Sequels Tobey Maguire was miscast as Spider-Man

[Frodo]

I thought he was good though in part 3 he seemed to overact at certain points which is more of a fault of the script and the direction. Other then that I think he was an execellent choice . The only actors I think were miscast were THC and Topher Grace.

As for the humor thing ,again ,that has to do with the script. One liners work as long as they're funny. Look at the Die Hard films , Willis was cracking jokes every five seconds and they usually get big laughs , and those films are far darker then the Spiderman films.

I don't think there would be any problems in returning Spiderman's trademark humor and sarcasim to film , the lines just have to be good and not clunky.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Well, I don't think that Maguire was miscast. He did a few one liners in the Spidey movies, and I think he pulled them off just fine.

As much as I adore the wisecracking Spidey in the comics and the cartoons, I don't think that the constant one liners would have worked well in the movies. I can just picture regular movie-goers saying stuff like, "Ugh, why can't he just shut up?! I just want to see him fight!"

For example, people just can't convince me that the train fight in Spider-Man 2 would have been better if Spidey had just delivered quips every five seconds. It would have gotten old very quickly.

Cutting the quips out of Spider-man takes away a vital part of the character. It's not just cutting humor, it's compromising Spider-man himself.

Raimi failed to grasp the duality between Peter Parker and Spider-man. When Peter puts on the Spider-man mask, he can act the way he can't as Peter Parker. He doesn't just start shooting off quips, it's almost a whole personality change. He's cocky, confident, and funny. Everything the real Peter Parker isn't. Spider-man is Peter's escape from his normal life. When you cut out Spider-man's personality (which was basically done in the films) you lose an entertaining character.

And I think quips would have worked fine in the train fight sequence, if they were written right. Not just corny insults, I'm talking more about the kind of humor Bendis writes for Spidey in USM. In that Spidey does more then fire random insults; it's more of a sarcastic commentary on the villain, pointing out the ludicrousness of their appearance and personalities. That kind of humor would have worked fine.

Also, I think it could have deepened the drama in that situation. Have Spidey start out with his usual sarcasm, and as the battle grows more intense, he begins to stop talking. That conveys the message "hey he's really in trouble." Because Spidey only shuts up on two occasions, when he realizes he's really in over his head, or when he's extremely pissed. His silence would show the audience that this isn't one of his normal fights, because Spidey's not treating it with the lightheartedness he usually does. It would add to the seriousness of the situation.


***edit
I hate being the last post on a page

 

[The Kingpin]

I agree with this thread, I think Jake Glyenhall (however you spell it) would have made a much better spiderman. He could have pulled off the serious dramatic roles as peter as well as the wit of spiderman.

 

[sithgoblin]

Though, had Tobey not been casted, I think Topher Grace would have made a good Peter Paker. I can imagine him pulling off the quips better then Tobey would have (had he been given the chance).

I agree with this thread, I think Jake Glyenhall (however you spell it) would have made a much better spiderman. He could have pulled off the serious dramatic roles as peter as well as the wit of spiderman.

I agree with you both, they would have been good Spider-men.

 

[sithgoblin]

Cutting the quips out of Spider-man takes away a vital part of the character. It's not just cutting humor, it's compromising Spider-man himself.

Raimi failed to grasp the duality between Peter Parker and Spider-man. When Peter puts on the Spider-man mask, he can act the way he can't as Peter Parker. He doesn't just start shooting off quips, it's almost a whole personality change. He's cocky, confident, and funny. Everything the real Peter Parker isn't. Spider-man is Peter's escape from his normal life. When you cut out Spider-man's personality (which was basically done in the films) you lose an entertaining character.

And I think quips would have worked fine in the train fight sequence, if they were written right. Not just corny insults, I'm talking more about the kind of humor Bendis writes for Spidey in USM. In that Spidey does more then fire random insults; it's more of a sarcastic commentary on the villain, pointing out the ludicrousness of their appearance and personalities. That kind of humor would have worked fine.

Also, I think it could have deepened the drama in that situation. Have Spidey start out with his usual sarcasm, and as the battle grows more intense, he begins to stop talking. That conveys the message "hey he's really in trouble." Because Spidey only shuts up on two occasions, when he realizes he's really in over his head, or when he's extremely pissed. His silence would show the audience that this isn't one of his normal fights, because Spidey's not treating it with the lightheartedness he usually does. It would add to the seriousness of the situation.


***edit
I hate being the last post on a page

Spot on!

 

[Visionary]

And I think quips would have worked fine in the train fight sequence, if they were written right. Not just corny insults, I'm talking more about the kind of humor Bendis writes for Spidey in USM. In that Spidey does more then fire random insults; it's more of a sarcastic commentary on the villain, pointing out the ludicrousness of their appearance and personalities. That kind of humor would have worked fine.

