Spider Man (2002) vs The Amazing Spider Man (2012) vs Spider Man Homecoming (2017)

[Tg11]

Out of these 3 Spider Man films, which has the better origin storytelling? For me personally, Sam Raimi's Spider Man (2002) was a true origin film for Spidey especially with Tobey Maguire in that franchise.

 

[Batmannerism]

Out of these 3 Spider Man films, which has the better origin storytelling? For me personally, Sam Raimi's Spider Man (2002) was a true origin film for Spidey especially with Tobey Maguire in that franchise.

Well, Raimi's Spider Man was the best origin story. But, which of those three films did I like the most, that's easily Spider Man :Homecoming. I liked it because it felt like a fresh take on an old story and because it captured what it would be like to be an awkward teenager struggling to prove himself. Plus it had a terrific villain. I loved Dafoe as the incredibly OTT Green Goblin, but Keaton's Vulture was a complicated character, and not entirely unsympathetic.

Where Spider Man 2002 does probably come out on top is the final confrontation between Spidey and The Goblin, the dialogue is pretty cheesy and the effects are very 2002, but it's intense and personal. A bit more so than Spidey vs Vulture and a lot more than Spidey vs the CGI Lizard.

 

[Tg11]

Spidey Homecoming I also have to give the edge to

 

[Fincher]

The Amazing Spider-Man. I didn't like the Raimi origin for much the same reason as I didn't like the Raimi movies in general. It was hammy and corny, and Maguire can't act, and to be honest I think Peter getting his father figure (and his girlfriend, for that matter) killed is unnecessarily dark for superhero films in general, but especially for something as otherwise light as Spider-Man. So I like that the Amazing films toned down / glossed over that stuff. ASM looked better, it was performed better, and it was more believable and engaging, both in and out of the origin aspects of the film.

Homecoming wasn't an origin movie, so there's nothing for me to say there.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Spider-Man Homecoming is an entertaining movie, but Spider-Man edges it out for me. The Uncle Ben stuff and the origin are basically perfect and while it had has some dodgy CGI in parts, I love how Raimi shot New York City. It harkens back to the Lee era of Spider-Man beautifully. I feel like Homecoming is a bit more....disposable and doesn't make as much of an emotional impact. Even if Holland is superior to Maguire.

The Amazing Spider-Man is not even close to either Spider-Man or Homecoming. The narrative is all over the place, Peter is unlikable outside of the Spider-Man costume for large patches of the film, and the movie feels generic. Though it's not without some elements I like, it's easily third banana.

Spider-Man
Spider-Man: Homecoming
The Amazing Spider-Man

 

[Tg11]

With Raimi's 2002 classic it basically showed Spider Man's true origins within its comic accuracy

 

[Nardz937]

Spider-Man 2002. It's genre defining. Game changing. Smooth. Well performed all-round and it feels like the original Stan Lee/Ditko/Romita comics come to life.

TASM is brutally boring. It rehashes the original but in a worse way by how much it drags. Not to mention is butchers some characterizations (most notable Curt Conners).

 

[fan4stic]

The Amazing Spider-Man. I didn't like the Raimi origin for much the same reason as I didn't like the Raimi movies in general. It was hammy and corny, and Maguire can't act, and to be honest I think Peter getting his father figure (and his girlfriend, for that matter) killed is unnecessarily dark for superhero films in general, but especially for something as otherwise light as Spider-Man. So I like that the Amazing films toned down / glossed over that stuff. ASM looked better, it was performed better, and it was more believable and engaging, both in and out of the origin aspects of the film.

Homecoming wasn't an origin movie, so there's nothing for me to say there.

That doesn't happen in Raimi's Spider-Man.

What you say happens in Raimi's movie happens in TASM movies.

 

[Stormborn]

Every live action Spidey film so far has had at least a few flaws.

• Spider-Man (2002) was great for the time. It's a mostly faithful origin story with a lot of heart but the writing was a little camp/clunky by modern standards.
• TASM 1 mostly felt like a repeat of the Raimi origin story with changes (e.g. Lizard instead of Green Goblin) that weren't improvements. Credit where it's due, I did like Garfield a lot more than Maguire though.
  
• Homecoming turned Spider-Man into an Iron Man sidekick who can't win a fight on his own and needs rescuing on multiple occasions. Spider-Man's actual origin (where he got his powers, Uncle Ben etc) doesn't even get a mention.

I'd say the best adaptations out there are Into the Spider Verse, the Spectacular Spider-Man TV series and the PS4 game.

 

[Fincher]

That doesn't happen in Raimi's Spider-Man.

What you say happens in Raimi's movie happens in TASM movies.

I didn't mean to say that it did, just that those were elements of the comics that I was glad the TASM movies toned down.