it earlier.

One of the main reasons mechs are better is because the web fluid/cartridges often run out at the least desirable times making Spidey think on his feet in dangerous situations. That’s aside from the visual metaphor for his scientific abilities, it being how he was originally designed, if it ain’t broke don’t fix it & and it would please the longtime fans. Meaning fans prior to the 21st century.The whole point of why I suggested the hybrid device was to accomodate Peter Parker's scientific accumen and in my view broaden it. If he were able to create a device which could interact with his own biology. To the point where it can manipulate web excretion (size and shape) then it would be a phenomenal piece of technical craftmanship. To combine technology with biology and make it work intricately is an astounding feat. Which I think goes beyond mere mechanical web-shooters (whilst also evolving the organic web-shooters from Sam Raimi's films).

Furthermore, not all longtime fans may share your views. Many of them may equally be 'pleased' if they kept/modified the organic web-shooter concept. Perhaps some fans prefer different interpretations for each medium. You can take the "if it's not broken, don't fix it" mantra and apply it to the films. Did it hurt the character on screen by having organic web-shooters? You shouldn't simply apply it to one interpretation and not the rest. Particularly in the same medium as the one which did not have big problems with the organic web-shooters (certainly after been released in cinemas).


I have already explained numerous times that one of the main reasons mechs are better is because of them representing a limited ability which in effect is a slight weakness thus making battles more interesting.What I have said continually is that you can replicate these effects (if one wishes) to do the same with the organic web-shooters. Which would suggest they would be more on par.

Sounds lame, heh.Well I give a sincere and rather plausible reasoning for how organic-web shooters could give Spider-Man the same 'danger' dynamic as the mechanical web-shooters. To which you reply rather nonchalantly which really says it all.


We could swap the webshooters with anything from the list of stuff that needs fixing like ..say, the origin, and pose the question- Are you going to spend the rest of the film upset if they don’t fix the origin (Ben died at home not in the road), but everything else inc- correct characterization, wise cracks & webshooters are fixed?

Well, no again, I’m gonna be happy that the majority of stuff is fixed.
What does that prove? NOTHING. The point is,- having mechs this time instead of organics is just as important as all those other issues.I merely questioned whether you prioritised the critical components of a film (narrative, themes, characerisation etc) over that of stylistic changes (largely superficial). I'll take your word for it but then it makes your posts redundant if you insist that the lack of mechanical web-shooters will not affect your overall enjoyment of the film and yet you dedicate much verbage to it. I personally don't care if they use organic/mechanical web-shooters because he will have web-shooters nonetheless. I only say there is no need to change them to simply be different (which is one important part of your overall argument).

Yes of course the web-shooters are one part of Spider-Man's character and a potential place of focus. Yes of course it belongs to a greater question of would you like to improve/change for Spider-Man. However, since this thread is focused (or more limited) in its scope it's only natural I'm going to concentrate on web-shooters now, isn't it?



Every six months I’ll frequent-

2x Liverpool
2x Manchester
3x Leeds
1x Chester

Conversations either overheard or that I have been part of have indicated a general preference of mechs in Spidey talk.There are 17 Forbidden Planet stores in the UK. There's also bookshops which sell graphic novels and independent comic book stores too. It would be fair to say that you visit a small proportion of the UK's comic book stores. Furthermore, from the ones you listed they only cover one part of the UK. Indeed only a region of England. I would imagine there to be a larger number of comic book readers in the south. Particularly in the greater London area. So as you've noted above. You've 'heard' opinions from a small number of the total fan-base of course (the largest obviously being American who could easily dwarf numbers in the UK - they could boost them too). You're also not there all the time so on different days you may have varying results.

It’s neither facile nor obtuse.
I never said these small pools of opinions have provided me with the opinion of the entire planets worth of Spidey fans, you just seem to have inferred that. I said that all internet polls and comic store talk I have witnessed has pointed toward mechs as the popular choice.Again it's rather meaningless if these opinions and polls represent a very small number of fans. I can't work out whether you really value the polls or not. First you said you had the consensus of many others then you say they're only a small number of a very large fan-base. Which means they cannot be an accurate indicator of a general trend or not (despite the possibility you might be right). Therefore I don';t see how they further your argument much.


This sounds like your ego talking.
I don’t wish to battle with it.
That’s spiritual unconsciousness.
Read ‘The Power of Now’, it’s freakin awesome!Listen, of you're going to give me a churlish and glib answer such as "deal with it" (which suggests you have a problem with debating a topic) then don't expect a genteel response. It's nothing to do with ego and more with manners and being mature. If you don't want to discuss it further fine, simply say so maturely. Otherwise I think someone's ego may be to blame :cwink:.

There already are non lethal restraint weapons that fire foam or adhesives. He doesn't need to base it on a fire extinguisher. Remember the foam gun used to trap Hulk in ang lees movie? I've seen real versions of those weapons used on people (with humurous results). Then there's net launchers and those things with two weights connected by rope that the indians would throw. These are the things he should be basing his web shooters on.

Would Peter Parker conceivably have access to non-lethal weaponry? Does the possession and use of one require a licence? It would be much easier (and I suspect cheaper) for him to get his hands on a foam fire extinguisher. Particularly since he's most likely to work in a laboratory with numerous flammable an volatile materials. I like the idea of a net launcher. It follows the idea that Spider-Man can trap and perhaps cocoon his prey as a spider does. Perhaps even a special type of web can be fired rather than a standard net. The counterweights with rope idea would require small counterweights if they were fired from the mechanical/hybrid web-shooter. He certainly wouldn't carry one on his belt.

if they want it realistic it should shoot out of his butt like spiders lol


Ignoring the possibility you're fishing for laughs. As I have shown. There are certain species of spider that can excrete web from their legs:

Link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5386524.stm)

[The Slang]

Would Peter Parker conceivably have access to non-lethal weaponry? Does the possession and use of one require a licence? It would be much easier (and I suspect cheaper) for him to get his hands on a foam fire extinguisher. Particularly since he's most likely to work in a laboratory with numerous flammable an volatile materials. I like the idea of a net launcher. It follows the idea that Spider-Man can trap and perhaps cocoon his prey as a spider does. Perhaps even a special type of web can be fired rather than a standard net. The counterweights with rope idea would require small counterweights if they were fired from the mechanical/hybrid web-shooter. He certainly wouldn't carry one on his belt.


He could just find a schematic for the non-lethal weapon. I was talking more about the design phase. If he's salvaging parts then yeah, a fire extinguisher could work. I'd like to see the webbing behave more like conventional projectiles in a way. And the webshooters should have various presets that shape and change the type of shot.
*One for a 'rubber bullet' type projectile. Able to break windows and cause considerable pain.
*One for a paintball-like-glob that spreads on impact. Ideal for gluing someones hand to the wall/floor.
*Standard webline of course for swinging and tethering.
*A net launcher. fires an expanding cluster of sticky weights connected by fibres. Ideal for producing a hammock like net, binding someones legs, or binding someones arms to their body.
*A webline with an expanding net tip. Ideal for creating a shield to catch debris/projectiles.
*A liquid cement stream that drys extremely fast, forming a solid shell.

Raimi intentionally avoided having Spider-man entangle or cacoon people with webbing for some reason.

[The Slang]

They should call him the web slinger for a reason. I wanna see him bust some moves that would put clint eastwood to shame. Like taunting a guy and shooting the gun out of his hand before he can hurt his hostage.

[Chris Wallace]

Raimi intentionally avoided having Spider-man entangle or cacoon people with webbing for some reason.

Because he wasn't planning to eat them? I only saw him cocooning people when McFarlane drew him, which never made sense to me. If all he was looking to do was incapacitate people, why do more than what's necessary?

[Eggyman]

I don't like sitting on the fence, but there's something that would answer a lot of complaints on both sides: He has organic webbing and creates the shooters to utilise it to its full potential. With this he could still add things to it via attachments.

[AlexRoss]

Mechanical, organic is heresy and this is ultimately why Sam Raimi's series crashed and burned. The pebble that started the avalanche.

[Dangerous]

Well you pretty much repeated what I said:

"a lacklustre Mary-Jane Watson, a whinging Aunt May, a humourless Spider-Man (the jokes were bad), a visually disappointing Green Goblin, killing off supervillains, making the villains too closely tied to Peter Parker and sympathetic. Let's not forget the crammed affair that was the third film."

Context being these are the elements on which they'll need to improve for the next film series.

I meant that if one simply focuses on technical detail alone (i.e web-shooters, costume colours, webbing under arm pits, size of eyes, spider symbol etc) then one may dismiss or overlook the more critical elements. To which I've already alluded. Of course they'll want to distinguish the next incarnation of Spider-Man from the previous one. It's so patently clear that it needs no mention. What I'm saying is not everything has to be changed for the sake of being different (regardless of whether one approves of the changes or not).

And what I am saying is that the mechs are as important to me as all the other important elements we agree on. You don’t think so, but we don’t need to chew it over forever.

Well of course the Christopher Nolan interpretation of Batman followed a formula. To ground the character in a more 'real' reality which is how they catered all of his gadgetry to fit such a reality. If the film makers decide they want a more technically gifted Peter Parker (compared to Sam Raimi's) then fine incorporate the mechanical web-shooters. It would then make perfect sense. To simply change things to be different because they're 'new' to a certain medium (in this case film) seems silly and lacks the precision of mind one would expect when drawing up a new reality for a character with an extensive lore and one which has been in existence for decades. Stylistically speaking, the most obvious place to start is the costume. It won't be hugely different of course but enough to differeniate it from the previous one. The symbol on the back for instance (which is rather obvious). For something which does not have the complexity of nuclear fusion, it can easily be overlooked by those whose focus is in the wrong area :cwink:

I agree that the costume certainly needs to approached from a different angle. I did not like anything about it; - the spider designs, the horrid raised webbing that often looked silver on screen, and often was on tie in merch, the triangle eyes, the painted on muscles. UGH. But the prime motivation for using mechs this time would be to be more faithful to the source material and the character and his abilities. As a bonus it would just help differentiate the two film series.

Although the films successfully deviated from the Stan Lee/Steve Ditko interpretation (and publicly Stan Lee stated he didn't mind). Besides it's not the only way so it shouldn't be definite (your statement implies there is not much room to 'manoeuvre' away from that position).

Successful according to who? The box office sure, but in mine and a vast chunk of fandoms opinions the films changed a lot of stuff for the worse.

The whole point of why I suggested the hybrid device was to accomodate Peter Parker's scientific accumen and in my view broaden it. If he were able to create a device which could interact with his own biology. To the point where it can manipulate web excretion (size and shape) then it would be a phenomenal piece of technical craftmanship. To combine technology with biology and make it work intricately is an astounding feat. Which I think goes beyond mere mechanical web-shooters (whilst also evolving the organic web-shooters from Sam Raimi's films).

