• 111 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Posted by Pfcoolio14 (1139 posts) 1 year, 3 days ago

Poll: Andrew Garfield vs Tobey Maguire (Spiderman) (106 votes)

Tobey Maguire 55%
Andrew Garfield 43%

Who was the better Peter Parker? Who was the better Spider man? All in all, who fit Spiderman?

#51 Posted by kriminal (643 posts) - - Show Bio

they are both good. I hated amazing spider-man but it was because of script. Garfield did a good job though. and spider-man 2 is great.

#52 Posted by The Stegman (23160 posts) - - Show Bio

Well, this thread made me re-watch each film, and I stand by my opinion, Garfield was the better Peter/Spidey, and ASM was better than Raimi's trilogy.

-More humorous moments, not just Spidey's quips, but how he learned how to use his powers, how he interacted with Gwen, how he humiliated Flash. Everything was just so much more fun.

-A better Flash Thompson, he's not just some generic bully, but he actually was shown to not be ALL bad when he tried to console Peter after Ben died. Also, he became a Spidey fan at the end, which could lead to them doing more with him.

-Emma Stone was better than Spider-Man 3's Gwen and A HELL of a lot better than the boring damsel in distress that was MJ

-I like how they differentiated his origins from the Raimi trilogy, no wrestling career, but they did hint at it by having him fall through a ceiling into a wrestling ring.

-As someone above said, I like that Peter never caught Uncle Ben's killer.

-Spidey fought like an actual spider which was neat, and I like how he used his webs and kind of "punched" them at people.

-I like how Peter was actually SMART in this film and invented things, not just being ''smart'' by giving out random info about spiders

-I LOVE how it ended with his words to Gwen about the promises that can be broken are the best kind.

-I like how we have some mystery about the Parker's deaths and how that might play in future films (I personally hope Osborn is behind it)

Overall, Amazing Spider-Man was superior to Raimi's films in almost every category (except villains, Ock and Osborn were better than the Lizard..but hopefully we can get more villains in the sequels).

Online
#53 Posted by PowerHerc (81637 posts) - - Show Bio

@jayc1324 said:

Garfield doesn't look like Peter Parker and isn't half as good an actor as Tobey.

This.

#54 Posted by SpideyIvyDaredevilFan26 (5880 posts) - - Show Bio

@spideyivydaredevilfan26: What Star Wars has to do with this?

I think he is a bad actor that can act, he just need the right director and the right script, also i think people decide to attack him for bad decision that George Lucas take and Lucas was the one to blkamce of all the crap going on around Vader.

Oh, I was just wondering because we were talking about controversial actors. I personally think he is pretty good. He did a good job in Attack of the Clones and great performances in Revenge of the Sith AND Shattered Glass. He is a good actor, just a bit angsty, but that does fit many of the roles he picks. As for Tobey...Again, I thought he was amazing. Even if we're not talking about the Spider-Man films (Where he gave the best comic book hero performance ever IMO), he was also really great in other movies like Seabiscuit and Brothers (Brothers is one of my all-time favorite movies. That freakout scene near the end was done perfectly) As for Keanu...Yeah, he sucks. The only thing he's ever been good in was Constantine and Bill and Ted. He sucked in everything else, even in otherwise good films like Bram Stoker's Dracula and The Matrix Trilogy.

#55 Edited by SpideyIvyDaredevilFan26 (5880 posts) - - Show Bio

And here is why the Raimi trilogy is better than Sony's Spidey:

-Characters are more sympathetic and realistic. Anyone who says the Garfield Spidey is better must have left the theatre at Uncle Ben's death. In the old movie, his death devestates Peter. It pretty much ruins his life for the first 2 movies, and he has this look of torture. And yes, his crying was part of that. In the new version, Garfield has the same reaction you might get when your COMPUTER CRASHES IN THE MIDDLE OF AN ESSAY

-Interesting villains without being overdone. Webb really had no idea what to do with the Lizard. He didn't know whether he wanted to make him an evil scientist, a misguided soul who thinks he's a savior, or a tortured personality. It was like a much weaker, less interesting version of Spider-Man 2's Dr. Octopus, whose conversion actually made sense near the end as Peter reminded him why he became a scientist in the first place and why it's important ("It should be used for the good of mankind...") Let's forget Spidey 3 existed.

