The Amazing Spider-Man So now we've seen both, which was the best? - Part 1

[UltimateWebhead]

Reading over the last couple of pages in this thread has brought a smile to my face. So many good posts. I'd love to quote them but I'd end up using an entire page in doing so, lol.

I won't deny either that there are those 'bandwagoning' fans that just jump on the newest, shiniest object in the room and claim it to be their favorite. That happens with almost everything though. For example, you'll see an exponential increase in the number of fans for the superbowl winner each year.

With that being said, there are many posters here on SHH that have given very good, well-thought, specific explanations as to why they prefer ASM to whatever film or films that Raimi created. To blanket one of those individuals or even myself into a 'bandwagoning' group is just silly.

I wish that I had the ability to explain myself as well as some of the posters on here (looking at you Shikamaru and Fox) but I thoroughly enjoy the new approach that Webb and Co are taking on my beloved Spider-man. As Oz pointed out, everything about the movie feels so grounded and genuine. And I agree with Smegger, I've watched ASM about 5 times now since owning it on Bluray and my enjoyment of the film grows upon each viewing.

 

[spidermanJLA!~]

I wonder how old Peter Parker is in ASM. I would say a junior as opposed to a senior in the Raimi series.

 

[TheWallCrawler]

He's 17

 

[Shikamaru]

I wonder how old Peter Parker is in ASM. I would say a junior as opposed to a senior in the Raimi series.

Both him and Gwen are 17 and seniors.

 

[chaseter]

Reading over the last couple of pages in this thread has brought a smile to my face. So many good posts. I'd love to quote them but I'd end up using an entire page in doing so, lol.

I won't deny either that there are those 'bandwagoning' fans that just jump on the newest, shiniest object in the room and claim it to be their favorite. That happens with almost everything though. For example, you'll see an exponential increase in the number of fans for the superbowl winner each year.

With that being said, there are many posters here on SHH that have given very good, well-thought, specific explanations as to why they prefer ASM to whatever film or films that Raimi created. To blanket one of those individuals or even myself into a 'bandwagoning' group is just silly.

I wish that I had the ability to explain myself as well as some of the posters on here (looking at you Shikamaru and Fox) but I thoroughly enjoy the new approach that Webb and Co are taking on my beloved Spider-man. As Oz pointed out, everything about the movie feels so grounded and genuine. And I agree with Smegger, I've watched ASM about 5 times now since owning it on Bluray and my enjoyment of the film grows upon each viewing.

I think more people claim to have hated the Raimi series after 3 and after the reboot was announced than let on in here.

Like here for example
http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=10912272&postcount=59

 

[Shikamaru]

I think more people claim to have hated the Raimi series after 3 and after the reboot was announced than let on in here.

Like here for example
http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=10912272&postcount=59

That doesn't necessarily imply that he was a big fan of the Raimi films in general originally. All it means is that he believes the movie would've turned out better if it had an extra 50 minutes of footage, which I kinda agree with because it would've seemed less rushed. It still wouldn't have made it a better Spider-Man film (at least not by much) but there are definitely chances it could've gave it a boost at least as just a stand-alone movie.

Plus, notice how he says "Spidey 3 could do the same if it's done well." Basically saying that that length would've been perfect for the movie only IF the movie was well done and a good movie from the beginning (which it wasn't) so it's not necessarily a contradiction.

 

[Picard Sisko]

No. That's not this. I've watched films like JFK, Shawshank many times, then not felt like watching it and then after a while watching it and going 'yeah, these films are boss.'

That never happened with the Raimi films. The charm and novelty wore off and once the excitement of a spidey film had waned, I just saw average films.

Whilst films would lose their initial wow, good films are still watchable and enjoyable. TDK is still very much enjoyable. But that's me.

But see, The Dark Knight does not come close to Shawshank Redemption, JFK, The Godfather, The Wizard of Oz, Goodfellas, etc. After seeing it so many times, I don't think the Dark Knight is a classic. I still think the Spider-Man movies are way above average (well, the first two), but I don't think they are far off from TDK.

 

[The Joker]

But see, The Dark Knight does not come close to Shawshank Redemption, JFK, The Godfather, The Wizard of Oz, Goodfellas, etc.

It does for me. It has not reached their level of status in terms of long time classics, but as far as quality goes it's up there with them.

I still think the Spider-Man movies are way above average (well, the first two), but I don't think they are far off from TDK.

I think Spider-Man 2 is the only one that is a contender to even be in the same hemisphere of quality as TDK.

 

[Picard Sisko]

It does for me. It has not reached their level of status in terms of long time classics, but as far as quality goes it's up there with them.

I disagree, but to each his own

I think Spider-Man 2 is the only one that is a contender to even be in the same hemisphere of quality as TDK.[/QUOTE]

Well yeah, I agree that Spider-Man 2 is in the same hemisphere as TDK. But I think that Spider-Man 1 is right below it.

Here is how I generally categorize some of them:

Best of the best: SM2, TDK, Avengers, X2: X-Men United
Great: SM1, BB, Iron Man, Superman II
Good: TASM, TDKR, X-Men
Okay: Thor, Captain America, TIH
Bad: SM3, X3, IM2, Batman Forever
Disgustingly Bad: Batman & Robin, Superman IV

 

[Anno_Domini]

Peter Parker may be an outcast socially awkward nerd but he was never a clumsy dork by any means. That is not a good representation of Peter Parker.

