Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Time to start the debate. Yes, Spiderman did indeed suck. The acting was cheesy and terrible, the costumes (especially the Goblin's) were awful, and the storyline had no conflict at all. Just a formulaic piece of crap. And yet, it made a lot of money...*sigh*

dude u think u can do a better job HA i would like to see that -.- the moive was fine u just obilsly dun know a good movie when u see one

And you obviously don't know english when you write it. Learn to spell and use grammar, and THEN come and talk to me. And next time, write some decent points. I did, and I'll say them again. The movie was as cheesy, if not more, than Batman and Robin.

Spider-Man was one of the best films ever. I'd admit, the Green Goblin did look wierd, but this was the only downside.

Don't even go there with that Batman and Robin crap... Batman and Robin was a travesty. Obviously the Green Goblin didn't look like that in the comic books, but it's a reinactment. William Dafoe (sp?) played a great homicidal maniac...my only complaint was Kirsten Dunst as MJ, but oh well. I think your expectations from comic to movie are extremely unrealistic and that you either need to get a life or loosen up a bit. Now if you wanna talk about a shitty movie...talk about Daredevil because that was a terrible movie. A black King Pin...that'll be the day. And if you're of the opinion that Spiderman was such a bad movie...then what would you do differently?

You guys are ALL Trolling. Spider-Man was the best comic book movie EVER, hands down. Goblin looked like he was a villain and not a holloween leftover like the comic. If William Dafoe had come out in a stocking, the movie would've bombed... it's a RETARDED Costume in the comics... this one looked like something cooked up by corporate america (which cooks up cheesy stuff all the time)... comic books are cheesy! What are you looking for? Face-Off? And Formulaic? It's the Spider-Man story, it's been done before, duh!

Daredevil had a TON of great parts, sure, they didnt' flow together well, but it had a bunch of really great sequences... it wasn't perfect, but it didn't SUCK... and Kinpin was much cooler being Black (fill in the blank: "that'll be the day _________" what? I don't get the complaint?)

And Batman and Robin was... well... it had something right... can't remember what it was though... REGARDLESS: The Worst Comic book movie by FAR Was Generation X, followed closesly by Howard the Duck and Fantastic Four (Corman version)... yeah... Batman and Robin simply wasn't (not even kinda) for comic fans...

I'm prepared for pointless debate, fellas... bring it...

Children! children! spiderman had to follow such a cult following it was impossible for it to live up to everyones expectations but in the end the story is now set and maybe the sequel will blow me away *fingers crossed*

Spiderman had just as many bad parts as good parts. I'm not a big fan of spiderman so i didn't really enjoy the movie but what we must remember is this movie was sort of like the 'Origin' movie, showing who the characters were, how spidey got his powers and all that, just like X men 1 was but look at X2, its amazing! We know the characters and their powers from the first movie so there was more time for a better story, better action, better.....everything so i can confidently say that the next movie is gonna be a blast and i'm looking forward to it. It's gonna be even betterm just like X2.

Again, I say to you, the acting was utter crap. Willem Dafoe sounded like a bad Joker impersonator, and the amount of cheese in that mirror scene "shudder." The opening sequence was good, where we saw his origin, but after that it was just a rehash of crap that's been in every superhero movie ever made. The Goblin looked like a power ranger villain. Kirsten Dunst couldn't act. The "lord's prayer" scene, which was supposed to be one of the freakiest in the movie, was hilarious it was so bad. Aunt May did a decent enough job playing a stock character, I suppose, as did Uncle Ben. Normy Osborn tried to do dark and tortured way too much and ended up looking like Keanu Reeves in the Matrix- AKA about as animated as a piece of wood. And then there's Tobey-who reminded me more of Harry Potter than Spider-man.

Now, I ask, what could we have expected? The movie was done by Sam Raimi. His movies are renowned for being campy piles of crap-and they're SUPPOSED to be that way. The Evil Dead series, Darkman, and lots of other are hilarious because they're so bad. And made to be so bad. He took everything he'd learned from those movies and applied it to Spider-man, even the cameo by Bruce Campbell. Except this movie was not SUPPOSED to be funny, it's supposed to be at least in some way dramatic. Raimi kinda failed on that regard.

