The Amazing Spider-man

[Kamdan]

I think you pinpointed it, thecolorsblend! I do believe that Rami?s Spider-Man is much like the Ditko version than the subsequent Romita version, which I GREATLY prefer.

Now, johnnygobbs, I didn?t simply state that Spider-Man 2 just ?SUCKS.? I gave my support of my opinion by stating ?Rami was practically kicking sand into Parker?s face during that movie.? As a matter of fact, I haven't heard you say why it was better than the first film. You must also remember that Rami?s plot for Spider-Man 4 had Parker fall in love with The Vulture?s daughter, which was not accepted by Marvel and the studio. They tried to have a compromise with Rami, but he didn?t want to, so he was let go. Boy, now I really feel like I?ve just been repeating myself. \

Rami's spin was good for the first time, because it truly flt like a "Rami film." The sequels just fell flat on their faces with their tiring "love plots," rather than "real life struggles." Also, did they ever listen to more than just the opening verses of the 1960's Spider-Man Theme?

Wealth and fame
He's ingnored
Action is his reward.
To him, life is a great big bang up
Whenever there's a hang up
You'll find the Spider man.

That sure as hell wasn't the case in the sequels and even by the end of the first film! He called it a "curse."

[thecolorsblend]

I think you pinpointed it, thecolorsblend! I do believe that Rami?s Spider-Man is much like the Ditko version than the subsequent Romita version, which I GREATLY prefer.

Fair enough... except that the Raimi films more or less follow the paths outlined in the comics.

Superman: The Movie... uh, I mean, the first Spider-Man shows us Peter's origin and his feelings of guilt and uncertainty and, ultimately, the burden he carries in doing what he does.

Spider-Man 2, continuing in that vein, shows Peter struggling to do right by both of his identities.  By the beginning of the movie, both Peter and Spidey are losing.

The movie ends with Peter gaining a sense of self-acceptance.  Is his life perfect?  No.  But he's doing the right thing.  He doesn't have to be perfect, he simply has to do his best (great power, great responsibility, etc).  Ultimately, it is Peter's heart that sustains him.

This is all pretty much in line with the Lee/Ditko run.

The third one kicks off in a fairly Lee/Romita'ish vein.  Spidey has become a bit of a celebrity in the city.  I honestly don't know if he ever reached such a level of public acclaim in the comics but that sense of triumph is inherent at least in the Lee/Romita issues I've read (although, again, I make no claim of being an authority on Spider-Man comics, I simply read them when I can).

Overall, Raimi took Peter from a callow target for bullies to a reluctant hero to a cursed hero to a triumphant hero.  The divergences in the progression of the 60's and 70's comics come mostly from Brock/Venom... story elements that, as far as I know, Raimi had foisted upon him by Marvel and Arad.

I would never argue that Raimi did a flawless job but I think the character arcs largely honor the comics.

[Kamdan]

I also argure that the only reason why Parker was happy in the third film was because he had Mary Jane Watson. As soon as she went away, he lost it. I just wish that they didn't make Watson the center of Parker's entire universe. Also, who's idea was it to make her an actress?! SHE'S A MODEL!!!!

[phantom stranger]

It's official.  Mark Webb is directing the rebooted Spiderman series.  I wonder if his last name sealed the deal for him.   

Nah, if that was the primary criteria Sony would've gone with Arachnus Von Slinger.

[The Joker]

The "I'm a Marvel, and I'm a DC" guy addresses the issue. 

http://www.youtube.com/user/ItsJustSomeRandomGuy#p/u/0/lg6v1dgTcxw

[johnnygobbs]

I also argure that the only reason why Parker was happy in the third film was because he had Mary Jane Watson. As soon as she went away, he lost it. I just wish that they didn't make Watson the center of Parker's entire universe. Also, who's idea was it to make her an actress?! SHE'S A MODEL!!!!

I actually like that Mary Jane Watson was portrayed as a rather homely girl-next-door type, rather than a classically beautiful supermodel (although I wouldn't object if the reboot eventually features the more traditional version of MJ).  After all, Parker is meant to be an ordinary guy with all the problems that entails, who just happens to be endowed with super-powers by incident.  How many ordinary guys have supermodel girlfriends?

[Paul (ral)]

Nah, if that was the primary criteria Sony would've gone with Arachnus Von Slinger.

love his last movie...btw

[thecolorsblend]

How many ordinary guys have supermodel girlfriends?

*taking the 5th*

[Kamdan]

How many ordinary guys have supermodel girlfriends?

I know who! Sam Witwicky.  
I'm just saying that her profession in the comics was never acting.

[johnnygobbs]

I'm sure the next franchise can be more faithful to the comics Darrell, but for Sam Raimi's more realistic take on the comics MJ was spot-on.  Surely, moviemakers are entitled to take liberties with the source material for the good of the project, and in this case, it was for the good IMHO.

Besides, the main difference between DC and Marvel's leading characters has always been the latter's focus on the 'common-man' super-hero.  Superman might be a 6'5" stud, Bruce Wayne might be a playboy with the world's top models at his arm, and WonderWoman may be an unobtainable Amazonian, but by and large Peter Parker, Matt McCoy, Bruce Banner et al, are all normal guys thrust into larger than life circumstances.

How many ordinary guys have supermodel girlfriends?

*taking the 5th*

Whatever Colors...