I don’t think that does go beyond the mechs as a technical achievement.
I mean how the hell could it be? It’s only half the achievement.

Half the work would already be done if his body was already naturally producing the web fluid rather than him having to mix that stuff up himself. That was an incredible achievement in itself; - creating a man made web fluid that hardens in less than a second, is stronger than nylon and dissolves after an hour. That was amazing.

Devising the mech webshooters alone, but not the web fluid would only be half the job.
He’d have a holes on his wrists that web would come out of and then he’d just build the webshooters to fit over the holes. Big deal.

Furthermore, not all longtime fans may share your views. Many of them may equally be 'pleased' if they kept/modified the organic web-shooter concept.

Righto, you didn't need to re-tread over these things since we had established it earlier.

You can take the "if it's not broken, don't fix it" mantra and apply it to the films. Did it hurt the character on screen by having organic web-shooters?

IMO yes, and I have explained why in my previous posts.

What I have said continually is that you can replicate these effects (if one wishes) to do the same with the organic web-shooters. Which would suggest they would be more on par.

Why bother when you can do something much better and this time- Use the mech webshooters and have the webs how they are supposed to be- Peter Parker’s greatest scientific achievement, comic faithful and in turn please the comic fans.

Well I give a sincere and rather plausible reasoning for how organic-web shooters could give Spider-Man the same 'danger' dynamic as the mechanical web-shooters. To which you reply rather nonchalantly which really says it all.

I was being honest. It is a lame idea.
Why not just use the mech webshooters instead of going all around the woods thinking of a new elaborate way to use organic webbing. What do you have against the mechs and I’m guessing you did not read Spidey comics prior to 2002?

I think of the people who became fans through the films and love them; - their opinions don’t matter (in terms of anything apart from BO) because they are at a disposition to think about this aspect of the character from an unbiased standpoint. And faithfulness to the source w/ something as important as the specifics Spider-Man’s abilities and powers is of crucial importance.


There are 17 Forbidden Planet stores in the UK. There's also bookshops which sell graphic novels and independent comic book stores too. It would be fair to say that you visit a small proportion of the UK's comic book stores. Furthermore, from the ones you listed they only cover one part of the UK. Indeed only a region of England.

Well actually, Leeds is not in the North West it’s West Yorkshire.


I would imagine there to be a larger number of comic book readers in the south. Particularly in the greater London area. So as you've noted above. You've 'heard' opinions from a small number of the total fan-base of course (the largest obviously being American who could easily dwarf numbers in the UK - they could boost them too). You're also not there all the time so on different days you may have varying results.

Again it's rather meaningless if these opinions and polls represent a very small number of fans. I can't work out whether you really value the polls or not. First you said you had the consensus of many others then you say they're only a small number of a very large fan-base. Which means they cannot be an accurate indicator of a general trend or not (despite the possibility you might be right). Therefore I don';t see how they further your argument much.

It was an observation of random albeit small pools of opinions in North England comic shops and online polls indicating a preference towards mechs. Take from that what you will.

Listen, of you're going to give me a churlish and glib answer such as "deal with it" (which suggests you have a problem with debating a topic) then don't expect a genteel response. It's nothing to do with ego and more with manners and being mature. If you don't want to discuss it further fine, simply say so maturely. Otherwise I think someone's ego may be to blame :cwink:.

I said deal w/ it because you seemed to have difficulty in accepting my opinion.
The ‘ego’ is just your minds idea of who you are, and one of its main means by which to stay in control of its host (that’s you or I) is to find ways to make itself right and other people wrong. I can see that your last sentence here came from your ego because of this.

No one is really right or wrong here, we are just exchanging opinions. I am a comicbook guy so I always prefer these movie adaptations to be as faithful as possible because the deviations never improve over the original designs.

The book ‘The Power of Now’ is really cool, I wasn’t making a smart ass remark.
I try to get everyone to read it but obviously only a small amount of people ever do.
It’s only about 5 bucks on amazon and you would thank me for recommending it.

[Jochimus]

Meh, I prefer the organic. I've always figured if a guy's gonna be endowed with the most prominent abilities of a spider, he should be getting the full package and not have to resort to toys. Plus the mechanical web-shooter thing started to bother me about the time I started reading Spidey 2099.

[Dangerous]

Because he wasn't planning to eat them? I only saw him cocooning people when McFarlane drew him, which never made sense to me. If all he was looking to do was incapacitate people, why do more than what's necessary?

cause it looked cool.

[Chris Wallace]

I disagree, but to each his own.
As far as the debate of organic vs. Mechanical, I can't say that I'd be affected either way. It would depend on how it's done. There's advantages to both, there's disadvantages to both. What I absolutely DO NOT want to see is bulky metal bracelets worn outside of his costume.

[The Lizard]

What I absolutely DO NOT want to see is bulky metal bracelets worn outside of his costume.

So the Japanese Spidey design is a no-go I'm assuming? :cwink:

http://i46.tinypic.com/2cdiqf9.jpg

[Chris Wallace]

You assume correct, Lizard.

[The IronMan]

mechanical web shooters to give him better and more varied control of his webs

[Chris Wallace]

mechanical web shooters to give him better and more varied control of his webs

That would be one of the advantages I was referring to. A disadvantage being the finite supply of webbing.

[Nathan]

Not really. He'll always have as much or as little webbing as the script requires. And just because it would be organic, it doesn't mean that he'd have an infinite supply of webbing. Even though Raimi and Co. decided that's the case, even if it doesn't make sense.

You can't create webbing out of thin air, even bodily resources get used up.

[knowsbleed]

I would prefer they go with mechanical web shooters for this reboot. All of the arguments have been stated. Plus the fact that the whole "running out of web fluid" thing would hinder the story is ridiculous... Raimi did that with organics. At least with mech web shooters it wouldn't be because of him questioning himself.

This whole argument about a teenager who could do what scientists today can't is funny as well. Maybe part of his experiments pre-Spider-Man was to create something like a "super bonding" fluid and he just incorporates what he has been researching his entire genius life for into his Spider-Man persona.

Seriously... when people discover something, SOMEONE has to discover it. Peter just happens to be the one to discover this. It's a COMIC BOOK MOVIE!

[Golgo-13]

So the Japanese Spidey design is a no-go I'm assuming? :cwink:

http://i46.tinypic.com/2cdiqf9.jpg

Me likes.:dry:

[Immortalfire]

Mechanical, organic is heresy and this is ultimately why Sam Raimi's series crashed and burned. The pebble that started the avalanche.

:dry:

[Raith]

I like organic. I never really thought of it until Raimi put them out there. When I saw that, it just sorta made sense to me. He gets all the powers of a spider including making webs built right in.

However, it really is a minor thing. I'd go with either, but if I had to choose, i'd stick to organic.

[Chris Wallace]

I like organic. I never really thought of it until Raimi put them out there. When I saw that, it just sorta made sense to me. He gets all the powers of a spider including making webs built right in.

However, it really is a minor thing. I'd go with either, but if I had to choose, i'd stick to organic.

Agreed. Fully agreed. This is one aspect on which I really don't have a strong opinion. There are too many other elements of the movie to be concerned about, and as long as this one is handled intelligently, I'll be happy either way.

[Young Superman]

I like organic. I never really thought of it until Raimi put them out there. When I saw that, it just sorta made sense to me. He gets all the powers of a spider including making webs built right in.

However, it really is a minor thing. I'd go with either, but if I had to choose, i'd stick to organic.
I'm the same way.

[NewYorkSpider]

Organics

[The Homer]

Time for Mechinical!

[Chris Wallace]

Mechanical, organic is heresy and this is ultimately why Sam Raimi's series crashed and burned. The pebble that started the avalanche.

That is quite possibly the most inaccurate statement I have ever read on these boards.

[Project862006]

organic i agree that he should have powers of a real spider

[Tony Stark]

Oh my, after nearly 10 years we are back to the organics. Guys there isn't even a horse's carcass left, just a pile of broken bones.

[Nathan]

The powers of a "real" Spider? Well, then I guess he'll be bending over whenever he uses his web.

[Tony Stark]

The powers of a "real" Spider? Well, then I guess he'll be bending over whenever he uses his web.

Oh yeah, the butt argument. I haven't heard that one before....

[Spider-Vader]

I'm with organic. They're more realistic than the web-shooters, especially if Peter's going to be in High School when he gets his powers. What high-school kid could create something like them? I mean Peter's smart, but not Tony Stark smart.

[Boom]

In the Iron Man movie, Tony Stark built a circuit board at age four and an engine at age six. I have yet to hear anyone complain about how "unrealistic" that was.

So it's okay for 6-year-old Tony Stark to build an engine, but it's not okay for 15-year-old Peter Parker to develop a mechanical device that shoots adhesive fluid at the touch of a button?

Okay then :dry:.

[Nathan]

I'm with organic. They're more realistic than the web-shooters, especially if Peter's going to be in High School when he gets his powers. What high-school kid could create something like them? I mean Peter's smart, but not Tony Stark smart.

You clearly haven't spend a lot of time reading most of the posts in here.

Sure, Peter Parker isn't Tony Stark or Reed Richards level smart, but he's pretty much above average. The mechanical web-shooters pose the least of the problems. There are youtube videos of a guy building a palm controlled flamethrower, where he can use finger movements to adjust flame size. All we're asking of Peter is to build wrist devices that can shoot strings of fluid.

Now comes the matter of the web-fluid. There's been some good amount of brainstorming in here, which allows Peter to aquire the web-fluid without making it seem farfetched. Like having Dr. Conners and his team already working on the formular, but Peter is actually the one with an epiphany and he knows what is exactly missing to make the formular work.

[Boom]

Yes, the mechanical webshooters themselves are not an issue.

When it comes to the fluid itself, my main concern is this: I imagine that, in order to fit into the mechanical webshooter, the fluid cartridge itself would have to be fairly small (like the size of a test tube). But in that case, wouldn't it run out fairly quickly? Considering Spider-Man is shooting webs that reach great lengths, he'd have to change cartridges constantly.

Take a water gun, for example. It has a fairly large container to hold the water. Depending on the gun you're using and how many times you pump it, the water will shoot out roughly thirty feet. After a while, the container becomes empty and you have to refill it.

Now take that water gun, decrease the size of the water container to the size of a test tube, pump, and shoot. You'd be out of water probably after the first shot.

[Nathan]

The cartridges are highly pressurized. They'd have enough fluid to pretty much web your whole room, should they explode.

[©KAW]

The mechanical web-shooters are wonderful devices, that should have been included into the original films. They're apart of Peter Parker's attributes in science and chemistry, and most importantly his ability to create. :cool:

[Project862006]

organic is more realistic and thats why it worked better i really dont want to see him run out of web during mid flight

[Nathan]

organic is more realistic and thats why it worked better i really dont want to see him run out of web during mid flight

This is just as much of a redundant argument as the butt one when talking of the realism of organics.