I will admit, Doctor Octopus looks freakin cool for the second movie. But that doesn't mean the movie will be good-it'll probably be as crap as the first.

Daredevil had everything right to be a decent movie, so I'm not sure what went wrong. Maybe it was the amount of times they ripped off the Crow. Either way, it ended up only slightly better than Spider-man.

If you want a good comic book movie, go watch X-men or X-2. End.

bah! Bah!

Dafoe is a genoius, man! He was insane! How can't you see it man! look in his eyes on the mirror scene, he was soooo cripy... you can't look in his eyes and tell me he wasn't crazy, man! Tobey was too geeky for ya! HA! Peter Parker's not SUPPOSED to be cool, man!

(to be really honest, I thought the Lord's prayers scene was pretty, uh, pointless, I didn't know it was supposed to be dramatic or anything... if I had, I woudla been dissappointed )

And Daredevil went wrong when they didn't LINK scenes together... it had no FLOW man... the scenes had no common reason for existing it just jumped from place to place and 'oh! Bullseye's over here' and 'Oh! Electra's over here' and it didn't quite hit the spot...

DD pales in comparison to Spider-Man cuz for everything DD did cool Spider-Man did something even cooler... even down to backflipping from shurkin/broken glass/goblin slicers...

so far all superhero movies in my eyes have sucked, some of the powers these ppl have cannot be portrayed properly on screen

Responding...watching that scene for the first time, I thought, "wow, that was an interesting piece of melodrama. Dafoe did a great job of making his character look totally unbelievable." And because it was a Raimi movie, that's what I went in expecting. But then, people kept talking about how great of an acting job it was, and I realized he had meant it to be believable.

And it wasn't that Parker was too geeky. Parker wasn't geeky enough. Mary Jane would TALK to him for God's sake. That's not supposed to happen. No, the problem was that Spider-man wasn't cool enough. The only time he did crack a joke ("Your friendly, neighborhood Spider-man!", he sounded like one of the stars of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy. There'd be nothing wrong with Spider being gay, but not when he's supposed to be in love with Mary Jane.

I think that Dafoe was the only saving grace of Spider-Man. He truly was insane. Beyond that, Spider-Man wasn't that good. I mean does everyone just forget about Parker doing a double back flip and then punching Flash down the hall. Yeah, I'm sure most people thought that was cool, but that infuriated me. If I ever saw a kid in high school that was known to be unathletic bust something like that, I'm turning into an instant detective!!! Ignoring other such flaws for the time being, Spider-Man was at it's core a story that has been told, re-told, revamped since 1963 and for my thirteen years of reading comic books, I see it at least three times a year. It is boring.

Even worse than that though is the first X-Men. Damn, does Singer know anything about the comic books? He actually told the cast not to read any of the source material in preparation for the roles as to not interfere with his retarded incarnations. The X-Men of comic books were dynamic due to character interaction and their own inherent flaws. His characters were flat, and designed to just get to next scene. Look at Halle's performance. I counted four flip-flops between her having a bad African accent to no accent at all. When are these people in charge going to realize that just because it is based on a comic book, doesn't mean that every line has to be dramatic and overemphasized.

For all I said above X2 was a vast improvement and second only to Blade in my opinion, with Hulk and Blade II. All those movies had incarnations of what it was like for these otherwise normal people to be put in extraordinary situations, especially in the Blade movies. The game shouldn't change just because your character has super powers; they talk and act just like we would. That is one reason Avi Arad needs to go, because it seems that if you want it in your movie Arad will approve it no questions asked.

One of the best films ever? HA! you make me laugh.More like one of the worst films ever.thanks for the good laugh for the day.

This post is so laughable its pitiful.This MAN-SPIDER movie-which is what it REALLY should have been called because of the organic webshooters, was a travesty also.Yes William Defoe was great in his acting,I disagree with vengence about the acting,the only one I thought was weak in the acting was James Franco as Harry Osborn.Defoe was great in his acting,but that Green Goblin costume damaged a great performance because people laughed at that goblin costume.I'd say YOU are the guy who needs to get a life because you cant seem to stand criticems of your precious MAN-SPIDER movie.No,if I want to talk about a shitty movie,I'll just talk about your stupid SPIDER-MAN,er MAN-SPIDER movie. Daredevil was by far a much better superiour film over that crap Spider-Man movie.At least a black Kingpin is a reasonable change unlike those moronic organics which make him MAN-SPIDER.