Lol, and being an outcast as in TAS-M? We will always disagree, because I take "clumsy dork" any day. That's the Peter I like before the spider bite.

Never said you did. I'm going by the reasons people in the general public say they think Spider-Man is a bad character. Almost all the reasons they bring up are reasons that apply only to Raimi's portrayal of the character and not to any other version.

Simply because Sam Raimi felt as he lost touch to every character in Spider-Man 3 except for J. Jonah Jameson. He made a mess out of Peter Parker by having him cry with every situation, by making Mary Jane Watson a total *****, destroying all hope to make the villains like Sandman and Venom feel like real threats and plenty more.

Yes I have seen them.

That would not be considered smart, or even a nerd. That would be considered just a guy with a really good memory. What you just said about TASM's Peter (that he reads about something the day before) is in fact a compliment and shows that Peter in TASM is a true nerd, because nothing yells more "nerd" than Peter having an incredibly understanding (not just memorizing) of something only a day after he read the thing he now has a major understanding of.

Really? Raimi's Peter only has a good memory? No, now that's just trying to give Raimi's Peter some excuse of why he knows these things. He's an intelligent young man that was able to keep in tide with talking to Otto Octavius even about his project because Peter is that smart.

I'm going by what the GA says. Also, are you sure that the same guy who quits being Spider-Man in SM2 just to be with MJ even though the whole city (minus Jameson) wants him back and openly says many times that they need his help is that heroic? Or the guy who doesn't ever bother to call 911 when he is the only witness to a guy getting his butt whooped on the street? Or the guy who only is motivated enough to become Spider-Man again not after he sees that guy getting beaten up or after he saves that little girl from the fire or after the whole city begs him to come back because they need his help but after his crush gets kidnapped?

And yes, I know that him quitting was also partly due to him losing his powers but the movie greatly implies that his powers are tied to his emotions, which is why he lost them in the first place. So he is still technically at least partly responsible for not being Spider-Man.

He didn't quit FOR MJ. He quit simply because his emotions were straining on his powers.

And when did the GA ever say he wasn't heroic besides what you're saying right now? I've never heard of the general audience saying he isn't heroic.

And may I remind you a powerless Peter Parker saving that little girl in that burning building

He doesn't have to stand up to Flash pre-spider bite. I wouldn't expect pre-spider bite Peter from the comics to do that very often either. But even after he gets the spider bite, he still acts like the same wimp when out of costume.

Yes, it makes a difference. The difference is not that he should "be a man and crush those in his way" (as some alpha males would say) but that he shouldn't be a complete pushover.

Can't say Peter Parker is ever a pushover when he's not inside the Spidey suit, so don't know where you're coming from with that.

Yes we did.

He's still not funny . Or sounds like he has much confidence behind the mask.

Just like Webb's Spider-Man not being funny except for one thing, huh? t:

Yet still more threatening than all the villains in the Raimi films t:.

Now you're just sounding biased here. Lizard is more threatening than Green Goblin and Doc Ock? Oh, please.

The difference is that Connors/Lizard is supposed to be sympathetic because that's the way he is in the comics. Norman's Green Goblin, Doc Ock, and Sandman were never sympathetic characters (in the comics, that is). Harry Osborn and Eddie Brock are though but that was poorly executed.

Also, though I think they did a good job with the Lizard and his sympathy, I still would've used a different villain for the movie because I'm personally tired of sympathetic villains in Spider-Man films. It would be nice to get a truly evil villain for once. I hope Electro in TASM 2 will be just that.

Connors is meant to be sympathetic, but not Lizard. Lizard is meant to be this brutal beast and we rarely see these two different personas being shown.

Lines like "Hahaha! So long Spider-Man!", "No one says no to me!" "Join me, Spider-Man!", "I'll destroy you Spider-Man!", and other lines that sounded similar to those came off as really cheesy not just from the wording but from the way Dafoe delivered them. The Green Goblin does talk like that to an extent and has a sense of humor but more in a Joker way. I didn't feel GG to be threatening at all.

None of these lines sound cheesy, especially when just reading these lines in Green Goblin's voice at midnight as I am.

Yes. Pre-spider bite, Peter was a total outcast from most people in the school and had no friends. The only people that payed any attention to him were the popular kids like Flash Thompson that always bullied him. Other than that, everyone just ignored him completely. He becomes less of an outcast after he gets bit by the spider. TASM got this right. We see him by the end hanging out with Gwen, being cool with Flash, and dressing less like an outcast nerd and more like your average teenage kid.

Of course Peter rarely had friends, but dressing up as he did in Webb's film...did Peter ever dress like that?

He was a nerd and an outcast originally (save for Harry and Gwen who were his only friends and for the people that bullied him like Flash and Liz) and then slowly deviated away from that after the spider-bite. TASM did the same thing and it will continue to be shown even more in the sequels when he meets Harry, MJ, and other people at Empire State.

Two different things. Nerd and outcast, and Peter has always been just a nerd. A total outcast of dressing like a bum, skateboarding, WANTING to be alone. That's not Peter, imo. He's a smart kid being forced to be alone as he's just made fun of and bullied constantly by Flash.