-The responsibility thing made sense. In the new Spidey, he wasn't doing something that bad. Yes, he lied to his Aunt and Uncle but it was in the sake of knowledge. In the original, it was for the sake of greed and lust, which makes me feel like I can sympathize more with him, especially during the "I'm responsible" scene in No. 2.

-Tobey is a better Spidey. I'm sorry, but it's true. I already ranted about the Uncle Death scene, but I'll go even further. Garfield seemed really confused on how to play Peter Parker. He didn't know if he wanted to be funny or awkward, and we end up with a weird fusion of the two. Maguire managed to play hints of both which resulted in a much more charming character.

-The confusing ending to Amazing Spider-Man. I REALLY hated this one. It just felt like Webb wanted to remake the original Spider-Man but didn't want to be too obvious, so we ended up with the "Are they or aren't they" mess of an ending that REALLY didn't work

-The score. That Danny Elfman Spider-Man score is classic IMO. THAT is what I think of when I think of the Spider-Man theme.

#56 Posted by frogdog (3240 posts) - - Show Bio

Doesn't matter both them are inferior to this guy

#57 Posted by Jonny_Anonymous (32853 posts) - - Show Bio

These pepole that birch about Amazing are reason we don't get good movies, Toby is a horrible little toad and the movies were trash

#58 Posted by VercingetorixTheGreat (2823 posts) - - Show Bio

Tobey played the better nerdy Peter Parker (Andrew looked cool and rode a skateboard... HE WAS COOL).

Andrew played the better Spiderman; was more intelligent

#59 Edited by DeathpooltheT1000 (9549 posts) - - Show Bio

Who has the other 4%?

#60 Posted by Fuchsia_Nightingale (10180 posts) - - Show Bio

AG

#61 Edited by Baberaham_Lincoln (921 posts) - - Show Bio

Uncle Ben's death felt... empty? because Andrew's spidey never got to go after him and just left a cold case... where as Tobey's spidey chased him down, RIGHT after learning how to web sling from building to building for the first time... and that scene was outrageously epic. I remember being in the cinema as a kid, with my jaws on the seat in front of mine... The new film was cool, but it didn't beat my nostalgia down... so i vote tobey.

#62 Posted by DwightSpitz (567 posts) - - Show Bio

I chose not to vote on the account that both actors did a terrible job. I don't really know Garfield like that, but judging from the Amazing Spider-Man, I don't like him at all. He felt way to amped up about playing Spiderman that he actually forgot to act in the meantime. I've never liked Maguire, Peter Parker is a nerd but he isn't a whiney bitch. That's what Maguire made him look like, and the terrible acting when he was supposed to be badass when the symbiote f'ed him up was laughable. (The movies were good though, I just didn't like Maguire).

No, the only Peter Parker is the one in the comics. I don't know who would do him justice on screen, maybe you simply can't do it.

#63 Posted by TheAmazingImmortalMan (2683 posts) - - Show Bio

I prefer Tobey, I think he is the better actor but I did like TAS and actually prefer that version and do look forward to TAS 2

#64 Edited by Extremis (3334 posts) - - Show Bio

@jonny_anonymous: wait you think Amazing is a good movie? Then you're the reason.

#65 Posted by Jonny_Anonymous (32853 posts) - - Show Bio

@extremis: hardly Amazing actually have stars that can act unlike Toadface Maguire as well as a bunch of fans with rose tinted glasses and with a fear of reboots

#66 Posted by Extremis (3334 posts) - - Show Bio

@jonny_anonymous: to call that an over generalization is an understatement. Maybe the amount of people who didn't like Amazing have valid complaints, as hard as it is for you to fathom.

Raimis first Spiderman trounced Amazing's rating on RT, making it better from a critical standpoint. It also did better at the box office, before adjusting for inflation and 3D prices, thus being more popular as well. It also sparked the superhero film trend that we are experiencing today. There would be no Nolanverse, no Whedon-directed Avengers without the success of these films. History will remember Raimi's films. Have fun with your hipster hack of an actor Garfield, kid. The rest of us recognize a superhero classic when we see one.