MAN-SPIDER was the best comicbook movie ever? what drugs are you on? More like SUPERMAN was the best comicbook movie ever,hands down.and bashing a movie is not trolling kid.No the movie would have NOT bombed if he came out in the original costume,SPIDER-MAN is such a popular icon figure,that it did not matter how awful the movie was,there was never any doubt that because of his popularity,the movie would be a hit.Give me a break,that Green Goblin costume was 100 times more stupid looking than the one from the comics.No that alien from outer space costume from this crappy movie is the costume which is retarded.You want to talk pointless debate? just about everything you just now said except for the part about Daredevil was pointless.

Word Mr. Parker. Unlike a lot of people that post, I read the source material. And although I realize that I cannot expect these writers to encompass all that is Peter Parker, I do expect one thing to come across. That is the fact that Pete is a poor bastard that even when he defeats his nemesis, 95% of the time in his personal life, things do not and cannot go right.
The movie would have been a lot more interesting if his initial love interest was Gwen Stacy and that she died in the bridge sequence. That's torture and anguish. That is what Parker is about.

I Hated it when Gwen died,I myself am glad they did not make this movie and have Gwen die.I myself would like to have Gwen in a sequel and see Mary Jane die myself.Thats what hacks me off is when I criticise changes from the comicbooks like the goblin costume,people say I want things to be exactly like the comics which is so untrue obviously since I would like to see a sequel where Mary jane dies.

People are so unbeleivable it's a freakin movie. The hulk didn't do as well as spider-man because it wasn't cheesy. Yet people say it sucked, when it had a better devloped plot then any super hero movie out there It might sound weird but people seem to be attracted to the cheesy movies more then any other movies. The writing for spider-man might have been bad but the actors and production seemed to have put it together well. And people expect movies to be so similiar to the comics when really it's harder than you think. And i bet if this comic book never existed and the movie still came out. People would like this movie a whole lot more. I know Every one has right to their own opinion.

Well, I don't particularly agree that the entire movie sucked because his webshooters were organic. As for the Hulk not being cheesy...did you watch the same movie I did?

I was just making a suggestion Mr. Parker, but I honestly like yours better. What I was trying to get across is that there was no real drama involved in the movie, where your idea about Stacy and Watson definitely would. You know from the jump that Spider-Man will win; I guess they tried to get that across with his break-up with Mary Jane at the end, but it wasn't believable and it was not enough. For instance, the last time that Parker fought Osborne, Norm gave Flash a job driving a truck, got him drunk and Flash crashed into a building. Leaving him as a vegetable.
Spider-Man is also very humorous which didn't come across with bad writing and extremely cheesy jokes.
Steely balls, you are exactly right. People, as in the general public, love cheesy movies, because the general public is generally stupid. Mindless action and dumb jokes are their idea of entertainment. You can only hope that the audience becomes more sophisticated, and that filmmakers give them what they want. Hulk was a good movie, and the two Blade movies were the best. I think Ang Lee's direction, and how he broke certain shots into comic book panels was brilliant. People harp about the use of CG in the movie, when it in actuality was the best out of all movies this summer. Just look at his facial expressions.

spiderman was cheesy and the plot was cheesy and predictable cause that's what comic books are-hence a comic book movie and since they stuck with the feel of spiderman it just makes the movie perfect.

Oh how wrong you are 113. Ever since Wildstorm/DC's The Authority came out and redefined the superhero genre, the major companies have been bold and allowed creators to place their mainstay characters in a lot more extreme, adult-oriented situations. I am not even a Spider-Man fan but I suggest that you read the new Spectacular Spider-Man series by Paul Jenkins and Humberto Ramos. The first arc was amazing and honestly the boldest step the Spider books have taken in years, and the next arc appears to be a step above that where a redesigned, tougher Doc Ock vows to make Spider-Man reveal himself to the public.
I can go on and on about specific titles and how they are not cheesy, but I honestly hope you can get your hands on some good books, you might find a new hobby. Plus, the Blade movies were not in the least bit cheesy.

