You shouldve seen the mask they originally inteded for the movie. It looked sick. No idea why they switched it for Power Rangers costume. Just replace purple underwear with Ultimate-like coat/robe and with that mask.. it wouldve worked imo.
Azula: My mommy didn't love me so I'm going to burn down your village.
I preferred Spider-Man from 2002, and the Goblin was a better baddie, with Dafoe doing an excellent job in the role. However the costume was pretty poor, looking like a rejected suit from the Power Rangers...
"Spider-Man" felt like a diehard fan capturing as much of the essence of the character as he can, and showed the world that you can be faithful to a comic and still be a good film.
"Amazing Spider-Man" felt like a studio product made by people that like money.
The only thing the original spidy had was Dafoe and Simmons imo. Well those were stand outs but the 2nd movie was decent and Sandman was caste perfectly imo. There is a lot they didn't have in those movies that made it lack the feel of spider-man.
I like the new one much better, though its not perfect.
The old one had a cringe-worthingly bad villain, ever since I first saw the film at the cinema I couldn't believe that that power-rangers costume was the best they could do, not only was it nothing like the original character, but it looked very, very cheap IMO. Also Willem Defoe must've asked for more face time as the guy kept feeling like he needed to reveal his face all the time. Outside of that Tobey Maguire's creepy stepford wives-style Spider-Man has never sat right with me, and there was very little chemistry between PP and MJ.
The only things that jarred with me about the new one was Peter's look, it was just too pretty-boy indie-kid for me, with the quafed hair and skateboard. Other than that they could've maybe done a little more with the bad guy, it may have been an idea to cut down the origin story and spend more time fleshing out the Lizard, but I can still see why they ended up making the decisions they did.