The Amazing Spider-Man Peter Parker / Spider-Man Characterization

[DACrowe]

The glaring problem was the actor and the director's ineptness to make Peter Parker have a pulse.

Maguire played Peter Parker like a consistent nerd that had his eyes fixated on some naked woman with large breasts.

It's going to depend on the actor (Garfield) and the director's (Webb) realization that Peter Parker should be a living breathing person with actual personality.

Man, if Michael J. Fox was 30 years younger, he would've made an awesome Peter Parker. His character in Back to the Future is essentially Peter Parker without spider powers.

Peter Parker was a high school stud who was the lead singer and guitarist of his own rock band who talked trash to authority figures (without a mask on) and dated the hot girl while getting in drag races? You see that is what I'm talking about. There is a disconnect with who Peter was in the comics and how he is portrayed now. I think the Spectacular Spider-Man show a few years ago struck a good balance. But Marty McFly he wasn't. With that said, MJF would have been a great Peter if he could have been.

 

[WarriorDreamer]

I think people are so quick to throw away the concept Raimi was trying to go for.

Before 2002, when it came to superhero movies was there as big an audience as there are for them now? No way.

There were many many films based on comic books but since Spider-Man superhero films have almost just become their own genre.

But, I think before that superhero movies were really great but I think they often lacked that one thing you always need: relatability. Raimi really locked into a genre of young, modern, cool but also down to earth superheroes.

I guess Tobey Maguire may not be everybody's prefrence. He's very soft looking, in looks, voice and persona. But I think he had a vulnerability that I think was really missing from alot of big action stars/ movies at the time.

And it was like either Kirsten D or Sam R (cant remember which) said on one of the DVD's, you can have all these big action sequences happening but if you dont care for the character, or feel they're vulnerability then it's completely pointless.

I think the Raimi films gave a big heart to the Spider-Man films and possibly even influenced the genre. It can be so easy to get caught up in the big expensive action sequences but small, intimate conversations with Aunt May, Mary Jane or Harry are priceless.

Peter Parker/ Spider-Man was a hero I could reeally relate to in the movies. He wasn't a millionare, he couldn't design himself a super costume in like 2 seconds, he wasn't part of some super group and he actually came from planet Earth (what a thought!) .

It was just him, his aunt his best friend and the girl he loves in Queens, New York. And I really like that concept.

Now I agree that Tobey's Peter often seemed like the 60's Peter Parker, but he was kinda supposed to be totally out of touch.

I hope to God (and I think I'm right) that this new version will feel very updated, very modern and 2011. That Peter Parker will be a little nerdy but GOOD nerdy kinda like Seth Cohen in the O.C, now he was a good representation of a cool nerd. One who is totally unashamably nerdy but is still in touch with everything that's going on and has a sense of humor about it.

So yeah, I think HUGE improvements can be made, but I'll always still look back on the Raimi/Maguire era with a huge amount of fondess, especially the first two.



Anyway sorry for going on so long. I know people hate reading long posts.

 

[Spiderman6592]

I think people are so quick to throw away the concept Raimi was trying to go for.

Before 2002, when it came to superhero movies was there as big an audience as there are for them now? No way.

There were many many films based on comic books but since Spider-Man superhero films have almost just become their own genre.

But, I think before that superhero movies were really great but I think they often lacked that one thing you always need: relatability. Raimi really locked into a genre of young, modern, cool but also down to earth superheroes.

I guess Tobey Maguire may not be everybody's prefrence. He's very soft looking, in looks, voice and persona. But I think he had a vulnerability that I think was really missing from alot of big action stars/ movies at the time.

And it was like either Kirsten D or Sam R (cant remember which) said on one of the DVD's, you can have all these big action sequences happening but if you dont care for the character, or feel they're vulnerability then it's completely pointless.

I think the Raimi films gave a big heart to the Spider-Man films and possibly even influenced the genre. It can be so easy to get caught up in the big expensive action sequences but small, intimate conversations with Aunt May, Mary Jane or Harry are priceless.

Peter Parker/ Spider-Man was a hero I could reeally relate to in the movies. He wasn't a millionare, he couldn't design himself a super costume in like 2 seconds, he wasn't part of some super group and he actually came from planet Earth (what a thought!) .

It was just him, his aunt his best friend and the girl he loves in Queens, New York. And I really like that concept.