And you say my post is so laughable that its pitiful. Look at you trying to convince people that this movie should be called "Man Spider." How can you even compare the organic webshooters to a black king pin. Michal Clark Duncan is like a cop out excuse for the king pin. They coulda found 1,000 huge white bald guys that woulda been better than him. I don't go to comic movies because they have recognizable faces...i go to them to see realistic depictions of the comics. And another low point on Daredevil would be his little school yard fight with Electra. DD met Elektra like 2 scences earlier and now she's going to just fight with some random bling guy...ok smart guy explain that one to me? And why didn't someone go and stick up for the blind guy?

It was a LOT more than just the organic webshooters and the green goblin costume to make the whole movie suck.The script looked like it was written by someone with the ideas of a 5 year old.Once again,I agree with Vengence.The Hulk not being chessy? Yeah kinda makes me wonder if he watched the same movie we did.The Hulk was crap also,but not as crappy as MAN-SPIDER was.

Everyone has to admit that spider-man did have bad writing. It's probably what turned some people off about the movie but over all it is a personal favorite of mine. And regards to my comment about the Hulk, When i mean cheesy i mean like stupid smart ass remark that's meant to be funny when it really isn't. I mean like Fast and the Furious Cheesy. I personally never saw any of this in the hulk but i don't want get into an argument about it because it's sort off topic. Instead of me saying it was not cheesy. I'll just replace that with "It was more of a Drama then most superhero movies i've seen."

Well a Spider-Man movie wasnt made,even though sony successfully fooled people like you with no logic into thinking so.This was a phony neautered version of hollywoods,spider-man is a guy with chemical webshooters,thats not the guy we saw on the screen,Man-spider is the person we saw.as far as I know,there are not that many actors out there in real life who have BOTH the size and the strength that Kingpin has so Clark was a good choice.I can compare it because a black Kingpin is a reasonable change unlike that organic bullcrap.Man your points are pitiful.

was spiderman a R movie? No, it wasn't so extreme action and diologue shouldn't be expected, and plus obviously some comics aren't cheesy, but they started out that way, and this is the first really successful superhero movie and they kept it traditional-as they should
so all the people who thought it was too cheesy-get over yourself cause your not clever and it was meant to be that way...

Don't even include B&R in this thread because true Batfans like myself wish that one never happened. Try mentioning a better Bat movie not just that garbage.

Spider-Man wasn't at all a bad movie. There were things I didn't care for like Goblin's costume but Spidey's costume was excellent. Not a diehard Spidey follower but the movie was pretty sound especially for the first one.

BTW, http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/sony/spiderman2/

113, you are right, they did intend for it to be cheesy and campy. Problem is, is that it isn't just a slap in the face to people who expected more out of a long-awaited production about a super-hero; it's a slap in the face of this entire movie's audience when it is dumbed-down because these producers, directors and writers don't think the audience can handle a sophisticated movie. But the real problem is that they are probably right. People got pimped slapped up and down by going to the movie multiple times, purchasing a so-so game and the special collector's edition of the movie.

The Hulk was not cheesy as I and Steely Balls understand the definition of the word cheesy. It realized that Banner was a tortured soul struggling to keep his bestial alter-ego in check, without stupid jokes and smart-ass quips. Although it hasn't been used here, everyone always remarks "could you have made a better movie?"
In all honesty, I could have consulted to help make Spider-Man a better movie, instead of the appointed yes-man Avi Arad. Is there something he won't approve?

So you keep calling him manspider because.....? u hoping someone might be dumb enough to jump on your bandwagon here? I agree the organics are dumb and inaccurate, but it made it much easier to explain than "oh Peter took months perfecting his web shooter so that the webbing was both strong and bio-degradable and also able to launch an undeterminable amount or length" how do you suggest they would explain how Peter figured out how to compact huge amounts of webbing into a capsule the size of a NyQuil Jel Cap. Atleast the organics are a reasonable change. And the only thing I have to say about your beliefs about the black king pin is....would it be a reasonable change to make Blade a white boy? (help me out here Daywalker) And don't tell me my points are pitiful because your logic is non-exsistent.

