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

Which Peter Parker do you like better?

Tobey. You can't beat that level of awkwardness. A freakin geek machine.
I actually felt sorry for him as he got beat up in his films. He had ZERO ego as was shown in his weird facial expressions and dance attempts. I believed he was a loser with superpowers and massive guilt issues.

Garfield on the other hand, I would of prefered it if the Lizard tore him to shreds.
this film wasn't neccesarily a bad idea, it was just too soon. The only reason it existed was because Sony had to keep the franchise through making more films.
And although they ranted about how this film was "for the fans" it's dark and edgy presentation lost that quirky, bright and zanyness people liked about Spidey in the first place.

^ It seems like your dislike of the new film is making you bias.

Garfield was sooooo much better as Parker. Tobey's just not a good actor. The guy can hardly speak. That's why he's had no success since Spiderman 3 which was 5 years ago now.

Garfield on the other hand clearly has a great career ahead of him.

* we are talking about who played Peter Parker better... it's not about who's the better actor or has more potential in the future... for me, it's Tobey... he's clearly more recognizable as Parker than Garfield...

Originally posted by the ninjak
The only reason it existed was because Sony had to keep the franchise through making more films.

* very true... why don't they just give it up so we can see Spidey with the Avengers? i love to see all Marvel characters in one awesome movie...

It'd have to last at least as long as the extended Return of the King... and even then it wouldn't be enough to do them all justice.

Originally posted by peejayd
i love to see all Marvel characters in one awesome movie...
I agree in terms of Spider-Man but really thing Garfield was a creepy, twitchy douchebag rather than a loveable dork like Maguire. As for All the characters that have been Avengers... Would that include the lame Monica Rambeau Captain Marvel and D-Man?

I liked Tobys parker though his spiderman was lacking the actual spiderman feel. That could have just been bad writing though.

Originally posted by peejayd
* we are talking about who played Peter Parker better... it's not about who's the better actor or has more potential in the future... for me, it's Tobey... he's clearly more recognizable as Parker than Garfield...



* very true... why don't they just give it up so we can see Spidey with the Avengers? i love to see all Marvel characters in one awesome movie... Well, he's more recognizable because he's been Spider-man for over 10 years, that doesnt mean he's better at it. I do believe Garfield fits better for the role. Especially as Spider-man. Better built for the part, nerdy, awkward, looks like Pete, good actor and has one thing Tobey's SM lacks. Right voice. Sure we cant know how Spider-man sounds from comics but we do know that he talks. A lot. And Maguire simply doesn't sound like someone who can make jokes or run his mouth during a fight or do it and make it sound natural at the same time. His voice is kind of annoying. Not "shut your mouth already!" kind of annoying (which wouldve been a good thing) but The "scraping chalkboard with your fingernails" kind of annoying. That kind of ruins his SM.

Originally posted by SamZED
Well, he's more recognizable because he's been Spider-man for over 10 years, that doesnt mean he's better at it. I do believe Garfield fits better for the role. Especially as Spider-man. Better built for the part, nerdy, awkward, looks like Pete, good actor and has one thing Tobey's SM lacks. Right voice. Sure we cant know how Spider-man sounds from comics but we do know that he talks. A lot. And Maguire simply doesn't sound like someone who can make jokes or run his mouth during a fight or do it and make it sound natural at the same time. His voice is kind of annoying. Not "shut your mouth already!" kind of annoying (which wouldve been a good thing) but The "scraping chalkboard with your fingernails" kind of annoying. That kind of ruins his SM.

Garfield/Stone scenes were annoying as hell. They could have done those so much better.

Originally posted by SamZED
Well, he's more recognizable because he's been Spider-man for over 10 years, that doesnt mean he's better at it. I do believe Garfield fits better for the role. Especially as Spider-man. Better built for the part, nerdy, awkward, looks like Pete, good actor

* arguable, friend... Tobey's fit for Peter/Spidey too... he's also nerdy, awkward, he also looks like Peter and a good actor as well...