Now I agree that Tobey's Peter often seemed like the 60's Peter Parker, but he was kinda supposed to be totally out of touch.

I hope to God (and I think I'm right) that this new version will feel very updated, very modern and 2011. That Peter Parker will be a little nerdy but GOOD nerdy kinda like Seth Cohen in the O.C, now he was a good representation of a cool nerd. One who is totally unashamably nerdy but is still in touch with everything that's going on and has a sense of humor about it.

So yeah, I think HUGE improvements can be made, but I'll always still look back on the Raimi/Maguire era with a huge amount of fondess, especially the first two.



Anyway sorry for going on so long. I know people hate reading long posts.

The dialogue in the Raimi trilogy was painful to watch. The exchanges were always so dragged out and overly dramatic.

Peter: "Hey MJ"

Pause

Pause

Pause

*Stare into one another's eyes for effect*

Pause

Pause

MJ: "Yeah Pete?"

Pause

Pause

Pause

*Peter quickly turns his eyes from MJ's*

Pause

Peter: "Never mind."

Pause

Pause

Pause

MJ: "C'mon, tell me."

Pause

Pause

Peter: "It's just-"

*Interrupted by another character*

 

[DACrowe]

Yep. For fanboys who watch these movies to an unhealthy degree, they probably do drag on during the 20th viewing. But for those who are experiencing it for the first or one of the first times in the theater, they were engrossing and pulled the audience into the film in a way no other franchise save for Harry Potter and Nolan's Batman has done in the last ten years. It is why they are so very successful. They are dismissed because....well fans want their new bright shiny toy.

I hope the new film is good, but after the newness of it wears off, there is a good chance nostalgia for these films will return.

 

[Thundercrack85]

It's usually a bad sign when Batman makes more quips than Spider-man.

Maguire's Spider-man just lacked personality. Spider-man is one of the few heroes who actually has fun when he's doing his job.

 

[Spiderman6592]

Yep. For fanboys who watch these movies to an unhealthy degree, they probably do drag on during the 20th viewing. But for those who are experiencing it for the first or one of the first times in the theater, they were engrossing and pulled the audience into the film in a way no other franchise save for Harry Potter and Nolan's Batman has done in the last ten years. It is why they are so very successful. They are dismissed because....well fans want their new bright shiny toy.

I hope the new film is good, but after the newness of it wears off, there is a good chance nostalgia for these films will return.

The difference between Batman, HP and the original Spidey trilogy is exactly what you said. The dialogue and character interaction in Batman and HP never gets stale. No matter how big of a fan you are or how many times you've seen it. That's a bad excuse to explain awkward dialogue. Dialogue should never get stale.

I find it hypocritical that you put those at fault for wanting a "new bright shiny toy" when the only reason you found the dialogue acceptable at the time of the films' releases is because it was the "new bright shiny toy" at the time.

 

[©KAW]

The dialogue in the Raimi trilogy was painful to watch. The exchanges were always so dragged out and overly dramatic.

Peter: "Hey MJ"

Pause

Pause

Pause

*Stare into one another's eyes for effect*

Pause

Pause

MJ: "Yeah Pete?"

Pause

Pause

Pause

*Peter quickly turns his eyes from MJ's*

Pause

Peter: "Never mind."

Pause

Pause

Pause

MJ: "C'mon, tell me."

Pause

Pause

Peter: "It's just-"

*Interrupted by another character*

Yep, that's all three films and then Aunt May tells a HERO STORY. The dialogue was not only written and directed horribly...but it was performed horribly, as well.

 

[DACrowe]

The difference between Batman, HP and the original Spidey trilogy is exactly what you said. The dialogue and character interaction in Batman and HP never gets stale. No matter how big of a fan you are or how many times you've seen it. That's a bad excuse to explain awkward dialogue. Dialogue should never get stale.

I find it hypocritical that you put those at fault for wanting a "new bright shiny toy" when the only reason you found the dialogue acceptable at the time of the films' releases is because it was the "new bright shiny toy" at the time.

But they remain popular in pop culture and memorable is the amount of pathos and humanity Raimi/Maguire put into the material. That is what differentiates it from almost all other franchise films. Again, only HP and the Batman franchisees have exceeded it. Though I would argue that a number of the Harry Potter films grow stale on rewatches (namely the first two, Half-Blooded Prince and DHP1). But people like the characters so much it doesn't detract from their initial viewing experiences or their legacy. I'd say the reason why the Spidey films were so well received (the first two times) is because people liked the characters.