That would have f---ed up the entire train sequence. That was no time for any hero to be joking. And let's face it, most of the jokes Spidey spew are corny.

I agree with this thread, I think Jake Glyenhall (however you spell it) would have made a much better spiderman. He could have pulled off the serious dramatic roles as peter as well as the wit of spiderman.

How the hell would he have done that, if it wasn't in the script?

 

[sithgoblin]

That would have f---ed up the entire train sequence. That was no time for any hero to be joking. And let's face it, most of the jokes Spidey spew are corny.
How the hell would he have done that, if it wasn't in the script?

Because it WAS in the script. "Here's your CHANGE!". Both Topher and Jake could have delivered it better.

And like we said, it's not just about the wisecracks, it's about his attitude. Tobey's Spider-man isn't confident enough.

 

[The Kingpin]

That would have f---ed up the entire train sequence. That was no time for any hero to be joking. And let's face it, most of the jokes Spidey spew are corny.
How the hell would he have done that, if it wasn't in the script?

I could see him making the jokes and acting as spider-man better then mcguire. he just didnt seem to have the right personality.

 

[Infinity9999x]

That would have f---ed up the entire train sequence. That was no time for any hero to be joking. And let's face it, most of the jokes Spidey spew are corny.
How the hell would he have done that, if it wasn't in the script?

And how exactly would they have f---ed it up? Does adding dialog suddenly make action look worse? And as I said, it wouldn't be for the whole train sequence. As the battle grows more intense, Spidey gets quieter until he's not speaking at all because he's just focusing on staying alive.

And I think the corniness of the jokes depend on the writer. The few one-liners Spidey had in the movies (aside from the "cute outfit, who made it for you, your husband?") were all very corny, but as I said, the cracks in USM are actually fairly intelligent insults, and come off more "witty" then corny.

 

[DACrowe]

I have already presented an iron clad case as to why I am right.

Simply because you think by fanboy whining that you have proven an opinion to be factually right is why you are wrong and thus why you fail. It is all opinion and you state your's like it is superior.

BTW, 3 of the 5 movies you named were exact recreations of comic book stories, two of them panel by panel. You know as well as I that you cannot do SM in such a way. I could argue why I think Maguire was excellent if you look past cosmetic complaints, but it would futile, so I'll end here.

 

[sithgoblin]

Simply because you think by fanboy whining that you have proven an opinion to be factually right is why you are wrong and thus why you fail. It is all opinion and you state your's like it is superior.

BTW, 3 of the 5 movies you named were exact recreations of comic book stories, two of them panel by panel. You know as well as I that you cannot do SM in such a way. I could argue why I think Maguire was excellent if you look past cosmetic complaints, but it would futile, so I'll end here.

Poor little fan boy. It is so obvious you have no ground to stand on when you attack my person instead of my evidence.

And what's your point about the films I like? You said there is no way I could ever like a comic film (a stupid thing to say), and I proved you wrong. So now you try and write that off by saying the only reason I like them is because they are close to the comics? No s**t, Sherlock!

By the way, only two of them - as you so aptly pointed out - were shot for shot recreations, so your entire argument is invalidated anyway.

Come back when you're ready to have a big boy discussion, instead of playing in the sand box.

 

[DACrowe]

To say something like that you must either be an idiot, or you don't understand the English language and therefore don't know what you are saying.

You insulted me first, buddy.

(Que a series of "I'm not your buddy friend, he's not your friend, guy, etc.)

And I stated you will never be satisfied because you want the artist to completely recreate what you read. Sin City (which was great) and 300 (which I did not care for, though it is just opinion) are extreme examples though of another author trying to completely duplicate the artist's work into another medium. I say that neither may succeed as a fully as a film but the former is a brilliant translation and so well made and done it doesn't matter.

Anyway, my point was that unless we have that extreme circumstance which will not happen with a character that has been written differently and contradicted himself from artist to artist for 40 years in the comics. Maguire and consequently Raimi chose the early issues (of a more geeky Parker, it must be noted) to adapt and then made the character their own. You do not like how they made the character their own because there were some obvious transitions just not from medium, but from creativity put into it by the director, writers and actor. I think Maguire gave an amazing performance as Spidey in the first two movies and was still quite good in SM3. And I speak as a whole just not the masked persona.

You disagree, fine. You still enjoy SM2, but as I pointed out you were not satisfied by the actor's performance because it was not how you envisioned and do not want to give him way to recreate the character to both work for him, the film, the audience AND the source material. So, you call him miscast. My point is you will most likely not be happy with any replacement in future installments, because they will have their own ideas about the character to infuse into him to make it work.

But you resort to throwing mud and feeling good about yourself. Congrats.

 

[Odin's Lapdog]

Tobey Maguire was miscast as Spider-Man. His Peter Parker was good - no complaints there - but his Spider-man was severly lacking. Spider-man is supposed to have an easy going, yet razor sharp wit. He's supposed to be funny - that's a major part of his charatcer: his funny one liners.

