World Update! Maguire or Garfield?

Who is better at playing the character?

  • Andrew Garfield

  • Tobey Maguire


Results are only viewable after voting.

Green Goblin

Crawling on walls
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
6,500
Reaction score
1,393
Points
103
Seeing as the other threads talk about this here is an updated version because the old one from the last two years has vannished recently lol.

Garfield for both. Equal in high school but the college years were done better in ASM2. Spidey is also done better.
 
Nick Hammond. :o

Nah, I prefer Garfield's Spidey, and some aspects of his Peter.
 
Maguire

The new movies are pretty meh IMO. I want to like them, but what a disappointment TASM2 was. I thought TASM had enough problems already, i figured they'd surely correct a lot of the problems from that first movie... Garfield's Spider-Man is better, but I don't like his Peter.
 
How do I add the function to see who voted what?
 
I can't really vote.

I prefer Andrew's Spidey, hands down. Whoever played the best Peter, though... Man, I can't decide.

Andrew's Peter is real cool and honestly pretty likable, to me.

But Tobey's Peter... I have a soft spot for him. It's probably due to nostalgia, but I also find his character absolutely hilarious (in a good way).

I have no idea what to vote.
 
I can't really vote.

I prefer Andrew's Spidey, hands down. Whoever played the best Peter, though... Man, I can't decide.

Andrew's Peter is real cool and honestly pretty likable, to me.

But Tobey's Peter... I have a soft spot for him. It's probably due to nostalgia, but I also find his character absolutely hilarious (in a good way).

I have no idea what to vote.

Basee it purely on acting abilities if ya can't decide ;)
 
Oh...

Well, then Andrew, hands down.
emperor-palpatine.jpg

*Emperor voice*
"Goooood choice young SpideyK..."
 
Just so people know this is the thread from now on.
 
Maguire's Peter actually had a personal, professional, and scholastic life to speak of, and his performance reflected the challenges of balancing those with his secret life as Spidey. There was a sincerity to his performance that Garfield has yet to match for me, and it's a travesty that several of the important aspects of Peter's life are glossed over in the new movies. Aside from that, Garfield's Peter is a tad too dependent on Gwen to shine at all. I'm worried more than ever for the third movie because of this (among many other reasons), as the rest of what makes him Peter Parker hasn't been explored in any sort of meaningful way. Tobey wins here across the board.

In response to the OP, I'm not sure how you can say that the college years were done better in the new movie. The character actually went to school, did homework, and interacted with classmates and the staff in the old trilogy. So far in TASM, college life, as well as the Bugle, has been relegated to a singular line of dialogue. Speaking of which, I'll take this time to say that neither movie really captured what made the college years special for Peter. This particular period of his life is where he came out of his shell; it didn't spontaneously happen at high school graduation after a pair of forgotten tragedies and a broken promise. :dry: The Harry, Flash, MJ, and Gwen dynamic was solid gold on the pages, and even though college was fairly important to Peter in the previous trilogy, it was used more as a device to highlight his struggles. In this new film, it was an afterthought. Still hasn't been properly explored on the silver screen if you ask me.

As for the portrayal of Spider-Man, right off the bat I'll give Garfield a nod as he looks excellent in the costume (either one). He really has an ideal Spider-Man body type, and although I do think that Tobey looked fine in each movie, Andrew simply looks better. Enough said on that. He also has a great voice for the character; he exudes confidence and excitement whenever he speaks in the costume, which is absolutely essential for the character. This is probably the one area where I think Tobey is really lacking as Spider-Man; it was a bit tough to buy into him at times when he spoke, as his delivery wasn't always on point. Aesthetically, Garfield wins.

