Controversial Spider-Man Opinions

[Kevinroc]

I mean, again, it was different. He crushing hard on her because she was like the "it girl" which Ultimate Mary Jane definitely wasn't.

But the girl Peter has a crush on is the "it girl" because Mary Jane was the "it girl" in the Raimi movies.

[Frontier]

But the girl Peter has a crush on is the "it girl" because Mary Jane was the "it girl" in the Raimi movies.

But that's Gwen's classic character too.

[Kevinroc]

But that's Gwen's classic character too.

During the Ditko days, yes. But she was also a pretty horrible person who was originally only interested in Peter because he didn't give her the time of day when they first met.

[Frontier]

During the Ditko days, yes. But she was also a pretty horrible person who was originally only interested in Peter because he didn't give her the time of day when they first met.

I wouldn't say it was that far off from how Romita Gwen came off (at least in everything but personality).

[Kevinroc]

I wouldn't say it was that far off from how Romita Gwen came off (at least in everything but personality).

Again, though, it's hard to ignore the Raimi of it all. Peter was into photography because he was a photographer in the Raimi films.

[Frontier]

Again, though, it's hard to ignore the Raimi of it all. Peter was into photography because he was a photographer in the Raimi films.

I mean, he was into photography because...well, Peter Parker's main job is being a photographer.

Like, you can focus on the Raimi similarities but it's not a one-to-one thing in my opinion.

[JTHM]

Again, though, it's hard to ignore the Raimi of it all. Peter was into photography because he was a photographer in the Raimi films.

This is absolutely crazy. Next you'll say that every scene where Spider-Man breathes is derivative of every scene where Spider-Man breathes in the Raimi trilogy.

[Kevinroc]

I mean, he was into photography because...well, Peter Parker's main job is being a photographer.

Like, you can focus on the Raimi similarities but it's not a one-to-one thing in my opinion.

This is absolutely crazy. Next you'll say that every scene where Spider-Man breathes is derivative of every scene where Spider-Man breathes in the Raimi trilogy.

Why was Peter into photography (pre-Lizard) in that movie?

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I definitely think the film banked too much on making the female lead a character that was destined to die and hinging so much on her and her relationship with Peter.

Doing Peter and Gwen as if they were "meant to be" all along is a bit like following Han and Leia for the first two SW movies and in the third one, either of them dies (don't bring up the ST, that's far in the future when they had a relationship/marriage/child and so on...different context), and somehow you have to expect to return to the bright optimisitic feeling you came in at the start. Like imagine how ROTJ would have felt if Han died, and you had a morose and sad Luke and Leia, and then you had the smash cut of credits to Williams' soaring fanfare, it would never have worked.

If you want an example of how that would have played out, look at The Amazing Spider-Man 2, at the very end, Gwen dies and then Peter spends a year sulking and not being Spider-Man, and then has the epilogue with Rhino where he suddenly becomes quippy again...and it just doesn't work. You can't sell two movies on a big romance, and then have Gwen die, and then basically manufacture a upbeat tone to end on. You need some kind of relief and sense of hope, but for Spider-Man to lose what's basically celebrated and spotlighted as the love of his life and the relationship that will never be as good, it's catastrophic for the movie and the character. The only way forward is to make it like Spider-Man Reign. (I know there were plans to bring in MJ in the third but that would never have worked under the conception that Marc Webb and Co. chose, after the way they built up Gwen, whoever cast as MJ would come off as weaker by far).

The story of Spider-Man isn't supposed to be "man loses the love of his life and spends the rest of his life being sad". You could work that with Wolverine, and with Batman , since they're supposed to be a tragic but badass brooding dude, so for instance BATMAN RETURNS, MASK OF THE PHANTASM, THE DARK KNIGHT ends with Batman permanently separated from the woman he loves but him continuing to be Batman regardless of loss is meant to be inspiring and cathartic nonetheless. In the case of Wolverine, however sad and f--ked up and dark you make his life, especially something like Logan, he's gonna crawl out claws popped and screaming.

