Official Spider-Man thread

Haven't read it yet.

CyclopsWasRight wrote:

Mecha wrote:

Yeah I can never watch that sex tape now...

I still would.

CyclopsWasRight wrote:

CernaMLD wrote:

CyclopsWasRight wrote:

I would feel like a dick, because she genuinely seems like an ok gal

Clearly she isn't. :fuckthat:

People make mistakes, get over it.

CleverCatchPhrase wrote:

shigdig wrote:

^^^^^

a bit too far. he shouldnt be harassed in every thread

He should for being a faggot all the time.

Reminding us almost EVERY OTHER THREAD that he lives (what he believes to be) a "pure" life doesn't make him a better christian.

Trust me I don't target him because of his beliefs. My whole family (accept me) is christian or catholic and I highly respect them. I LOVE them. Why you may ask? Because they don't go to forums that have none believers and preach. They go among their own kind to talk about christ instead of acting like they're a gaming forums only light of righteousness.

My brother is part of a gaming forum. He's a HUGE gamer. You know what he talks about in a gaming forum? The games he plays. He never mentions his personal beliefs because he knows it doesn't make a difference to the forum's community and it's not his job to do so. The only time he would even mention he's christian is if he's asked.

Some of you may retort that" well he has a right to post his beliefs." Of course! Everyone does. If he doesn't agree with the threads topic? He doesn't have to read it.

Lets say there was a post just like this in the forum my brothers in. He wouldn't open it, because it's obviously not his demographic.

Another example: If I saw a christian forum. I wouldn't join and when a new member joins go out of my way to post "Hello! I'm CCP, the sites devout non-christ-believer!" I also wouldn't go into their threads about christ and post "Well, I believe in Satan and I disagree with you because the satanic bible says I should fornicate and do what ever I want even if it's killing babies" or "I would fuck the shit out of the virgin mary."

I have the right to do it, but I don't because what ever I believe has nothing do to with christians so there is no reason for me to go out of my way to annoy them.

Zera goes into posts he knows has nothing to do with his lifestyle to post his disagreements as if he's holier-than-thou.

im not gonna read that lol

shigdig wrote:

CleverCatchPhrase wrote:

shigdig wrote:

^^^^^

a bit too far. he shouldnt be harassed in every thread

He should for being a faggot all the time.

Reminding us almost EVERY OTHER THREAD that he lives (what he believes to be) a "pure" life doesn't make him a better christian.

Trust me I don't target him because of his beliefs. My whole family (accept me) is christian or catholic and I highly respect them. I LOVE them. Why you may ask? Because they don't go to forums that have none believers and preach. They go among their own kind to talk about christ instead of acting like they're a gaming forums only light of righteousness.

My brother is part of a gaming forum. He's a HUGE gamer. You know what he talks about in a gaming forum? The games he plays. He never mentions his personal beliefs because he knows it doesn't make a difference to the forum's community and it's not his job to do so. The only time he would even mention he's christian is if he's asked.

Some of you may retort that" well he has a right to post his beliefs." Of course! Everyone does. If he doesn't agree with the threads topic? He doesn't have to read it.

Lets say there was a post just like this in the forum my brothers in. He wouldn't open it, because it's obviously not his demographic.

Another example: If I saw a christian forum. I wouldn't join and when a new member joins go out of my way to post "Hello! I'm CCP, the sites devout non-christ-believer!" I also wouldn't go into their threads about christ and post "Well, I believe in Satan and I disagree with you because the satanic bible says I should fornicate and do what ever I want even if it's killing babies" or "I would fuck the shit out of the virgin mary."

I have the right to do it, but I don't because what ever I believe has nothing do to with christians so there is no reason for me to go out of my way to annoy them.

Zera goes into posts he knows has nothing to do with his lifestyle to post his disagreements as if he's holier-than-thou.

im not gonna read that lol

Tl:dr, Yes he should, because fuck him.

Quote :

Ready to have you day ruined? In a lengthy chat with Comic Book Resources, The Ultimates co-creator has talked more about his decision to leave Marvel, dropping some upsetting revelations in the process. Not only was an Ultimate Captain America series he was working on scrapped (artwork from which can be found at the bottom of the page), but then Editor-in-Chief Joe Quesada decided not to give him and Joss Whedon (yes, the same Joss Whedon responsible for Astonishing X-Men and a little movie you may have heard of called The Avengers) the go ahead on a Spider-Man run. Reading between the lines, it sounds as if Hitch joins a VERY long list of creators who no longer have any interest in working for the publisher due to the way they have been treated. Read his comments for yourself here, but be sure to click on the link below to check out the interview in full.

Source: Comic Book Movie

Honestly, as much as I dislike Joss Whedon's insistence on inserting snarky humor into every goddamn scene, he'd be a pretty good fit for Spider-Man.

You know whenever you agree or disagree with his politicial views you gotta admit, he's pretty fukken awesome.

Toxicmaniac wrote:

You know whenever you agree or disagree with his politicial views you gotta admit, he's pretty fukken awesome.

Minus the corruption, he seems like a cool guy.

^
To be fair America could do with a likable president and this guy qualifies.

Ramzan_Kadyrov wrote:

^
To be fair America could do with a likable president and this guy qualifies.