#67 Posted by Jonny_Anonymous (32853 posts) - - Show Bio

Classic? HA I feel sorry for you also kid? You realise I probably older than you right?

#68 Posted by Extremis (3334 posts) - - Show Bio

@jonny_anonymous: was that a question? Haha

And yes a classic of the superhero film genre. If you can't pay respect to the legacy of those films you shouldn't be able to call yourself a comic fan. And I could care less how old you are, you're obviously a 'kid' in every sense of the word.

#69 Posted by TheAcidSkull (17334 posts) - - Show Bio

andrew Garfield. Toby was decent in spider-man 2 though.

still. AG

Online
#70 Posted by Jonny_Anonymous (32853 posts) - - Show Bio

Right, well Id rather be a "kid" than an asshole like yourself

#71 Posted by Extremis (3334 posts) - - Show Bio

@jonny_anonymous: ouch you really know how to hit where it hurts don't you (insert "that's what she said")

#72 Posted by The Stegman (23160 posts) - - Show Bio

Still like Garfield better.

Online
#73 Edited by Fallschirmjager (15277 posts) - - Show Bio

I think people view the Raimi trilogy much like they view Christopher Reeve. Too many people are looking through nostalgia colored glasses imo.

Spider Man 1 was a pretty good movie. But I think TASM told the origin story much better than the original. We actually got to meet Peter's parents which could have plot ramifications later. I also hated that he didn't build his web shooters in the original Spiderman and instead they were organic. And Peter not catching Ben's killer had more meaning than the original where he did catch the guy.

Spider Man 2 is still the best Spider Man movie so far, I will agree. Mostly because Doc Oc was the best villain in any of the movies, but I have faith that TASM will improve its villains. Lizard was ok (and I loved the tie-in of him knowing Peters' parents and him being a mentor-ish figure to Peter). I also liked the CGI, maybe I'm alone on that one. Its a comic book movie...it can't be 100% realistic.

Spider Man 3 is 100% garbage.

So for me right now Spider Man 2 > TASM > Spider Man >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Spider Man 3.

Still prefer Garfield over Tobey any day. Who cares if Garfield rode a skateboard? I don't know what your experiences in high school were, but the skateboarding clique were never the "popular, cool kids". I never envied someone on a skateboard...

Also Emma Stone is wayyyyy better than Dunst. Even if they portray difference characters. (Although Dunst did look super hot in the raining scene...)

#74 Edited by DeathpooltheT1000 (9549 posts) - - Show Bio

I think people view the Raimi trilogy much like they view Christopher Reeve. Too many people are looking through nostalgia colored glasses imo.

Spider Man 1 was a pretty good movie. But I think TASM told the origin story much better than the original. We actually got to meet Peter's parents which could have plot ramifications later. I also hated that he didn't build his web shooters in the original Spiderman and instead they were organic. And Peter not catching Ben's killer had more meaning than the original where he did catch the guy.

Spider Man 2 is still the best Spider Man movie so far, I will agree. Mostly because Doc Oc was the best villain in any of the movies, but I have faith that TASM will improve its villains. Lizard was ok (and I loved the tie-in of him knowing Peters' parents and him being a mentor-ish figure to Peter). I also liked the CGI, maybe I'm alone on that one. Its a comic book movie...it can't be 100% realistic.

Spider Man 3 is 100% garbage.

So for me right now Spider Man 2 > TASM > Spider Man >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Spider Man 3.

Still prefer Garfield over Tobey any day. Who cares if Garfield rode a skateboard? I don't know what your experiences in high school were, but the skateboarding clique were never the "popular, cool kids". I never envied someone on a skateboard...

Also Emma Stone is wayyyyy better than Dunst. Even if they portray difference characters. (Although Dunst did look super hot in the raining scene...)

You could said the same about Burton/Keaton Batman, JLU cartoon and Linda Carter Wonder Woman.

#75 Posted by deaditegonzo (3683 posts) - - Show Bio

Garfield, Tobey was really corny/cheesy.

#76 Posted by TheAcidSkull (17334 posts) - - Show Bio

@extremis: if someone doesn't agree with you, it doesn't mean they are wrong. CHILL.