And that's exactly what happened. He became more self confident and not just to the woman he loves. And like I said, this will presumably continue in the sequels unless Webb pulls a TDKR and ignores/contradicts all the stuff from the previous films . lol

Too bad TDKR didn't do that, but okay.

And it's fine if you like Peter being confident to the woman he loves, but so did Peter once he and MJ finally started to date. So your point?

Two differences between Nolan's Batman and Raimi's Peter:
1) Peter's intelligence is all "tell but don't show". You never see him using his wits at all and it's like the writers don't even try to show that.

They didn't show it simply because it doesn't do anything with the story such as if Nolan forced a situation with Batman using his detective skills.

2) BB and TDK are based on stories taking place in Batman's early career as a crimefighter, Year One and Long Halloween respectively. BB and Year One both take place in Bruce's first year as Batman and TDK and Long Halloween both take place in his second year as Batman. If you compare Batman in BB to Batman in Year One, he's not that different in terms of detective skills and how much he uses them. Then if you compare Batman in TDK to Batman in Long Halloween, he's not that different in terms of detective skills either. So Nolan's Batman's detective skills fit with the time in which Batman's career is taking place in. Of course the whole point was to further expand on this and to show how Bruce becomes the veteran experienced Batman as years pass by but TDKR kinda destroyed that progress. But hey, you already know my thoughts on TDKR so I won't get into that here.

The fact that Nolan only gave his version of Batman only a few years, one would expect to give Bruce exceptional skills, but even from the beginning, he is taught by ninjas without having any skills from any other area. Saying it should've grown once again is an interpretation on your behalf when it should have been established first before it expanded and it was never established of Batman ever having detective skills or what have you.

And yes, I am aware of how you feel about TDKR. You are aware of my feelings towards the movie as well, yes? Notice my sig?

Nothing here. I agree in this case. To each his own as yes, the third movie was the worst one in terms of quips (and in terms of everything).

Tell that to everyone in my theater that jumped during that closet scene and during the sewer scene.

The main scary thing about the sewer scene was that it felt very real. It felt as if Peter was going to die there. You could almost put yourself in Peter's shoes and imagine that you were there underwater being drowned by a giant green Lizard monster.

I would tell that to everyone in your theatre, or I'd just laugh that they would get scared so easily.

And if you were to say the idea of death was what was really scary, then I assume you had that feeling with every battle he had with Lizard since he could've died in any of those scenarios.

Sure. I have an open mind. I'm willing to listen.

The idea of wanting to "help" NYC when it's just a mindless idea that everyone seems to have a problem as Connors does is a head scratcher.

It does for me. It feels like a different movie with a different story by the time we get to the GG vs Spider-Man stuff. It's as if they quickly rushed to get the origin out of the way and then when they got to the grad scene, they said "Okay, now we can begin telling the story we want to tell".

So you should know how I feel with TAS-M. The origin part was the funnest part of the film as Webb finally got into CBM territory with having Spidey vs Lizard that was just a bore and had a very different tone after the first hour that feels like nothing like the first sixty minutes.

Well yeah, I agree that Spider-Man 2 is in the same hemisphere as TDK. But I think that Spider-Man 1 is right below it.

Here is how I generally categorize some of them:

Best of the best: SM2, TDK, TDKR, Avengers, Superman: The Movie, Superman II
Great: SM1, BB, Iron Man, X2: X-Men United, Thor, Captain America
Good: TASM, X-Men
Okay: IM2, TIH
Bad: SM3, X3, Batman Forever
Disgustingly Bad: Batman & Robin, Superman IV

TDKR in the same league as TAS-M?

That's sad to think.

Definitely disagree with certain parts of your list, and the bold would be my changes.

 

[JOE]

TDKR in the same league as TAS-M?

That's sad to think.

Definitely disagree with certain parts of your list, and the bold would be my changes.

why do you continue to fabricate tdkr as one of the all-time best comic book movies? it was a slightly above average finish (only because of the ending scene) to a great first, and amazing second movie. it pleased the fans, thats it. no expectations exceeded, just enough for it to make some money.

tdk is the only movie where if someone says "they didn't like it" they'll get weird looks among comic book fans/batman fans.

if someone says they didn't like tdkr (which i've heard plenty of times) it's not as big of a deal.

so, tdkr in the same league as tdk?

that's sad to think.

 

[Anno_Domini]

why do you continue to fabricate tdkr as one of the all-time best comic book movies? it was a slightly above average finish (only because of the ending scene) to a great first, and amazing second movie. it pleased the fans, thats it. no expectations exceeded, just enough for it to make some money.

tdk is the only movie where if someone says "they didn't like it" they'll get weird looks among comic book fans/batman fans.

if someone says they didn't like tdkr (which i've heard plenty of times) it's not as big of a deal.

so, tdkr in the same league as tdk?

that's sad to think.

Hey, let's look at which movie is in a top ten list for critics the past week and who's also fittingly in AFI's Top Ten which have only been given to TDK, IM and S-M 2.

Sad to think TDKR isn't given praise by CB fans, but as expected as they're the most fickle.

 

[JOE]

Hey, let's look at which movie is in a top ten list for critics the past week and who's also fittingly in AFI's Top Ten which have only been given to TDK, IM and S-M 2.