Originally posted by SamZED
and has one thing Tobey's SM lacks. Right voice. Sure we cant know how Spider-man sounds from comics but we do know that he talks. A lot. And Maguire simply doesn't sound like someone who can make jokes or run his mouth during a fight or do it and make it sound natural at the same time. His voice is kind of annoying. Not "shut your mouth already!" kind of annoying (which wouldve been a good thing) but The "scraping chalkboard with your fingernails" kind of annoying. That kind of ruins his SM.

* i agree on this part though... i'm not annoyed by his voice though, it's just that he does not a lot, unlike Spidey in comics especially when fighting with the villains...

Originally posted by peejayd
* we are talking about who played Peter Parker better... it's not about who's the better actor or has more potential in the future... for me, it's Tobey... he's clearly more recognizable as Parker than Garfield...



No Tobey's acting was terrible. Parker/Spiderman is a wisecracking cocky SOB. Tobey could hardly talk properly let alone pull that off.

Garfield on the other hand pulled it off brilliantly.

Originally posted by the ninjak
The only reason it existed was because Sony had to keep the franchise through making more films.


Originally posted by peejayd


* very true...

Well no because they could have easily made it a Spidey 4, and begged Maguire to stay if he was that good. But the fact is, he was very replaceable.

Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
Garfield/Stone scenes were annoying as hell. They could have done those so much better.

Oh please. That was such a well done romance story. In comparison the Maguire/Dunst romance was just not believable at all!

No, it wasn't well done. It sucked.

Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
No, it wasn't well done. It sucked.

Lol. What am I reading?

Originally posted by Based
Lol. What am I reading?

Bad taste in Romance stories.

It wasn't a romance, it was a catastrophe.

Didn't like it either tbh. The secret Id revelation could've been done much better.

It was much more believable and enjoyable than the Maguire/Dunst rubbish.

Not really. It made that one look great, tbh. That just shows how bad it was.

Chemistry between Garfield and Stone was amazing. That was one of the things most reviews pointed out. Just because you didn't like it, doesn't make it bad. General opinion is that it was pulled off very well.

If that's true, then general opinion can kiss my ass

I didn't think it was terrible. I thought it was midicore. But like another poster said I liked it much better then Dunst and Maguire. That could be my personal bias against Kirstin Dunst though.

Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
If that's true, then general opinion can kiss my ass And minority opinion can kiss my ass. wavey

Originally posted by Arachnid1
And minority opinion can kiss my ass. wavey

I'll eat your soul.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
No Tobey's acting was terrible.

* he wasn't that good... but he wasn't that bad either...

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Parker/Spiderman is a wisecracking cocky SOB. Tobey could hardly talk properly let alone pull that off.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Garfield on the other hand pulled it off brilliantly.

* nah... exchange their scripts, and you'll reverse your argument... if Tobey was given Garfield's role, he could've pull it off as well...

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Well no because they could have easily made it a Spidey 4, and begged Maguire to stay if he was that good. But the fact is, he was very replaceable.

* so is Garfield... i think the difference here is not the actor but the script given... if Tobey was given a better script and a better story, he could've pull it off as well...

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Oh please. That was such a well done romance story. In comparison the Maguire/Dunst romance was just not believable at all!

* i do agree that Garfield-Stone loveteam has a chemistry more than Maguire-Dunst... but Maguire-Dunst, inspite the lack of chemsitry, managed to create an iconic kissing scene (with Spidey updown) that makes up for it... with that alone, Garfield-Stone pales in comparison...

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
^ It seems like your dislike of the new film is making you bias.

Garfield was sooooo much better as Parker. Tobey's just not a good actor. The guy can hardly speak. That's why he's had no success since Spiderman 3 which was 5 years ago now.

Garfield on the other hand clearly has a great career ahead of him.

you nailed it,could not have said it better myself.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
No Tobey's acting was terrible. Parker/Spiderman is a wisecracking cocky SOB. Tobey could hardly talk properly let alone pull that off.

Garfield on the other hand pulled it off brilliantly.





Well no because they could have easily made it a Spidey 4, and begged Maguire to stay if he was that good. But the fact is, he was very replaceable.



Oh please. That was such a well done romance story. In comparison the Maguire/Dunst romance was just not believable at all!

you took the maguire apologists to school there.

Toby Maguire all the way.