Thats the same way I look at SM1
You don't think they could've at least cast better actors as Peter and MJ respectively and have Spidey quip more? Or have a better written MJ that doesn't come off as shallow a lot of the time?
We havent seen an accurate portrayal of Batman even.Will you give Nolan's Batman any less credit because of that?
Same can be said about Raimi's spidey
He quips from time to time(Let mom and dad talk Jonah,Here's you change,I have a knack for that,Hate those things,I am sheriff around these parts....)
Not enough for most people
Same can be said about Batman,his detective aspect is touched upon on occasions,just not enough
2 problems with that comparison:
1) You're comparing a personality trait with a specific set of skills. Spidey's sense of humor is a personality trait while Batman's detective skills are skills he has acquired over years of training and studying. If a Batman story doesn't require Batman to use detective skills, then it makes sense why he doesn't use detective skills much whereas there is no such thing as a Spider-Man story where he isn't required to use his humor because his humor is not a skill but a personality trait. Spider-Man not wisecracking enough would not be the equivalent of Batman not using enough detective skills but the equivalent of Batman constantly wisecracking throughout an entire movie, which would go against his personality.
2) The first 2 Nolan films are based on stories that take place in Batman's early career as a crimefighter and mirror the skills he had during that time so obviously you can't just jump in and already have Batman as the "Bat-God" of the current comics that can take down almost anyone with prep time. Year One and Long Halloween specifically are the movies BB and TDK are based on respectively. Year One and BB both take place in Bruce's first year as Batman and TLH and TDK both take place in Bruce's second year as Batman. Batman in BB and TDK is not that different from the Batman in Year One and Long Halloween in terms of abilities. Bruce in BB and TDK uses about as many detective skills as he does in YO and TLH which is why the amount and level of detective skills he uses in BB and TDK is acceptable. There is no excuse for TDKR though. It takes place 8 years later and there is no reason why Bruce shouldn't have been the
world's greatest detective by then because he was no longer a rookie crimefighter and was no longer based on the early YO & TLH version of Batman. That's one of the many reasons why I found TDKR very disappointing but that's a topic for another time.
When the movie Reboots,people will bring this up about him.Its only natural,people need to find ways to justify the reboot by bringing out flaws in the previous series,(Im not talking about you,just the general opinion I have after following the movie in this forum)
Of course they will. There will always be people who will compare a reboot to the previous films and will bash the previous films. It's a natural thing for fans to compare a new franchise to the films before it. It's not just with comic book movies but with movies and stories in other forms of medium in general. However, I would argue it works both ways. There still are a lot of people who prefer the Burton films and dislike the Nolan films and people who prefer the Raimi films and dislike the reboot. In either case, some people bring up good arguments to support their opinion while others dont.
In my case, the reason I like TASM has nothing to do with the Raimi films and the reason I like the Nolan films (minus TDKR) has nothing to do with the fact that I disliked the Burton films. Ive had major issues with the Burton films from the beginning as well as the Raimi films. I wanted to see a Spider-Man reboot even before the reboot was officially announced so I doubt that my dislike of the previous franchises comes from their respective reboots.
Dont get me wrong. SM1 and SM2 are by no means bad movies. SM1 is an ok movie and SM2 is a good movie but I always saw them as half-assed Spider-Man movies that couldve adapted the characters better, even for its time.
About Actors and CGI,Raimi was limited my budget.CBMs werent famous at that time so Sony was obviously reluctant to give it a lot of Budget
Noadays even characters like Thor get a 150M budget
There are instances in even TASM where the Green screen in clearly visible,all the fights look too cartoony.Thor has pukeworthy CGI,especially at that part when that metal guy attacks.Ditto with CapAm and TIH(Only Marvel movies having good CGI are IM,IM2 and TA)
BB has terrible terrible fight scenes and the whole train scenes have very bad CGI
CGI is something very difficult to get right,I dont count it as a massive flaw
Raimi got a bigger budget for SM2 and look at the fight scenes.The train fight is still the best fight in CBM history for me
The budget for SM1 was $140 million. Adjust it for inflation and that is equal to Thors budget or more. Yet as much as I think the CGI for Thor couldve looked a lot better, it still looks a lot better than certain scenes in SM1 and the green screen is still less visible.
