Try again.

It goes both ways.. He gets all his spider powers so why is it so hard to accept he gets the web shit too? Why not?

ROFL whoa, yeah maybe I'm just out of my depth with all of the heavy mental lifting in comic books.

Are you dense?

I never said it wasn't believable. I simply pointed out how ridiculous it is to say something is "hard to believe" or "easier to believe" in a movie based on a comic book that is based on completely unbelievable shit.

As for why not, I would simply say if youre going to make a movie based on a book, you should remain true to the source material.

I guess its not that big of a deal when you think about it. Its not like any shitty comic book movies were made that completely disregarded the source material.

Its not like anything completely stupid has ever happened like Sandman being Uncle Ben's killer, Sabretooth being Wolverine's brother, or Deadpool having katanas up his arms shooting optic blasts with his mouth sewn shut. I guess with the way Im acting you would think that Batman's love interest in the books turned out to be some halfassed villain that tried to kill him, destroy Gotham, and got herself killed in the process, all after an eight year stint where Bruce inexplicably just stopped being The Batman.

Screw it. We don't need source material. Im sure the Hollywood screenwriters can do a much better job than the folks that have been actually writing the stories for decades.

Maybe not so much that as youre just not paying attention. You took issue with not knowing where he got the suit, and I provided the clips from both films that explain your issue.

Maybe you never read the comic books. Its just funny to me that in a movie filled with totally unbelievable shit, someone would call bullshit and be like "brah, that would TOTALLY never happen."

Its hilarious.

Yes, I forgot the movies talking about the suits.

But in the instance of the webs, I dont care about the official lore, gaining that power like he gained every other makes a lot more sense to me... and oh yes, I read the hell out of Spidey comics as a kid, but that was the 70's so its been a while.

They were better then.

Cheaper too.

Please. Even the most successful superhero film ever completely and utterly shits on the source material. The entire Nolan franchise shits on the Bat mythos. Taking the liberty of such a minor detail that you spend less than two seconds thinking about while watching is not a big deal.

And what film is that, exactly?

Also from that "love interest" comment it sounds like you don't actually know what you're talking about. Talia has been the greatest batman villian in the last decade in the comics. NOT just a 'love interest.'

And she was handled so well in DKR. Weird.

Bats had no idea who she was.

Because, as I said, Nolan shits all over the source material.

And yet you claim that its not a big deal to disregard it.

Strange.

Yeah it's not a big deal apparently because The Dark Knight is the highest grossing film ever. Nolan's films were the complete character and source assassination and yet you're discreditting the Spiderman franchise due to such a small and pointless source material change like web-wrists versus web-shooters. That's like me saying Nolan's films are shit because he makes Batman expose his eyes and wear makeup instead of wearing high tech lenses like he's supposed to ROFL. Virtually everything about Nolan's films goes against source material down to how the character flat out responds and you hardly hear a peep about it.

Pretty sure that when I stopped buying them they were no more than 25 cents.