Sad to think TDKR isn't given praise by CB fans, but as expected as they're the most fickle.

biased opinions stated as fact, i love it.

 

[mayo23]

biased opinions stated as fact, i love it.

Didn't you know? Anno's opinions are always fact!

 

[Anno_Domini]

biased opinions stated as fact, i love it.

Biased? Opinions?

So I'm making it up with TDKR being on top ten lists?

Don't understand your point there fella.

Plus, let's go back to something I'd like to make mention...

tdk is the only movie where if someone says "they didn't like it" they'll get weird looks among comic book fans/batman fans.

Quite frankly, TDK is the ONLY CBM that warrants a "weird look" if someone says they don't like the film, much more than in Picard's list such as Spider-Man 2, X2 and The Avengers, so wouldn't, by the logic, TDK be the ONLY CBM to be the 'best of the best' then? Yes?

 

[Anno_Domini]

Didn't you know? Anno's opinions are always fact!

I said nothing about opinion

 

[Picard Sisko]

TDKR in the same league as TAS-M?

That's sad to think.

Definitely disagree with certain parts of your list, and the bold would be my changes.

Why is that sad? It's my opinion!

I don't think TDKR is really such a great movie. Its a good conclusion to the Nolan trilogy, but its full of plot holes, and rides off the success of TDK in my opinion. I'm still debating whether or not I like Batmen Begins or TDKR more.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Hah, didn't say your opinion is sad. Said it's sad to think, for me personally.

 

[Shikamaru]

But see, The Dark Knight does not come close to Shawshank Redemption, JFK, The Godfather, The Wizard of Oz, Goodfellas, etc. After seeing it so many times, I don't think the Dark Knight is a classic. I still think the Spider-Man movies are way above average (well, the first two), but I don't think they are far off from TDK.

It does to me. I think it's one of the greatest movies ever made and what I mean by that is that it is in my opinion in the top 10 best movies of all time, if not then definitely in the top 20 or top 15.

Lol, and being an outcast as in TAS-M?

Yes, that is a good representation of Peter Parker. I don't see why it's so shocking to you to begin with. A lot of nerds are outcasts especially the stereotypical nerds which you claim to love so much.

We will always disagree, because I take "clumsy dork" any day. That's the Peter I like before the spider bite.

That's fine. Your opinion. However, that is irrelevant to how good of a portrayal of Peter Parker is. It is not a good portrayal because that is not how Peter Parker was written in the comics.

Simply because Sam Raimi felt as he lost touch to every character in Spider-Man 3 except for J. Jonah Jameson. He made a mess out of Peter Parker by having him cry with every situation, by making Mary Jane Watson a total *****, destroying all hope to make the villains like Sandman and Venom feel like real threats and plenty more.

Well said . Don't repeat this to me though. Repeat it to the GA. They don't care about the pre-production and personal reasons of Sony and Sam Raimi as to why the film was bad. For your average Joe that saw the movie, the movie was bad and the director screwed up big time. That's the end of the story for him/her.

Really? Raimi's Peter only has a good memory? No, now that's just trying to give Raimi's Peter some excuse of why he knows these things. He's an intelligent young man that was able to keep in tide with talking to Otto Octavius even about his project because Peter is that smart.

I never said he just has good memory. That is what you said, or at least implied. You told me that Tobey's Peter was a bigger nerd than Andrew's Peter because he can memorize tons of stuff and I told you that having a good memory doesn't automatically make you a nerd. This doesn't mean that Tobey's Peter is not a nerd at all; just that the argument that you provided for why he is a nerd is complete BS.

He didn't quit FOR MJ. He quit simply because his emotions were straining on his powers.

And the movie tells us that his emotions are connected to his powers and that he was losing his powers due to depression over not being able to be with MJ. Then a while after he loses his powers and quits being Spider-Man, he adapts back to his old life and begins to enjoy his personal life again more than ever before and tries to hook up with MJ again even though the girl is already engaged and even though crime rates all over the city are rising and many people in NY City are asking him to return. Yes, he does try to become Spider-Man again and I give him credit for that but that's only after several hesitations including a moment when he doesn't even bother to call 911 when he notices a guy getting beaten to a pulp by a gang. It's only when the girl he has a crush on gets kidnapped that he fully becomes emotionally motivated again to become Spider-Man and does so successfully. All the stuff from before combined didn't seem to do that for some reason.

And when did the GA ever say he wasn't heroic besides what you're saying right now? I've never heard of the general audience saying he isn't heroic.

I want to clarify. It's not that they say he's not heroic but that he isn't heroic enough or that he's nowhere as heroic as other superheroes. I hear some people say this. Those people usually say stuff like "Spider-Man? What can he do? He has lame powers that can only be used for helping grandmas cross the street!"

To be fair, I don't think this applies to the Raimi films that much. I do think they could've done a lot more to show what Spider-Man is capable of but I don't think the GA's opinion on this comes from the Raimi films. Notice how when I first wrote that list of reasons the GA has to why Spider-Man sucks, I said that most of those reasons only apply to Raimi's version of Spider-Man (not all).

And may I remind you a powerless Peter Parker saving that little girl in that burning building

Already gave him credit for that. You get no cookie.