Why exactly does everyone automatically assume that he'd be running out of web-fluid every 5 minutes? And why wouldn't he run out of webbing just because they are organic? Is his webbing like Cyclops's Optic Blast and they originate from another dimension? Sooner or later he'd use up his resources if he'd keep swinging around town and plummet to his death. And now he isn't able to simply exchange a cartridge in a couple of seconds.

Organics aren't any more realistic than mechanical web-shooters. That's a fact.

[Project862006]

they do the same thing without having some device attached to his wrist

[Spider-Vader]

The powers of a "real" Spider? Well, then I guess he'll be bending over whenever he uses his web.
Pleeeeeeeeeeeease, tell me you know spiders' webbings don't come out of their asses.

If you want to go that way, then maybe Peter's spinnerets developed in his arms instead of around his butt.

[Boom]

What's the problem with him running out of webbing during a fight? Wouldn't that just add to the suspense?

[Gamma Goliath]

yeah i alway liked when he ran out in the cartoon, then he has to improvise to defeat his foes. plus the shooters show of his intelligence at a young age...

[Dr Tactics]

Now comes the matter of the web-fluid. There's been some good amount of brainstorming in here, which allows Peter to aquire the web-fluid without making it seem farfetched. Like having Dr. Conners and his team already working on the formular, but Peter is actually the one with an epiphany and he knows what is exactly missing to make the formular work.

I said I wouldn't come back till 2012 but for one, the whole logic if whether or not a high school kid can create a web fluid. We first have to realize that the adhesive DOESN'T WORK AT ALL. This PERFECT web fluid dissolves in a hour or so. What good is that?? except it works for Spiderman in what needs to be done. And thinking of organic webs and Raimi's perfectly Logical Spiderman world, real spider silk doesn't dissolve so all that webslinging in NYC makes for a Huge mess of Steel like strong,flexible web that no one can do anything with but you don't see webs all over the city.What happened to them?? So if he's gonna have the powers (and spider silk) what is to do with the Spider Silk mess in NYC??

[Nathan]

they do the same thing without having some device attached to his wrist

Except he can't modify his webbing at all. That's something he's able to do with mechanics. He's able to give it certain properties, that help him against certain opponents.

Like when he fought Hydro and knew his regular webbing wouldn't do anything against him. So he mixed a coagulant into his webbing which would react to Hydro's H2O and harden.

[©KAW]

Except he can't modify his webbing at all. That's something he's able to do with mechanics. He's able to give it certain properties, that help him against certain opponents.

Like when he fought Hydro and knew his regular webbing wouldn't do anything against him. So he mixed a coagulant into his webbing which would react to Hydro's H2O and harden.
Damn right!

And that's yet another reason why mechanical web-shooter are better!

[Dangerous]

This is just as much of a redundant argument as the butt one when talking of the realism of organics.

Why exactly does everyone automatically assume that he'd be running out of web-fluid every 5 minutes? And why wouldn't he run out of webbing just because they are organic? Is his webbing like Cyclops's Optic Blast and they originate from another dimension? Sooner or later he'd use up his resources if he'd keep swinging around town and plummet to his death. And now he isn't able to simply exchange a cartridge in a couple of seconds.

Organics aren't any more realistic than mechanical web-shooters. That's a fact.

Plus running out of web via a web cartridge running empty while either in a fight or whilst webslinging makes Spidey think on his feet and produces more exciting scenarios and shows his ingenuity.

[Dangerous]

Except he can't modify his webbing at all. That's something he's able to do with mechanics. He's able to give it certain properties, that help him against certain opponents.

Like when he fought Hydro and knew his regular webbing wouldn't do anything against him. So he mixed a coagulant into his webbing which would react to Hydro's H2O and harden.

Hell yea.

I actually forgot this additional reason why mechs are better while I was kicking Mach2Infinity's ass a couple of pages ago.

[3dman27]

mechanical webshooters

[OctaviusINC]

Personally, I'm with the mechanical webshooters.

But I liked the organic webshooters too.

I mean, I think we know how the writers are going to implement the mechanical webshooters. Spidey's going to be laying the smackdown on a villain but oh noes! He's out of webbing! So the villain takes advantage and fights back. I think that will be the main difference between the 2 the further we get into this 'new" franchise. We didn't have to worry about webbing in Raimi's vision.

[The Lizard]

organic is more realistic and thats why it worked better

Reasons why the organic webs are NOT any more "realistic":

1. Real spiders don't spin webs as fast as Spidey does. The sheer amount of webbing that comes out of Spidey's shooters and the speed with which he dispenses it is FAR faster than any spider could produce webs from its spinnerets.

2. The pressure needed to shoot webs as far as Spidey does makes more sense coming from a mechanical pressurized container. Even taking into account Spidey's increased muscle strength, the amount of force needed to shoot webs hundreds of feet every few seconds while webswinging is beyond the capacity of a couple of small glands located in Peter's wrists.

3. The amount of organic webbing generated by Peter's body would be way too large. Since Spidey generates and shoots this webbing so quickly, where is all this webbing stored? How much food does Peter have to eat to generate that much organic material from his own body to be squirted off every few seconds while swinging?

4. Organic spider webs do NOT dissolve quickly like Spidey's webbing is supposed to do in the comics. If Spidey's organic webbing is supposed to actually be like a spider's, except larger, then Spidey's webs should be hanging all over New York and making a mess for weeks after he spins those webs. The artificial webbing is designed to dissolve in an hour or so for this exact reason.



The only way that mechanical shooters are less "realistic" is the fact that the mech shooters would be visible under Spidey's tight costume in real life. I think this is the real reason the organic shooters were used in the Raimi movies -- for aesthetic purposes instead of logical reasoning.

[Crook]

No, I don't think that's it at all. Movie-magic explains why shooters aren't seen under the costume. You only need to browse the posts here to see the true reason organics were made; it's a simplistic concept that obviously requires little to no thought.

Spiders shoot webs + Spidey shoots webs from wrists = Organics

It's evident people either don't care or are too dumb to pick apart the already flimsy design.

[Carcharodon]

I didn't mind organics at all. I thought it was a cool idea. However, I'd like to see mechanical shooters this time around. It IS a reboot, after all, so let's try something "new."

[Mac_Hine]

What's the problem with him running out of webbing during a fight? Wouldn't that just add to the suspense?
Exactly! That's why I'm for webshooters!

[Chris Wallace]

Seems to me the pro-organics side keeps defeating its own argument by offering illogical defenses.
Look, if they can work the mechs into the story in a way that reasonably makes sense, I'm all for it.

[SpeterMan3]

organic is more realistic and thats why it worked better i really dont want to see him run out of web during mid flight
Did you miss Spider-Man 2?

[Chris Wallace]

Did you miss Spider-Man 2?

Good point, good point. Any way you slice it, his webbing failed him 3 times in that movie WITHOUT the benefit of spare cartridges.
Here's a question for the pro-mechs side: Do you want him to have a utility belt (hidden underneath the costume, of course)with spare cartridges or just depend on what's in the bracelet?
Another question: Do you think his other gadgets (tracers, Spider-Signal, maybe even stingers and/or impact webbing) could ever be introduced into the movies?

[Nathan]

Stinger and impact webbing was part of Ben Reilly's arsenal I believe, but since we'll probably never see the clone saga on screen, I wouldn't mind if they give Peter these things in later movies. Except for the stingers, I'm not a fan of those.

But I'd definitely love to see the Spider-tracers introduced.

[SpeterMan3]

Good point, good point. Any way you slice it, his webbing failed him 3 times in that movie WITHOUT the benefit of spare cartridges.
Here's a question for the pro-mechs side: Do you want him to have a utility belt (hidden underneath the costume, of course)with spare cartridges or just depend on what's in the bracelet?
Another question: Do you think his other gadgets (tracers, Spider-Signal, maybe even stingers and/or impact webbing) could ever be introduced into the movies?
I'd say belt, but wouldn't he look chunky? :awesome:
The other gadgets, I say yes, but probably progressively, as he develops, he makes new gadgets and not all at first.

[Spectacular23]

In the Iron Man movie, Tony Stark built a circuit board at age four and an engine at age six. I have yet to hear anyone complain about how "unrealistic" that was.

So it's okay for 6-year-old Tony Stark to build an engine, but it's not okay for 15-year-old Peter Parker to develop a mechanical device that shoots adhesive fluid at the touch of a button?

Okay then :dry:.

LMFAO. :lmao::lmao::lmao:

[CGCollectibles]

I think it can go either way, but for non-fan purposes it would be a lot better to have Organic web-shooters.

[nightwing23]

I think they should Mechanical Web-shooters, it would be fun to see him make them, also funny if they malfunctioned while he made them, or in the middle of fighting a villain :D

[Avengers-Report]

That is what they are for, to create random suspense during a battle when he runs out of webbing. Also, it reinforces the idea that Peter is a nerd, but just a little unrealistic in my opinion.

[Infinity9999x]

I would like to see the web shooters just because it would be nice for a fresh take. However, I never had a problem with the organics, they made sense.

[The Slang]

How would people feel about seeing Spidey use his web to create things?
In the comics he's made parachutes, shields, skis, replacement masks, air bags to breath underwater and even a small raft.

[Kurosawa]

How would people feel about seeing Spidey use his web to create things?
In the comics he's made parachutes, shields, skis, replacement masks, air bags to breath underwater and even a small raft.

I always liked that.

[Chris Wallace]

I found those things to be a stretch. a spider's web has numerous gaps. And even his artificial webbing still looked like a real web, & hence would be way too porous to serve as a parachute or any of those other functions. I think it would look really cheesy on film if they did that.

[Nathan]

I could buy that he could make a parachute. He is able to adjust the nozzle on his webshooters and could make the webbing either thicker or thinner. But all that other stuff is way too cartoonish. Even the parachute would be pushing it.

[Chris Wallace]

I could buy that he could make a parachute. He is able to adjust the nozzle on his webshooters and could make the webbing either thicker or thinner. But all that other stuff is way too cartoonish. Even the parachute would be pushing it.

I get the explanation, but I don't think it would look plausible.

[Spectacular23]

i still think they should use the web shooters and even show a quick scene with them and that it. It not like the director is gonna purposely dread on the web shooters. The movie called Spider-man not web shooters. But still they should use it. For a fresh start at least.

[kedrell]

I'm kind of conflicted on the issue. I do prefer webshooters to organics as it opens up some interesting possibilities with regards to the plot(especially in the middle of a fight or something like that) and it would definitely help distinguish this new film from Raimi's. But I wanted Marvel to be the one's to do it first when they eventually get the property back. So it makes sense for Sony to do it now and would be a smart move on their part but ultimately I hope they aren't that smart.