In The Night Gwen Stacy Died, Gwen dies midway into the comic, and the rest of the comic is Peter in a violent rage lashing out at people, going in a dark place and then beating the stuffing out of Green Goblin (in the movie Dane DeHaan skulks off...which yeah), and then Goblin dies at the end, and then you have the epilogue with Mary Jane showing that no matter how bitter and alone and sad Peter feels (and should feel), there are people in his life who care do love him and that eventually he'll be alright.

[Kevinroc]

Doing Peter and Gwen as if they were "meant to be" all along is a bit like following Han and Leia for the first two SW movies and in the third one, either of them dies (don't bring up the ST, that's far in the future when they had a relationship/marriage/child and so on...different context), and somehow you have to expect to return to the bright optimisitic feeling you came in at the start. Like imagine how ROTJ would have felt if Han died, and you had a morose and sad Luke and Leia, and then you had the smash cut of credits to Williams' soaring fanfare, it would never have worked.

If you want an example of how that would have played out, look at The Amazing Spider-Man 2, at the very end, Gwen dies and then Peter spends a year sulking and not being Spider-Man, and then has the epilogue with Rhino where he suddenly becomes quippy again...and it just doesn't work. You can't sell two movies on a big romance, and then have Gwen die, and then basically manufacture a upbeat tone to end on. You need some kind of relief and sense of hope, but for Spider-Man to lose what's basically celebrated and spotlighted as the love of his life and the relationship that will never be as good, it's catastrophic for the movie and the character. The only way forward is to make it like Spider-Man Reign. (I know there were plans to bring in MJ in the third but that would never have worked under the conception that Marc Webb and Co. chose, after the way they built up Gwen, whoever cast as MJ would come off as weaker by far).

The story of Spider-Man isn't supposed to be "man loses the love of his life and spends the rest of his life being sad". You could work that with Wolverine, and with Batman , since they're supposed to be a tragic but badass brooding dude, so for instance BATMAN RETURNS, MASK OF THE PHANTASM, THE DARK KNIGHT ends with Batman permanently separated from the woman he loves but him continuing to be Batman regardless of loss is meant to be inspiring and cathartic nonetheless. In the case of Wolverine, however sad and f--ked up and dark you make his life, especially something like Logan, he's gonna crawl out claws popped and screaming.

In The Night Gwen Stacy Died, Gwen dies midway into the comic, and the rest of the comic is Peter in a violent rage lashing out at people, going in a dark place and then beating the stuffing out of Green Goblin (in the movie Dane DeHaan skulks off...which yeah), and then Goblin dies at the end, and then you have the epilogue with Mary Jane showing that no matter how bitter and alone and sad Peter feels (and should feel), there are people in his life who care do love him and that eventually he'll be alright.

This is why not having MJ there from the beginning showed a complete lack of understanding of the story and the relationship they were adapting.

But no, they needed to give screentime to the mystery of Richard Parker.

(Nobody needs to try to make the argument that MJ being there would have undercut the Peter x Gwen relationship since people were already familiar with her.)

[Revolutionary_Jack]

This is why not having MJ there from the beginning showed a complete lack of understanding of the story and the relationship they were adapting.

Exactly, you can do Mary Jane without referring to Gwen. But you can't really work with Gwen without Mary Jane. as Loeb/Sale's Spider-Man Blue makes it clear, "you can't tell the story of me and Gwen without Mary Jane Watson". The only way to adapt that, is via love triangle and Spider-Man Blue showed how to approach it.

The MCU movies to their credit, kind of did understand this. So MCU sets up Liz as Peter's girlfriend but makes it clear that MJ is in the background and that's the direction the story will go towards. So when Peter and Liz break up in Homecoming, you don't feel too bad, or for that matter anything since Tom Holland can't have chemistry with any actor...but I digress.

[Frontier]

Why was Peter into photography (pre-Lizard) in that movie?

To foreshadow his Bugle job?