No your the guy who has non existent logic with that moronic statement that organics are a minor change.If it were such a minor change there would not be so many people out there still pissed about it.and No I'm not trying to get anybody here to jump on my bandwagon,I just havent been brainwashed like you have into believeing a spiderman movie has been made when there hasnt been one made yet.this was a phony neautered version of hollywoods.Man-spider is who we got stuck with.See I care if hollywood rapes to death a great character unlike you and many others so I refuse to call this phony neautered version of hollywoods spider-man because that wasnt the true Peter Parker under the costume.You've been so brainwashed by hollywood your hopeless to be reasoned with though,I give up.I'm done with you.

You Man-spider fans got the dumbest logic.You like organics then your not a fan of spider-man your a fan of Man-spider.Organics=Man-spider.

Dude, drop the man-spider. Even I think you sound like an idiot, and I'm on YOUR SIDE.

I have a feeling the organics dont bother you that much then? Okay I'll stay off your thread then.really I know it SOUNDS crazy to call him Man-spider but really it makes sense when you think about it. He's a monster now because of those freaking organics,the reason being is because organics are disgusting and gross.Before he was more man than spider,so SPIDER-"MAN" made sense.Now he is MORE Spider than he is man with the organics,so MAN-"SPIDER" is really more what he is.

We understand. You've just said it 4,692 times.

Well since Wesley has been cemented into the role now, it probably would be funny seeing a blonde haired blue eyed guy running around all in leather with a sword on his back. Visually it would throw me off but if you think about it, Blade's ethnic background isn't really key to the character but the cool factor that Wesley brought to the character is. But hey, there's always Angel

But back to the topic, it was mentioned earlier about being a true follower of the comicbook blah blah blah. Although I don't follow Spider-Man as close as I used to, I grew up with "ole webhead" from the earlier cartoons and comics and that's where the real essence of the character is. Spider-Man had been around for a long time and you can't just jump in the middle of his life and make a movie about it (like basing it off of the current comic story line). Spidey has been waiting on a movie deal for so long and has so many fans new and old that the origin story if very fitting. The movie wasn't perfect but I wouldn't rate it as crap.

I don't disagree with the storyline-the overall concept was very good. But the characters were 1 dimensional, and the movie was filled with bad cliches. I wanted to throw something at the screen whenever a cheesy line popped out like "We'll meet again, Spider-man!"

those cliches are what make up comic books. "friendly neighborhood spiderman!" i just don't like how Toby Maguire hoots and hollars when he's web slinging. He should just shut up and swing.

Food for thought............................


Remember when you go to see your favorite comicbook hero on the big screen, somewhere in the intro, it will say that the movie is "based on" the comic book character which gives them leaway to make some things different and not worry about every nit picky detail.

I've never seen a comic book superhero's story or look translated to the bigscreen without a few changes or flaws (big rubber batsuits,Green goblin "flightsuit",Spawn necroplasmic armor, etc etc)

No no no no no! Good storylines and characterisations written by killer writers are what make up comic books. Great art is what makes up comic books. A sense of history is what makes up a comic book. I swear, I will smack the next person that says that it's ok for Spider-man to be cheesy 'cause it's based on a comic.

And Daywalker, I'm not nitpicking, believe me. I understand that the movies have to change from the comics. There are some movies, like Blade, that completely change from the comics and are still awesome. And there are some, like Spider-man, that just plain suck whether they stick to the comic or not.

I'm going to have to go with VenganceGOD this time. Although I liked Spiderman it did really suck at some points. Basiclly any time Toby or Dafoe were on screen for more rhan two minutes. The Green Goblin suit was just a cheap Power Rangers ripoff and Kirsten could not act to save her life.

But on the upside it was Toby's first film he will hopefully get better, Dafoe's out and the script writers should of learned of their mistakes, so my only major gripe is the actor who plays Harry Osbourne. I mean for gods sake man he acted like he was from the Hulk movie no freaking emotion ever.

Oh just out of intrest what is the picture you're using VenganceGOD I've been trying to figure it out for a while now but no such luck. A little help here

It's not fair to compare Spiderman to Blade because the 1st Blade movie didn't re-tell the story of his origin. Spiderman seemingly sucked because they did the whole radio active spider, uncle ben dieing, green goblin story. If you think about the Spidey comics, Green Goblin was one of the stupider characters, and that's why he isn't in the comics now a days. Doc Octopus should help to create a much better movie. And dont pick on Dafoe, he did a great job on Green Goblin considering the costume he was stuck wearing.

