How was your view of Spider-Man shaped?

[Garlador]

I hadn't shared my view yet, but I feel like it was... well, everything going on in the late 80s, early 90s.

The comics were on fire. The 90s cartoon was extremely popular (though I also had tapes of the '81 cartoon as well). The toyline was huge. My brother and I played a ton of Spider-Man on the Sega Genesis. We basically had everything but a movie, but all that media that we did have really gave me a pretty varied look at different kinds of approaches to what "Spider-Man" meant. He was a hero defined by really great action, really cool villains and anti-heroes, a really captivating love life with Mary Jane, and a sort of... grounded... view of things. He wasn't a "perfect" hero; he lost his temper, he got frustrated, but he rarely got broken. His tenacity to push forward and do right by others I thought was really awesome.

My parents had a broken marriage, so I'll fully admit that as a kid I looked up to Peter and Mary Jane getting all manner of hell thrown their way, having their own conflicts, but always finding the means to endure and grow stronger together. As an adult man now with a wonderful wife, it's strange but honest to admit that I really do cling to those highlights that kept my faith alive growing up. The "families that never gave up", as Spider-Girl's book put it.

[marhawkman]

I hadn't shared my view yet, but I feel like it was... well, everything going on in the late 80s, early 90s.

The comics were on fire. The 90s cartoon was extremely popular (though I also had tapes of the '81 cartoon as well). The toyline was huge. My brother and I played a ton of Spider-Man on the Sega Genesis. We basically had everything but a movie, but all that media that we did have really gave me a pretty varied look at different kinds of approaches to what "Spider-Man" meant. He was a hero defined by really great action, really cool villains and anti-heroes, a really captivating love life with Mary Jane, and a sort of... grounded... view of things. He wasn't a "perfect" hero; he lost his temper, he got frustrated, but he rarely got broken. His tenacity to push forward and do right by others I thought was really awesome.

My parents had a broken marriage, so I'll fully admit that as a kid I looked up to Peter and Mary Jane getting all manner of hell thrown their way, having their own conflicts, but always finding the means to endure and grow stronger together. As an adult man now with a wonderful wife, it's strange but honest to admit that I really do cling to those highlights that kept my faith alive growing up. The "families that never gave up", as Spider-Girl's book put it.

It's like with Superman. I wish I was that inspirational.. but I'm not. But it's what makes Superman special. He's just that great a guy that he can sway even super-villains to his side.

[Agent Z]

I'm a child of the 90s and 2000s. My image of Spider-Man was shaped by the 90s series, the Raimi films and Spectacular Spider-Man. And of course, whatever comics I could get my hands on.

That's one of the tamest things ever put to film.

[Spider-Tiger]

That's one of the tamest things ever put to film.

As compared to the MCU Spider-Man movies?

Obviously these movies aren't raunchy or sexually explicit.

[Agent Z]

As compared to the MCU Spider-Man movies?

No Way Home technically has more sex appeal in the scene where Happy and May catch Peter and MJ in his room when the latter is trying to remove the former's clothes.

The upside down kiss is iconic and well shot but calling it "sexy" is a huge stretch.

Any given scene that has Batman and Catwoman talking has sex appeal, even if they're keeping their clothes on. The Raimi movies are among the most wholesome films in any genre ever made. And that is not a bad thing.

[Spider-Tiger]

No Way Home technically has more sex appeal in the scene where Happy and May catch Peter and MJ in his room when the latter is trying to remove the former's clothes.

The upside down kiss is iconic and well shot but calling it "sexy" is a huge stretch.

Any given scene that has Batman and Catwoman talking has sex appeal, even if they're keeping their clothes on. The Raimi movies are among the most wholesome films in any genre ever made. And that is not a bad thing.

Perhaps you should rewatch the scene? Kirsten Dunst is literally drenched head to toe in a sheer blouse. The scene and the way it's shot is absolutely intended to be sexy and certainly many people do perceive it that way. (Just read the comments section under any clip of this scene)

But anyway this is a matter of personal opinion so if you don't find it to be sexy, okay, but it's not a stretch in the slightest. (Calling that scene with Holland which is played for laughs "sexy" seems more of a stretch.)

[bat39]

I'm 30 now, and my first exposure to Spider-Man was the 2002 Raimi film. In many ways, that film continues to remain the definitive and quintessential take on the Spider-Man mythos in my head, no matter how much I've been exposed to other material, some aspects of which I enjoy a lot more.

My earliest exposure to the comics was early issues of Ultimate Spider-Man, which really felt like a take on the movie's story (Spider-Man as a pro wrestler, Harry and MJ at Midtown High, Norman Osborn as the first big villain etc.) I also read some issues of Spider-Girl, so Peter and MJ getting married was also cemented as the logical endgame in my mind (I also was generally aware, I dunno how, that Peter and MJ were married in the comics). And the then-recent Spider-Man Chapter One was my introduction to a lot of the classic villains and I continue to retain a soft corner for that series, no matter how maligned it is by most fans. That said, I did find it jarring in Chapter One that there was no MJ or Harry around!

Around that time I got one of those giant-sized guides to the Spider-Man universe, and that was my first real introduction to the larger mythos (along with hours spent trawling fansites). Imagine my shock at discovering that MJ wasn't always 'the one' for Peter, and that his great love had once been Gwen Stacy, who was the original girl on that bridge, and actually died! Because the truth is that between Ultimate Spider-Man, Spider-Girl, and a few of the then-contemporary issues from the JMS run I got my hands on, the idea of Peter-MJ was inviolable in my mind.

I also watched the first couple of seasons of the TAS on reruns around that time, as well as the 2003 MTV animated series that was based off the Raimi film. The TAS had MJ and Harry, so that was familiar territory to me. I also remember reading a collection of Lee-Romita stuff from the mid-60's (which included the pivotal Amazing Spider-Man # 39-40 - the reveal of the Green Goblin's identity) and being surprised by how different the original Peter was from Tobey Maguire's portrayal in the films.

Over time, my Spider-Man tastes have grown a lot more varied. I enjoyed TASM (the first one, not the second one) and Andrew Garfield is my favorite Spider-Man, while Tobey Maguire is my favorite Peter Parker. I enjoyed Emma Stone's Gwen. I love the Spider-Gwen concept. I love Miles Morales - his comics and the Spider-Verse movies. I love the Peter from the Spider-Verse movies, who to me feels like a blend of 616 Peter and the Raimi/Maguire Peter.

But at the core, my idea of Spider-Man is based off the Raimi films.

The Peter-MJ relationship in those movies really helped spark off my own nascent sexuality back then

I think Peter and MJ being so 'real' and so subdued is what makes this scene, and their relationship in general, so much sexier. Theirs is a romance that you feel you can aspire to in real-life. Dunst's MJ feels like an attainable goddess.