Heh.

Your and idiot.

I guess if you like looking at a shitty goblin costume that looked nothing like the character, and that couldn't make the cut for a Mighty Morphin Power Rangers tv episode, or watching Kirsten Dunst hang onto a ****ing mannequin for a swing sequence, then I guess you could say the first movie was better.

Maguire was shit as Spiderman. He did an okay job as Peter, but he utterly failed as Spider-Man. No trash talking, never really talked at all unless he was yelling "Hang On" or screaming in pain. Loved his little bitchass high pitched "EHH!" when hitting the ground after Goblin sent him flying in the climax of the first film. Here, Ill let you enjoy that again. I know you loved it.




Maguire's Spider-Man was a woe is me whiny bitch up until the abortion that was SM 3 where he was the super happy dork, and then an emo douchebag. I don't think I need to address how they destroyed "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility" in SM 3. That was just the dumbest thing ever, bottom line.

Part of Raimi's movies was bad writing, and part of it was shitty design and direction by Raimi himself. He got butthurt when he was made to put Venom into his third film, so he tanked it and got out of the franchise.

ASM was light years better than any of Raimi's films that all had the same "Save Mary Jane" plot. Seriously. How many ****ing films do we need to see where that is the main goal of the story?

ASM Spidey was saving the city, not the damsel in distress, which was a damn welcome change.

ASM 2 looks awesome, with the exception of the machine style Rhino. Im not digging that at all.

In one of the shots in one of the trailers, you could see Paul Giamatti in there. It's a battlemech, like in Avatar.

The new Spiderman sucked balls, great big ones... and I doubt this next one will be any better.

The Raimi Spider-Man was better than The Amazing Spider-Man, mostly because The Amazing Spider-Man was awful. Maguire-Spidey may have come across as whiney, but Garfield-Spidey was a showoff, and a bully, and went beyond being a wiseass to being a loudmouthed dick. The storyline was screwed around; they made Peter into a darker character, didn't develop the reasons why he fought crime and kept his identity secret, and he had some sort of Daddy-issue corporate intrigue storyline that he really didn't need hamfistedly crammed in there. Contrarily, there was no wrestling match, no J. Jonah Jameson, and Spidey never learned or mentioned his signature line of dialogue. It was a bad movie.

I will give it this: Even with the ten-year technology difference, the special effects in the first one were weak, and the second one did do some inventive bits of fight choreography, especially during the fight in the halls of Midtown High. Those aside, though, it didn't have much going for it that Raimi's didn't do better.

And I guarantee the sequel won't be as good as Spider-Man 2.

The tobey movies sucked yak butt. Tobey wasn't even close to being the biggest problem with those pieces of shit. The new ones are far, far better.

The reboot is crap. Old ones are obviously old and the scripts had their share of problems but were far superior. Toby was the better Spidey. Peter IS SUPPOSED to be nerdy/awkward not a hipster douche bag like in the new ones.

Tobey wasn't awkward and nerdy. He acted like a pussy. Zero chemistry between him and the wretched Kirsten Dunst. Jizz shooting out of his wrists. Botched villain after botched villain. Just utter trash.

Ah, yes, I should have granted that as well: the casting of Kirsten Dunst was a trainwreck.

I don't see how you could possibly imagine a better Green Goblin than Willem Dafoe, though. No one does dangerously-insane like he does, and he looked like Gobby even without his mask on.

The idea of being able to shoot webs because of the transformations in your body is a helluva lot easier for me to believe, than some high school kid with the brains and means to actually manufacture that shit.

Its bad enough that neither series bothers to explain where this kid got his fancy suit, but atleast the first series had a plausible explanation for the webs.

He creates the web shooters in the comics.

This is a film based on the comic.

What part of this are you having difficulty with?

You can believe that a guy can get the proportional strength, speed, agility, and borderline precognition of a spider, but you cant believe that he might be able to build web shooters?

Heh. Stick to non fiction, and your head will hurt less pal.

lol that doesn't make any sense. Read what he posted. It makes more sense that the web shit in his wrists develops because he gets all the other spider attributes. It doesn't make any sense that he would get everything else EXCEPT that but is smart enough to make it himself despite being a young and hip high schooler.

Other than him creating his own web shooter in the comics?

ASM I view as an updated version, kind of like ultimate spiderman comic.. Most kids are not nerdy or dorky, especially if they got powers. They would act more like ASM.

ASM is much closer to the comic books than the first set of movies.

Can you guys tell me where in that post refers to comic book accuracy? I said it's more believable/makes more sense that way.

It makes perfect sense.

His issue was suspension of disbelief. He was fine with all this other completely impossible shit happening to a human body, but took issue that Pete might be smart enough to create the wrist mounted propulsion system for his weblines. THAT was what he had trouble believing. Pretty funny when you think about it.

Peter has a pretty damn high intellect in the books. Its not quite on par with Stark or Richards, but its well within the paramaters of building some web shooters.

In the books he created the web fluid as well as the web shooters, but I guess for ASM they decided that having it already exist at Oscorb would be better for their story.

The building of his web shooters was a simple way to showcase how smart Peter really is.