Originally Posted by Lord
I doubt it, a good film? Yeah. A blockbuster? Yeah. A modern Classic? It's Spider-man, so yeah. A Fun film to watch and an "event"? Yep. And would it have set a new standard for comic book adaptations? Probably too.
But the thing is, that Sam Raimi's Spider-Man did all the things stated in here, and he also brings a better sence of fun, while James Cameron is more Serious Hollywoodesque.
I can totally see what you mean. But the thing about Cameron is that he would've made a great Spider-Man movie FOR THE 90's. After Batman and Fobin, things were doomed for superhero movies. I think a darker CBM would've been better for a change. I think his scirpt is a better movie but Raimi's is a better Spider-Man movie. I think that Leonardo Dicaprio as Peter Parker would've been amazing. Better than Tobey and Garfield combined.