|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Oct 24, 2017 1:48:40 GMT
Before I post my assessment of SMH, I have to debunk the myth that I have an anti-MCU agenda. I've said many times before that I'm always unbiased and fair and give every MCU movie and show a fair chance. For example, despite the bad reviews for Iron Fist, I didn't think Iron Fist was that bad. MCU movies are just awful and Agents of SHIELD and Agent Carter and Jessica Jones are also awful. But Daredevil, Luke Cage, and Iron Fist aren't bad. I haven't watched The Defenders yet, so I can't comment if that's good or bad since my policy is that I never rate a movie or TV show until I've seen it for myself. So now that I've set the record straight, I'll post my unbiased and fair assessment of SMH.
SMH is the worst movie adaptation of Spider-Man ever:
1st, SMH isn't even a Spider-Man movie. SMH is just an Iron Man movie with Spider-Man as a supporting character. Tony Stark is in the beginning, middle, and end of SMH. Iron Man comes to the rescue in SMH not once but TWICE! And while we saw Wonder Woman use her bullet-deflecting bracelets and magic lasso (2 powers that are integral to the Wonder Woman character) in her movie, in SMH Spider-Man not only doesn't use his Spider-Sense (a power integral to the Spider-Man character) but also uses AI suits given to him by Tony Stark. So Spider-Man in SMH was basically just another War Machine, using an AI suit made by Tony Stark.
If in the Wonder Woman movie, Wonder Woman started battling Ares with Batarangs and Bat-grenades, then DC fans would all say that was an awful movie. But when Spider-Man uses AI suits given to him by Tony Stark and basically is just another War Machine, MCU fans all say "Wow! Best Spider-Man movie evah!" How can anyone take MCU fans seriously when they think that a Spider-Man movie with Spider-Man being basically just another War Machine by using an AI suit made by Tony Stark instead of his own unique powers is the "Best Spider-Man movie evah!"?
2nd, SMH turned Marvel's flagship character Spider-Man from a superhero who cares about using his powers for good because he has a "great responsibility" (as he learned from not stopping the thief who would kill Uncle Ben) into an immature and shallow show-off who only cares about "When is Happy Hogan going to call me back?" and "I hope Tony Stark is impressed with what I'm doing".
Now that I've posted my unbiased and fair assessment of SMH, I'll also address a couple of comments that I've received in the past from MCU fans:
1. 1 MCU fan said "there is no logical support for the idea that Marvel fans were not justified in complaining about SM3, TASM, and TASM2. It certainly wasn't just Marvel fans taking a dim view of those movies."
Spider-Man 2 and Spider-Man were 2 great movies. They were not only the 2 best Spider-Man movies ever but also 2 of the top 10 best superhero movies ever. So of course, SM3, TASM and TASM2 aren't going to measure up when compared to Spider-Man 2 and Spider-Man. But when SM3, TASM and TASM2 are compared to SMH, they're all much better than SMH for the very reason I stated above - that SMH turned Marvel's flagship character Spider-Man into an immature and shallow show-off who only cares about trying to impress Tony Stark.
2. 1 MCU fan said "I have no idea if that is your real opinion or just one that conveniently supports your overall anti-Marvel agenda."
Like I explained above, I don't have an anti-MCU agenda. And it is my real opinion that SMH is the worst movie adaptation of Spider-Man ever. 1 of the most powerful moments in Spider-Man was when Spider-Man caught up to the thief who killed Uncle Ben in the empty warehouse and Spider-Man got a good look at his face and Spider-Man for the 1st time realized that he could've easily stopped the thief earlier that night but let that thief get away. That's the defining moment in the history of the Spider-Man character because that is what drove Peter to use his powers for good.
