Me thinks you haven't taken any science classes in high school or know how colleges & universities operate...
Methinks you've never been to school at all- since you clearly can't read. Peter's school in TASM isn't a regular high school- it's a SCIENCE High School. Thus Midtown SCIENCE High School. Those schools require extremely high test scores and academic grades for acceptance. So- again- everyone there would be a science nerd. Flash wouldn't fit, and Peter would've been school President.
Gwen and Peter didn't even talk to each other up till that first scene where she tells him to go to the nurse. He had no way of knowing Gwen had a thing for him before that. Heck, Gwen didn't even fully have legit love feelings for him until the kiss.
Okay- how old are you? Because you sound like a twelve year old, and I'm doing this with someone that young. Obviously Peter and Gwen had spoken before the context of the film. They'd had an entire, albeit distant- history with each other. It's obvious to anyone with reasonable intelligence that when Gwen is frantically trying to calm Flash down- she's doing so because she digs Peter and doesn't want him hurt. Every eye contact they make reflects mutual attraction. Even a high school kid could spot that a mile away. The fact that she accepts his stumbling, bumbling date request, and then further pursues him to have dinner with her says it even more so.
You completely misunderstood the whole burglar thing. Yes, he does do it for revenge at first but by the end of the movie, he no longer feels the need for vengeance. This does not mean he doesn't give a crap about catching the burglar now. It means he believes that all criminals, including the man that killed his uncle, are dangerous criminals that should be brought to justice and that the man who shot his uncle isn't any more important than the average murderer walking the streets. That is what I meant when I said he's no longer fixated on revenge and is fixated more on being Spider-Man for the people that need Spider-Man. That is the exact opposite of him being on a revenge kick or not giving a crap about his uncle's killer that's still out there.
No, I completely understood the burglar thing. And the point is that Webb takes us in a round-about way to get to a point that the comics and Raimi's film made a direct line to. Webb was twisting an convoluting something that didn't need any explanation at all. Which is a lack of skill on his part. Peter giving up his search for the burglar- When- he could've easily captured him immediately after Ben had been shot- is a waste of screen time and waste of story opportunity. That's been my major issue with this reboot. They're wasting time with things that have already been covered, and covered quite adeptly. There are many more Spider-Man stories to tell than the origin and Peter learning the great responsibility lesson. They wanted to focus on the parents? Fine- do that. Don't keep retreading history.
Please explain to me how he is a jerk and a moron.
He takes credit for his father's research.
He blames his parents for dying.
He fights with Ben over nothing.
He doesn't acknowledge that Ben has been his father in absence of Richard.
He doesn't comfort Aunt May after Ben's death.
Gwen tries to comfort him and he brushes her off.
He goes on the meaningless search and destroy mission after Ben's killer.
He runs from the street gang that he could clearly have beaten to a pulp.
He asks Gwen out, and then never takes her out. Gwen has to invite him to dinner.
He goes to dinner and provokes Gwen's father.
As Spidey he provokes the cops. "I just did your job for you"
On the bridge, he takes off his mask to assure the kid he's a normal guy, while lifting a car.
He leaves the other drivers dangling from the bridge.
He wears a mask, yet has a camera with his name on it.
He leaves Stacy to fight the Lizard alone.
He doesn't comfort Gwen when her father dies, and he still disregards her father's dying wish. To explain- Peter certainly could have been at the funeral and comforted Gwen and then explained that he couldn't go on seeing her.
These are what I remember and I won't watch that movie again. Twice was too much.
Now- I will say that it wasn't only Peter that was poorly written. Pretty much every character in the film was miles off base. The entire script was terrible.
Webb said Sony planned a trilogy but that is always how Hollywood works out at first (Raimi said the same thing when SM1 came out) and if Spidey will be integrated in the MCU (which is likely), then it definitely won't end at a trilogy. Marvel said they don't plan to end the MCU anytime soon.
Okay, this is nothing but wishful conjecture on your part. Of course they will continue to make more Spider-Man films, just as they will make more Batman films. But Webb said his story was a trilogy- nothing more need be said.
And to correct you, Peter still struggles with the whole "great power comes great responsibility" even in the early issues after he became Spider-Man. It's not something he fully learned to live by by the end of Amazing Fantasy #15 and the message still comes back every once in a while even today in the modern comics. It is by no means a flaw that the message is revisited in future films.
He did not and does not struggle with it as presented in this film. He contends with himself wondering why he can't ever be happy. Have a life of his own. But he never misunderstands what responsible behavior is- as he does in TASM. Of course, circa 1982 the writing in the comics really began to go down the tubes, and since then Peter has engaged in extremely idiotic behavior, so I'm not really referring to any of that. But again, under Stan Lee's run, Peter always got it. Even in the "Spider-Man No More" story, his lapse was only momentary and again- not because of a lack of comprehension as in TASM- but because he was fed-up with doing a thankless job and concerned that he might even be doing it for the wrong reasons.