[Chris Wallace]

Does that really matter?

[kedrell]

It could.

[Raith]

In the Iron Man movie, Tony Stark built a circuit board at age four and an engine at age six. I have yet to hear anyone complain about how "unrealistic" that was.

So it's okay for 6-year-old Tony Stark to build an engine, but it's not okay for 15-year-old Peter Parker to develop a mechanical device that shoots adhesive fluid at the touch of a button?

Okay then :dry:.

It's a fair question, but I think what makes this not exactly correct is that Tony Stark was a filthy rich kid that made things that weren't exactly "new". I mean, he didn't INVENT the engine, nor did he do it in his bedroom from scratch. He was smart, but smarts don't make engine blocks appear out of thin air. With a good book, you could build a circuit board from parts at your local radio shack. The thing is, you don't have to suspend any disbelief at all for those examples. There isn't anything "unrealistic" about it. Especially if you have unlimited cash and resources.

Parker, on the other hand, is a poor kid with no access to high tech equipment or materials. His web shooters are one of a kind. There's nothing like them out there. I don't necesarily disagree with what you're trying to say, but this comparison doesn't really work IMO.

[DorkyFresh]

i honestly could care less. i see the practicality of going with organic shooters (why would he get all these spider-related powers, but no web-shooting abilities?) but i also see good reasons for going with mechanical webshooters (creating random tension, showing his intelligence, etc)........so really, i could care less. as long as he ain't shooting web like REAL spiders do, i'm good...

[Raith]

wooooops, double post

[Reikowolf]

it's a very small detail. So long as they work the same way as in the comics.

[Chris Wallace]

It's a fair question, but I think what makes this not exactly correct is that Tony Stark was a filthy rich kid that made things that weren't exactly "new". I mean, he didn't INVENT the engine, nor did he do it in his bedroom from scratch. He was smart, but smarts don't make engine blocks appear out of thin air. With a good book, you could build a circuit board from parts at your local radio shack. The thing is, you don't have to suspend any disbelief at all for those examples. There isn't anything "unrealistic" about it. Especially if you have unlimited cash and resources.

Parker, on the other hand, is a poor kid with no access to high tech equipment or materials. His web shooters are one of a kind. There's nothing like them out there. I don't necesarily disagree with what you're trying to say, but this comparison doesn't really work IMO.
Agreed. You left out the required chemicals, though.
I think that's my main problem with the mech shooters. He ain't got no money, but he manages to keep replenishing this high-tech device that NASA can't even make. I especially found it annoying during the McFarlane run, where he seemed to just waste web fluid, shooting it everywhere like he had an unlimited supply.

[Dangerous]

like I said; - it looked cool webbing crims in web cocoons!

[Chris Wallace]

It looked unbecoming. It looked ridiculous. And it looked wasteful. Unless the "crim" in question was potentially strong enough to break free, there was no reason to cover them completely like he was going to eat them. Particularly when your weapon is also your means of transportation. You'd look like a real clown walking home because you wasted webbing on a crackhead. But then, Todd also would have him holding 10 weblines in each hand while swinging, which is what my previous post was actually referring to.

[Spectacular23]

it's a very small detail. So long as they work the same way as in the comics.

What exactly do you mean by this? don't they all work the same way?

[Agent 194]

I always liked that.


So did I.

[The Slang]

He was smart, but smarts don't make engine blocks appear out of thin air...

Nikola Tesla. Invented the AC motor. The basic design of which is still used in every car today. It came to him in a vision. He saw a circle of magnets proppelling electricity around a geometric pattern. Went to America and changed the world. Edison despised Tesla for his ability to by-pass the experimental stage and rely solely on Epiphany. Tesla said that the images that flooded his head were 'tormenting.'

I actually think Stark was loosely based on Tesla. Atleast in the movie. There has -without question- been an attempt on behalf of the education system to supress information about this person whom some refer to as 'the father of the 20th century'

[Parker Wayne]

I would say Organic webshooters. Even Stan Lee liked the Organic webshooter idea better than mechanical for the first film.

I was watching "Spiderman tech" on the history channel and Stan Lee talk about Organic webshooters and that Spiderman had a huge patch of webbing in wrists. Stan Lee mentioned that he wished he thought of than when he first created Spiderman.

I found the video, forward it to 5:00.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J36AZp0BMik&feature=related

[batboy99]

While it isnt a big deal to me, organics make MUCH more sense.
I never understood why he didn't have organic web shooters. Out of all the things spiders do, weaving webs is probably one of the first things you think of. Plus a high school student with almost no money living with his aunt who is also having money troubles always creating web fluid seems a little odd.

[Spectacular23]

yeah one thing i can't seem to understand that everybody is acting like peter parker was like homeless poor.:doh: He wasn't even desperate poor he has a job!! Working for a big NY paper like the bugle must own him big. you seen the movie he gets like 300 maybe even 500 for his shots of spidey. So i think it is possible for peter parker to have the money to buy his web fluid materials. I don't think he was that poor.

[TheSlag]

One aspect I like (liked) about the Mech vs. Organic, was Peter having to balance money between Aunt May's needs (medicine, rent, etc.) and money needed for web making.

With the organics, it should make the decision about money more clear, money goes to Aunt May as opposed to Peter for selfish reasons, new car, dates, MJ, etc.

I prefer the conflict that arises when he tries to balance Aunt May's needs with needing to make more webbing.

Also, I like some of the quips he would make when webbing up villains, along the lines of .. do you realize how much money it costs to web you up...

And of course, it (Mech's) shows off Peter's genius, as well as gives us more opportunities to watch him finetune the invention of the Mech Web Shooters, and the webbing itself.. without any potential "sex implied" jokes (I hope).

[The Slang]

Why didn't spider-man web up a single person in raimis movies? He didn't have to cacoon them, but he never entangled them at all. He only stuck them in giant orb webs or hung them from streetlights in SM 2. I wanna see him glue someone to a wall or bind their legs/arms.

I like my crimefighting to be as humiliating as it is righteous.

[spider-neil]

in the spidey I'd like him to use his webs to overcome a villian

electro
webs his hands and feet so he doesn't get electrocuted when he hits the villian

lizard
punches lizard and nearly breaks his hands on his super tough hide so webs his hands like a boxer so they (his hands) can take the impact

mysterio
makes a web blindfold so can be guided solely by his spidersense

[Chris Wallace]

Why didn't spider-man web up a single person in raimis movies? He didn't have to cacoon them, but he never entangled them at all. He only stuck them in giant orb webs or hung them from streetlights in SM 2. I wanna see him glue someone to a wall or bind their legs/arms.

I like my crimefighting to be as humiliating as it is righteous.

He did; we just didn't see it. There was the headline "Gunmen found trapped in goo".

[Spectacular23]

He did; we just didn't see it. There was the headline "Gunmen found trapped in goo".

Goo. Thats a good one. But in the movie his web didn't look like glue at all they look like long strings of hot glue.

[SpeterMan3]

Goo. Thats a good one. But in the movie his web didn't look like glue at all they look like long strings of hot glue.
:huh:

[SP1D3RxV3N0M]

:huh:

x2 :dry:

[The Slang]

That post didn't sound like a comment at all, it sounded like long strings of hot comment.

[terry78]

Can you please stop talking about hot strings of hot substances? My heterosexual nature can only take so much inneundo.

[Spectacular23]

x2 :dry:

Oh man:doh:...I meant to say that in the movie his web didn't look like goo at all they look like long strings of hot glue.

[The Lizard]

yeah one thing i can't seem to understand that everybody is acting like peter parker was like homeless poor. He wasn't even desperate poor he has a job!! Working for a big NY paper like the bugle must own him big. you seen the movie he gets like 300 maybe even 500 for his shots of spidey. So i think it is possible for peter parker to have the money to buy his web fluid materials. I don't think he was that poor.

I liked the idea introduced in the Ultimate comics about Peter having inherited some scientific equipment from his dad that helped in perfecting the webshooters.

[Alex The Great]

Ok here's my thought on all this:


I'm ok with webshooters IF they can make sure it makes sense, I'd love to see a classioc Parker luck where Spider-Man is web swinging around and runs out of fluid, and then has to reload whilst falling couple hundred feet

I'm ok with Organic simply because it makes sense, You get all of a Spider's Abilitys but not webslinging? That's on of the Spider's most used/usefull ability....

Again, i'm fine with Web Shooters if they can make it realistic and sensible. But Organics is fine aswell

[SpeterMan3]

Oh man:doh:...I meant to say that in the movie his web didn't look like goo at all they look like long strings of hot glue.
Ah. Lol.

[SP1D3RxV3N0M]

I think the should go with the mechanical route because really, can some one explain me how can He shoot webs from his wrist throught the sleeve of the costume?

[Chris Wallace]

That's a pretty thin argument. Obviously there's a tiny opening. The same as there'd be if he went the mechanical route.

[SP1D3RxV3N0M]

That's a pretty thin argument. Obviously there's a tiny opening. The same as there'd be if he went the mechanical route.

Not really, if he uses the mechanical webshooters he can incoporate them in the suit, but if the web is biological there would have to be a pretty big opening to make sure the web always manages to past even if the sleeve changes position.

[Sky Captain]

I say mechanical if only for the fact that we've seen the organics in three movies already. Let's give the mechanical ones a shot to be on the big screen.

[Alex The Great]

I think the should go with the mechanical route because really, can some one explain me how can He shoot webs from his wrist throught the sleeve of the costume?
A thin hole? it goes so fast it just zips right through, leaving a itty bitty hole?

[Chris Wallace]

This leads to my biggest fear about mechs; I DO NOT want external webshooters. Just because he has them doesn't mean they have to be visible.

[Chris Wallace]

Not really, if he uses the mechanical webshooters he can incoporate them in the suit, but if the web is biological there would have to be a pretty big opening to make sure the web always manages to past even if the sleeve changes position.

That could just as easily happen with mechs.

[The Slang]

I think he means that if the gloves were somehow attatched to or built into the webshooters then the 'nozzle' would always position itself properly. Wasn't there kind of a small red barrel on his gloves where the web fires? I think it was only visible in some shots.

[david icke]

Not really, if he uses the mechanical webshooters he can incoporate them in the suit, but if the web is biological there would have to be a pretty big opening to make sure the web always manages to past even if the sleeve changes position.

If you are really going to get hung up on that at all, you would be as well to get hung up on the fact that the eye pieces on his mask would probably get moved around a lot, especially while he was in battle, so he wouldn't be able to see right a lot of the time, edit: but we want the eyes enclosed like the books, and cloth eyepieces would block his vision completely, not to mention eye pieces would block his vision to an extent all the time, esp at the sides.
Also stuff like, how does he stick to walls through his gloves and boots etc.
For the organics you just accept there is a designed opening at the wrist that is hard to see.