Yes, that's true. But I do find it a bit disappointing that that burning building with the little girl trapped inside and the stuff from before combined didn't 100% motivate him to become Spider-Man again and get his powers back but the kidnapping of his self-centered crush got him to 100% in less than a minute after her kidnapping.

Can't say Peter Parker is ever a pushover when he's not inside the Spidey suit, so don't know where you're coming from with that.

He still has that wimp vibe and carries himself like a wimp. An example is the scene when all of his sheets in his binder fall on the street and every single person walking by steps on them. I get that Peter is supposed to be mistreated to an extent but that is going way way way way way way too far. Heck, even the bus driver and other nerds picked on Peter pre-spider bite in the Raimi films. Peter in the comics was never the bud of everyone's joke to that ridiculous level at any point, pre or post bite. That was just ridiculous. Also the scene where he timidly asks Jameson for a bit of a raise and Jameson just laughs in his face and then kicks him out is also going way too far with the whole "Peter is a pushover" thing. Read the early Amazing Spider-Man issue where Peter asks JJ for a raise and manages to get one or the Ultimate Spider-Man issue where Peter gets fired by JJ but still gives him a whole speech on what an unfair coward prick he is (and rightfully so). There are limits to Peter's lack of confidence as Peter Parker.

Just like Webb's Spider-Man not being funny except for one thing, huh?

He's funny throughout the whole movie.

 

[Shikamaru]

Now you're just sounding biased here. Lizard is more threatening than Green Goblin and Doc Ock? Oh, please.

He is t:. Seeing as how the new Spider-Man is faster and moves more like the one in the comics as opposed to Tobey's Spider-Man thus concluding that Andrew's Spider-Man is stronger than Tobey's Spider-Man who was on par with SM1's GG and knowing that Andrew's Spider-Man took a bit from the Lizard in TASM and was outmatched in many ways (and this is high school Spider-Man BTW, not the college Spider-Man of the Raimi films who is meant to be much stronger), I think it's fair to assume that the Lizard can defeat SM1's GG any day . Plus, he got closer to taking over the city than the Green Goblin ever did. I think I'll go with the giant green Lizard monster over the guy flying around in a Power Rangers reject suit. Doc Ock is more debatable but I'll still go with the Lizard.

Connors is meant to be sympathetic, but not Lizard. Lizard is meant to be this brutal beast and we rarely see these two different personas being shown.

And the Lizard wasn't sympathetic in the film. Connors was the sympathetic one. The Lizard was a brutal beast .

None of these lines sound cheesy, especially when just reading these lines in Green Goblin's voice at midnight as I am.

Really? Hold on.

*waits till midnight and listens to GG's voice on YouTube*

Nope. Still the same. Honestly, the voice is not that creepy to begin with. Dafoe was far scarier/creepier as Norman Osborn than as GG.

Of course Peter rarely had friends, but dressing up as he did in Webb's film...did Peter ever dress like that?

Exactly like that? No. Similar to that? Yes. He even has the same haircut he had at one point in the comics.

Two different things. Nerd and outcast, and Peter has always been just a nerd. A total outcast of dressing like a bum, skateboarding, WANTING to be alone. That's not Peter, imo. He's a smart kid being forced to be alone as he's just made fun of and bullied constantly by Flash.

They're two different things but you can be both at the same time. You can be a nerd and be an outcast who doesn't fit in because you're a nerd. And Peter has been both. He was a nerd constantly bullied by the top popular kids like Flash but also an outcast ignored by everyone else in the school, which was the majority of the school. Basically, most of the school completely ignored him except for the few people that bullied him (talk about a crappy life). You saw that in TASM too.

He's not dressed like a bum. That old vest-jacket thingy he wears throughout the film makes him look more nerdy especially when he has the glasses on. It's what a 21st century nerd that looks a bit stereotypical would wear. We've been over the skateboarding a million times (it has NOTHING to do with anything; by no means proves he's not a nerd or not an outcast) and I don't see how he wants to be alone.

And it's fine if you like Peter being confident to the woman he loves, but so did Peter once he and MJ finally started to date. So your point?

See above points. Also, I want to point out that although this is true to an extent, the irony is that they only date in SM3.

They didn't show it simply because it doesn't do anything with the story such as if Nolan forced a situation with Batman using his detective skills.

Why not though? It's a very important part of Spider-Man. It goes back to when I said that the films are rushed and half-assed adaptations. I blame the writers for this and not Tobey. At least Nolan's Batman, though the detective stuff is not the main focus around Batman at all, is still present and you still see glimpses of Batman's intelligence throughout all three movies and yes, even including in TDKR (I'm going to admit that).

I would tell that to everyone in your theatre, or I'd just laugh that they would get scared so easily.

And in return, I will show everyone in my theater this:

None of these lines sound cheesy, especially when just reading these lines in Green Goblin's voice at midnight as I am.

See what I did there?

And if you were to say the idea of death was what was really scary, then I assume you had that feeling with every battle he had with Lizard since he could've died in any of those scenarios.

Nah. But that particular scene felt very real to me. I was really afraid for Peter that he could've drowned. It is a great scene IMO.

The idea of wanting to "help" NYC when it's just a mindless idea that everyone seems to have a problem as Connors does is a head scratcher.