Now I'd like to give my 2 cents about Spidey's quick-witted personality. A lot of people dish on Tobey's interpretation of the character, but I don't think it was bad at all, just subdued. He had plenty of quips and one-liners, they simply weren't as overblown as what we've seen in the new movies, which brings me to my next point. As I've said several times before, the opposite extreme is never the answer to a perceived problem. Scenes with the car thief and the Rhino highlight this perfectly for me. In the former, the whole issue was taken way too far, and it felt as if the filmmakers were simply doing it to show off their hilarious, edgy new Spider-Man. Didn't work for me. With the Rhino, they somehow managed to turn it up to 11, with Spider-Man clowning around in the back of a van with plutonium, and then practically rehearsing a stand-up comedy routine to the villain while cars are being rammed and pancaked all over the streets. Let's not forget that this is in broad daylight with countless people in danger. There are other examples, but these are the two that I found to be the most grating. Spider-Man is a wise guy, but the stuff we saw on display in these two movies was just too much. It was both irresponsible and inappropriate , and quite frankly, Spider-Man should know better than that. If anything, he reminded me more of Deadpool, and that ain't Spider-Man. I'll go ahead and say, however, that this is more a problem with the writing than it is anything else (like most of the problems with these movies). The creative team just doesn't seem to understand when to rein it in more often than not.

I'll give Andrew the benefit of the doubt and say that he has a higher ceiling, but the writing has to be there for him to live up to his potential, bar none. His heart is in the right place; he's obviously very passionate about the character, so it's unfortunate to see that the crew around him doesn't seem to share his enthusiasm and dedication.
 
Maguire's Peter actually had a personal, professional, and scholastic life to speak of, and his performance reflected the challenges of balancing those with his secret life as Spidey. There was a sincerity to his performance that Garfield has yet to match for me, and it's a travesty that several of the important aspects of Peter's life are glossed over in the new movies. Aside from that, Garfield's Peter is a tad too dependent on Gwen to shine at all. I'm worried more than ever for the third movie because of this (among many other reasons), as the rest of what makes him Peter Parker hasn't been explored in any sort of meaningful way. Tobey wins here across the board.

In response to the OP, I'm not sure how you can say that the college years were done better in the new movie. The character actually went to school, did homework, and interacted with classmates and the staff in the old trilogy. So far in TASM, college life, as well as the Bugle, has been relegated to a singular line of dialogue. Speaking of which, I'll take this time to say that neither movie really captured what made the college years special for Peter. This particular period of his life is where he came out of his shell; it didn't spontaneously happen at high school graduation after a pair of forgotten tragedies and a broken promise. :dry: The Harry, Flash, MJ, and Gwen dynamic was solid gold on the pages, and even though college was fairly important to Peter in the previous trilogy, it was used more as a device to highlight his struggles. In this new film, it was an afterthought. Still hasn't been properly explored on the silver screen if you ask me.

As for the portrayal of Spider-Man, right off the bat I'll give Garfield a nod as he looks excellent in the costume (either one). He really has an ideal Spider-Man body type, and although I do think that Tobey looked fine in each movie, Andrew simply looks better. Enough said on that. He also has a great voice for the character; he exudes confidence and excitement whenever he speaks in the costume, which is absolutely essential for the character. This is probably the one area where I think Tobey is really lacking as Spider-Man; it was a bit tough to buy into him at times when he spoke, as his delivery wasn't always on point. Aesthetically, Garfield wins.

Now I'd like to give my 2 cents about Spidey's quick-witted personality. A lot of people dish on Tobey's interpretation of the character, but I don't think it was bad at all, just subdued. He had plenty of quips and one-liners, they simply weren't as overblown as what we've seen in the new movies, which brings me to my next point. As I've said several times before, the opposite extreme is never the answer to a perceived problem. Scenes with the car thief and the Rhino highlight this perfectly for me. In the former, the whole issue was taken way too far, and it felt as if the filmmakers were simply doing it to show off their hilarious, edgy new Spider-Man. Didn't work for me. With the Rhino, they somehow managed to turn it up to 11, with Spider-Man clowning around in the back of a van with plutonium, and then practically rehearsing a stand-up comedy routine to the villain while cars are being rammed and pancaked all over the streets. Let's not forget that this is in broad daylight with countless people in danger. There are other examples, but these are the two that I found to be the most grating. Spider-Man is a wise guy, but the stuff we saw on display in these two movies was just too much. It was both irresponsible and inappropriate , and quite frankly, Spider-Man should know better than that. If anything, he reminded me more of Deadpool, and that ain't Spider-Man. I'll go ahead and say, however, that this is more a problem with the writing than it is anything else (like most of the problems with these movies). The creative team just doesn't seem to understand when to rein it in more often than not.