[The Slang]

I had this idea for a spider man mask that has goggles with an elastic strap sewn into it. The strap would be invisible but it would hold the goggles in place. If the goggles were rubbery they might even be able to move alittle bit.

[david icke]

I had this idea for a spider man mask that has goggles with an elastic strap sewn into it. The strap would be invisible but it would hold the goggles in place. If the goggles were rubbery they might even be able to move alittle bit.

That's the thing, you can imagine that he has incorporated something like that into his mask if you want, but there will always be other little things you need to suspend your disbelief for. The eye pieces would always block his vision at the sides, he would have a kind of tunnel vision wearing them.
But, we want him to have the look from the comics, no eyes showing, so that's just something we have to forget about/suspend our disbelief for and get on with the story.

[Chris Wallace]

How much is a skin-tight outfit going to move around anyway? Do people argue that Batman's belt should shift around when he fights? Or his armor plates?
"Oops-that's not where my grapple gun is! Damn it!"
No. Nobody has ever raised this argument in 60+ years & it's silly to bring it up now.
I have yet to get a satisfactory answer to this question; why are so many fans pushing for the mechs simply because they're more faithful to the completely fictional, scientifically implausible comics, and then turning around & saying they want him in a more cheaply-made costume because that's more realistic?

[The Slang]

I have yet to get a satisfactory answer to this question; why are so many fans pushing for the mechs simply because they're more faithful to the completely fictional, scientifically implausible comics, and then turning around & saying they want him in a more cheaply-made costume because that's more realistic?

I'll tell you why in my opinion.

1: In 100 years, science will be alot closer to creating mechanical web shooters than it will to creating organic ones. Within 100 years I have no doubt that we will have the capabilities to replicate all of spider-man's powers in a human being EXCEPT organic webshooters. Why? because nothing in nature including spiders can SHOOT webs in the way that spider-man does. The easiest option would always be to use something artifical, even if it was cybernetic.

2: There's a certain silent relationship between a soldier and his gun. Between a samurai and his sword. A musician and their instrument. And for me, spider-man and his webshooters. It's the union of a human being and a tool, the Mastery of it. The pursual of complete effectiveness. For humans are tool making animals. The fact that he's carrying devices on him makes him more like a police officer or other public servant. It was part of the feeling that I came to associate with spider-man. The tactical use of technology is living testimony to the idea that knowledge is power. Brains over brawn, Mind over matter etc

And as for the cheaper costume. The key to making something seem natural and real is imperfection. It's harder for me to respect something that seems so completely and utterly polished and showy and seeking approval. There's a falsness to it.
It's like the Hitman movie. Just the cover was enough to ruin it for me. I remember the character from the videogame being cold and cool. You had to respect his efficency. Then on the cover they have their rather soft looking actor in too much makeup with unatural lighting and touch ups, gazing into my eyes like he wanted to lure me to bed. Just another example of hollywood trying to pretty something up and completely neutering it in the process. So yeah, my point is that seeing spider-man in a cheaper costume will bring him closer to our world and make him seem less delicate and ornamental.

[david icke]

And as for the cheaper costume. The key to making something seem natural and real is imperfection. It's harder for me to respect something that seems so completely and utterly polished and showy and seeking approval. There's a falsness to it.
It's like the Hitman movie. Just the cover was enough to ruin it for me. I remember the character from the videogame being cold and cool. You had to respect his efficency. Then on the cover they have their rather soft looking actor in too much makeup with unatural lighting and touch ups, gazing into my eyes like he wanted to lure me to bed. Just another example of hollywood trying to pretty something up and completely neutering it in the process. So yeah, my point is that seeing spider-man in a cheaper costume will bring him closer to our world and make him seem less delicate and ornamental.

I don't think that comaprison to a well made costume is very apt at all. Comparing a guy wearing badly applied actor's make up with bad lighting is more akin to comparing it to a badly made awful looking, 'realistic' superhero costume, which is essentially what you want to replace the well designed one with. Because at the end of the day, it's all about what looks visually interesting and great onscreen.
With the movie Spider-man costume it's about trying to replicate the feeling you get when you look at a very well drawn and striking image from a comicbook.
This would not happen with the kind of costume you guys think you want.

So, to be more 'realistic', we should have a crappy looking, 'home made' costume, with no web definition, because that's what the guy would make in real life.
In real life he would wear what McGuire wore to the wrestling.
By this reasoning all Spider-man drawings should be of a guy with rips, patches and tears on his costume, baggy and saggy(when caught in wet weather for instance) , with a builder's ass hanging out of the trousers every now and again, after all that swinging and leaping about.
Or, if you want to ignore all the realistic things that would happen to his costume in real life and just settle for realistic stitching, you could just have a crappy looking tracksuit-like halloweeen suit, with the artist under instructions not to draw the webs in very well so you can barely see them.

Because that is what you are asking for, 'Make the costume look like crap please, as it would be more realistic!'

edit: and in fact, why not have crappy lighting following him around all the time? There's no film crew following Spidey around in 'real life', let's not only have a costume with webs you can't make out, let's not be able to make out Spidey very well either in general. Let's throw out the magic and illusion of moive making altogther and make it as realistic as possible, after all it's not like we need any kind of suspension of disbelief for these kinds of movies, or for movies in general right?

edit: and as for your argument about why they should not use organics... so they should not do certain things in sci-fi type fantasy movies because there is nothing in nature like it?!
How about they create a spider-man organic web shooter using a Spider's web and some kind of organic manipulation based on technology.
Sci-Fi is not bound by nature, sci-fi is subject to the imagination finding ways to further nature and technology through speculation.

edit: and anyway, if you mix up the spider DNA with a human's, you can speculate that the human part 'ejaculates' the web, sorry if anyone is reading this while eating their dinner, but that is the most obvious mix of human and spider nature to explain it.

[The Slang]

Oh damn I offended this guy again. Look dude, all that crap you just wrote is based completely on assumption. You don't know 'what I think I want'. I never mentioned anything about raised webs. I never said I wanted the costume to be a piece of ****. Just tone it down a notch so it doesn't look so fragile and valuable. So it looks like its for using and not just looking at. Don't you have the imagination to consider that there is a midpoint between the two extremes? And the problem with the hitman lighting/makeup wasn't that it was bad. It was good aesthetically, if he was meant to be on the cover of a fashion magazine instead of killing people. You might like all that glitter and glamour but I want a character I can relate to.


edit: and anyway, if you mix up the spider DNA with a human's, you can speculate that the human part 'ejaculates' the web, sorry if anyone is reading this while eating their dinner, but that is the most obvious mix of human and spider nature to explain it.

You're an idiot.

[david icke]

Oh damn I offended this guy again. Look dude, all that crap you just wrote is based completely on assumption. You don't know 'what I think I want'. I never mentioned anything about raised webs. I never said I wanted the costume to be a piece of ****. Just tone it down a notch so it doesn't look so fragile and valuable. So it looks like its for using and not just looking at. Don't you have the imagination to consider that there is a midpoint between the two extremes? And the problem with the hitman lighting/makeup wasn't that it was bad. It was good aesthetically, if he was meant to be on the cover of a fashion magazine instead of killing people. You might like all that glitter and glamour but I want a character I can relate to.



You're an idiot.

Ok, I'm the idiot, but you can't respond to a post without resorting to insults, and ignore most of my points.

and please, tell me how I think you offended me.

Ok big shot, how about showing some real life examples of what you want costume wise instead of just typing up essentially 'I want a costume that looks more like the person actually made it'.

Use my imagination to imagine a mid-point? I've already been over this subject in another thread thoroughly, and have seen no examples or arguments for any kind of costume improvement whatsoever.
Damn right I have to use my imagination, because no-one is shjowing any examples apart from home made costumes and crappy ones used for crappy tv shows.
As I said, please show some real life examples, because the Raimi costumes do not look that 'delicate' to me at all.

In all honestly i would be pleasantly surprised to be shown a way for teh webbing to created on a costume that was better and solved all the problems it poses.

dude,btw, I would not throw the word 'idiot' around so easily when you type up the kind of thing you did in your last post about organic webbing and why web shooters should be used because they 'will be invented in 100yrs!' LOL times a billion

edit: Not to mention you are convinced we will have real life Spider-men in the world...when?...'In a 100yrs!' LOL times 100yrs

[The Slang]

I really don't like you. Times a billion? what are you 6? oh, they won't have anti-gravity for a jillion, gazillion years. There are human animal hybrids being inceminated right now you clown. Nanotechnology has the potential to change the world as we know it. Nothing organic/naturally forming will ever have the range/fire power that an artifical device is capable of. I'm seriously considering the evolution of our technological capabilities, and all you can come up with is an ejaculating penis? Yes your an idiot. This is the second time I've made a point I'm passionate about and you bury it with some bull**** because of your own personal misinterpretations. You know all too well why you decided to bash my post. Which was an OPINION in response to CHRIS WALLACE that wasn't up for debate.

[david icke]

I really don't like you. Times a billion? what are you 6? oh, they won't have anti-gravity for a jillion, gazillion years.

Way to miss the point dude, I think using the argument 'We will have web-shooters and spider-men in 100yrs!' sounds much more like a child-like argument.
Difference is, yours was a serious argument, mine was a throwaway line.

btw, just curious, what do you think will be invenetd first in this 100yrs timeframe, web-shooters or spider-men genetics?
It's just that I'm organising my 135th birthday party quite soon and I'm wondering whether I should ask for some web-shooter cartridges, and where to set my birthday cake up, y'know, in case some guests will be entering by the window.

Point being, how on Earth can you argue that something should or should not be used in a sci-fi movie because you think it will be invented in 100yrs?!


There are human animal hybrids being inceminated right now you clown. Nanotechnology has the potential to change the world as we know it. Nothing organic/naturally forming will ever have the range/fire power that an artifical device is capable of. I'm seriously considering the evolution of our technological capabilities, and all you can come up with is an ejaculating penis? Yes your an idiot. This is the second time I've made a point I'm passionate about and you bury it with some bull**** because of your own personal misinterpretations. You know all too well why you decided to bash my post. Which was an OPINION in response to CHRIS WALLACE that wasn't up for debate.

Dude, couple of points first, I would not be throwing out insults all the time, it's against the rules, I mean, that's a good few you've launched now, idiot, clown etc. I'm telling you this because i like you, and i don't want to see such a good sport banned.

and it's a public debating forum mate, how you can post something up and say it isn't up for debate is beyond me.

and, holy crap, what's wrong with a bit of sci-fi speculation? and suddenly an argument is not valid as it invloves a penis?
It was simple sci-fi biological speculation for organic webbing, human/spider dna mix, in which the human is given super-strength proportionate to that of a spider. So why can't the power of ejaculation be increased along with all other strengths in the body? and why can't a muscle mechanism develop like that in the wrists to shoot the webs?
Just a harmless bit of sci-fi spec, I doubt it'll happen in a hundred years though, maybe a billion, give or take a birthday party.