Tobey was never able to pull that off.

When you look at this classic image of Spider-man, do you see Tobey's interpretation? Seriously think about the comic character here. Look at it objectively and see the character that is Spider-man, and then consider Tobey's acting performance.

I don't see Tobey's Spider-man. I see a Spider-man whose essence has yet to be captured on film. I hope now that Spider-man 3 was poorly recieved, it will give another filmmaker and actor an opportunity to do both Peter AND Spider-man justice.

I agree with you there except for the fact that his peter parker was also a lil off

parker was a nerd but he was an arrogant nerd without a viable means to express his superiority to those who attacked him. He loved those close to him but others that mocked him (everyday people and bullies or generally anyone who he thought was better), he really wanted to put them in their place.

tobey maguire's peter parker was ultimately happy still being put down by peeps and being a bumbling idiot as long as he had MJ, that was his only motivation. Even now, he's never used any of his spidey sucess to help out his aunt financially, he prefers to rent out an apartment instead of help her with bills and is not truelly bothered to see her moving out of her family home, especially after the goblin blew it up.

 

[Venom 1988]

You insulted me first, buddy.

(Que a series of "I'm not your buddy friend, he's not your friend, guy, etc.)

lol

 

[chaseter]

Considering most of the time it was a stunt man underneath the costume....

 

[kjdevlin]

Poor little fan boy. It is so obvious you have no ground to stand on when you attack my person instead of my evidence.

Do you realize that if any spiderman movie had as many one-liners as you would like to expect- it'd be terrible? First of all, this is what the comics and cartoons are for; YOU to enjoy all of those one liners. I think that I heard more jokes within the first two minutes of that video you posted than in an entire stand up act and that's fine, but that's where they belong.

You're probably going to say that that wasn't even your initial argument. To address your "facts", I'll start off by informing you that they aren't facts. They're opinions. YOUR opinions. Observe:

I don't see Tobey's Spider-man. I see a Spider-man whose essence has yet to be captured on film. I hope now that Spider-man 3 was poorly recieved, it will give another filmmaker and actor an opportunity to do both Peter AND Spider-man justice.

Yes. YOU.

You are the one with no grounds in telling everyone that, factually, tobey was miscast and that everyone who thinks he was not- is wrong. Tobey was the main character in all three films. ALL three films did EXCEPTIONALLY well in the box office. In my opinion: factually, he was not miscast.

AND there is no way you could possibly even make the argument that any other acter would have done in better. That's nonsense.

 

[sithgoblin]

Do you realize that if any spiderman movie had as many one-liners as you would like to expect- it'd be terrible? First of all, this is what the comics and cartoons are for; YOU to enjoy all of those one liners. I think that I heard more jokes within the first two minutes of that video you posted than in an entire stand up act and that's fine, but that's where they belong.

You're probably going to say that that wasn't even your initial argument. To address your "facts", I'll start off by informing you that they aren't facts. They're opinions. YOUR opinions. Observe:



Yes. YOU.

You are the one with no grounds in telling everyone that, factually, tobey was miscast and that everyone who thinks he was not- is wrong. Tobey was the main character in all three films. ALL three films did EXCEPTIONALLY well in the box office. In my opinion: factually, he was not miscast.

AND there is no way you could possibly even make the argument that any other acter would have done in better. That's nonsense.

Hasn't anybody told you?

I'm God.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Do you realize that if any spiderman movie had as many one-liners as you would like to expect- it'd be terrible? First of all, this is what the comics and cartoons are for; YOU to enjoy all of those one liners. I think that I heard more jokes within the first two minutes of that video you posted than in an entire stand up act and that's fine, but that's where they belong.

I disagree. I think that a wisecracking Spider-man would be fine, if the jokes are written well and not horribly corny like most of the jokes Spider-man said in the movies. Look at some of the cracks he makes in USM, those could be translated very well to film.

It amazes me when people say that a funny Spider-man would ruin a movie. Not only do they
1) obviously fail to grasp the entire aspect of duality to Spider-man's character, and therefore fundamentally misunderstand the character of Spider-man
2)They also fail to realize that some of the most popular movie franchises IN THE HISTORY OF FILM MAKING incorporate wisecracking characters as the main protagonist or a main character. Franchises such as

Star Wars, Indiana Jones, or Die Hard. All of these movies also happen to have a darker tone then Spider-man, but also feature a wisecracking hero. Obviously humor didn't ruin those movies.

You are the one with no grounds in telling everyone that, factually, tobey was miscast and that everyone who thinks he was not- is wrong. Tobey was the main character in all three films. ALL three films did EXCEPTIONALLY well in the box office. In my opinion: factually, he was not miscast.

AND there is no way you could possibly even make the argument that any other acter would have done in better. That's nonsense.

