Spiderman
- Thread starter UTclass2015
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I care more about the quality of writing.
The first two movies were awesome. The third was an insult to Spidey fans.
I think Maguire did a good job. However, all actors are limited by the material. A horrible role well-acted is still a horrible role.
The first two movies were awesome. The third was an insult to Spidey fans.
I think Maguire did a good job. However, all actors are limited by the material. A horrible role well-acted is still a horrible role.
A films quality cannot be measured by simply asking who is in it. Would Raiders of the Lost Ark have been a good movie if Harrison Ford wasn't playing the lead? Probably, but it would have been a much different film. Despite Toby Maguire having already been cemented in our minds as the film role for Spiderman, it'll be interesting at the very least to see a new take on such a meaningful character.
But I think we can all agress Neil Patrick Harris was the best Spiderman in the last 20 years.
But I think we can all agress Neil Patrick Harris was the best Spiderman in the last 20 years.
No. Maybe because of nostalgia, but The first two movies made me a spiderman fan. Third movie was meh (the ending made me laugh , it was so silly). Now? Now we have a retarded suit redesign, someone with even more of a blank face than Toby Maguire, and what seems like the the 2000's reboot a mere ten years after the original blockbuster. I really, really don't get it.
Am I a bad person for hating that movie solely because of how the lead role looks? Because based on that alone, I think it will be horrible. It looks like the horrible love child of the Spidey series and Twilight.
Yes. Yes yes yes. Wanna know why? Garfield can do comedy. Spider-man is a funny character, and by all accounts this spidey is funny. Andrew Garfield is a good actor, Toby is... Meh. I didn't like his Parker.
I'll say yes, because Toby McGuire never really seemed to gel as Peter Parker in my mind. It all felt weird and forced. Of course I realise that all actors are limited by the writing. It takes a fucking genius to get a good performance out of shit writing.
But Andrew Garfield? I've seen him in a couple of things and he generally puts in pretty damn good performances. But again, it all comes down to the writing.
But Andrew Garfield? I've seen him in a couple of things and he generally puts in pretty damn good performances. But again, it all comes down to the writing.
Honestly? I like the 3rd movie the most. It's the most entertaining one with the most versatile plot, most character development and I like that they were having fun with the whole concept.Johnny Impact said:
I don't see the supposed big gap in quality between the first 2 movies and the 3rd one. For me, it's just fanboy bitching.
As for the topic, they're both god actors. Macguire has that nerdiness all over him so it was pretty easy for him to fit the role. Garfield will definitely play his part right, the rest is up to the script. Will he be better? I think that the fanboys will say "no" but in my opinion, it will be like comparing Nicholson and Ledger as Joker - a matter of taste.
Macguire was a bad Spidey. There's no way around that fact. He's in no way a bad actor, but he doesn't fit the part of Spider-man. All of his awkward teenager emotions just felt like he was reading directly off of the script and I don't think I've ever seen someone express less emotion in a movie than he did.
Garfield, on the other hand, is hot off of The Social Network and if you've seen that movie you know exactly how good he is at expressing complex emotion (REALLY REALLY GOOD, I liked Eduardo Saverin more as a character than I could ever like Mark Zuckerberg). And in reality, that's a lot of what Spider-man is and has been. He's not just a superhero; he's a superhero with a very complex past and underdog sensibilities that make him into what I believe is one of the most realistic superheroes in existence.
Garfield is good with realism and if the trailer shows anything, the new movie is going with a darker, more realistic approach to Spidey. Parker's life has been anything but fun and games and I really hope the film and Garfield can show what he's really made of.
Garfield, on the other hand, is hot off of The Social Network and if you've seen that movie you know exactly how good he is at expressing complex emotion (REALLY REALLY GOOD, I liked Eduardo Saverin more as a character than I could ever like Mark Zuckerberg). And in reality, that's a lot of what Spider-man is and has been. He's not just a superhero; he's a superhero with a very complex past and underdog sensibilities that make him into what I believe is one of the most realistic superheroes in existence.
Garfield is good with realism and if the trailer shows anything, the new movie is going with a darker, more realistic approach to Spidey. Parker's life has been anything but fun and games and I really hope the film and Garfield can show what he's really made of.
Well, since they're taking the "grim and gritty" route, I think that that's going to be the case. I sure hope that they're not going to make Garfield play Macguire playing Peter Parker. That would be stupid.Hammeroj said:
Also, both actors have different approaches to playing their parts (Garfield is more subtle in showing emotions while Macguire tends to overact a lot in his movies) so that's also a factor.
Hell no. Just from the trailer, he already reminds me of the kid from the Dragon Ball movie. Here's hoping that that's simply a misleading first impression. Best case scenario: he's not quite as bad as Hayden Christenson.
Okay, this may be a little off-topic, but why are they making a reboot? I mean, the first Spiderman movie wasn't that long ago. I think it was made in 2002, not that long ago for a movie.
Anyway, I didn't see anything in the previews that impressed me, but then again I'm not a Spiderman fan. Liked the first movie, that's about it.
Anyway, I didn't see anything in the previews that impressed me, but then again I'm not a Spiderman fan. Liked the first movie, that's about it.
There are more than 1 type of an awkward teenager. Just because the setting is the same, doesn't mean the characters will be as well. I could be wrong though.Hammeroj said:
p.s. You can be muscular without being big or broad shouldered
p.s.2. How can you go "realistic" with Spiderman? With Batman it was possible because it's just a guy with a lot of cool and expensive gadgets. Spiderman has superpowers, so do most of his enemies. I think that they got it as realistic as possible in the 2002 version.