CBM Debate! Spider-Man 4 Vs. The Amazing Spider-Man

CBM Debate! Spider-Man 4 Vs. The Amazing Spider-Man

Logical debate between the two sides of the argument. Winner takes all!

Follow LMFA0:
By LMFA0 - 5/7/2011
Hello fellow comic book lovers! Lately I have heard many people on this website bashing and ranting about the new Spider Man movie and others who bash the previous Spider Man Trilogy. The thing is I, like many people, am tired of hearing people whine and complain with little to know fact or logic behind their comments about either of these movie franchises.

So here’s my proposal: We have a debate! Now, what I mean by debate is that there will be two sides. One side of the debate will be the people who are for the new Spider Man franchise. These people will have to state why they like it, what they didn’t like about the other franchise, and must write persuasively in order to convince the other side this movie is worth watching and supporting. The other side, the people who are for the previous franchise will be debating why they love the old franchise, what they don’t like about the new one, and try to persuade the other side that Sony has made a mistake and Spider Man 4 should have been made.

The rules are simple, but many will break them.
There will be no bashing, ranting, or incoherent comments! You must base your argument ON FACT! No speculation is allowed due to the fact it is just that, speculation.

All comments must be LOGICAL AND FACT BASED! Deductions will be made for people who don’t follow the rules! Those of you that follow the rules and make proper arguments will be rewarded one point. Likewise, those who do not follow the rules will have one point deducted.

The results will be posted Next Sunday May 15th.

Good luck and may the best, and most logical side win!
DISCLAIMER: This article was submitted by a volunteer contributor who has agreed to our code of conduct. ComicBookMovie.com is protected from liability under "safe harbor" provisions and will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. For expeditious removal, contact us HERE.
0
LIKE!
32 Comments
JBatesyFilmreviews - 5/7/2011, 10:48 AM
From what it looks like, the Amazing Spiderman is sticking much more closer to the comic book. However it is also willing to deliver a fresh new take on the character, eg the suit, the science school he will go to etc... I mean, seriously there were rumors that Raimi was going to mix felicia hardy with the character the vulture to create the vultress. I doubt that would have gone down well with fans everywhere!
BrotherStarkofMABMindz - 5/7/2011, 11:34 AM
I would rather see Spider-Man 4, because I loved the direction Raimi was going with the franchise and if we could possibly see the Sinister Six in the saga, so I'm pissed they choose to reboot it

DAMN YOU SONY
Batman72012 - 5/7/2011, 11:46 AM
As a fan of raimi's movies,I loved SM1 and SM2 and was able to withstand 3 but it pains me to say that the amazing spider-man looks far better than the crapfest that spider-man 4 would have been.
CraptainAmerica - 5/7/2011, 11:56 AM
Raimi did a great job. My anticipation for the reboot takes nothing away from a (almost) great trilogy.

BUT any movie that was gonna use John Malkovich as it's main villain was never going to excite me. Anyways, we as fans asked for Venom (as did the studio) and that was ultimately the thirds undoing.

I welcome this change of direction.
Dynamo - 5/7/2011, 12:00 PM
Bring on the reboot.
golden123 - 5/7/2011, 12:06 PM
Why is there no love for the people that would rather there not be a reboot or Spider-Man 4? You assume everybody wants to see another Spider-Man movie. Let Raimi's flicks rest in peace for at least ten years (preferably at least twenty years).
Dynamo - 5/7/2011, 12:13 PM
@Golden123

