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

[Sardaukar]

Three things I didn't like about Raimi's Spider-Man:

1. Organic Webshooters
2. Power Rangers GG
3. MJ was Gwen Stacy in everything but name

Despite these things, I preferred Raimi's flick because it was more faithful to the spirit of the comic (imo) and a lot more fun.

 

[TheWallCrawler]

No matter how much one enjoyed TASM (I really enjoyed it, 9.5/10) I think that we can all agree on the fact that this film felt like a prequel to the full fledged Spidey-film that will be, and personally, I can't wait! I'm confident that they will overcome the script flaws, and potentially it could be mind blowing!

 

[Jexx]

Three things I didn't like about Raimi's Spider-Man:

1. Organic Webshooters
2. Power Rangers GG
3. MJ was Gwen Stacy in everything but name

Despite these things, I preferred Raimi's flick because it was more faithful to the spirit of the comic (imo) and a lot more fun.

In 'everything'? I didn't know she was Pete's intelligent equal.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Three things I didn't like about Raimi's Spider-Man:

1. Organic Webshooters
2. Power Rangers GG

That was a cowl for an armor
The unused design looks too much like a Power Ranger character, more than the one we saw in film

3. MJ was Gwen Stacy in everything but name

About this point:
She started as Liz Allen in being Flash's girlfriend
She moved to Harry but cared most about Peter (early comics MJ)
Almost married John Jameson (she's that girlfriend made for John boy in ASM 124, short lived)neither MJ nor Gwen like

 

[Jexx]

She still didn't act like MJ, I think he meant that she acted like Gwen. I don't see that, but my experience with Gwen is from Spectacular Spidey, so I dunno.

 

[the.wolf]

Yep. Webb's is better, in my opinion.

Especially because it lacks what's been called "Tobey Face."

I believed all of Garfield's emotions.

Gwen Stacy. In the third movie, she was just a passing character who could have had more of an impact, but she's just used as a make-my-ex-jealous device.

In this movie, the character is used a lot better, in my opinion.

I liked both Aunt Mays. Rosemary Harris and Sally Field did a great job.

I liked Martin Sheen's Uncle Ben more. You saw how Uncle Ben was more of a father in this movie.

Whereas, in the SM1 he is shown as Peter's father right before he dies. So his character wasn't really developed.

Rhys' Connors is more believable as a guy who's bent on growing his arm back, which is something that was never showed in the past three movies.

Especially, because it seemed like they didn't know what to do with his character in SM1-3.

First, he fired Peter for being late in SM1, and then he's his teacher in college.

I just couldn't stomach that, it's me being nitpicky, I guess.

 

[LegendAssemble]

Amazing Spider-Man just isn't what the Raimi films were, I mean look at the box office, it's losing to ICE AGE 4 in its second week! Don't get me wrong, I loved the movie, but it just felt hollow. It was just a popcorn flick that doesn't have the same effect with multiple viewings. It doesn't hit you the way the Raimi films, especially Spider-Man 2 did. I really want to be excited and on edge about AMS 2 but I'm not, well not the way I am about Iron Man 3, Avengers 2, or even DKR (that only is only last because I don't like Nolan on a personal level, despite being one of the best directors of our time).

 

[LegendAssemble]

Yep. Webb's is better, in my opinion.

Especially because it lacks what's been called "Tobey Face."

I believed all of Garfield's emotions.

I agree he's a great actor but Tobey wasn't a bad actor, infact I'm pretty sure he wasn't doing much acting haha.

Gwen Stacy. In the third movie, she was just a passing character who could have had more of an impact, but she's just used as a make-my-ex-jealous device.

I recall Venom kidnapping her instead of Mary Jane in an earlier script but the studio opting for MJ AGAIN instead.

In this movie, the character is used a lot better, in my opinion.

Not really a fair comparison concidering this is building without Mary Jane at all, but I definitely say Stone's Gwen>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dunst's MJ.

I liked both Aunt Mays. Rosemary Harris and Sally Field did a great job.

They were both good, Harris was more like classic and Field was more like Ultimate, however I didn't like how Harris' Aunt May was like Yoda in Spider-Man 3, just because she was Peter's voice of reason in 2.

I liked Martin Sheen's Uncle Ben more. You saw how Uncle Ben was more of a father in this movie.

I disagree but then again I never really had a father figure so I don't know if Uncle Ben was really acting the way a father should or not.

Whereas, in the SM1 he is shown as Peter's father right before he dies. So his character wasn't really developed.

I don't know I liked in SM1 when the last thing Peter tells him is he needs to "stop trying to be! (his father)" and then Ben dies and when Norman tells Peter "He's been like a father to him and he needs to be a son to him now" Peter tells him he had a father "his name was Ben Parker". I really thought the new movie screwed up the Death of Ben. Peter didn't learn much from it, he wasn't that innocent kid who was suddenly burdened with responsibility (similar to the way you feel when youre pushed into the real world when youre that age.)

Rhys' Connors is more believable as a guy who's bent on growing his arm back, which is something that was never showed in the past three movies.

Especially, because it seemed like they didn't know what to do with his character in SM1-3.

First, he fired Peter for being late in SM1, and then he's his teacher in college.

I disagree because he could have easily been Peters professor and have fired him. Not all college professors are tenured, a lot of them teach as a hobby or on the side, my step father is one of the top local bankruptcy attorneys but he also teaches at a local university. It's not a stretch to say conners does the same. However I agree Rhys' Connors was better, I couldn't have bought him as the Lizard in the old films.

I just couldn't stomach that, it's me being nitpicky, I guess.

kinda but I see where you're coming from.