It doesn't make sense to you because you are (presumably) sane. Of course that a normal mental person wouldn't want to turn everyone into a giant Lizard but for Connors who has been driven insane and unstable by the serum, it all makes sense. He believes he has achieved perfection and wants to share his gift with the world. A motivation doesn't have to make sense to us. It just has to be believable that it would make sense to the villain and has to make us the viewers believe and understand why the villain would have that motivation (in this case, we believe Connors would have that motivation due to the insanity brought for by his mutation and we understand why it makes sense to him but no one else).

So you should know how I feel with TAS-M. The origin part was the funnest part of the film as Webb finally got into CBM territory with having Spidey vs Lizard that was just a bore and had a very different tone after the first hour that feels like nothing like the first sixty minutes.

I didn't find the film less interesting after the origin. I found everything after the origin a bit more interesting instead since they finally got to the story they wanted to tell (I'm talking about SM1 right now). I like all parts of TASM equally and like how everything is connected though I do think the second act has a few pacing problems.

 

[Anno_Domini]

It does to me. I think it's one of the greatest movies ever made and what I mean by that is that it is in my opinion in the top 10 best movies of all time, if not then definitely in the top 20 or top 15.

Obviously not something to really put faith into, but you could take this into consideration....maybe, lol:

Rank Rating Title Votes
1. 9.2 The Shawshank Redemption (1994) 870,294
2. 9.2 The Godfather (1972) 632,823
3. 9.0 The Godfather: Part II (1974) 405,524
4. 8.9 Pulp Fiction (1994) 678,387
5. 8.9 The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (1966) 267,372
6. 8.9 12 Angry Men (1957) 214,412
7. 8.9 The Dark Knight (2008) 851,986
8. 8.9 Schindler's List (1993) 450,990
9. 8.8 The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003) 617,112
10. 8.8 Fight Club (1999) 665,328
11. 8.8 Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980) 435,639
12. 8.8 One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975) 365,620
13. 8.8 The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001) 640,860
14. 8.7 Inception (2010) 668,885
15. 8.7 Goodfellas (1990) 383,874
16. 8.7 Star Wars (1977) 489,030
17. 8.7 Seven Samurai (1954) 140,005
18. 8.7 The Matrix (1999) 635,639
19. 8.7 Forrest Gump (1994) 566,498
20. 8.7 City of God (2002) 286,811
21. 8.7 The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002) 553,279
22. 8.6 Once Upon a Time in the West (1968) 122,017
23. 8.6 Se7en (1995) 507,553
24. 8.6 The Silence of the Lambs (1991) 425,591
25. 8.6 Casablanca (1942) 240,025
26. 8.6 The Usual Suspects (1995) 407,539
27. 8.6 Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981) 374,112
28. 8.6 Rear Window (1954) 180,124
29. 8.6 Psycho (1960) 224,505
30. 8.6 It's a Wonderful Life (1946) 152,898
31. 8.6 Léon: The Professional (1994) 371,727
32. 8.6 Sunset Blvd. (1950) 81,689
33. 8.5 Memento (2000) 463,650
34. 8.5 The Dark Knight Rises (2012) 466,760
35. 8.5 American History X (1998) 401,883
36. 8.5 Apocalypse Now (1979) 261,226
37. 8.5 Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991) 400,266
38. 8.5 Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964) 217,378
39. 8.5 Saving Private Ryan (1998) 449,801
40. 8.5 Alien (1979) 300,123
41. 8.5 North by Northwest (1959) 132,610
42. 8.5 City Lights (1931) 50,990
43. 8.5 Spirited Away (2001) 194,498
44. 8.5 Citizen Kane (1941) 189,814
45. 8.5 Modern Times (1936) 64,188
46. 8.5 The Shining (1980) 310,073
47. 8.5 Vertigo (1958) 136,986
48. 8.5 Back to the Future (1985) 351,994
49. 8.5 American Beauty (1999) 464,655
50. 8.4 The Pianist (2002) 238,855

Yes, that is a good representation of Peter Parker. I don't see why it's so shocking to you to begin with. A lot of nerds are outcasts especially the stereotypical nerds which you claim to love so much.

Imo, The Big Bang Theory stereotypes nerds in a way where I find to be truer than outcasts trying to just stay and sit in a corner by themselves.

That's fine. Your opinion. However, that is irrelevant to how good of a portrayal of Peter Parker is. It is not a good portrayal because that is not how Peter Parker was written in the comics.

And neither, really, is Batman in Nolan's trilogy, but I find that portrayal to be the best as Raimi's usage of Peter Parker in his films.

Well said . Don't repeat this to me though. Repeat it to the GA. They don't care about the pre-production and personal reasons of Sony and Sam Raimi as to why the film was bad. For your average Joe that saw the movie, the movie was bad and the director screwed up big time. That's the end of the story for him/her.

Of course that's what the GA thinks, BUT...that doesn't mean the GA isn't at least aware that the characters were written far better in Spider-Man 1 and 2.

I never said he just has good memory. That is what you said, or at least implied. You told me that Tobey's Peter was a bigger nerd than Andrew's Peter because he can memorize tons of stuff and I told you that having a good memory doesn't automatically make you a nerd. This doesn't mean that Tobey's Peter is not a nerd at all; just that the argument that you provided for why he is a nerd is complete BS.