HEY Vengence, seems like you got a huge problem with Super hero movies, hence the name "SUPER HERO MOVIES" guess what, Mr, "God" what was the hulk... the first one... what was spider man... the first one... what was daredevil... the first one... hmmm... there all first in the series... people may say the FIRST is always the best and sequels suck, WELL ITS REVERSE with these type of movies. Vengence, IT SEEMS LIKE you hate all the super hero movies, so why are you in this topic, this thread even. In my opinion, all the movies were entertaining, who gives a crap about quality, I loved em, they entertained me for a whole 2 hours.

agreed

Cliche's are a rather classic piece of most comics. Friendly neighborhood,Same Bat time,great hera, riddle me this etc........they're all parts of comic book history that cannot be denied. A comic book is meant to be a loosely written fun saga/adventure, not a graphic novel.

I agree about Blade, that movie definitely changed the daywalker character for the better. As I said earlier, Spider-Man wasn't perfect(what movie is?) but I can't see the film being crap. I thought the movie was a good step in the right direction for Marvel.

You can't fault Defoe for the suit he wore and I thought he was a maniacal genious as the Goblin. The Green Goblin is supposed to be a psycho and although I didn't care for the suit, I liked when the mask lenses moved to reveal Defoe's eyes because he looked crazed(nice touch).

Wow...you have NO idea what you're talking about. I've been an avid comic book reader for as long as I can remember. I love the Marvel characters, and I've only hated two of the movies based on them, Hulk and Spiderman. The first AND second X-mens were very very good, and I really enjoyed Daredevil. Superheroes are the best kind of fiction to me, and I hate to see characters I love be ruined. Yes, these ARE the origin stories, but they don't HAVE to be bad. Have you ever read Ultimate Spider-man? If not, you should read the very beginning of it (it's called Power and Responsibility, out in Trade Paperback at most of the giant bookstores). Brian Michael Bendis retells the Spider-man origin in modern times, and it rocks. Very human, without an inch of the cheesiness that was hugely apparent in both Spider-man and Hulk movies.

I complain about Spider-man the movie, not because I hate Spider-man, but because I love him. I complain out of a real desire to see these movies do better. There have been many good comic book movies. As I mentioned, X-men, Daredevil, Blade, the first two Batmen, and the first two Supermen. The first Spider-man outing was terrible, and I sincerly hope the second one will be better. But if it's not...well, you'll be hearing from me again.

I think this picture really sums it all up nicely:

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/forumfun/misc15.jpg

I was going to say it earlier, but someone beat me to it. VengeanceGod, I agree. It is the thinking that comic books are to be fun and that comic books are cliches that actually hurt the comic book industry. Because when a sub-par movie like Spider-Man releases, and the general public likes and respects it, then they feel like they have already done it. Therein, they don't have to read the material, they are now instant experts. And nothing pisses me off more than someone saying something that is wrong and that they really know nothing about.

The movie was bad. It had nothing to do with the fact that it is an origin story, because X-Men was not an origin story and I hated that one too. The movie was badly scripted, no excuses for anyone. Look at the background for all of the people in charge of all those Marvel movies. Basically the writers and directors. Don't you think that it is important that these people have a base in comics and these characters? Apparantly the producers and Avi Arad didn't, because none of these people did. You can look at the director's commentary and features and see that Ang Lee of the Hulk was the closest. I like Spider-Man and Daredevil and I am a true fan of all the others as characters, but with the exception of the Blade movies and X2, none of them were done justice.

Boy this movie surely WAS badly scripted.The script was a joke starting from the beginning of You Want to know who I am,you sure you want to know? what a joke.

I didn't see anything wrong with that line, I thought it was kinda clever. He was just letting you know that his life wasn't one filled with great times and glamour. Pete's life is filled with hard times and bad luck. He always talks about how being Spider-Man is a curse.

From the outside looking in, people may think that Peter's life is an exciting one but he doesn't see it that way. I was watching the cartoon the other morning and my wife happened by and said he has to be the only hero that puts his costume on in his bedroom and I thought that was so funny.