I had no problems with Captain America and TIHs CGI. I do think the Hulk looks a bit fake at times and that Abomination couldve had a much better look overall but the fight scenes make up for it. That last fight in TIH is the second best fight in a comic book movie so far IMO (the first being the final fight in Avengers).
I cant think of any scenes in TASM that look too cartoony. Thats just me.
I count bad CGI as a massive or minor flaw depending on the characters, story, and genre. A Batman movie, especially a grounded-in-reality Batman movie, does not exactly need that much CGI to begin with. I personally liked the train scenes and think they served in giving Gotham more of a distinct look and I think TDK and TDKRs Gotham didnt look as good as Gotham did in BB due to the train and the narrows not being shown. As for the fight scenes, I really dislike them too. But then I thought about it more and came to the conclusion that Nolan did it to leave it to the audiences perspective about what exactly happens during those scenes. Though I did not like the idea, I respected the decision. Then I thought about it even more and came to the conclusion that there was no way to make the fights in BB the exact length they were and have the audience see everything. I personally think those fights wouldve dragged and been longer than they shouldve been had they been filmed better. And although I understand why Nolan did it and think he vastly improved the action in TDK and TDKR, I still think the action couldve been handled a lot better and what we get isnt anything great. The new CW Green Arrow TV series seriously has better filmed and better choreographed fights than the Nolan films had for the most part (no joke). However, everything else in the Nolan films make up for the fights and the movies were not meant to be big action films to begin with. They were more psychological crime dramas.
I agree on SM2. The special effects and the fights in that movie look great. However, keep this in mind. SM1s budget was around $150 million while SM2s budget was around $200 million. SM1 had around 75% of the budget SM1 had yet SM2 looks at least 3 or 4 times better than SM1. This means they couldve either made SM2 look better than it already did or they couldve done a better job with SM1 from the budget they had.
You raise an interesting question
I have talked about the movie in real life with atleast 50 people,and all of them except 2-3 have said that SM1 was a far better movie
A couple of my friends even refused to watch the movie after hearing WOM even when I offered to pay for their tickets
Except my Sister and a couple of Female friends,I am yet to meet someone in real life who finds TASM better than SM1
True Story
Fair enough. It works the opposite way for me. Almost everyone I talked to in the real world (friends, family members, random people, etc.) said they liked TASM more. Maybe its because I live in Canada. Lol
Part of the reason why many people refused to see it is because the reboot came out too soon. I still hold to that opinion. I think they shouldve waited a bit longer before rebooting because I knew the movie would get tons of backlash simply for being a reboot, even more backlash than the standard level of backlash that the standard reboot gets.
Spidey has 3/4
As I said before,MCU doesnt deserve to be called the pinacle of CB movie making,and should not be taken as an inspiration for Spider-man
Theyre not the pinnacle of CB movies (that would be TDK at the moment) but a couple of them are definitely up there or at least The Avengers and Iron Man are (and also The Incredible Hulk IMO). And no, Spider-Man should not take inspiration from them. What I meant is that we deserved to get a Spider-Man movie that stays true to the characters and mythos just as much as the MCU movies stood true to the characters and mythos of the comics and characters they adapted.
As I said you have to look at both sides of the coins
There would be a dozen more changes in the movie besides the special effects.At that time CBMs were seen as fun movies which is why Raimi took that route and that is the reason why you feel some dialogues as cringe worthy
Its fair to say that if he made the movie today,he would have updated the tone and plot according to today's expectations
The Avengers is the most fun comic book movie ever made and I dont feel it to be cringeworthy.
I was talking about the general audience. If the general audience saw the movie today for the first time, would most of them still like it as much as they liked it in 2002? In fact, scrap the idea of Raimi just making the movie now. Lets say it was made in 2002 but it was only released now for the first time as the lost Spider-Man movie. Would the general public and comic book fans alike still like the movie as much as the movie is liked? I think not. And the main reason why I think comic book fans specifically wouldnt like it as much is not due to the campy tone or the rushed origin but due to things like Spidey not wisecracking enough, MJ being portrayed badly, stuff like Peter giving his legal name at the wrestling match which they could use to track him and find out hes Spider-Man, etc. Basically, people today wouldnt have overlooked a lot of the problems SM1 has in general from an adaptation point of view like they did back in 2002. It wouldve been bashed harder than TASM was.
the biggest misconception on SHH do you people even watch the raimi films because i constantly see this toby was wise cracking sorry he didn't go all ryan reynolds on you but he was wise cracking