If Peter Parker is an intelligent man to have known these things already, than that just shows how smart Peter is to know how things work, to know how things are created and used.

And the movie tells us that his emotions are connected to his powers and that he was losing his powers due to depression over not being able to be with MJ. Then a while after he loses his powers and quits being Spider-Man, he adapts back to his old life and begins to enjoy his personal life again more than ever before and tries to hook up with MJ again even though the girl is already engaged and even though crime rates all over the city are rising and many people in NY City are asking him to return. Yes, he does try to become Spider-Man again and I give him credit for that but that's only after several hesitations including a moment when he doesn't even bother to call 911 when he notices a guy getting beaten to a pulp by a gang. It's only when the girl he has a crush on gets kidnapped that he fully becomes emotionally motivated again to become Spider-Man and does so successfully. All the stuff from before combined didn't seem to do that for some reason.

But it simply wasn't for MJ that Peter quit. Hell, as you said, MJ was engaged so there was no way he thought he had a shot left, it was only MJ that decided she now wanted to be with Peter, not the other way around.

I want to clarify. It's not that they say he's not heroic but that he isn't heroic enough or that he's nowhere as heroic as other superheroes. I hear some people say this. Those people usually say stuff like "Spider-Man? What can he do? He has lame powers that can only be used for helping grandmas cross the street!"

To be fair, I don't think this applies to the Raimi films that much. I do think they could've done a lot more to show what Spider-Man is capable of but I don't think the GA's opinion on this comes from the Raimi films. Notice how when I first wrote that list of reasons the GA has to why Spider-Man sucks, I said that most of those reasons only apply to Raimi's version of Spider-Man (not all).

So you're really talking about if Spidey is heroic when you bring in examples of people thinking he only helps grandmas? Lol. It was obviously a mistake he didn't help that kid who was getting beat up, but he understood his destiny even when his powers weren't working by saving that little girl from that building that was caught in flames.

Already gave him credit for that. You get no cookie.

You did?

Yes, that's true. But I do find it a bit disappointing that that burning building with the little girl trapped inside and the stuff from before combined didn't 100% motivate him to become Spider-Man again and get his powers back but the kidnapping of his self-centered crush got him to 100% in less than a minute after her kidnapping.

That was never going to give Peter his powers back until something happened with Mary Jane as all of that happened because of Peter's love to Mary Jane(something, imo, that is completely ruined when MJ breaks up with Peter and nothing happens...if love did this to Peter in S-M 2, something similar should've happened in S-M 3).

He still has that wimp vibe and carries himself like a wimp. An example is the scene when all of his sheets in his binder fall on the street and every single person walking by steps on them. I get that Peter is supposed to be mistreated to an extent but that is going way way way way way way too far. Heck, even the bus driver and other nerds picked on Peter pre-spider bite in the Raimi films. Peter in the comics was never the bud of everyone's joke to that ridiculous level at any point, pre or post bite. That was just ridiculous. Also the scene where he timidly asks Jameson for a bit of a raise and Jameson just laughs in his face and then kicks him out is also going way too far with the whole "Peter is a pushover" thing. Read the early Amazing Spider-Man issue where Peter asks JJ for a raise and manages to get one or the Ultimate Spider-Man issue where Peter gets fired by JJ but still gives him a whole speech on what an unfair coward prick he is (and rightfully so). There are limits to Peter's lack of confidence as Peter Parker.

I love that contrast though. Peter Parker being this wimp, but when he's Spider-Man, he's way more different, but even after the spider bite, Peter Parker is at least more confident with the way he is such as when speaking to his friends more or his Aunt. There's a little maturation and confidence with Peter after the spider bite, but nothing compared to how he is when he's Spider-Man. That contrast is satisfying, imo.

He's funny throughout the whole movie.

Not if you ask me

He is t:. Seeing as how the new Spider-Man is faster and moves more like the one in the comics as opposed to Tobey's Spider-Man thus concluding that Andrew's Spider-Man is stronger than Tobey's Spider-Man who was on par with SM1's GG and knowing that Andrew's Spider-Man took a bit from the Lizard in TASM and was outmatched in many ways (and this is high school Spider-Man BTW, not the college Spider-Man of the Raimi films who is meant to be much stronger), I think it's fair to assume that the Lizard can defeat SM1's GG any day . Plus, he got closer to taking over the city than the Green Goblin ever did. I think I'll go with the giant green Lizard monster over the guy flying around in a Power Rangers reject suit. Doc Ock is more debatable but I'll still go with the Lizard.

Nothing is concrete on Webb's Spider-Man being stronger; in fact, I believe I read something where Webb concentrates on his Spidey only being faster and more agile, but Raimi's Spider-Man seems far more stronger.

But...we are talking about who's more threatening of the villains, and while you can say Lizard could beat up Green Goblin, that doesn't make him any more threatening to Spider-Man. Both of these villains had their moments of beating Spidey, but couldn't one say Lizard could beat up GG in the comics as well? That doesn't make Lizard any more threatening just because he's a giant lizard. His master plan was that of a B-rated sci-fi film that I think could've been much better and his presence wasn't scary at all.

And the Lizard wasn't sympathetic in the film. Connors was the sympathetic one. The Lizard was a brutal beast .