Dude, the film made $735 million at the box office while Spider-Man 1 made $821 million. That's not that big of a difference and TASM is still in theatres...
You're comparing box office figures of a film ten years ago. Even Spidey 3's money is from five years ago. In terms of ticket sales, TASM is far- far below the sales generated by the first 3, and this is with a larger release, and a higher budget than all but Spidey 3. International money doesn't count for much since there's only about a 40 percent return on it, versus a 50 percent return on domestic. So the movie has only made about 350 million bucks. But the main point is, that this film didn't generate the level of audience response as the first three. People didn't care about seeing it, because it offered nothing new.
Nah. This film is embarrassingly better than the Raimi films and even more so in the portrayal of Peter/Spidey... [/QUOTE]
Well, you're right, it was certainly embarrassing. Everything else you're saying is merely a matter of opinion. Peter wasn't funny and Spidey's "wisecracks(?)" weren't funny either.
Raimi's films were campy? Where was that? If you want to point to simply light-hearted moments, then there are just as many in TASM.
The problem in your and others' analysis is that people seem to have a generational-cultural shift as to what is acceptable. So, things being presented as more cynical and callous are considered serious while things that are less so are considered campy. The problem is that the bar moves every few years. In Superman '78 Lex Luthor joked about the deaths of innocent millions, while in Batman '89 they actually showed the Joker killing people. So one was then considered campy while the other "dark". Then in Spider-Man the Goblin vaporizes his enemies. So that is considered dark and Batman '89 is now campy. Honestly I don't know what is supposed to make TASM gritty aside from that it was shot a lot at night and maybe that Ben was actually shown being shot, Stacy was shown being disemboweled... Or maybe it's just wishful thinking on the part of fans.
As far as the Goblin and what he wanted- it was stated- POWER. Both via his corporation and by the physical violence of the Goblin himself. He wanted Peter to be his "partner" (nee- underling) and assist him in that. It's a very realistic goal, as we see everyday people, criminal organizations, corporations, nations pursuing that very simple goal. I'm surprised that needed to be spelled out for you. The Lizard's total bat-sh**tery of wanting to turn the world into Lizards may have made sense to you and him, but it was a pretty frickin' stupid concept to build a film around, and was yes- very campy.
D) while Tobey was a half-assed Peter. Tobey acted more like Clark Kent from the Richard Donner films (though less talkative and a bit more whiny in his voice) than he acted as Peter Parker. Garfield got all the important Amazing parts of Peter right with a few aspects from Ultimate incorporated too. The other characters are more like their comic counterparts as well. In terms of tone, this movie got the tone and spirit of the comics better as well. Spider-Man comics aren't exactly dark and gritty like Batman comics (except for a few; Death of Gwen Stacy, Maximum Carnage, Kraven's Last Hunt, etc.) but they're definitely not fun and campy like the Raimi films were. They're pretty serious despite the main character himself always cracking jokes. This film also sets up easter eggs and future plot points better and doesn't follow the old formula that the Raimi films did. The dialogue is done better (the whole stuttering thing while talking to a girl actually WORKED) and the villain has a motivation that made sense to himself unlike GG in the first movie that had no motivation at all. You constantly hear him tell Spidey to "join him" but it is never stated what he wants Spidey to join him for. Join him in killing innocent civilians? Taking over the country? Committing genocide? Compete and team up in the Olympics? It's as if Webb watched the original films, made a whole list of all the flaws they had, and then check marked every single thing as he made the film (though that also caused this film to feel more like a set-up film of greater things to come instead of feeling like a great Spider-Man film). It's definitely no Batman Begins or anything too great but I think from an objective film critic point of view, TASM is superior to SM1 as a movie and in terms of an adaptation.
Some posters here seem to lack brain cells and it's sweet to have guys like you post things that actually make sense.
t:
stop acting like they're the greatest writing on earth. They really arn't. I love stan to death.. but yes, he was full of silly blunders. Stan Lee's era really didn't have much heart ache or drama.. the drama came simply from taking care of aunt-may and paying his rent... which... isn't enough to support any motion media.. cartoon or movie alike. It's fine for a once a month story... there classic stories because they created a hero, and set his world. But... if those stories were released exactly the same today... people would be dogging them left and right over how horribly written they were. I'm sorry.. but that's truth. It's also why stan (god love him) hasn't created any character or story, or comic substantial since he left marvel. His writting imo is a product of the era. And it worked and was very successful then. 