[blah]

I voted for the Mechanical kind, but then it hit me! How about a mix of both?
To the best of my knowledge, spiders can't shoot their webs that far anyway, so how about if Peter made a mechanical wrist-mounted accelerator for his organically created web fluid.

Personally, I loved when peter used to modify his web fluid formula to adapt to the situation at hand.

[Chris Wallace]

I'm really not a fan of the combo idea; it was proposed for Raimi's films & ultimately discarded.

[Chris Wallace]

I really don't like you. Times a billion? what are you 6? oh, they won't have anti-gravity for a jillion, gazillion years. There are human animal hybrids being inceminated right now you clown. Nanotechnology has the potential to change the world as we know it. Nothing organic/naturally forming will ever have the range/fire power that an artifical device is capable of. I'm seriously considering the evolution of our technological capabilities, and all you can come up with is an ejaculating penis? Yes your an idiot. This is the second time I've made a point I'm passionate about and you bury it with some bull**** because of your own personal misinterpretations. You know all too well why you decided to bash my post. Which was an OPINION in response to CHRIS WALLACE that wasn't up for debate.

Throwing around personal remarks tends to invalidate your argument.
Look, the idea of a spider-Man is, at present, scientifically impossible and implausible. And nobody is going to go into a theater to see what THEY KNOW to be a sci-fi movie and think, "Wait a minute; that can't happen!"
Just out of curiosity, though, based on your argument, what are your thoughts on Venom, whose webbing is COMPLETELY organic & always has been, and NEVER had any sort of artificial supplement to project it.

[The Slang]

Well no one really understands the properties of the fictional symbiote, so the writers just leave it to our imagination. It seemed to be able to change from a solid to liquid state though. Which could allow it to mimic devices and create pressurized capsules. But his webbing was still 'alive' so long as it was attatched to him. He could will it forward just as the symbiote wills itself across the floor.

[Chris Wallace]

"Pressurized capsules"? Are you serious? I doubt that ANY writer ever thought that far into it. What explanation do you have for Miguel O'Hara, then? Or the brief period that Spidey actually had organic webbing in the comics?

[Chris Wallace]

We're talking about a world where someone like Wolverine can exist, who can jettison his natural claws at whatever speed suits him, without the benefit of any spring-loaded mechanism. Where a man can lose his sight due to radiation poisoning and be compensated with a built-in sonar.

[Immortalfire]

I really don't like you. Times a billion? what are you 6? oh, they won't have anti-gravity for a jillion, gazillion years. There are human animal hybrids being inceminated right now you clown. Nanotechnology has the potential to change the world as we know it. Nothing organic/naturally forming will ever have the range/fire power that an artifical device is capable of. I'm seriously considering the evolution of our technological capabilities, and all you can come up with is an ejaculating penis? Yes your an idiot. This is the second time I've made a point I'm passionate about and you bury it with some bull**** because of your own personal misinterpretations. You know all too well why you decided to bash my post. Which was an OPINION in response to CHRIS WALLACE that wasn't up for debate.

I too find the suggestion of an ejaculating webshooter..uh, weird to say the least. But don't refer to board users as idiots.

[Chris Wallace]

I too find the suggestion of an ejaculating webshooter..uh, weird to say the least. But don't refer to board users as idiots.

:applaud

[Parker Wayne]

I have heard stories about this thread since I joined the hype, and I must say, it is as crazy as people said. People want complete scientific plausibility in superhero films? I don't understand why.

How much is a skin-tight outfit going to move around anyway? Do people argue that Batman's belt should shift around when he fights? Or his armor plates?
"Oops-that's not where my grapple gun is! Damn it!"
No. Nobody has ever raised this argument in 60+ years & it's silly to bring it up now.
I have yet to get a satisfactory answer to this question; why are so many fans pushing for the mechs simply because they're more faithful to the completely fictional, scientifically implausible comics, and then turning around & saying they want him in a more cheaply-made costume because that's more realistic?

People are pushing for mechanical webslingers only because they were in comics. Comic fanboys want films to be completely like the comics when it just isn't possible.

I mean, if they were switched around, people would overwhelming want organic webslinging.

I for one, want organic webslinging but I won't lose my mind if they go mechanical. Even Stan Lee likes organic webslinging better.

[Chris Wallace]

I have heard stories about this thread since I joined the hype, and I must say, it is as crazy as people said. People want complete scientific plausibility in superhero films? I don't understand why.




So they'll have something to complain about.

[batboy99]

yeah one thing i can't seem to understand that everybody is acting like peter parker was like homeless poor.:doh: He wasn't even desperate poor he has a job!! Working for a big NY paper like the bugle must own him big. you seen the movie he gets like 300 maybe even 500 for his shots of spidey. So i think it is possible for peter parker to have the money to buy his web fluid materials. I don't think he was that poor.He isnt super poor, but im sure the materials would cost quite a bit. Not to mention all the money he had to put into developing the fluid, but I dont think that we need to worry too much about it, its just a movie after all.

[webslinger81]

I hope they go with mechanical web shooters this time. It could possibly add more drama to fight scenes & everything else. Plus the mechanical shooters will showcase how much of a smart kid Peter really is.

[The Squirrel]

Organics are creepy. Yes, they worked in the other movies. But since this is a reboot, let's give mechanics a try this time. :up:

[Chris Wallace]

I can't wait for the GA's reaction if they go with mechs; "Why did they take away his web powers and give him silly string?"

[©KAW]

I can't wait for the GA's reaction if they go with mechs; "Why did they take away his web powers and give him silly string?"
The general audience won't care one way or the other, because they don't read the comics, and if they did, they wouldn't be asking that question. They would be saying; "Why the hell did they give him ORGANICS in the first place?"

How sad is it when the director screws up so badly on so many important Spider-Man elements, that the norm for Spider-Man are things that were never given to him by his creator.

How many new fans of the property are we going to have to correct and say..."No, Sandman really isn't Uncle Ben's killer, that was just in the movies." Just like Batman fans had to do with those who thought The Joker was actually Bruce Wayne's parents killer.

[Chris Wallace]

Actually, because the GA isn't familiar with the comics, the ORGANIC webbing is what would be most familiar to them. The change would likely confuse many of them & possibly bring about the "silly string" reference, as that is the closest thing in the real world to his snythetic webbing. (I've often wondered if the web shooter was the inspiration for this invention) The uninitiated are not put off or grossed out in any way by the organic webbing any more than by the wall-crawling; to them it's just a natural extension of the abilities and attributes of a man who would call himself Spider-Man. It's only us, the comic fans, who overthink & get hung up on these things and debate them to death. It's only us who get annoyed when someone takes a movie's liberties as canon. So what if Ra's Al Ghul was neither Henri Ducard nor Batman's mentor? Who truly cares if Tony Stark was wounded in Asia & not the Middle East? Who really gives a crap if Krypton isn't made of crystals? Nobody but us.
And the uninitiated cannot be discounted, as they greatly outnumber us & are the REAL driving force behind a movie's numbers. They make or break a movie, not fanboys who walk out of the theater citing the myriad differences between the movie & the comic.

[©KAW]

So because of this, you think it's alright to just change everything that makes Spider-Man great and known to his fanbase. Unlike those changes you named for Iron Man and Batman, their characters that make them who they are are kept intact, Spider-Man isn't.

So it's okay because the general audience doesn't care and that they make or break a film--that we all should just lie down and shut up. Not going to happen, not when we see Spider-Man being changed to the point where he's no longer Spider-Man. I don't even know what the hell I was watching on screen for 8 years, all I kept saying was, "where the hell is Spider-Man?"

[Dangerous]

I don't even know what the hell I was watching on screen for 8 years, all I kept saying was, "where the hell is Spider-Man?"

Word.

All these newbs can argue why organics are better than mechs, but I'd say it's HIGHLY likely mechs will be used in SM2012 and then everything will be cool on this issue. And hopefully, they will get the rest of Spidey right this time too.

[Chris Wallace]

So because of this, you think it's alright to just change everything that makes Spider-Man great and known to his fanbase. Unlike those changes you named for Iron Man and Batman, their characters that make them who they are are kept intact, Spider-Man isn't.

So it's okay because the general audience doesn't care and that they make or break a film--that we all should just lie down and shut up. Not going to happen, not when we see Spider-Man being changed to the point where he's no longer Spider-Man. I don't even know what the hell I was watching on screen for 8 years, all I kept saying was, "where the hell is Spider-Man?"

Wow. Did I say that? I don't happen to think that this gadget-nor the technical savvy that went into its creation-is the thing that made Spidey's fanbase fall in love with him. If it were, then many other incarnations/storylines-the 70's TV show, for example, would have been more enjoyable & well-received. But it wasn't that. It was his relatability factor, which is what Raimi's movies moreso focused on. I could see how the inclusion of this gadget would detract from that.
Don't get me wrong; when I first heard about the organic webbing i was just as outraged as you & many others on these boards. I signed petitions, I ranted & raved, and eventually realized it didn't hurt anything. I wasn't watching the movie thinking, "Oh, God-how can they have him spinning natural webs?"
Funny, though, how you don't seem to think that the loss of Batman's technical knowhow & expertise-him having to go to Fox for everything instead of being able to make it himself-ruined those movies. Nor do you seem to be bothered by the absence of his detective factor. But for Spider-Man to have evolved into being truly able to "do whatever a spider can"-blasphemy.
Huh.
I remember I was watching the first movie with my family, & I commented on the organics controversy. I quickly realized that not only was I the only person in the room who knew about the mechanical webshooters-I was the only one who cared. My aunt made it sound really stupid.
"So if he can't make them naturally, where do they come from? The suit?"
I then explained in detail what the webshooter was & how it worked.
"So they come from the suit."
I tried once more to expand on her oversimplification.
"So you're saying, the webs come from the suit."
From the suit. Like it could be argued that Batman's grapple lines or smokebombs come from his suit. Like Iron Man's repulsor rays. That is how the mechanical webshooter sounds to the uninitiated.

[Rincewind]

Probably everything that has to be said is already been said. But with that in mind...

This is a question between faithfulness to the comics and common sense.