A brutal beast when he simply had to be with Peter and Captain Stacy. He never decided to harm just people he didn't care about, which would've made him feel like a feral beast and he never did

Really? Hold on.

*waits till midnight and listens to GG's voice on YouTube*

Nope. Still the same. Honestly, the voice is not that creepy to begin with. Dafoe was far scarier/creepier as Norman Osborn than as GG.

Highly disagree t:

Exactly like that? No. Similar to that? Yes. He even has the same haircut he had at one point in the comics.

Exactly like that? Good, glad he never dressed exactly like a moron.

They're two different things but you can be both at the same time. You can be a nerd and be an outcast who doesn't fit in because you're a nerd. And Peter has been both. He was a nerd constantly bullied by the top popular kids like Flash but also an outcast ignored by everyone else in the school, which was the majority of the school. Basically, most of the school completely ignored him except for the few people that bullied him (talk about a crappy life). You saw that in TASM too.

Imo, Raimi portrayed the bold perfectly as much as you can say Webb portrayed the other way perfectly as well. We are definitely getting into opinion territory now it seems, lol.

He's not dressed like a bum. That old vest-jacket thingy he wears throughout the film makes him look more nerdy especially when he has the glasses on. It's what a 21st century nerd that looks a bit stereotypical would wear. We've been over the skateboarding a million times (it has NOTHING to do with anything; by no means proves he's not a nerd or not an outcast) and I don't see how he wants to be alone.

That doesn't speak to me as 21st century nerd. That speaks to me as a 21st century hipster.

See above points. Also, I want to point out that although this is true to an extent, the irony is that they only date in SM3.

Well of course since the trilogy was about Peter Parker and Mary Jane Watson and their 'love story'. It's not like the same pattern can be used when Gwen Stacy is meant to die in this series; Peter and Gwen had to quickly become a couple, lol.

Why not though? It's a very important part of Spider-Man. It goes back to when I said that the films are rushed and half-assed adaptations. I blame the writers for this and not Tobey. At least Nolan's Batman, though the detective stuff is not the main focus around Batman at all, is still present and you still see glimpses of Batman's intelligence throughout all three movies and yes, even including in TDKR (I'm going to admit that).

Why not? Why force a situation that doesn't belong in the story? One thing I hate is when something is cradled for the CB fans that has nothing relevant to the plot of the film.

And in return, I will show everyone in my theater this:


See what I did there?

Needless to say, I couldn't trust anyone in the theatre on what they'll say if they get scared over the littlest things

Nah. But that particular scene felt very real to me. I was really afraid for Peter that he could've drowned. It is a great scene IMO.

Really? I'm sure there could be the same, or even more, panic of Peter's death with Lizard squeezing Peter ontop of OsCorp Tower, imo.

It doesn't make sense to you because you are (presumably) sane. Of course that a normal mental person wouldn't want to turn everyone into a giant Lizard but for Connors who has been driven insane and unstable by the serum, it all makes sense. He believes he has achieved perfection and wants to share his gift with the world. A motivation doesn't have to make sense to us. It just has to be believable that it would make sense to the villain and has to make us the viewers believe and understand why the villain would have that motivation (in this case, we believe Connors would have that motivation due to the insanity brought for by his mutation and we understand why it makes sense to him but no one else).

Imo, it still makes far more sense, on a thematic level, for Connors to still test his family first. What's more insane in trying to "heal" his perfectly healthy family?

That's why his motivation is off. It feels like a bad sci-fi film with no emotional pull whatsoever.

I didn't find the film less interesting after the origin. I found everything after the origin a bit more interesting instead since they finally got to the story they wanted to tell (I'm talking about SM1 right now). I like all parts of TASM equally and like how everything is connected though I do think the second act has a few pacing problems.

I enjoyed Spider-Man from the beginning to end because it all felt like it was in the same tone and atmosphere, whereas TAS-M felt like Webb directing an indie film that grew in size within a hour, and that's not how I should feel, imo. The scope should've been there from the beginning.

 

[spidermanJLA!~]

Connors' motives were very blurred imo. Ratha said," Start trials or else." And then he just decides to test it on himself.

 

[Shikamaru]

Oh for crap sake. I wrote a whole long post replying to Anno's last post and to a specific section in the post before his last post where he wrote about Nolan's Batman not being a detective (I left that part out originally because I needed a whole post to talk just about that) but then as soon as I click Post Quick Reply, all you see is "Internet lost connection". That's really......"wonderful". Too lazy to type all that again so that will have to wait .

 

[Web face]

Oh for crap sake. I wrote a whole long post replying to Anno's last post and to a specific section in the post before his last post where he wrote about Nolan's Batman not being a detective (I left that part out originally because I needed a whole post to talk just about that) but then as soon as I click Post Quick Reply, all you see is "Internet lost connection". That's really......"wonderful". Too lazy to type all that again so that will have to wait .

 

[Anno_Domini]

Oh for crap sake. I wrote a whole long post replying to Anno's last post and to a specific section in the post before his last post where he wrote about Nolan's Batman not being a detective (I left that part out originally because I needed a whole post to talk just about that) but then as soon as I click Post Quick Reply, all you see is "Internet lost connection". That's really......"wonderful". Too lazy to type all that again so that will have to wait .

Lol.