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

What film series version of Spider-Man is better written and how would you rate them as a fan of this web slinging superhero. Did the Sam Raimi films capture the feel of the comics better or was it the MCU that had it done just right?.

I like the Raimi films personally. Still think Spiderman 2 is the best superhero made.

Raimi's Spiderman 2 is by far the best ever Spiderman film, HOWEVER I like Tom Holland and I'm enjoying his take and looking forward to seeing him for yeas to come.

Sam Raimi's Spider-Man are far superior as movies and adaptations (though Homecoming is still an overall better movie than Spider-Man 3).

The Raimi trilogy isn't completely accurate, the filmmakers took plenty of creative liberties, but I'd say it gets more right than wrong, and they're definitely the most faithful Spider-Man movies, though they are some liberties that were just unnecessary. However, being 100% faithful to the source material isn't really possible unless if you make a literal direct panel to panel adaptation, that's something that honestly may not actually translate that well on screen for a Spider-Man movie. I don't think all the liberties that Raimi took were that bad, a lot of them were quite trivial and complaining about them is nitpicking. I actually liked some of the creative liberties they took, they worked well for the stories they were trying to tell.

MCU Spider-Man movies are decent movies, but not good adaptations.

Originally posted by YousufKhan1212
Sam Raimi's Spider-Man are far superior as movies and adaptations (though Homecoming is still an overall better movie than Spider-Man 3).

The Raimi trilogy isn't completely accurate, the filmmakers took plenty of creative liberties, but I'd say it gets more right than wrong, and they're definitely the most faithful Spider-Man movies, though they are some liberties that were just unnecessary. However, being 100% faithful to the source material isn't really possible unless if you make a literal direct panel to panel adaptation, that's something that honestly may not actually translate that well on screen for a Spider-Man movie. I don't think all the liberties that Raimi took were that bad, a lot of them were quite trivial and complaining about them is nitpicking. I actually liked some of the creative liberties they took, they worked well for the stories they were trying to tell.

MCU Spider-Man movies are decent movies, but not good adaptations.


venom was an aberration lol

Sam Raimi.

Even if 3 was a bit of a mess.

Supposedly they are bringing Alfred Molina back as Doc Ock for the next film.

Eh.

Originally posted by Surtur
Supposedly they are bringing Alfred Molina back as Doc Ock for the next film.

Eh.

https://i.postimg.cc/ZKD6r9tp/OIP.jpg

I think Andrew Garfield is the best spiderman. His sequel just sucked

Originally posted by tkitna
I like the Raimi films personally. Still think Spiderman 2 is the best superhero made.

I watched Spider-Man 3 recently for the first time, basically since it was released. I remembered it being the weakest of the trilogy, but holy shit was it bad. It was so bad it kind of soured the other two for me, knowing how bad of a note the story ends on.

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
venom was an aberration lol

Not completely. Venom wasn't done completely right, but that's largely because Raimi didn't understand the character that well and he's even admitted that he didn't understand Venom. Raimi wasn't a big fan of Venom because the character was introduced in the 1980s, the material that Raimi liked the most were the silver age comics. Raimi originally wanted Vulture as a villain for Spider-Man 3, Vulture was in the earlier drafts and Raimi even had talks with Ben Kingsley, but Vulture was removed from the script and replaced by Venom.

And let's be fair, Raimi didn't get Eddie Brock wrong in terms of personality. Topher Grace's Eddie Brock was actually based on the Ultimate comics version of Eddie as well as the 90s show, who by the way was a dishonest incel who tried to entice 15 year old Gwen Stacy in having sex, and Eddie's roommate described him as a "psycho" with incel tendencies due to constantly being rejected by girls. Topher Grace's Eddie was pretty similar to that (creeping on Gwen Stacy and trying to hit on Betty Brant who told him to go away etc.), albeit a bit toned down due to PG-13 rating. Eddie Brock in the 90s show was a rival photographer of Peter Parker that Peter really disliked due to his dishonesty, and we see something similar to that in Spider-Man 3.

Raimi, easily.

The contents you share are really helpful to me. I hope you will provide more great information. bmi calculator

Raimi caught the feeling of the character better (even if his films did get cheesy AF at times)...

Dont get that feeling of loneliness at all from MCU Spidey. I guess thats tough when youre best pals with Iron Man. But I get it, they had to move the movies on, we got plenty of sad lonely Peter Parker in the previous films.

MCU Spidey has only really worked in the confines of CA: CW, Infinity War and Endgame. His solo movies have been, story wise, underwhelming. Far From Home had one of the best stand alone sequences in the MCU though with the illusions segment. That was great.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
MCU Spidey has only really worked in the confines of CA: CW, Infinity War and Endgame.


Yeah was an absolute joy having him in those movies.