Twenty?! God no. 7 years is enough...
tehdude - 5/7/2011, 12:22 PM
I agree with golden. Continuing or rebooting the franchise feels like they're just trying to play it safe. Try something new. Find a new franchise that has potential and maybe ten to fifteen years later we can see a reboot of this franchise if it's absolutely needed.
PaulRom - 5/7/2011, 3:52 PM
From what I heard, Spidey 4 would've been quite a mediocre film to say the least. I'd love to see the Vulture brought onto the big screen, but apparently he was gonna be MJ's dad? Huh? And Felicia Hardy was gonna be a Vultress instead of Black Cat? Wow.
And Trudey, I believe Sony really pushed Raimi around, which is what damaged SM3. From one website: Raimi walked off Spider-Man 4 specifically because Sony was pushing him around the way they did on Spider-Man 3, and now they're free to hire a complete yes-man who will put five villains into the script and get Mary Jane to show her boobs. Movies directed by a studio with dollar signs in their eyes will never, ever be good. Sony apparently had more control over screwing things up, since Raimi's first two films are gold.
And concerning the reboot, I think it's too soon. I mean...it'll be out five years after SM3 and 10 years after SM1. It's not like Hulk were you can easily reboot it after half a decade. Marc Webb has on his hands a complete revamp of perhaps the most successful CBM franchise of all time, it's not easy to do something like this so soon.
As to whether they should've gone with the reboot or SM4, I think they should've made at least one more film ending the series on a perfect note, then wait a few years before rebooting. The cast of Raimi's films are getting older and can't continue to play characters a decade younger. Perhaps the reboot was the best thing for the franchise after all...but it still feels too son.
Zelikee1 - 5/7/2011, 5:06 PM
Ok here is how I see it:I second Craptain America's comment that the last trilogy had some really GREAT aspects and did so much for the entire cbm genre. I was like 11 when SPIDER-MAN came out. True there were several things that were changed (organic web, hairy fingers, no gwen, skipped over highschool-spidey career), or miscast (MJ really is nothing like she is in those movies... nothing)but what those films got was the heart of spider-man, this was NOT the BATMAN AND ROBIN or CATWOMAN of the marvel movies they didn't say 'Hey lets take this crappy kiddy comic book character and change it until it is unrecognisable and then market it to everyone and we'll make more dough!' I believe that regardless of its faults the first trilogy had its heart in the right place.

That said...

I am embracing a new take on the character. I'm looking at it as if a new writer/artist team is coming onto the book after a decade of one guy's interpretation. Sure it may take a while to be completly comfortable with how he draws the suit or which villain they tackle BUT this is a chance to see a different side of the character.

Like I said the first trilogy did a great job but one thing that was mostly ignored was a fundamental part of who spiderman is: his sense of humour. Anyone who reads spiderman will know that when he is fighting a villain he is yammering away shooting as many quips as he does thwips (that's the webbing sound affect for non readers) and peter's humour is there when he is out of costume, just more subdued. If they had have incorperated this significant character trait then it would have gone a long way in helping pace the movie by breaking up the serious stuff with segments of RELEVENT humour rather than throwing random stuff in to break up the gloom of peter's life; and it would have allowed Tobey to get his acting chops around that part of the character, which he did pretty well in SPIDER-MAN2 THE VIDEOGAME, instead of being percieved as the WHINEY spider-man.
Now Andrew Garfield, at first everyone was like WHO THE [frick]! i don't know this bozo! and there was a lot of hate, ironically, i recall, from people (cough JOSHW: I WILL NEVER WATCH THIS MOVIE cough : P) who are now his most avid supporters and the reason we like the guy is: he is one of us. He talked in several interviews when it was first announced how honoured he was and how this is a dream come true, how he used to climb up doorframes and run around being spiderman, not just when he was like 5 but right the way through. He's watched and read all the stuff and loves LOVES the character. How can you hate that guy? I know Tobey read the first hundred ASM comics but he never seemed THAT thrilled to be the character.
I think being a real fan, Garfield will know how spidey should sound and how he would react when a giant scaly lizard lunges on top of him, snapping its deadly five-inch razor-teeth and drooling everywhere. 'WHOA, buddy!Can you say Halitosis?'
PaulRom - 5/7/2011, 5:56 PM
@Trudey I assume you didn't catch the sarcasm in that site's quote? And how does it contradict itself?
And FYI, Raimi did express interest in having Lizard in a future Spiderman film. Same with Dylan Baker. also, even if SM4 was made, I believe Raimi would've made the Vulture awesome, like how he turned Sandman from an obscure villain to a perfect translation on screen. And look at Spectacular Spiderman's take on Vulture....THATS the way to do the guy, instead of some dude with actual feathers. I think Raimi would've done the character justice as he had with all villains except Venom and Green Goblin to a degree.
PaulRom - 5/7/2011, 6:41 PM
@Trudey just because thy say one thing sarcastically doesn't mean they're not credible.
And I dont think Connors was in the first Spiderman film...he was definitely in the other two though. And that's correct, Lizard might've been in Spidey 5 or 6 if the franchise wasn't rebooted.
thesymbiote - 5/7/2011, 8:37 PM
I would honestly have been pretty nervous about Spider-Man 4 after Spider-Man 3 being quite a disappointment for me. I know that Raimi was forced into putting Venom, but at the same time, there was no need for emo Peter or the dance scene. Even if he was forced to put Venom, he could have done a MUCH better job.