But SMH essentially wipes out (basically retcons out) that defining moment from their version of the Spider-Man character by turning Spider-Man into an immature and shallow show-off who only cares about trying to impress Tony Stark. That's why SMH is the worst movie adaptation of Spider-Man ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Oct 24, 2017 1:52:57 GMT
Before I post my assessment of SMH, I have to debunk the myth that I have an anti-MCU agenda. I've said many times before that I'm always unbiased and fair and give every MCU movie and show a fair chance. And here is the admission of trolling, no need to read beyond this. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Oct 24, 2017 2:28:56 GMT
Before I post my assessment of SMH, I have to debunk the myth that I have an anti-MCU agenda. I've said many times before that I'm always unbiased and fair and give every MCU movie and show a fair chance. For example, despite the bad reviews for Iron Fist, I didn't think Iron Fist was that bad. MCU movies are just awful and Agents of SHIELD and Agent Carter and Jessica Jones are also awful. But Daredevil, Luke Cage, and Iron Fist aren't bad. I haven't watched The Defenders yet, so I can't comment if that's good or bad since my policy is that I never rate a movie or TV show until I've seen it for myself. So now that I've set the record straight, I'll post my unbiased and fair assessment of SMH. SMH is the worst movie adaptation of Spider-Man ever: 1st, SMH isn't even a Spider-Man movie. SMH is just an Iron Man movie with Spider-Man as a supporting character. Tony Stark is in the beginning, middle, and end of SMH. Iron Man comes to the rescue in SMH not once but TWICE! And while we saw Wonder Woman use her bullet-deflecting bracelets and magic lasso (2 powers that are integral to the Wonder Woman character) in her movie, in SMH Spider-Man not only doesn't use his Spider-Sense (a power integral to the Spider-Man character) but also uses AI suits given to him by Tony Stark. So Spider-Man in SMH was basically just another War Machine, using an AI suit made by Tony Stark.
If in the Wonder Woman movie, Wonder Woman started battling Ares with Batarangs and Bat-grenades, then DC fans would all say that was an awful movie. But when Spider-Man uses AI suits given to him by Tony Stark and basically is just another War Machine, MCU fans all say "Wow! Best Spider-Man movie evah!" How can anyone take MCU fans seriously when they think that a Spider-Man movie with Spider-Man being basically just another War Machine by using an AI suit made by Tony Stark instead of his own unique powers is the "Best Spider-Man movie evah!"?2nd, SMH turned Marvel's flagship character Spider-Man from a superhero who cares about using his powers for good because he has a "great responsibility" (as he learned from not stopping the thief who would kill Uncle Ben) into an immature and shallow show-off who only cares about "When is Happy Hogan going to call me back?" and "I hope Tony Stark is impressed with what I'm doing". Now that I've posted my unbiased and fair assessment of SMH, I'll also address a couple of comments that I've received in the past from MCU fans: 1. 1 MCU fan said " there is no logical support for the idea that Marvel fans were not justified in complaining about SM3, TASM, and TASM2. It certainly wasn't just Marvel fans taking a dim view of those movies." Spider-Man 2 and Spider-Man were 2 great movies. They were not only the 2 best Spider-Man movies ever but also 2 of the top 10 best superhero movies ever. So of course, SM3, TASM and TASM2 aren't going to measure up when compared to Spider-Man 2 and Spider-Man. But when SM3, TASM and TASM2 are compared to SMH, they're all much better than SMH for the very reason I stated above - that SMH turned Marvel's flagship character Spider-Man into an immature and shallow show-off who only cares about trying to impress Tony Stark. 2. 1 MCU fan said " I have no idea if that is your real opinion or just one that conveniently supports your overall anti-Marvel agenda." Like I explained above, I don't have an anti-MCU agenda. And it is my real opinion that SMH is the worst movie adaptation of Spider-Man ever. 1 of the most powerful moments in Spider-Man was when Spider-Man caught up to the thief who killed Uncle Ben in the empty warehouse and Spider-Man got a good look at his face and Spider-Man for the 1st time realized that he could've easily stopped the thief earlier that night but let that thief get away. That's the defining moment in the history of the Spider-Man character because that is what drove Peter to use his powers for good.
But SMH essentially wipes out (basically retcons out) that defining moment from their version of the Spider-Man character by turning Spider-Man into an immature and shallow show-off who only cares about trying to impress Tony Stark. That's why SMH is the worst movie adaptation of Spider-Man ever.I feel bad for the suckers who feel they even need to address this pablum. Carry on. |
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Oct 24, 2017 4:43:58 GMT
Your passion really should be channeled towards sports or politics.
|
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Oct 24, 2017 7:06:15 GMT
I don't mind him having the suit or the Spider Sense not being focused on too much.
This is the sixth Spider-man movie and third version of the character so it needed to mix it up a little.
Same with Uncle Ben. People already complained that The Amazing Spider-man went that route again so it would have been an awful idea to do it yet again.
|
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Oct 24, 2017 8:32:33 GMT
It was the most watered down and light hearted of all the Spidermans thats for sure. ASM2 is still the worst.
|
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Oct 24, 2017 8:54:32 GMT
Before I post my assessment of SMH, I have to debunk the myth that I have an anti-MCU agenda. I've said many times before that I'm always unbiased and fair and give every MCU movie and show a fair chance. You can say it all you wont but it's like me saying I once had a weekend long sexapalooza featuring Elizabeth Olsen, Chloe Bennet and a extra large bottle of baby oil, their both a load of bollocks.