We had Bill Clinton, and he was actually good too. Too bad we insist on impeaching a guy for getting a blowjob but when it comes to starting a war on false pretenses and murdering U.S. citizens overseas, we seem to have a problem with impeaching Bush and Obama.

Should've dressed up as NightCrawler.

Obama just confirmed that he is a comic book fan. ;-)

Quote :

RIP, Peter Parker.

Spider-Man's alter ego -- the geeky, wise-cracking teenager who learned back in 1962 that with great power comes great responsibility -- will succumb to one of his greatest rivals in Wednesday's Amazing Spider-Man No. 700. In the issue, Parker loses a major battle with Doctor Octopus, who spent the past year fighting to destroy the world as his own body slowly died.

However, this doesn't spell the end for the legacy of Spider-Man; instead, Dr. Octopus has a moment of clarity, realizes that his longtime enemy was a force for good and, having swapped his mind into Parker's body, takes on the life and exploits of Spidey for himself.

Marvel writer Dan Slott, who wrote the finale of the comic series that started the wall-crawler's exploits, explained the transformation to USA Today.

"This is Moriarty in the head of Sherlock. This is Prince John inside of Robin Hood. This is the greatest villain inside the body of the greatest hero and trying to do good," he said. "This is a guy who was a couple steps way from a bucket list, and now he's got a whole new lease on life. That's really going to change him."

He further advanced the idea in an interview with CNN.

"For all intents and purposes, [Otto Octavius, who became the evil Doc Ock] was the adult Peter could have become, Spider-Man's dark reflection," Slott said. "So what if we flipped it? What if we gave him a second chance? Peter's final, heroic act was giving Doc all the memories and experiences that kept him on the right path. But is that enough? Can that overcome Ock's true nature?"

Now, as per the common trend in comics, the tone of the franchise will take on a darker shade. As such, Marvel will cast aside the Amazing title for a new, fresh one: Superior Spider-Man. Much of the Marvel universe already has experienced a semi-reboot in the past year or so.

Of course, in the world of comics, nothing is permanent: During the 1990s, Spider-Man had an identity crisis that, for a time, made it seem that Parker actually was a clone of a man named Ben Reilly, who took on the webbed garb for himself before dying. And many comic legends have appeared to have died, only to return through some scientific miracle or plot twist. A few examples: Superman died in the 1990s, Bruce Wayne lost the cape and cowl as Batman for a time, and Bucky took on the role of Captain America.

Source: The Hollywood Reporter

Quote :

greatest villain inside the body of the greatest hero

Doc Ock? :fuckthat: Joker = greatest villain.

Spider-man? Greatest hero is Batman, greatest superhero is Superman. :lulzsec:

But on-topic, I disliked this when I heard it.

So he swapped bodies with Spidey? Sounds beyond stupid.

Lets hope they don't stay true to the comics this time.

Looks


Humor


Intelligence


Relationships

Considering Tobey didn't skateboard, wasn't a rebel that got in fights, wasn't crying and brooding all the time (until he had a reason), wasn't acting like a tit all the time and getting in arguments with Ben and May, actually remembered to kill uncle Ben's killer and whatnot, obviously Tobey.

Garfield had a bit more humour to his role than Maguire...however he already had it as Parker and there was no change between pre-bite Peter Parker and post-bite peter. At least Tobey began nerdy and really socially awkward and when he got bitten and was in SM form then his whole personality changed into this courageous vigilante who isn't afraid to speak his mind and get it on with MJ.


Yes you've cleverly put pictures of things that Maguire lacked, but if I had a copy of the ASM film I could give you screens of loads of things that it got wrong.

As mentioned above

PERSONALITY

BEHAVIOUR

LOOKS (regardless of what you say, Garfield looks more like Ed Cullen than comic Peter)

PLOTLINE/DECISIONS

Andrew Garfield. Without a doubt.

I can sort this all out

@Ramzan_Kadyrov

Never gotten into fights huh?



BTW, there is more where that came from.

It's true, Ben and Peter argued, so what? At least Peter didn't act like total jerk by telling Ben to stop pretending to be his father, like Tobey did.

Also you're right. Andrew wasn't socially awkward at all. He was a total ladies man from the beginning of the film.

You can point out everything wrong with Andrew as Peter all you want, but it will never come us close to Tobey's inaccuracies.

^
Moving in slow motion? Oh really? Maybe that's because he's ALREADY SPIDER-MAN.

I'm talking about pre-bite Peter you fool. It's entirely out of character for that supposedly nerdy kid to be so socially awesome and getting into fights and skateboarding and rebelling from teachers.

Sure that was a dick move on Peter's part in Spider-Man 1, but that was a spur of the moment, one-time thing. With ASM he's just generally this brooding, grumpy teenager who really has it out for May and Ben.

You're playing around with extremes here. I didn't say he was a ladies man at the beginning.. but he wasn't so socially awkward like Maguire. Garfield seemed to have balls to stand up to bullies out of choice and whatnot (as well as rebel against teachers). MJ talks to Tobey and he just stares at her, smiling and can't say anything. THAT is socially awkward.

Quote :

Andrew as Peter will never come as close to Tobey.

I agree.