Was I upset about a reboot? To be completely honest, yes I was initially. Way back when it was first announced.

But my opinions about it have changed since then. I personally like Marc Webb's style a lot in 500 DoS and I really love the cast of this movie (I never liked Kirsten Dunst). I also started really liking this reboot because of the story going way back to the source material.

Was a reboot needed? Maybe not. Maybe another director could just continue in Raimi's universe. But there's a big fear of mine that it could then become what Batman started becoming in the 90s.

But the more I thought of it, the more and more I started seeing so many restrictions in the "Raimi universe". The Peter/MJ angst was getting really gimmicky, so they couldn't do that. Or if they did, it would start becoming Twilight bad. Yes, there were other villains. But let's be honest, Peter's love-life has always been a big part of Spidey. So it would be damned if they do, damned if they don't. Not to mention Peter (Peter, not Spider-Man) was getting unlikable. Fast. There was so much whining it was ridiculous.

But I can see why fsucsu and others would want Raimi. For whatever their flaws, I still loved the movies. But I'm open and welcome to change when its being done by a cast that I really like and a director that I really want to see more of.

Sidenote though - Yeah, fsucsu, I argued with you about Webb, but that doesn't mean I disagree with everything you say. But you already know my point of view about supporting upcoming, younger directors in the film industry.

PSS: Just read what your worries about Garfield's acting, fsucsu. Watch Social Network. Its a fantastic movie, and Andrew Garfield was outstanding in it. As for a whiny bitch Peter that you were talking about...wasn't Toby Maguire's Peter a whiny bitch by the end of it? And this is coming from a girl who loves a good angst story (part of why I love Spider-Man so much as an everyman).
LoudLon - 5/7/2011, 10:50 PM
I've read Sam Raimi's treatment for Spider-Man 4 (it's available online on numerous screenplay sites) and honestly, I don't think it would have worked. It seemed even more hokey than SM3 was. I'm glad in a way they've opted to simply reboot the franchise, with a movie which focuses on Spidey's early/high school years.

That said, while I am very interested in seeing what they do with The Amazing Spider-Man...I'm one of those haters who cannot stand the costume. It's already been made apparent by the success of the previous Spidey films that his classic, iconic costume works on screen. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. This new costume...I just can't stand it.

But, in keeping with the OP's wishes, I won't get any more hateful than that about it.

To sum up: glad they opted to start fresh. Raimi's Spider-Man 2 was, and is, one of the very best CBMs ever made IMO -- but it went quickly downhill after that and was only going to get worse, judging by his treatment for 4.
Zelikee1 - 5/8/2011, 12:23 AM
@fsucsu
As far as I've read, Garfield's comments were that the Spider-man story was as important as Greek Mythology or Shakespeare, not saying that Peter Parker or any of the characters were in any way Shakespearian.
daredevilfan - 5/8/2011, 8:32 AM
i vote spider man 4
JWStubner - 5/8/2011, 12:20 PM
I'm a huge fan of movie franchises having continuity to them so I'm pretty pissed they just decided to reboot so soon. Now it seems we're just going to get Sony's version of Spider-Man anyways without any continuity from the already established characters. Movie goers don't like that. They want a story to follow and continue to follow like Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings and we had that and now we have to start all over again. Who's to say they don't reboot again. Sony should have just kept going with whatever plans they had for Spider man 4 and replaced the actors instead of doing a full fledged reboot.
RadicalDuck - 5/8/2011, 12:33 PM
@fsucsu - I wasn't sure whether you were referring to me or not on the comment boards- I've been in many awkward situations of mistaken identity so I didn't want to assume anything! :-p