Also u can have ur opinion but simply remember to frame it as such, simply things like adding I don't like, I don't think, imo, I thought and such, you know given that that's all you are saying is your opinion because you have no real authority to judge things universally or with any more weight than anyone else.
You should also keep in mind there are more than 1 interpretation of Spider-Man, the 5 prior movies focused on the same basic formula but Spider-Man has multiple facets to his character, one of his defining traits is he's a kid, this movie focused on that because after 5 films and 2 reboots they figured try something new, hence why this Spidey didn't showcase his Spidey sense, also the suit thing has a purpose to it, Spidey over indulges in it he even doubts his worth without it, in the end he earns the suit and it's enhancements by proving himself without it.
Lastly keep in mind Spidey wants to be an avenger for most of the film, it's an allegory for youth, being the neighbourhood Spider-Man is being young, being an avenger is being an adult, the neighbour hood spidey chases the dream of being an avenger whilst everyone is telling him enjoy being the neighbour hood spidey, until he's faced with it and he realises being your friendly neighbourhood Spider-Man is pretty cool and he embraces that, also Spidey in other media has been shown fanboying out at other heroes so it's true to the character but again different than prior movie adaptations as they existed where Spidey was the lone superhero.
It's fair if you don't like it everyone has different taste I mean rotting fish is a delicacy in some countries for Christ sake, but just because you dislike something or it doesn't fit what you wanted doesn't make something actually bad, or a poor adaptation ect just means it's not something you dig, yah dig?
|
|
|
|
Post by spooner5020 on Oct 25, 2017 15:27:01 GMT
It was the most watered down and light hearted of all the Spidermans thats for sure. ASM2 is still the worst. You act like that's a bad thing. You must have never read a Spider-Man comic. This felt exactly like one of the comics and that's a good thing. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Oct 25, 2017 15:40:52 GMT
It was the most watered down and light hearted of all the Spidermans thats for sure. ASM2 is still the worst. You act like that's a bad thing. You must have never read a Spider-Man comic. This felt exactly like one of the comics and that's a good thing. Fans of the FoX-Men comics don't like the source material, they say they like Spider-Man but dislike the Spidey comics too. |
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Oct 25, 2017 15:47:31 GMT
Yeah, you claim you're unbiased, but you wrote one of the most biased reviews I've ever read.  1st off, This is not an Iron Man movie. I don't know how many people have told you this. Everyone else who've seen it knows it's 100% a Spider-Man movie. No, Spider-Man is not another War Machine, and how can we take YOU seriously when critics and audiences claims it's one of the best Spider-Man movies when you're calling it the WORST Spider-Man movie? 2nd, this is just another interpretation of Peter Parker/Spider-Man, and definitely the most accurate Spider-Man from the Spider-Man in the comics. You say he's immature, he's a teenager for god's sake. Have you even read a Spider-Man comic? And you're complaining we didn't see Uncle Ben get shot and killed and the whole "with great power comes great responsibility." Well, I'm glad they didn't showed that otherwise it would be another beat-by-beat reboot like TASM. A reboot is supposed to do something new with the source material. Spider-Man's AI suit is new and fresh, but it's still the same character. I don't care that you didn't like it, but an unbiased review would also have some positive words to say about the film. What was good about it? Just admit you didn't like simply because it's an MCU property. |
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Oct 25, 2017 16:01:15 GMT
Toby Maguire seemed like the most accurate to the Peter Parker character from the comics.
Tom Holland's Peter Parker seems more like the Ultimate version.
|
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Oct 25, 2017 16:04:42 GMT
Toby Maguire seemed like the most accurate to the Peter Parker character from the comics. Tom Holland's Peter Parker seems more like the Ultimate version. Fair enough, though Maguire gets Peter Parker right, he doesn't get Spider-Man right. Andrew Garfield gets Spider-Man right, but he doesn't get Peter Parker right. Tom Holland perfectly blends together Peter Parker and Spider-Man IMO. Not sure if you agree. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Oct 25, 2017 16:11:15 GMT
Toby Maguire seemed like the most accurate to the Peter Parker character from the comics. Tom Holland's Peter Parker seems more like the Ultimate version. Peter was never as sadsack as Tobey made him. |
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Oct 25, 2017 17:19:20 GMT
Toby Maguire's Spider-man wasn't a sad sack. Peter Parker in the comics at least in the 60's was a quiet outcast who had a lot of troubles like looking after his aunt, making money and having trouble with girls.
