Andrew Garfield's Peter Parker

[marvelguy25]

That's the whole point. Peter is in over his head. But he still tries to make it all work. How successful he is at it depends on the story itself.

Having Gwen come in and be "the brains" was a terrible decision. They undercut how smart Peter is supposed to be.

You make a point but its nothing to be bothered about

[Kevinroc]

You make a point but its nothing to be bothered about

I'm not bothered by it. I was just explaining why I was so dismissive of the intelligence of "Amazing Peter."

These movies are done now. Marvel and Sony are going to want to put their emphasis on their new Spider-Man. I don't think we'll see a DC of "Amazing" anytime soon (if ever).

[lowryder2005]

You make a point but its nothing to be bothered about

I'll try to be the sensible and sensitive guy here, but can I ask you something? You clearly are the "stalking poster" archetype, the guy who states something, then people who disagree or just state something different show up, maybe ignoring him altogether, and he compulsively feels he'll have to prove wrong everyone who won't agree with him (usually on really, really, really subjective opinions), who monopolizes a thread, tries to stand the ground with a couple of sterile, dry arguments until hopefully some bro will appear to back him up.

You made your points pretty clear. We got it. For you Garfield is God and Maguire/ Raimi's is poopoo/wooden/silly, you basically used every adjective and epithet your vocabulary has to offer. You tried (let's say somewhat) to justify your position with some - debatable - facts. It was made clear you won't convince anyone else who doesn't already love Garfield's portrayal and those who don't like Webb's Spider-Man won't convince you instead.

Now, do you really think you are adding something to the discussion by just being a broken record? I mean, I've went out for a walk, got me a chilli dog and you're still here debating over the same two or statements, without making any progress in the conversation whatsoever since 12 hours or so. Isn't this enough, really?

The last three pages are just you ranting with everyone who posts something you disagree with. You understand this, right? I don't agree with you, neither do the other three or four guys who posted before and after me, a lot of other guys respectfully will disagree with what I said but I don't see anyone quoting everyone else.

This isn't an armwrestling match or an endurance contest. Seriously, let it go. Re-read yourself in a couple of weeks and you'll find it silly too.

[Teste]

Garfield's Spider-Man is nothing of the sort. He is a jerk who likes being a jerk and probably just didn't do it as much before the spider-powers.

Exactly. IMO, Garfield's Spider-Man wasn't likeable enough. His Peter was too cocky, and his Spider-Man was a jerk for the sake of being a jerk.

The only great thing the reboot had, IMO, was the amazing chemistry between Garfield and Emma Stone. But Sony shot themselves by killing her, and so removing the best thing in the movies.

I would have loved a Spider-Gwen movie with Stone, though.

[Keeper of the Crows]

I don’t see why the Rami and Webb films can only be evaluated by being pitted against one another. It seems like there is a tendency on either “side” to promote one franchise by denigrating the other. But they’re all films about Spider-Man, a character we love! I prefer Spider-Man 1 and 2 over the ASM films, but there were some great moments in the Webb movies as well.

It’s not a zero-sum game. Insulting Toby doesn’t make Garfield any better objectively, and vice-versa. It won’t be long before we have a third set of Spider-Man movies, and some people will prefer that iteration of the character.

I will say this though, Marvelguy—Garfield is certainly lucky to have such a devoted fan. Even though I’m excited for Marvel’s take on Spider-Man, I’m sorry you’ll never get to see him continue with the character. I hope you’re able to enjoy what comes next. With Kevin Fiege’s involvement, you might be pleasantly surprised.

[marvelguy25]

Exactly. IMO, Garfield's Spider-Man wasn't likeable enough. His Peter was too cocky, and his Spider-Man was a jerk for the sake of being a jerk.

The only great thing the reboot had, IMO, was the amazing chemistry between Garfield and Emma Stone. But Sony shot themselves by killing her, and so removing the best thing in the movies.

I would have loved a Spider-Gwen movie with Stone, though.

Yeah no, garfield was in no way a jerk being a jerk. He was portrayed as a decent human being with flaws. He'll, any of us could've been in this position and honestly spidey has done some worse than the car their. Seriously? Nobody remembered the school fight or the burning car wreckage or the time square scene or the montage or at least trying to stop the lizard from contanminsting New York even with a gun wound?

And honestly Peter wasnt so much a jerk in this series to begin with

[marvelguy25]

I don’t see why the Rami and Webb films can only be evaluated by being pitted against one another. It seems like there is a tendency on either “side” to promote one franchise by denigrating the other. But they’re all films about Spider-Man, a character we love! I prefer Spider-Man 1 and 2 over the ASM films, but there were some great moments in the Webb movies as well.

It’s not a zero-sum game. Insulting Toby doesn’t make Garfield any better objectively, and vice-versa. It won’t be long before we have a third set of Spider-Man movies, and some people will prefer that iteration of the character.