The mechanical web shooters are a bit of a stretch as far as believability goes. Even top scientists with huge resourses and awesome equipment can't create a material quite like the spider's web. Peter Parker, smart as he is, would be just a high school kid with limited money supply. It would require a huge suspension of disbelief for me to accept that he could create something like this on a regular basis in his basement. Perhaps a company like OsCorp could develop such a material, that's not that much of a stretch; but a smart kid with no money and no equipment? No. Even if he had the know-how, he still will have a hard time finding the materials and mixing them together on a regular almost daily basis.
One possible solution would be to go Ultimate and make the artificial webbing be some sort of experimental invention of his father. And so Peter wouldn't need to make something out of nothing, the groundwork can already be laid out and it would be a bit more plausible.

As for the organic webbing, to me it makes much more sense. It's the most typical ability of the spiders and I've always found it odd that a spider mutate like Peter doesn't have it. Besides, it doesn't require any more suspension of disbelief than the rest of his superhuman abilities, especially the wall-crawling.
But, on the downside, it's not faithful to the comics and, even worse, has already been used in the Raimi movies. So I doubt that we will see it in the reboot.

Overall, I think that it would be better for the new movie to go with mechanical web shooters. It would be faithful to the comics and would distance the movie from the Raimi trilogy. The big problem (for me, at least) would be to find a way to make it believable that a high-school kid with a (very) limited budget and no lab equipment could create something like this.

[Chris Wallace]

He isnt super poor, but im sure the materials would cost quite a bit. Not to mention all the money he had to put into developing the fluid, but I dont think that we need to worry too much about it, its just a movie after all.

And it would be strange that while he's struggling to pay bills, he has side money to replenish his arsenal.

[Dragon]

The mechanical web shooters are a bit of a stretch as far as believability goes.

Okay, now list the things about SPIDER-MAN that aren't a stretch. You either accept them or you don't. But apparently Spidey's success for nearly 50 years says most folks have been cool with the mechs. Until Cameron decided on organics, not a single person cared enough to drop the character, so let him be who he is; A guy that built webshooters reflecting his drive and cleverness.

[Dragon]

And it would be strange that while he's struggling to pay bills, he has side money to replenish his arsenal.

Well, considering that that arsenal has saved both his life and those of countless others hundreds of times, i'd say the expense is worth it.

And who's to say how expensive the chamicals are? The chemcials that make up the human body are like under a hundred bucks.

[Dangerous]

Dragon is right.

Plus if any of you pro organics crowd want the definitive and comprehensive explanation why mechs are the best option, see my posts on pages 12-13 of this thread.

[The Squirrel]

Even if they just had them as maybe something his father had built for the military before he died, and Peter just discovers them, that would be better than not having them.

[Chris Wallace]

That seems a little strange, that Peter's dad would just happen to have been working on a synthetic polymer adhesive that would mimic the properties of spider silk.

[The Squirrel]

I'm just saying, if you think the GA is going to have a hard time believing a 16 yr old kid could build web shooters. Having it be something his Scientist Father could have been working on before he died (for whatever reason) and Peter is able to finish it using his father's notes, is good alternative.

[Dragon]

That seems a little strange, that Peter's dad would just happen to have been working on a synthetic polymer adhesive that would mimic the properties of spider silk.

I don't think the father aspect is needed. But even if it were used, let's remember that fate and destiny are integral parts of the Spider-Man story.

[The Squirrel]

I don't think the father aspect is needed. But even if it were used, let's remember that fate and destiny are integral parts of the Spider-Man story.

It isn't needed, but then, I don't have a problem with a teenager figuring out how to build web shooters.

[Spectacular23]

I'm just saying, if you think the GA is going to have a hard time believing a 16 yr old kid could build web shooters. Having it be something his Scientist Father could have been working on before he died (for whatever reason) and Peter is able to finish it using his father's notes.

I actually thought this was a good idea. Since almost everybody on the forum complaining about the impossibility of a 15-16yrs old building a simple advice that expels adhesive "Web fluid", then yeah he should use his father notes and stuff he got from his dad. Although this is a bit from the ultimate route i still think it would make a good idea.

[Dragon]

It isn't needed, but then, I don't have a problem with a teenager figuring out how to build web shooters.

Same here.

[Chris Wallace]

I actually thought this was a good idea. Since almost everybody on the forum complaining about the impossibility of a 15-16yrs old building a simple advice that expels adhesive "Web fluid", then yeah he should use his father notes and stuff he got from his dad. Although this is a bit from the ultimate route i still think it would make a good idea.

Not sure why you'd refer to the device as "simple", in light of the fact that 40+ years after the concept was introduced, modern science still hasn't come up with a way to actually create it. And I would personally like the "Ultimate" references kept to a minimum.
I want to go on record, though, saying that I am in no way "anti-mechs"; I would prefer they stick to the organic (no pun intended) but I'm not gonna cry shenanigans if they don't, provided that 1-the webbing looks good (that's important; I don't want it actually looking like silly string; ever notice that a lot of times, in the comics the webbing had a purple-"ish" hue to it?) and 2-no big, bulky bracelets. That I would definitely have a problem with. Now how many on the "pro-mechs" side can say that they won't want Webb tarred & feathered if he stuck to organic, hmm?

[SpeterMan3]

Well, I can say it. :)

[Infinity9999x]

As someone who's fine with either option, I have to say that anyone who argues that webshooters aren't "realistic" as a reason to not use them isn't thinking things through all that well.

Spider-man is about a boy with Spider-like powers who jumps around in bright red and blue tights and fights man-lizards, people who can shoot lighting out of their fists, and men who wear alien costumes.

I doubt the general public is going to balk at the idea that a low-level genius boy could invent a web-spinning device.

[Chris Wallace]

Who raised the argument of the webshooters themselves being unrealistic, as compared with the context of the movie?
I wonder what fans would be saying if it was reversed; him having organics in the comics & them switching to mechs for the movie.

[The Squirrel]

Now how many on the "pro-mechs" side can say that they won't want Webb tarred & feathered if he stuck to organic, hmm?

I can. I'm not going to 'cry havok and let loose the dogs of war' just because I don't get web-shooters in this movie.

But I will stick to my opinion that organic webs are creepy and gross.

[Chris Wallace]

Fair enough.

[Dragon]

The very fact that we've all supported the films featuring the organics says we can live with them.

[kedrell]

Of course we can live with them. I actually would prefer Webb to stick with organics as it will allow a much more clear line to distinguish the eventual Marvel-made Spidey movies from the Sony ones. When Marvel gets the rights back though, I want mechs all the way. I always prefered mechs to organics as it allows yet another level of difficulties for Peter.

[Golgo-13]

It's been a while since i've watched the Raimi trilogy; has there ever been a mention to Spidey's webs being bio-degradable in that they dissolved after an hour or so? I can't remember if that was even bought up in the movies, but that's always an element that i liked about the webbing...mech ones that is...

[Chris Wallace]

They never said anything either way in the movies; there was a reference in the Spider-Man 2 novelization, where MJ noticed his webbing starting to break down & thought about the fact that there had been no reports of webbing cluttering the city's cornices. But I don't think it's truly necessary to mention it in film at all. Who cares?

[Rincewind]

Okay, now list the things about SPIDER-MAN that aren't a stretch.
Well, the superhuman abilties, if that's what you're referring to, aren't really a stretch to me, because they're just a vital part of the setting and the characters. What I mean is, yes, they are utterly impossible, but they are just an inseparable part of the comic book world.
It would be a stretch for me if a smart kid with little money and virtually no lab equipment invented an impossibly complicated device out of nothing because, well, just because. It's not really a complicated reason. I would gladly accept non-organic web shooters if they go Ultimate and have the groundwork for the whole thing be done and ready beforehand. Sure, it may dimish Peter's genius, but then again, a genius is not a wizard; he would need something to work with.

[Chris Wallace]

Well, the superhuman abilties, if that's what you're referring to, aren't really a stretch to me, because they're just a vital part of the setting and the characters. What I mean is, yes, they are utterly impossible, but they are just an inseparable part of the comic book world.
It would be a stretch for me if a smart kid with little money and virtually no lab equipment invented an impossibly complicated device out of nothing because, well, just because. It's not really a complicated reason. I would gladly accept non-organic web shooters if they go Ultimate and have the groundwork for the whole thing be done and ready beforehand. Sure, it may dimish Peter's genius, but then again, a genius is not a wizard; he would need something to work with.

Somewhat O/T, but your last sentence calls to mind something I have always hated about the first Superman movie; how the hell did Lex discover Kryptonite without any sort of research or point of reference?
I could even buy the idea that Peter was toying with an invention along those lines BEFORE getting bitten, so it would seem less of a convenient coincidence. I remember in the 90's series he surmised that the spider basically passed along an instinctive knowledge of what chemicals would be needed to make the webbing, which makes about as much sense as the plot of the Street Fighter movie.

[Infinity9999x]

Well, the superhuman abilties, if that's what you're referring to, aren't really a stretch to me, because they're just a vital part of the setting and the characters. What I mean is, yes, they are utterly impossible, but they are just an inseparable part of the comic book world.
It would be a stretch for me if a smart kid with little money and virtually no lab equipment invented an impossibly complicated device out of nothing because, well, just because. It's not really a complicated reason. I would gladly accept non-organic web shooters if they go Ultimate and have the groundwork for the whole thing be done and ready beforehand. Sure, it may dimish Peter's genius, but then again, a genius is not a wizard; he would need something to work with.

No one had a problem with Peter somehow coming up with the materials to make a Spider-man suit that looks like it was created by professional costumers...(and that's because it was).

People wouldn't be bothered by web shooters. I mean honestly, who's going to sit there and go "I can buy that the kid gets superpowers from a genetically altered spider, but WEBSHOOTERS? What's up with that? TOTALY UNREALISTIC!"

Yeah...it's a comic movie. I think they'll be fine.

Honestly though, I don't really mind either way. The organics made sense, but the webshooters would be a nice chance.

[Rodrigo90]

Every time I think of organic webbing...I think back to that bedroom scene in Spider-Man 1...we all know what that scene was supposed to represent eh chaps? lol

[Chris Wallace]

No one had a problem with Peter somehow coming up with the materials to make a Spider-man suit that looks like it was created by professional costumers...(and that's because it was).

People wouldn't be bothered by web shooters. I mean honestly, who's going to sit there and go "I can buy that the kid gets superpowers from a genetically altered spider, but WEBSHOOTERS? What's up with that? TOTALY UNREALISTIC!"

Yeah...it's a comic movie. I think they'll be fine.

Honestly though, I don't really mind either way. The organics made sense, but the webshooters would be a nice chance.

People wouldn't be seriously bothered by webshooters, no. Not a lot of people anyway. There'd be some confusion amongst those unfamiliar with the comics, but I doubt there'd be any real outrage.