In all honesty there are points for both here- I do agree with fsucsu in that, whilst Spider-Man 3 is the weakest in the franchise, it by all means is no Batman and Robin. I think the main problem of that was the studio interference- the fact that Raimi clearly hates Venom is apparent in the way his story is told and this is one of the things that I dislike most in Raimi's trilogy. The trilogy has its flaws, but then again, dont so many of the others? Its one of the main film series which I grew up on and just because of several mistakes and a lot of hate for its final chapter I'm not going to fully dismiss it as a valid interpretation of a worldwide icon, even if some things irritate me.You have to hand it to him though- Spider-Man 1 is definately part of why CBM's are so popular today- its a strong foundational film which has paved the way for most that we see today.

I'm excited by a lot of the reboot because I think it opens a great deal of opportunities for the franchise. It does pain me though to have to go through the motions of the whole origin story again, and I think it should have probably been left another five years or so before trying to start afresh. Also, after seeing some of Garfield's stuff he most certainly has the goods to make the role his own. And whilst some aspects of the production do worry me somewhat, I'll be honest and say that the chance to see Spider-Man back in the cinema again...it is a prospect that makes me happy :-)
Mrcool210 - 5/8/2011, 12:55 PM
Altough i liked raimi's trilogy im excited or the reboot. Im this way because i believe with the new ome thier going ot be more true to how the character is the acotr is acually a fan of the character unlike tobey there going for more drama less action which once again is like how it was in the comics and they are going for a villian that we all want to see. Raimi i love ya, but its time for webb's spider-man (get it) to swing in
Frogman - 5/8/2011, 2:42 PM
Can we not love the original trilogy AND like the direction of the reboot? Also I don't get the "too soon" argument, Batman Begins was 8 years after Batman & Robin, that franchise too was heading downhill so this isn't THAT different.
RadicalDuck - 5/8/2011, 3:04 PM
@fsucsu - wow! Thanks very much! :-D

@Frogman - I don't see why we can't really in all honesty. I love and respect the Raimi trilogy as great films whilst accepting the flaws that I see/hold as a Spider-Man fanboy but I think that one of my main worries about the reboot is it being born out of a row over studio interference- if this sort of thing gave us the sadly mis-handled Venom for the sake of audience pulling power, then I am sceptical about whether it will be a decent film that does the Spidey justice or a 2 and 1/2 hour long figure advertisment. As I say, there are definately great possibilities for the reboot. One thing I am disappointed about it the lack of inclusion in the Marvel Cinematic Universe- I would have loved to see Spidey swing past an advert for Stark Industries. However, I think a Spidey cinematic universe would work well and by that I mean a cause/effect event strucure within the movie world. If anyone saw 'The Spectacular Spider-Man' tv series, I think it demonstrated how well it can be done, with villains being created by other villains, who return several episodes later because of intervening events etc. Raimi didn't really expand on it, but kept it limited to the main cast, which is great for drama and interplay between the characters but if you're trying to replicate the comic book world onscreen, you have to be prepared to expand the horizons somewhat to include something that could potentially be an epicly intricate and intelligent multi-film story...sorry to bore the whole of the website, just sharing my ideas :-p
Deadshot - 5/8/2011, 5:24 PM
"A reboot was completely needed:
Oh yes I mean spider-man 3 was such a financial loss, right?

"considering what a mess Spider-Man 3 was combined with Raimi apparently losing his mind with making Felicia Hardy as "The Vulteress".

The Vulteress character only existed in ONE early draft, and there were 11 drafts. It was cut before spiderman 4 was, so stop using it as an excuse for why the movie should not have been made.

"SONY told him this was not working out and he walked."

Wooohooo! We lost a director who actually cared enough about the character to not take the 20 million paycheck if it meant making a shitty movie?

"After watching the critical and finacial success WB/DC had with a gritty reboot of Batman followed by TDK. SONY knew all along a campy, cartoony and flawed franchise that Raimi left them with after Spider-Man 3 was not good enough."