I'll give Andrew the benefit of the doubt and say that he has a higher ceiling, but the writing has to be there for him to live up to his potential, bar none. His heart is in the right place; he's obviously very passionate about the character, so it's unfortunate to see that the crew around him doesn't seem to share his enthusiasm and dedication.

Great post.

To the emboldened...I guess maybe I just don't see it the same way and feel like people that do have issues with that scene, I've seen many comments similar to yours, are exaggerating the details. If you felt it was out of place, that's fine but I really liked that whole opening bit.
 
Yea it's funny to see people complain about him quiping considering the lack of quips was a big reason for some not liking the Maguire version.
 
Last edited:
Great post.

To the emboldened...I guess maybe I just don't see it the same way and feel like people that do have issues with that scene, I've seen many comments similar to yours, are exaggerating the details. If you felt it was out of place, that's fine but I really liked that whole opening bit.

Hey no doubt, I'm glad you did and I'm not trying to insinuate that you shouldn't, my point was that it was excessive and too "showy" like quite a few other things in this franchise.

It just seems that there's a lot of pandering to the audience going on, as if they just need us to notice all of these little details, rather than implementing them more naturally into the characters, plot, and setting. Again, glad you liked it and all, but I think it's tough to argue that it wasn't over the top. It was a dazzling scene without question, I just don't think it was done with the best of intentions.
 
I like Andrew Garfield better as Spider-Man but I think the Toby Magurie movies are better
 
Movie quality aside, I heard how Toby talks in the games, and he could have been a better Peter Parker than Andrew is
Andrew has better moves as Spider-Man, that's one thing he got better than Toby

I'm sticking to Toby being the Peter Parker/Spider-Man I prefer
 
Toby Maguire.

I can't like or relate to Andrew Garfield's rude hipster Peter Parker.
 
Are we talking about who acted the scenes better or who played the better written Peter?

Honestly, I adore both iterations of Peter Parker so far as they both provide different perspectives of Peter's life, Toby's Parker is more complete in what he does, Andrew's in what he feels. We could probably talk about it for days, but I think both of them were fantastic iterations of the character we know and love.

Toby's spidey however, is blocky, a little lethargic and just a bit more dull. Andrew's spidey is charismatic, agile and as if the comic book spiderman has ripped himself from the pages, and delighted us with his prescence on-screen.

In terms of actual acting, Andrew Garfield is given more to work with, and as a result, we see more sides of peter, instead of Toby's, which at times drifts too far into him just speaking softly, sometimes deviating into short bursts of rage. I think the clocktower scene was packed with emotion, and I think it trancended any challenges Toby Parker had to face, and I don't think Toby Macguire gave us anything as genuine or heartbreaking.

Jumping around a bit, I think Garfield's relationships with the other actors made him stand out a little more than Macguires.

I can't decide, probably Garfield at the moment, could be macguire tomorrow. Peter Parker is so diverse, and the ways you can portray him are diverse, and multiple different ways can work.
 
Maguire

The new movies are pretty meh IMO. I want to like them, but what a disappointment TASM2 was. I thought TASM had enough problems already, i figured they'd surely correct a lot of the problems from that first movie...

this...
 
It has to be Garfield for me although I do agree that Toby's Parker had more day to day issues to deal with such as school and work that was a lot more inline with what Parker from the comics has always dealt with
 
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"