 

[spider-neil]

Amazing Spider-Man just isn't what the Raimi films were, I mean look at the box office, it's losing to ICE AGE 4 in its second week! Don't get me wrong, I loved the movie, but it just felt hollow. It was just a popcorn flick that doesn't have the same effect with multiple viewings. It doesn't hit you the way the Raimi films, especially Spider-Man 2 did. I really want to be excited and on edge about AMS 2 but I'm not, well not the way I am about Iron Man 3, Avengers 2, or even DKR (that only is only last because I don't like Nolan on a personal level, despite being one of the best directors of our time).

ICE AGE 3 was absolutely massive and ASM is a reboot, ASM getting knocked down to number 2 isn't really a surprise. If ASM 2 underpeforms at the box office then you can been concerned.

Raimi's movies were beloved and there was apathy towards the reboot that retreads old ground if the sequel doesn't tear up the box office despite being completely new and fresh (isn't retreading old ground unless Peter loses his powers which I doubt) then we can start to say Spidey losing his place in the public hearts.

ASM has made over 500m WW despite loads of people saying they weren't interested in this movie, I find that incredible.

 

[Gianakin_]

I'm a person who likes taking sides in general, but this is the first I'm going to say that I like both equally. They both did things right and they both f**ked up. But I will say that Webb's version has more potential to launch the better franchise. Whether Sony lets him (or even keeps him), though...

 

[TheWallCrawler]

Before The Amazing Spider-Man Sony was on the very verge of bankruptcy, do you think that the money from The Amazing Spider-Man is enough to bring them back into the game? Or is there a possibility that they will fall and Marvel will get the rights before TASM 2?

 

[Jexx]

You know, with how much Mary Jane gets taken hostage in the Raimi movies, you would think the police would suspect Peter as Spider-Man since they've been seen together frequently enough to warrant that.

 

[Jexx]

Before The Amazing Spider-Man Sony was on the very verge of bankruptcy, do you think that the money from The Amazing Spider-Man is enough to bring them back into the game? Or is there a possibility that they will fall and Marvel will get the rights before TASM 2?

Oh geeze.. if Marvel gets the rights back, would Marvel even be able to continue TASM? I know sometimes stuff like that happens.

 

[TheWallCrawler]

Oh geeze.. if Marvel gets the rights back, would Marvel even be able to continue TASM? I know sometimes stuff like that happens.

They would definitely continue the series, but they would change the costume a bit, and also try a little different tone (I think)

Marvel is probably smart enough to realize that if Spider-Man got rebooted, no matter who did it, everyone would just boo to that decision. So, they would do a sequel, but try their own things with it

 

[spider-neil]

would bet any money that if/when Disney get the rights the only thing that will change will be the costume to make it a little more traditional and Spidey will appear in the Avengers. No way on this earth would they reboot the movie, absolutely NO CHANCE.

 

[Jexx]

I like the costume the way it is :/

 

[TheWallCrawler]

I like the costume the way it is :/

I can promise you, if Marvel gets the rights back, they will change the costume

I mean, the costume is probably changed in the next movie even if it's still made by Sony. Yes, you could argue that in these movies they change the costume when the story requires it, but even Christopher Nolan said this:
"We wanted to change the Batman suit for TDK, and then we realized that there's a story reason for it too, which is great"

Whether it's a good reason or a half-assed one, I'm like 80% sure that they will upgrade the look, and if Marvel gets to continue this series they will probably change the costume almost entirely

 

[Smegger56]

I'll be honest, I don't want Marvel to get the rights back while this spiderman version is on the go.

I want to see how this version goes before Spidey returns to Marvel, if he does.

 

[Jexx]

Well, I wouldn't mind a change to the suit, but I don't want it to completely deviate from the look and feel of this movie.

I loved the fact that he's using sneakers and that the eyes are yellow. :/

 

[spider-neil]

I'll be honest, I don't want Marvel to get the rights back while this spiderman version is on the go.

I want to see how this version goes before Spidey returns to Marvel, if he does.

And you would see the story play out. If rights changed hands the change would be almost transparant to the general audience.
Disney by and large don't make changes for the sake of making changes.

 

[Jexx]

Not necessarily, the tone of the movie would probably be less grounded..

 

[spider-neil]

Not necessarily, the tone of the movie would probably be less grounded..

I just don't see them changing a thing. I really didn't see the Spidey universe being any different from the Avengers uninverse. Put it this way, if Fury had turned up in the closing credits (and how I wish that had happened) I would buy it where as Nolan's Batman turning up in MoS would feel odd to say the least.

 

[TheWallCrawler]

And you would see the story play out. If rights changed hands the change would be almost transparant to the general audience.
Disney by and large don't make changes for the sake of making changes.

Making changes because they want to see something in a Spider-Man movie isn't change for the sake of change. Changing a costume design just so it would be different from the previous trilogy is changing for the sake of changing

that being said, I love the new costume. But if Marvel got it's hands on Spidey again and they continued this series, the costume would change. It's pretty naive to say otherwise

 

[Jexx]

Well, personally, changing the costume for the sake of changing the costume is realistic.

If I was a superhero, I know that I would be changing my costume.

 

[Visualiza]

Well, personally, changing the costume for the sake of changing the costume is realistic.

If I was a superhero, I know that I would be changing my costume.

Spider-Man's costume is pretty iconic, though. There really was no good reason for it to be so drastically different other than to differentiate it fro the Raimi films.

They could've simply gotten rid of the raised webbing, altered the hues and values of the colors, changed the spider on the back, and either widened or condensed the web pattern. Subtle changes that would have made a difference but still kept the iconic look. I actually like the new costume; it looks awesome. Still doesn't change the fact that it wasd a poorly conceived idea to change it in the first place.