Raimi's Spider-man ushered in the wave of these comicbook films, it showed how much potential they had to not just be enjoyable to fans of the source material but to movie goers.

"considering what kind of money a cutting edge and gritty Spider-Man movie can pull in."

Yes because we all know Spider-man works best as a dark character that seeks vengeance on the death of his parents when they were shot down in front of his very eyes when he was very young....err wait that was someone else.

"Enter talented young filmaker Marc Webb and hot young actor Andrew Garfield."

I suppose all it takes is one film to be "talented" in this mediocre day and age. And the giraffe with the skateboard, i'm not sure why you'd consider him hot whether its appearance wise or career wise.

"A villain thats been teased for 3 movies straight in The Lizard.."
I think nearly all can agree the payoff would have been MUCH better if it was the same actor and the same universe.

"is more than worth.. THE VULTERESS is you ask me."
Again, that character was gone before the movie was.

"The Sandman Uncle Ben's murder accomplice i'm sure wasn't."
From what I'm hearing this deviation from the source material is nothing compared to what we will be seeing. Believe me.

"Was anybody actualy interested in seeing The Vulture in Spider-Man 4?"

An older villain might have been a nice change?

"Then it wasn't even Black Cat in the film.. she would be The Vulturess.. LOL."
Sigh...again?
tehdude - 5/8/2011, 5:30 PM
@Deadshot- thank you. some of these people are completely stupid. Dark gritty spiderman? yeah, no. Raimi embraced the cheesyness of the comic series.
daredevilfan - 5/8/2011, 5:38 PM
think its possible for the reboot to flop and spider man 4 gets made
RadicalDuck - 5/8/2011, 6:20 PM
@Deadshot - "From what I'm hearing this deviation from the source material is nothing compared to what we will be seeing. Believe me."

Why what have you heard thats being changed?
Seriously, I'm not bein sarky I'm genuinely interested.
Deadshot - 5/8/2011, 6:31 PM
Can't really say much man wish I could, and what my sources have said could just be total bull**** anyway, and I hope it is.
Freshkicks1212 - 5/8/2011, 9:59 PM
oh I think my comment will better suit here
Freshkicks1212 - 5/8/2011, 9:59 PM
Sony were money greedy bastard and imposed on Raimi's plans for spiderman 4 with alot of stupid ideas so they disagreed and Raimi left the franchise. So Sony decide to do a reboot without him and this is how we ended up with this reboot that has almost less than half the budget of the first Spiderman Film. and ironically Sony was against Ramimi idea of Lizard being the Villain in Spiderman 4 and Now hes the villain in this movie. So you cant really trash Raimi's work in favor of what sony is doing now with this reboot because personally for me the bad out weights the good...And I Hate That Shit Suit!!
Frogman - 5/9/2011, 2:11 AM
@SotoJuiceMan: If I could like your comment I would. I see them as different universes too! Just like I see the movies as a separate universe from the comics, I think some people get too wrapped up in trying to make them one and the same.
CaptainDC - 5/9/2011, 4:41 PM
Although I did not like the idea at first, now I'm starting to warm up to it. Kirsten Dunst was a terrible Mary Jane, and the 3rd movie was one of the worst comic book movies in history, fact. Stupid and boring, this new chance gives Spiderman a brand new outlook that we can hope will always be promising. It'll be a fun ride to see how Spiderman should be
RadicalDuck - 5/11/2011, 1:45 AM
@daredevilfan- thats just not going to happen I'm afraid. Spider-Man 4 I mean.
RadicalDuck - 5/12/2011, 8:10 AM
@SotoJuiceMan- exactly! I didn't notice it until I came on here until everyone started pointing it out!

And matthuliz- I seriously think we're past Joel Schumacher now - I think Hollywood has learned its lesson there. As I've said in earlier posts, I highly doubt that Sony would let him walk around like that. I mean this is the studio that interferred so much that Sam Raimi left. Most people are saying this costume is specifically designed to look awesome in 3D- who knows? Maybe it'll be edited out or recoloured or something. Obviously I can't say for definate because I don't work there, and if they do leave it I'll be quite irritated- but I just really doubt that that's going to be left in there.

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.