Well, you could make the argument that another actor would have done better, but there's obviously no way to prove it until we see another actor take a crack at the character. Now, I do agree with you in that I don't really think Tobey was miscast. I think he could have portrayed the Spider-man I wanted, but he obviously couldn't because of the way the movie was directed and the script was written. I do however think other actors could have portrayed the Spider-man I wanted better then Tobey could.

 

[Eggyman]

I don't think he was miscast; I think the character was written wrong. We have examples of him pulling off the one liners, but they were far too few throughout the films.

One of the best oneliners in the tilogy was one that Tobey came up with: 'Guess you haven't heard, I'm the sheriff in these parts.' Pure Spideyness right there

It's just a shame we didn't see more of this

 

[Spider-Fan]

I don't think he was miscast; I think the character was written wrong. We have examples of him pulling off the one liners, but they were far too few throughout the films.

One of the best oneliners in the tilogy was one that Tobey came up with: 'Guess you haven't heard, I'm the sheriff in these parts.' Pure Spideyness right there

It's just a shame we didn't see more of this

Here's your change was also quite nice.

While I think SM3 was closer to the jokes Spidey should have, we still could have had more. However, I can see why someone would limit the amounts (though I as a fan would like to see more).

 

[Visionary]

I disagree. I think that a wisecracking Spider-man would be fine, if the jokes are written well and not horribly corny like most of the jokes Spider-man said in the movies. Look at some of the cracks he makes in USM, those could be translated very well to film.

It amazes me when people say that a funny Spider-man would ruin a movie. Not only do they
1) obviously fail to grasp the entire aspect of duality to Spider-man's character, and therefore fundamentally misunderstand the character of Spider-man
2)They also fail to realize that some of the most popular movie franchises IN THE HISTORY OF FILM MAKING incorporate wisecracking characters as the main protagonist or a main character. Franchises such as

Star Wars, Indiana Jones, or Die Hard. All of these movies also happen to have a darker tone then Spider-man, but also feature a wisecracking hero. Obviously humor didn't ruin those movies.

Yes, it's all about the tone, that's why banter worked in those films.

I hope there are even LESS jokes in Spider-Man 4. They don't work well for most comic book films (they're annoying as hell), unless the movie itself is mostly an adult oriented type film (DIE-HARD/V for Vendetta). I would hate to see a steady stream of banter coming from Spider-Man, especially under the Disney-like mentality that Marvel/Sony has these films under. I wouldn't mind seeing Spidey's witty banter under a mature direction.

Die-Hard, has some intense action, serious threats, realistic death scenes and blood to counter the witty bantering, which is why it works so well. You can't write the script for kids or not to offend parents. Even JJJ's banter is written too damn cute, adding banter to Spidey would only make things...more cutesy.

Perhaps with a new writer, new director, you and I can both get what we want. They have to write SM4's script with an adult frame of mind, not catering to kids to sell toys, which usually sells itself. The bantering works well in the comics and cartoons, but Spidey will look like an ass spewing dodo jokes in a live action movie where "Rain Drops Keep Falling On My Head," is playing in the background, or having Peter Parker performing a solo River Dance.

 

[LegendaryCaleb]

i kinda wish tobey acted like this
[YT]Lyw2ZnbJsJQ[/YT]

but tobey did great!
happy with his performance

 

[Spider-Who?]

Tobey isn't in charge of whether Spider-Man has a razor sharp wit or him being funny. That's the writer's job, Marvel and the director's responsibility. Tobey can only say and do what the script ask of him. This also goes for the next actor who plays Spidey, if it isn't in the script, then there wont be any banter from him either. Having said that, every single actor they cast is going to be a miscast, because you're not placing blame where it belongs.

Has it ever occured to you that Marvel/Sony/Raimi simply didn't want Spider-Man spewing banter, it's not like Marvel don't know he does this, they had to approve of the script in order for Spidey's movies to be filmed.

Personally, I'm not really fond of a bunch of banter in comic book films, especially under this already juvenile setting. It just does work in my eyes, or it make matters worst. Love it in the comic books and cartoons, but seeing it consistantly throughout the Fantastic Four movie, makes me want throw babies from a freakin' rooftop. I loved the witty banter in "DIE-HARD" and "V for Vendetta," because these movies were written with balls. It had mature content/themes to counter its banter, so it doesn't look like your watching a cartoon on speed.

If the movie is written with balls, then I'm all for a witty bantering Spider-Man, and even then it must be timed accordingly.

beautiful.

 

[GoldGoblin]

i kinda wish tobey acted like this
[YT]Lyw2ZnbJsJQ[/YT]

but tobey did great!
happy with his performance

^
Is that a new game?

 

[LegendaryCaleb]

^
Is that a new game?

no...suprisingly its just a marvel video for a website...isnt it cool?