I will say this though, Marvelguy—Garfield is certainly lucky to have such a devoted fan. Even though I’m excited for Marvel’s take on Spider-Man, I’m sorry you’ll never get to see him continue with the character. I hope you’re able to enjoy what comes next. With Kevin Fiege’s involvement, you might be pleasantly surprised.

I just hope they don't make him the most hated of the spider-men. Garfield suffered enough as it is as well as Webb. Heck, garfield was my ideal role fir the character including with the enthusiasm of wanting to play the character for years and sony just made him the most hated of the bunch. I like his take I really do but I just don't think he deserves so much hate especially with years of trying to get the role. I can relate to this abd there were alot of stuff missing from the film that would've won fans and audiences over but Sony destroyed that. Whether or not a DC comes is a concern. If it doesn't come that just hurts and it it does it'll be acceptable. If it doesn't then I hope someone hires him for a short film or mini series of the character.

[lowryder2005]

Just ended up here:



Oh, boy, the memories.
Whoever the new Spider-Man is, he needs to return.

J. K. Simmons : JJJ = Robert Downey Jr. : Tony Stark

[marvelguy25]

Seriously? I see people disrespecting garfield and this isn't helping much.

Anyway, yeah I'd love to see Simmons again much like his bond got back Judi m

[Tupiaz]

The problem with Garfield as PP was not the acting but the script. The problem was that PP was not a nerd/dork but a smart outsider. In the old days fans could relate to him because many of the readers was not athletic that was the charm. He became athletic with the bit. Here he can stand on the skateboard and is showing of his power to impress girls where back in the day. He would not do so because he wanted his secret identity to be secret.

[marvelguy25]

The problem with Garfield as PP was not the acting but the script. The problem was that PP was not a nerd/dork but a smart outsider. In the old days fans could relate to him because many of the readers was not athletic that was the charm. He became athletic with the bit. Here he can stand on the skateboard and is showing of his power to impress girls where back in the day. He would not do so because he wanted his secret identity to be secret.

He was great at skateboarding when he was adjusting his powers and those showing off his powers thing was just by accident aside from Gwen. The flash thing was just him being over his head.

And no, he was portrayed as a modern day geek and Peter in the comics was sorta an outsider. Raimi just took things to far by making him more if a caricature.

[CrimsonEchidna]

Honestly, I felt like McGuire's Peter Parker was a caricature. He was true to the 60's interpretation of what a "nerd" is and it stands out like a sore thumb in the present day.

[Kevinroc]

Honestly, I felt like McGuire's Peter Parker was a caricature. He was true to the 60's interpretation of what a "nerd" is and it stands out like a sore thumb in the present day.

Raimi's Spider-Man was clearly done in the style of the Stan Lee/John Romita, Sr. Spider-Man. Everything there looks like it jumped out of Stan and John's stuff. Considering the status of comic book based movies at the time, this was not actually a bad idea. It gave the films their own style and identity.

The problem with the Amazing films, at least IMO, was that they tried to cash in on what was popular. Nolan Batman or world-building Marvel Studios films. They lack their own identity. The only thing people are going to remember about these movies was Emma Stone.

[marvelguy25]

Raimi's Spider-Man was clearly done in the style of the Stan Lee/John Romita, Sr. Spider-Man. Everything there looks like it jumped out of Stan and John's stuff. Considering the status of comic book based movies at the time, this was not actually a bad idea. It gave the films their own style and identity.

The problem with the Amazing films, at least IMO, was that they tried to cash in on what was popular. Nolan Batman or world-building Marvel Studios films. They lack their own identity. The only thing people are going to remember about these movies was Emma Stone.

The amazing series tried to have its own identity. The spiderman comics are also considered dark even in the ditko and romita days. Several issues had a dark tone in them and no people would also remember spiderman, the romance, Gwen's death, Andrea's portrayal etc.

[lowryder2005]

Raimi's Spider-Man was clearly done in the style of the Stan Lee/John Romita, Sr. Spider-Man. Everything there looks like it jumped out of Stan and John's stuff. Considering the status of comic book based movies at the time, this was not actually a bad idea. It gave the films their own style and identity.

The problem with the Amazing films, at least IMO, was that they tried to cash in on what was popular. Nolan Batman or world-building Marvel Studios films. They lack their own identity. The only thing people are going to remember about these movies was Emma Stone.

What has been proven in this thread is that Spider-Man is an alpha male, he is dominating and imposing. Batman pales in comparison.
Trust me, you'll understand when you get the adult and serious Spider-Man movie with Nightwish doing the leading single and Speedcore Metal in the OST. Moreover, if they bring back Garfield, Pete'll be dating Mary Jane, Gwen and Black Cat at the same time. Because of course they have to sell his incredible good looks after all.

I'm sure there is something about Peter being a supporter of polygamy in-between the Ditko and Romita run. Am I ri... I mean of course I am right!