How do you really feel about Sam Raimai Spiderman Trilogy?

[enyawd72]

Amen to that! In my mind, the '67 classic will ALWAYS be the definitive Spider-man. That cartoon was my first exposure to Spidey in the late 60's and basically developed my life's interests from illustration to comics, to collecting Megos as a kid and now as an adult. Wallopin' Websnappers!

It's amazing how much our first exposure to something becomes ingrained in us as the "correct" interpretation of something. I know exactly what you mean, because I feel the exact same way about the Nicholas Hammond series. Even though it was radically different than the comics, with no "super" villains to speak of, it did get a lot of things right, and will always be MY definitive version of Spidey, just as Lou Ferrigno will always be the Hulk to me.

[MIB41]

You could tell Raimi had trouble reconciling his story with the Venom subplot, which certainly appeared pushed on him. Parker was already having issues with Spiderman's fame. But when you add in the revelation that Sandman killed his uncle, MJ's rejection, and then Harry's regained memory, there's not a lot of room left to say the Symbiote was responsible for his mood swing. Any one of those would have put most of us in a rebellious mood. Way too much psychology to fill one movie with. Then you had the major blunder of the Symbiote not staying on Parker in the beginning. In the comics, once the Symbiote found Parker as it's host, it never gave him up. It became his street clothes as well as his Spiderman costume. That's why he needed the bell to knock it off. In the movie treatment, this logic didn't ring true (no pun intended), since he was able to take the outfit off as he wished in the beginning.

[Earth 2 Chris]

Emo Parker was cringe-worthy in my estimation. The whole sequence at the dance club was just way too campy. I really loved the goofy "Raindrops Keep Fallin' On My Head" sequence from 2, but the whole Evil Peter thing just wasn't funny to me, especially since they played it as a joke until he slapped MJ.

Chris

[boynightwing]

That brings me to my next point
which is that I thought that the "bad boy Peter Parker" in Spiderman 3
was actually done quite brilliantly because essentially it was supposed to
be a nerd trying to be cool. Not a nerd that turns into a cool guy.

That's exactly how I felt about it. I found Emo Parker to be hilarious.

[UnderdogDJLSW]

I have an affinity for the cartoon myself, so when I went into the 1st movie, I felt that it had some of the flavor of the cartoon and it worked. I didn't like the Sandman being involved with Uncle Ben's death, but did not mind the venom addition or the nerd-y Parker trying to be bad boy cool. I'm probably one of the few that thought that was funny.

[MIB41]

When I would read Spidey comics or stories to my son, I always found myself mimicking the voice work from the 60s cartoon. High-pitched, uptight Parker and low, cocky Spider-Man. It just works.

Chris

Amen to that! In my mind, the '67 classic will ALWAYS be the definitive Spider-man. That cartoon was my first exposure to Spidey in the late 60's and basically developed my life's interests from illustration to comics, to collecting Megos as a kid and now as an adult. Wallopin' Websnappers!

[Earth 2 Chris]

When I would read Spidey comics or stories to my son, I always found myself mimicking the voice work from the 60s cartoon. High-pitched, uptight Parker and low, cocky Spider-Man. It just works.

Chris

[Brazoo]

Certainly it's a very important part. With my recent posts in this thread,
I was just trying to make the point that Spiderman should state his claim
as a youthful wisecracking hero. It appears that you agree with me, at
least in some respects, but in the end Maguire just didn't sell it for you.

I certainly can relate to THAT idea more than trying to make Spidey into
something manlier in vocal tone/noise... an approach that I feel is more
appropriate for his superhero elderstatemen

Yeah totally, that's a perfect way to put it, he just didn't sell it for me!

I can also see people reading it with a more manly voice - I guess. If he kind of transforms into a "Man" when he puts on the outfit, but that's what makes reading so great - it's a personal experience. Ultimately this is the obstacle of creating adaptations like this.

[huedell]

I don't mind that he sounds young - I just think Spider-Man is suppose to be funny. As Parker becomes more confident as Spider-Man he uses one-liners to taunt his enemies - and mask his own fear to some degree. I just don't think Maguire sold the one-liners or that kind of confidence well, and to me that's an important part of the character.

Certainly it's a very important part. With my recent posts in this thread,
I was just trying to make the point that Spiderman should state his claim
as a youthful wisecracking hero. It appears that you agree with me, at
least in some respects, but in the end Maguire just didn't sell it for you.

I certainly can relate to THAT idea more than trying to make Spidey into
something manlier in vocal tone/noise... an approach that I feel is more
appropriate for his superhero elderstatemen

[Brazoo]

Wisecracking in a "manly voice" seems very misguided IMHO.

I think that some people just hate on Maguire... I appreciate your explanation Sharry, but, apparently I'm sold on
Maguire's higher pitched voice.... PERFECT PERFECT for "mocking" enemies IMHO.

The Spidey character is a KID at heart... not SUPERMAN/Clark Kent.

I prefer the young tone stay intact in all incarnations of Spidey.

I don't mind that he sounds young - I just think Spider-Man is suppose to be funny. As Parker becomes more confident as Spider-Man he uses one-liners to taunt his enemies - and mask his own fear to some degree. I just don't think Maguire sold the one-liners or that kind of confidence well, and to me that's an important part of the character.

[huedell]

I always thought Spider-man was a *****, so it was Dead On to me.

Better HIM than any of the other big guns in the Marvel U (or DCU
for that matter altho' admittedly, playing Hulk's alter-ego as a wimp
is desirable to me),

It's a big part of what makes Spidey unique IMHO.... and Raimi's
vision was on very on point in that regard.

[BlackKnight]

Sharry...this is one of your most dead on posts ever...I agree with you 10 TRILLION percent...lol.

Tobey Maguire was a good Parker...but a lousy Spidey...and I couldn't agree with you more about his wimpy voice as Spidey...notice every time he got hit by his foes...he would yelp and scream like a high-pitched whimpering schoolgirl...

I always thought Spider-man was a *****, so it was Dead On to me.

[huedell]

Wisecracking in a "manly voice" seems very misguided IMHO.

I think that some people just hate on Maguire... I appreciate your explanation Sharry, but, apparently I'm sold on
Maguire's higher pitched voice.... PERFECT PERFECT for "mocking" enemies IMHO.

The Spidey character is a KID at heart... not SUPERMAN/Clark Kent.

I prefer the young tone stay intact in all incarnations of Spidey.

[Brazoo]

Yeah - I agree with you guys - McGuire never did pull off the one liners or the right attitude as Spidey.

[Hector]

I liked the first 2, the 3rd had too much going on. And the "bad boy Peter" was lame. I think Tobey McGuire makes a great Peter Parker, but a rotten Spidey. Someone should have done a voice-over when he was in costume. Spidey isn't supposed to sound like a wimp. I did think Doc Ock was spot-on. And having grown up on the 60s cartoon, I didn't even know who Mary Jane was until the first of these came out, (I was like, where's Betty Brant?) so I really don't have an opinion of her.

I guess that's it.

Sharry...this is one of your most dead on posts ever...I agree with you 10 TRILLION percent...lol.

Tobey Maguire was a good Parker...but a lousy Spidey...and I couldn't agree with you more about his wimpy voice as Spidey...notice every time he got hit by his foes...he would yelp and scream like a high-pitched whimpering schoolgirl...