My point, there's no fancy cave, no enterprise full of fancy metal suits and no fascinating story of how he's from a distant planet and his powers are fueled by the sun. He's just an everyday kid with everyday problems trying to make it in the world all the while trying to be a city's savior. I think all of this was translated into the movie and I rather enjoyed it. Not a perfect 5 stars but I did like it.

I understand what you are saying Daywalker, and your opinion really shows that you have an understanding of the character; but that opening line was neither clever, witty, or indicative of the character of Spider-Man. It was a corny one-liner that is a prime example of the tripe that Hollywood writers come up with when they want to make their character seemed tough. If any writer tried to put that in a Spider-Man comic book, I'm sure they would catch a lot of heat from the readers and his/her peers.

Why is exactly that these filmmakers cannot come up with a script on-par with the good comic book scripts? Why is it that no major comic book writer has been accosted for any movie scripts as of now or for the future? These producers show no respect to anyone when they approach the films in the manner that they do.

To the fans, they say they will make what they want and we'll like it. To the progenitors (Stan Lee), they say shutup, take your cameo and royalty check, and get out of my face. To the writers and artists, past and present, they say yeah your stories are good for your little kiddie book, but you and your stories won't fly on the big screen. And finally to Spider-Man, they say that he isn't interesting enough to pass off to the public as-is; what can we do as people that no nothing about the character to make him better.

I've said it once and now i've said it again. Spiderman was an intoduction to the world just like x men 1. They both had good and bad points. In x men 2 we knew the world and the characters so there was more time for a decent story and action and it was an overall better movie. This is probably gonna happen in spiderman 2. All newbies know what it about now so a better story can be told.

And Doc Oc should be a really cool villian if he uses his tentacles all the time. If/When they choose to do Spiderman 3, I hope they stick with the 1 bad guy trend. Adding 2 bad guys per movie like the Batman Series made it kinda corny. So hopefully Spidey 3 won't have Rhino or Vulture because those are 2 weak ass characters. I'm truly hoping for Venom because i think he can hold his pwn for a whole movie, and it'd be cool to see some kinda chase seen where Venom is like swinging after Spidey in Down Town and Spidey is trying his best to get away.

as long as sony is producing it,dont count on it.

I think the idea of the sequal makes perfect sense. They did the first movie the way they did so they would not have to cover origns later. It makes expandinf Spider-Man's world in sequals much easier.

Stan Lee should really hang his head in shame for endorsing this movie;
Spiderman and The Hulk were just about pick up the money and run for stan lee and all involved. The casting really was weak to say the least;
Tobey Maguire as Spiderman did not work, he basically managed to look like a twelve-year old Peter Parker (so they've scrapped any chance of making 'Spider Man Jnr' ). Kirsten Dunst was too sappy as Mary Jane Watson- the kind of acting that you seriously do not believe in. That Guy as Harry Osbourne(I don't really want to know who he is) was just terrible at developing any substance to the character(or emotion, or any acting ability) Willem Dafoe as the Norman Osbourne was just criminal. For that entire film he couldn't actually manage to move his face he was that wooden and non-existent.
The goblin suit was terrible, it actually induced me into fits of hysterical laughter when I seen it - Sam Raimi and his costume designers watch too many cheap teenage flicks like Power Rangers, BeetleBorgs etc

I thought Tobey was an okay Peter,Just not good as spider-man.He didnt sound at all the way you would imiagine spider-man to sound.The way he spoke in the 90's toon,now THAT was spidey.William Defoe was a good Norman Osborn,but his performance was wooden like you said and hampered because of that horrible and laughable looking alien from outer space goblin costume with no mouth movement.It was like a ventriliguist show or something.People laughed at that costume.

my mom says all the cool kids watch beetleborgs!!! And i agree with Mr Parker on William Dafoe. he was good as norman osborne, but the costume killed the character. I still think he delivered the line "i'll get you spiderman" or was it "you haven't seen the last of me Spiderman" really well. He has a great manical voice, too bad his costume was so much of a joke. Well atleast they kept the Green Goblin green....I guess.

yah the green goblin looked stupid. but new costume or old one he would still look like someone you wanna beat the sh!t out of.

i agree