The Raimi movies were pretty accurate to that what with Peter being bullied, a bit reserved, taking on a Pizza delivery job for chump change, troubles with his powers and Mary Jane.
Meanwhile Tom Holland's Peter Parker seems to have the good life so far not like his old comic counterpart at all.
It is true that Holland blends the Peter Parker and Spider-man role the best of the three through.
|
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Oct 25, 2017 17:55:21 GMT
Toby Maguire's Spider-man wasn't a sad sack. Peter Parker in the comics at least in the 60's was a quiet outcast who had a lot of troubles like looking after his aunt, making money and having trouble with girls. The Raimi movies were pretty accurate to that what with Peter being bullied, a bit reserved, taking on a Pizza delivery job for chump change, troubles with his powers and Mary Jane. Meanwhile Tom Holland's Peter Parker seems to have the good life so far not like his old comic counterpart at all. It is true that Holland blends the Peter Parker and Spider-man role the best of the three through. I am very familiar with Spider-Man from the early days of the comics onward and I think you exaggerate both how bad his life was in the 60's comics and how good his life was in SMH. I think they were pretty close. And I am speaking as someone who loves the Sam Raimi Spider-Man trilogy. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2017 17:57:36 GMT
Toby Maguire seemed like the most accurate to the Peter Parker character from the comics. Tom Holland's Peter Parker seems more like the Ultimate version. No, he isn't. For one, Parker became able to stand up for himself after gaining his powers while Maguire's Parker remains a big sad sack. And yes, he IS a sad sack. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2017 17:59:26 GMT
Toby Maguire's Spider-man wasn't a sad sack. Peter Parker in the comics at least in the 60's was a quiet outcast who had a lot of troubles like looking after his aunt, making money and having trouble with girls. The Raimi movies were pretty accurate to that what with Peter being bullied, a bit reserved, taking on a Pizza delivery job for chump change, troubles with his powers and Mary Jane. Meanwhile Tom Holland's Peter Parker seems to have the good life so far not like his old comic counterpart at all. It is true that Holland blends the Peter Parker and Spider-man role the best of the three through. I own a compilation of Spider-Man's very first year in circulation, and you're exaggerating on Comic!Parker's lot in life. If anything, Holland is the most accurate to depiction of Parker and Spider-man to date. |
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Oct 25, 2017 18:11:03 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Oct 25, 2017 18:20:20 GMT
Peter Parker had it bad in the comics, he was bullied by Flash, an outcast, no actual friend characters, his aunt was old and frail, she went really ill at one point and was hospitalised, he was dirt poor, everyone hated Spider-man,his body was a dick etc.
Meanwhile Holland's Spider-man has it good. He's not bullied. He has a close friend in Ned, other friends from the spelling thing, a young healthy aunt, a good looking girl liked him, he went on a date to the school dance, he's in good with Iron Man who made him an expensive suit and people have no problem with Spider-man.
He's having a ball. That was nothing like the original comic Spider-man. Maguire's Spider-man was definitely most like the original Peter Parker.
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Oct 25, 2017 18:31:55 GMT
Peter Parker had it bad in the comics, he was bullied by Flash, an outcast, no actual friend characters, his aunt was old and frail, she went really ill at one point and was hospitalised, he was dirt poor, everyone hated Spider-man,his body was a dick etc. Meanwhile Holland's Spider-man has it good. He's not bullied. He has a close friend in Ned, other friends from the spelling thing, a young healthy aunt, a good looking girl liked him, he went on a date to the school dance, he's in good with Iron Man who made him an expensive suit and people have no problem with Spider-man. He's having a ball. That was nothing like the original comic Spider-man. Maguire's Spider-man was definitely most like the original Peter Parker. Agreed. In Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2, Peter also has to deal with a jerk boss, struggling to pay his rent, taking care of his elderly aunt, and relationship problems with Mary Jane. When watching the Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2, you feel for Peter because we've all had those kinds of similar problems at 1 time or another. Peter was truly the underdog that everyone wants to root for.
But in SMH, Peter had it easy. Peter wasn't an underdog but an immature and shallow show-off. No one wants to root for a character like that.
|
|
