webb is so much truer to teh comics tahn raimi

Before you start claiming I've never read the Spider-man comics, saying how Raimi's spiderman wasn't true to the source material because of the web shooters and the lack of gwen stacy... maybe you'd like to look into Webb's Amazing Spiderman you hypocrites.


1. In the comics the suit looked like web, not a basketball.





2.Webb:
"After the trailer, the first footage shown at the panel introduces us to Peter Parker’s pre-superpowered life. His teachers complain that he’s tardy. He’s reprimanded for skateboarding in the hallway. He’s constantly bullied. He’s the kid who hides beneath his hoodie in the back of the classroom, the kid who always comes home with a black eye and can say he tripped and fell only so many times. But when he punches one of the boys who hit him in school, he and Uncle Ben are called into the principal’s office."

Right, Peter was not rebellious at all in the comics. He's a socially awkward nerd, not a rebellious little punk. Peter would never be late for class before getting powers in Ultimate OR Amazing series. And skateboarding before having the spidey powers? Slightly out of character much?

3."He’s constantly bullied. He’s the kid who hides beneath his hoodie in the back of the classroom, the kid who always comes home with a black eye and can say he tripped and fell only so many times. But when he punches one of the boys who hit him in school, he and Uncle Ben are called into the principal’s office."

Peter never got bullied as such in the comics. He got picked on a bit and sure, he'd fight back after getting the powers. But before getting the powers? Not at all.

4."The next scene shows us Peter holding his father’s leather briefcase. He searches through the case, taking out his father’s glasses, his OSCORP ID, his calculators, and finally, a mysterious folder of documents."

So his father worked for Oscorp now?

5.Anyway, Peter's meant to be antisocial and whatnot, and in this film it seems that the reason for this is the loss of his parents. This is extremely out of character. Peter never really brooded in the comics about the loss of his parents, especially not before he gained the super powers.
Also in the trailer you see Peter being left with uncle Ben and aunt May as a young boy... in the comics he's meant to be a baby! This is why he would have not been so upset about it in the comics.

6.




Why's everyone focusing on Peter? Is he that interesting? I thought he was a socially awkward nerd?

7.



What's the point in having the spider bite in the back of the neck as opposed to the hand? I mean what does it change? Every previous incarnation of spider-man had the bite on the hand. What does this add to the film, seriously? It's just a further lack of respect for the source material.
And why is there webbing? Did the spider climb in? Spiders fangs don't contain the web last I looked.

8.

Maybe my eyes are just decieving me but is Peter wearing his spidey suit from the waist down? If so that shows Gwen knows he's spiderman and is supportive. Couldn't be more out of character for the Amazing universe Gwen (this is Amazing spiderman is it not?). In the comics she dies before ever knowing. But yet again, this is just an assumption.

Yeah.

I actually took this info from here but summarised the main points Just so you know I've read a number of Spider-man comics, but not loads so this wont bother me, I can enjoy the film on its own terms. But anyone saying Raimi's films were anything less than great because they think he's not true to the source material.. think again.
http://www.spidermancrawlspace.com/wordpress/2011/08/01/why-the-amazing-spider-man-movie-is-probably-going-to-suck-cont/

He is socially awkward. The picture where he walks down the hallway while everyone is staring at him. is suppose to show that Peter is insecure.

No one said this was going to stay 100% true to the comic books. But the characters are more accurate to the source material than they were in the Raimi films.

Also about the suit, you need to get your eyes checked. Because the webs in the comic books don't stick out either.

^
Oh so the people looking at him presents his paranoia? So what is this now, an art house film?

And yes the webs are raised in Raimi's film, but at least they look like web. He's spiderman, not basketball man.

"But the characters are more accurate"
Ahem... Peter's a rebel in this that gets in fights BEFORE getting superpowers. Gwen Stacy knows he's spiderman. His parents work for Oscorp. Not really accurate mate.

These aren't massive deviations but neither were the ones in Raimi films. This is what happens when you nitpick.

Insecurity is part of being socially awkward.

Also it's funny how you only bring up the changes, but not some of the accuracy to the comic books.

As for Garfield's suit, I see black lines kinda like in the comic books. Where as Tobey's suit has sliver webs that stick out.

So we don't lose track of what we're discussing I'll address your points, one by one.

1.Yes I bet insecurity IS part of that but firstly, Webb is making him a rebel so he's not socially awkward in the same way as the comics where he's just nerdy. Secondly, these are people STARING at him. Acknowledging him being there. This isn't him just seeing that, but them actually doing that. Last I checked you don't pay attention nor give a shit when the socially awkward person enters the school.

2. I brought up the changes the same way that's all anyone else does when they mention Raimi films. They never praise the good aspects (which there A LOT of), but focus on the negative. Plus this is just a summary of what someone else wrote.

3.Silver that stick out, ooh a colour and different thickness. Who cares? The entire SHAPE is wrong on Amazing spiderman. Web is silvery is it not? Therefore it's logical it would look that way on the spidey suit. On ASP, yeah it is embedded into the suit and black like in the comic BUT at least it does not resemble the web so they may as well not even bother with the pattern.

@Mecha LOL

1. Well who knows? I could be wrong. That scene where everyone is staring at him could mean something else. But just because he acts like a rebel, doesn't mean he isn't socially awkward.

2. Well you're not doing a good job at pointing out those positive aspects.

3. You seem to care a lot considering you're nitpicking about the webs.

1. Dude, one does not simply get everyone staring when you walk in unless you look absolutely weird..... wait, just remembered it's Andrew Garfield. Nevermind, it all makes sense now. And I never said the fact that he is rebellious stops him being socially awkward, but mentioning that he is still not the same character. If he's that rebellious, he blatantly has more confidence (which is odd for an insecure person).

2.
Like I said, this is about the deviations from the comics, in response to all the people praising how its so much more faithful to the comics than Raimi's interpretations. Also it's not my own article. I simply summarised it.

3.All I did was mention in one bulletpoint that the suit is wrong and you responded to it. If anything you're nitpicking the article. I am just responding to your response.

1. It suppose to show how Peter feels. That doesn't mean people were actually staring at him. Either way, it doesn't matter. Because we don't know for sure what that scene was about.

2. Well compare to the Raimi films, it basically is more faithful to the comic books.

3. Are you serious? All I said was the webs in the comic books don't stick out either. Then you try to justify the silver raised webs, which wasn't in the comic book.

1."So what is this now, an art house film?"

2.Really? Web shooters and Gwen Stacy. Is that it?

3.But at least its still webs huh? Not just randomly laid down lines.

Did I just travel back to Tuesday June 26, 2012???!!!

This thread already existed. You can't just bypass a lock by copy and pasting the same thread. You want to rediscuss this, then request an unlock of the previous one and we'll decide.