[Dragon]

Well, the superhuman abilties, if that's what you're referring to, aren't really a stretch to me, because they're just a vital part of the setting and the characters. What I mean is, yes, they are utterly impossible, but they are just an inseparable part of the comic book world.
It would be a stretch for me if a smart kid with little money and virtually no lab equipment invented an impossibly complicated device out of nothing because, well, just because. It's not really a complicated reason. I would gladly accept non-organic web shooters if they go Ultimate and have the groundwork for the whole thing be done and ready beforehand. Sure, it may dimish Peter's genius, but then again, a genius is not a wizard; he would need something to work with.

The webshooters are as much a part of who he is as the powers themselves. They were created along with his powers. While yeah, you and others might think it's impossible to build webshooters, Stan, Steve Ditko, Jack Kirby and a huge part of the comic reading audience think its more impossible that he develops overnight whole new organs and a circulatory systems and brain synapses to support them. Not to mention that the organics don't function in anyway like a spider's spinnerettes.

And it isn't as if Peter Parker is the only character in the Marvel Universe that creates unique objects in his home lab. Why is it that the Vulture is the first man to develop a personal flying device? That's something that alot more people would have been trying to do than make a webshooter (Has ANYONE really ever tried to make such a thing?) Why is it that Ock was the first one to develop robotic tentacles? Such a device would be a great help to the physically challenged, yet no one else thought of it. How many others? The Goblin's personal flying device. Mysterio's illusiuonary abilities. Chameleon's quick disguise tech. How invaluable would that be to the CIA? The Trapster developed adhesives more potent than Peter's webbing. Tony Stark built his original armor in a cave with little to no resources.

Which brings us to another reason the webshooters are important. It isn't just about showing that Peter is clever. It's a physical example of WHY this teenager is able to battle ADULT GENIUSES with large amounts of capital and beat them. He's smarter and more resourceful than they are.

[The Squirrel]

The webshooters are as much a part of who he is as the powers themselves. They were created along with his powers. While yeah, you and others might think it's impossible to build webshooters, Stan, Steve Ditko, Jack Kirby and a huge part of the comic reading audience think its more impossible that he develops overnight whole new organs and a circulatory systems and brain synapses to support them. Not to mention that the organics don't function in anyway like a spider's spinnerettes.

And it isn't as if Peter Parker is the only character in the Marvel Universe that creates unique objects in his home lab. Why is it that the Vulture is the first man to develop a personal flying device? That's something that alot more people would have been trying to do than make a webshooter (Has ANYONE really ever tried to make such a thing?) Why is it that Ock was the first one to develop robotic tentacles? Such a device would be a great help to the physically challenged, yet no one else thought of it. How many others? The Goblin's personal flying device. Mysterio's illusiuonary abilities. Chameleon's quick disguise tech. How invaluable would that be to the CIA? The Trapster developed adhesives more potent than Peter's webbing. Tony Stark built his original armor in a cave with little to no resources.

Which brings us to another reason the webshooters are important. It isn't just about showing that Peter is clever. It's a physical example of WHY this teenager is able to battle ADULT GENIUSES with large amounts of capital and beat them. He's smarter and more resourceful than they are.

:applaud

[Chris Wallace]

I'll buy that argument. But to be fair, Osborn & Octavious poured millions into their devices & had sophisticated labs in which to create them. Beck worked in a major Hollywood studio. I believe Toomes had investors for his flying harness. Stark was a weapons manufacturer-nay, he was THE WORLD'S FOREMOST weapons manufacturer. ALL of them had advantages over a kid from Queens. Now realistically, there would be no more question in the minds of moviegoers on Peter's ability to make such devices than there was over his ability to make such a sophisticated & elaborate costume. Hell, we swallowed the Joker being able to make Smylex gas, high-voltage joy buzzers, acid-squirting flowers and a customized gun WITHOUT the benefit of a lab. As much as people ranted about Daredevil, I never heard "How'd he get the costume & billy club" among the complaints. Nobody questioned how Cyclops just happened to have a uniform-WITH tiger stripes-that fit Wolverine when they are completely different sizes. We've been seeing lightsabers and laser guns and killer androids and all kinds of scientific impossibilities for years. There's the Transformers movies, which made millions despite their totally absurd premise. Audiences WILL buy into the implausible, depending on how you present it to them.

[Dragon]

I'll buy that argument. But to be fair, Osborn & Octavious poured millions into their devices & had sophisticated labs in which to create them. Beck worked in a major Hollywood studio. I believe Toomes had investors for his flying harness. Stark was a weapons manufacturer-nay, he was THE WORLD'S FOREMOST weapons manufacturer. ALL of them had advantages over a kid from Queens. Now realistically, there would be no more question in the minds of moviegoers on Peter's ability to make such devices than there was over his ability to make such a sophisticated & elaborate costume. Hell, we swallowed the Joker being able to make Smylex gas, high-voltage joy buzzers, acid-squirting flowers and a customized gun WITHOUT the benefit of a lab. As much as people ranted about Daredevil, I never heard "How'd he get the costume & billy club" among the complaints. Nobody questioned how Cyclops just happened to have a uniform-WITH tiger stripes-that fit Wolverine when they are completely different sizes. We've been seeing lightsabers and laser guns and killer androids and all kinds of scientific impossibilities for years. There's the Transformers movies, which made millions despite their totally absurd premise. Audiences WILL buy into the implausible, depending on how you present it to them.

But even if Ock and Osborn had millions to spend, they still couldn't have built their devices alone. There are components that couldn't have been built by hand. Yet somehow their devices are exclusive and in Osborn's case, a complete secret. And Stark didn't become the world's leading weapons manufacturer on his own. He didn't develop his weapns in a cave. He developed them in a state-of-the-art munitions plant with dozens of technicians assisting him. Yet he builds his most advanced weapon in a cave. And let's not forget Curt Connors' bio-regeneration serum. These devices are all far more sophisticated than Peter's webshooter. So they are equally implausible, yet there they are.

And this brings us back to my last point. That Peter shouldn't be able to beat these guys with their weapons and resources. His powers alone are certainly not enough, since they've all managed to defeat him on pure power alone. His only edge is his mind. And the webshooters are the prime example of that.

[Chris Wallace]

Why did you refute my post when I was actually backing you?

[Dragon]

Why did you refute my post when I was actually backing you?

I wasn't disagreeing with those areas. Only addressing the issues about Stark, Ock and Osborn. The overall point being that Superherodom is ridiculous from page 1, and as you say how well it works is only in presentation. And I basically agree with you in that I don't feel like the organics ruined the Raimi films. I'd just rather see the films line-up as much with the source material as possible.

[Chris Wallace]

Wow. We're on the same page. For the most part.
Look, if they make sense within the parameters of the film, the webbing looks like web & they stay inside the gloves, I will have no problem.

[mjbull23]

I would prefer to see organic webbing over web shooters. Simply put, to me the notion of maintaining such a device operational and fully efficient at all times seems far to risky for Peter's own good. Would you want to rely on some device of your own creation to not fail at some critical time when engaging your enemies or swinging 400 feet in their air nestled between skyscrapers?

Organic webbing not only adds more mystique to his abilities, but it makes him more imposing as a crimefighter.

[The Squirrel]

Having glitches in the web shooters is what adds to some of the drama/suspense when Spidey is fighting his villains.

[Boom]

Organic webbing not only adds more mystique to his abilities, but it makes him more imposing as a crimefighter.
Having an infinite supply of webbing makes him more imposing? As opposed to him running out of webbing mid-fight and still able to defeat his opponent using his strength and wits?

Organic webbing is convenient, sure, but it's boring as far as I'm concerned.

[Chris Wallace]

I wouldn't say boring. I never found it boring when he had the symbiote, or when the organic webs made their way into the comics. Besides, we did see webbing malfunctions in the second movie.

[MessiahDecoy123]

Organic webbing not only adds more mystique to his abilities, but it makes him more imposing as a crimefighter.
More mystique? Organics are simplistic and predictable. Boy gets bit by spider. Boy spins webs like spider.

A 4th grader could've came up with it.

Mechs are far more sopisticated and far less disgusting.

[drmick]

Can anybody come up with a compromise that will placate both sides?

The original compromise by Raimi that was eventually pulled won't placate the mechanical camp.

I've got an idea or two that might work...

[kedrell]

I wouldn't say boring. I never found it boring when he had the symbiote, or when the organic webs made their way into the comics. Besides, we did see webbing malfunctions in the second movie.


And that made no damn sense at all.:cmad:

'Why is this happening to me?' Because the writers need it to at this point in time in the story, Tobey.:doh:

[Deaths Head II]

And that made no damn sense at all.:cmad:

'Why is this happening to me?' Because the writers need it to at this point in time in the story, Tobey.:doh:

Except...the exact same thing happened in the comics when Spidey first fought the Sinister Six.

He was depressed about his life as Spider-Man and his mental anxiety made his powers start to fail. He thought he had lost his powers for good and he didn't understand why. It wasn't until Betty Brant and Aunt May were captured by the SS that he got the willpower to fight again. Then his powers returned and he realized what had happened to make them go away.

That plot is straight from the 60s comic books. Only with his webbing being affected on top of Spider-Man's wallcrawling abilities and enhanced physical stats.

[MessiahDecoy123]

Can anybody come up with a compromise that will placate both sides?

The original compromise by Raimi that was eventually pulled won't placate the mechanical camp.

I've got an idea or two that might work...
The organics camp have three movies with organics.

The only way to balance it out is have three movies with mech webshooters.

[spider-neil]

web shooters, web cartridge belt, spidey signal and web tracers seem like such a no brainer to me. show that in the movie and then make cheap toys of said items and place them in 'toy'r'us' and you will be laughing all the way to the bank. that would be THE best use of product placement.

[Oddzball]

The mechanical shooters have generally been a minor nuissance. Occasionally one will be damge or he'll run out of fluid, but for the most part they're things of absolute reliability an d limitless shots.

And it's a complication. The guy who ges spider abilities just happens to be able to invent synthetic web and a web shooting system that is undetectable under a jacket's sleeve at the age of 15.

Keep it simple.

[Chris Wallace]

You know what I hope they do? Keep the audience guessing until about the middle of the movie. Since there's no need to do an origin story, we can just see him go into action already suited up, and then about halfway through we can see him take off his glove and then we know for sure.

[spider-neil]

how cool would it be to have the toy of the web shooters. I'm not talking about that spray can contraption piece of rubbish I mean an actual autentic looking web shooter with small cartridges that you replace.

[Chris Wallace]

If it could be done, they'd be able to make REAL ones.
I had a toy contraption when I was a kid, that squirted a goopy, glue-like substance. That was as close as I think they'll get any time soon.

[spider-neil]

If it could be done, they'd be able to make REAL ones.
I had a toy contraption when I was a kid, that squirted a goopy, glue-like substance. That was as close as I think they'll get any time soon.


sounds like a piece of cake to me. reduce the spray can down to the size of a zippo lighter and then you are good to go. I've seen TINY areosal cans.