The MCU movies to their credit, kind of did understand this. So MCU sets up Liz as Peter's girlfriend but makes it clear that MJ is in the background and that's the direction the story will go towards. So when Peter and Liz break up in Homecoming, you don't feel too bad, or for that matter anything since Tom Holland can't have chemistry with any actor...but I digress.

I mean, I feel pretty bad for how terribly Peter's treated the poor girl and the fact that he doesn't seem that bothered by it (because MCU Spidey can't get too overdramatic) and then is immediately on the Michelle train in the next movie with little to no build up.

I think he has chemistry with Zendaya and Jacob Batalon.

[Kevinroc]

To foreshadow his Bugle job?

I mean... That's completely off-screen in ASM 2.

I mean, I feel pretty bad for how terribly Peter's treated the poor girl and the fact that he doesn't seem that bothered by it (because MCU Spidey can't get too overdramatic) and then is immediately on the Michelle train in the next movie with little to no build up.

I think he has chemistry with Zendaya and Jacob Batalon.

I still absolutely hate that Marvel are too cowardly to unambiguously say they cast Zendaya as Mary Jane. "Michelle Jones" is the name of one of the goofy teachers on AP Bio.

[Spider-Tiger]

The story of Spider-Man isn't supposed to be "man loses the love of his life and spends the rest of his life being sad". You could work that with Wolverine, and with Batman , since they're supposed to be a tragic but badass brooding dude, so for instance BATMAN RETURNS, MASK OF THE PHANTASM, THE DARK KNIGHT ends with Batman permanently separated from the woman he loves but him continuing to be Batman regardless of loss is meant to be inspiring and cathartic nonetheless. In the case of Wolverine, however sad and f--ked up and dark you make his life, especially something like Logan, he's gonna crawl out claws popped and screaming.

The Dark Knight also had the sense to not overemphasize the romance between Rachel Dawes and Bruce Wayne. It was an element of the story, but it wasn't the central element, and Rachel wasn't a co-lead in the same way that Gwen was in TASM. And as talented and capable an actress as Maggie Gyllenhaal is, she's no Emma Stone (or Anne Hathaway) in terms of star power. So when they brought in Anne as Selina Kyle in the sequel, it worked.

This is why not having MJ there from the beginning showed a complete lack of understanding of the story and the relationship they were adapting.

But no, they needed to give screentime to the mystery of Richard Parker.

(Nobody needs to try to make the argument that MJ being there would have undercut the Peter x Gwen relationship since people were already familiar with her.)

Co-signed.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

The Dark Knight also had the sense to not overemphasize the romance between Rachel Dawes and Bruce Wayne. It was an element of the story, but it wasn't the central element, and Rachel wasn't a co-lead in the same way that Gwen was in TASM. And as talented and capable an actress as Maggie Gyllenhaal is, she's no Emma Stone (or Anne Hathaway) in terms of star power. So when they brought in Anne as Selina Kyle in the sequel, it worked.

In a weird way, The Dark Knight Rises with Bruce/Talia/Selina kind of did do "the love triangle in a superhero movie" thing. Talia is the rich girl with daddy issues, Selina is the poor woman who sasses and teases out richboy Bruce. Weird because Chris Nolan is not the guy who gets romance and yet he did that on the big screen.

Obviously the configuration is going to be different, since Peter is poor where Bruce is rich, but mostly it's the same arc of love across class lines, with the working class Mary Jane preferred over the upper-class Gwen. So The Dark Knight Rises shows how a Peter/MJ/Gwen love triangle could have played out.

No other movie has explored the concept of competing love-interests or that kind of added texture (and even Nolan was able to do it because both characters happen to be part of Bruce's rogues gallery who he has sex with). TV of course has gone there sometimes, Daredevil Season 2 was interesting because it kind of pivoted on a Matt/Elektra/Karen Page love triangle which never happened in comics (Elektra was dead during BORN AGAIN, Karen Page's definite story) and then Matt and Karen had broken up back-and-forth at the time Elektra came back. Smallville did that in its sitcom manner.