Web''s could be better. There is a lot of room for improvement. But to dismiss the original films is silly, IMO. SM2 may not have been a perfect adaptation of the comics, but it is a great movie.

 

[Spiderman6592]

But they remain popular in pop culture and memorable is the amount of pathos and humanity Raimi/Maguire put into the material. That is what differentiates it from almost all other franchise films. Again, only HP and the Batman franchisees have exceeded it. Though I would argue that a number of the Harry Potter films grow stale on rewatches (namely the first two, Half-Blooded Prince and DHP1). But people like the characters so much it doesn't detract from their initial viewing experiences or their legacy. I'd say the reason why the Spidey films were so well received (the first two times) is because people liked the characters.

Web''s could be better. There is a lot of room for improvement. But to dismiss the original films is silly, IMO. SM2 may not have been a perfect adaptation of the comics, but it is a great movie.

They remain popular in pop culture because it was the first successful adaption of the character to film. I'm not saying the Raimi trilogy was bad; it wasn't. I loved them. But I loved them because Spider-Man is my favorite superhero ever. Were they good? Absolutely, but there is HUGE amounts of room for improvement. Where can that improvement be achieved? In dialogue and some VFX. The original trilogy had great story arcs (except SM3) and had well above average VFX but some of it looked PAINFULLY fake.

Also, HP doesn't grow stale because of dialogue goofs or errors but solely because of the fact that if you watch a movie enough, they're going to get boring. I'm bored of Inception, but it's still one of the bet films I've ever seen.

Again, no one is dismissing the original 3 films (well, maybe SM3). We're saying that they aren't all that amazing. They're above average films and one of the downfalls was the dialogue and character interaction.

 

[WarriorDreamer]

Yep, that's all three films and then Aunt May tells a HERO STORY. The dialogue was not only written and directed horribly...but it was performed horribly, as well.

You talking about Aunt May's 'hero speech.' Are you forgetting this is a superhero movie? Not a violent gritty crime drama.

So... are you completely writing off all the Spider-Man films? Does that mean you could do better if everything about those films was 'horrible.'

 

[Spiderman6592]

Kaw is known for not being very fond of Raimi's interpretation of the first 3 films. Just accept that and move on.

 

[DACrowe]

They remain popular in pop culture because it was the first successful adaption of the character to film. I'm not saying the Raimi trilogy was bad; it wasn't. I loved them. But I loved them because Spider-Man is my favorite superhero ever. Were they good? Absolutely, but there is HUGE amounts of room for improvement. Where can that improvement be achieved? In dialogue and some VFX. The original trilogy had great story arcs (except SM3) and had well above average VFX but some of it looked PAINFULLY fake.

Also, HP doesn't grow stale because of dialogue goofs or errors but solely because of the fact that if you watch a movie enough, they're going to get boring. I'm bored of Inception, but it's still one of the bet films I've ever seen.

Again, no one is dismissing the original 3 films (well, maybe SM3). We're saying that they aren't all that amazing. They're above average films and one of the downfalls was the dialogue and character interaction.

I agree there is room for improvement, but the dumping on the originals as mediocre, as many fans do around here, is childish. Raimi has always been a cheeky director with a touch of camp and his films reflected that. It felt authentic to the filmmaker and worked, but I would like to see a more mature version. I don't know if that will make a good movie though.

With your point on Inception, I would agree. However, I was immediately bored with the first two Potter films because they were too frivolous and ironically the last two have been, like the books, too damn serious and dreary. Both, particularly DHP1, felt more like funeral marches or a wake....not the closing chapters in a fantasy epic that has had such fun entries in the past (POA, GOF, OOTP). In trying to be adult they lost their magic (no pun intended). Kind of like how SM3 became too campy and detracted from what should have been a good story.

 

[Spiderman6592]

I agree with most points but at the same time, you can't blame us for writing off the original films for their bad dialogue and simply say we want our new shiny toy. It's just preference. I was never satisfied with the character interaction in the Raimi films, even though I hold them close to my heart. I just would prefer a more mature and slightly more serious Spider-Man film and I always have.