Online
#77 Posted by Fallschirmjager (15277 posts) - - Show Bio

@deathpoolthet1000: I actually liked Val Kilmer a lot as Batman - even if he didn't quite get Bruce down. I think Bale was probably the best, mostly because he was Batman for all 3 movies unlike Burten's Batman which was a bit of revolving door.

I think given time people might like Garfield more - after all we've only seen him in 1 movie. Once we get TASM 2,3 and 4 people might start liking him more. As for me I'm sold all ready.

#78 Edited by DeathpooltheT1000 (9549 posts) - - Show Bio

@fallschirmjager: Saddly Kilmer gets over looked by many, they dont notice how he try to make a more tridimensional Batman that Keaton, since he try to do other things, people hated him for the fact he wasnt Keaton and decide to go another direction.

#79 Posted by Extremis (3334 posts) - - Show Bio

@theacidskull: and you're targeting me specifically? Maybe you should take your own advice there bub as I've already left it.

#80 Edited by Obtrusive (1642 posts) - - Show Bio

Mr Garfield is kind of a jerk spiderman. Not nerdy enough. Or smart enough. Plus he stole his web shooters.

#81 Posted by ThatGuyWithHeadPhones (10369 posts) - - Show Bio

I think people view the Raimi trilogy much like they view Christopher Reeve. Too many people are looking through nostalgia colored glasses imo.

Spider Man 1 was a pretty good movie. But I think TASM told the origin story much better than the original. We actually got to meet Peter's parents which could have plot ramifications later. I also hated that he didn't build his web shooters in the original Spiderman and instead they were organic. And Peter not catching Ben's killer had more meaning than the original where he did catch the guy.

Spider Man 2 is still the best Spider Man movie so far, I will agree. Mostly because Doc Oc was the best villain in any of the movies, but I have faith that TASM will improve its villains. Lizard was ok (and I loved the tie-in of him knowing Peters' parents and him being a mentor-ish figure to Peter). I also liked the CGI, maybe I'm alone on that one. Its a comic book movie...it can't be 100% realistic.

Spider Man 3 is 100% garbage.

So for me right now Spider Man 2 > TASM > Spider Man >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Spider Man 3.

Still prefer Garfield over Tobey any day. Who cares if Garfield rode a skateboard? I don't know what your experiences in high school were, but the skateboarding clique were never the "popular, cool kids". I never envied someone on a skateboard...

Also Emma Stone is wayyyyy better than Dunst. Even if they portray difference characters. (Although Dunst did look super hot in the raining scene...)

This

Online
#82 Posted by dbatdog (532 posts) - - Show Bio

Neither. It should be Dan Gilvezan. :)

I choose Garfield since Emma Stone is much hotter than Dunst. :)

#83 Edited by Obtrusive (1642 posts) - - Show Bio

@frogdog: I don't know who that guy is and im afraid people will make fun of me if i asked. Imagine that being said in hushed tones.

#84 Posted by _Black (2302 posts) - - Show Bio

Don't really love either but I dislike tobey more. I still can't get over how "stubby" he looks. Stupid complaint but he just doesn't fit my image of spider-man at all. Plus he was too whiny.

#85 Edited by Reignmaker (2232 posts) - - Show Bio

The cool-dude, glamor-boy who skateboards around, listening to Coldplay, just wasn't the Peter Parker I grew up with. For that reason, I had a tough time warming to Garfield's Peter Parker. He's more like Bendis' Ultimate Spider-Man, than the original creation by Lee and Ditko. For that reason, I prefer Tobey by a long shot.

That being said, Emma Stone was absolutely amazing as Gwen Stacy. Phenomenal, in fact. Probably one of the strongest girlfriend performances in any comic book movie. She's probably the biggest reason Amazing Spider-Man got any positive reviews. Everything else in the film was pretty generic stuff.

#86 Posted by Sundipped_Superman (285 posts) - - Show Bio

The only thing good about "The Amazing Spider-man" was the fact that Peter made his own web shooters and Emma Stone was absolutely brilliant as Gwen Stacey.

#87 Posted by Armistice (4048 posts) - - Show Bio

Andrew Garfield and it is not even close.

#88 Edited by TheAcidSkull (17334 posts) - - Show Bio

@extremis said:

@theacidskull: and you're targeting me specifically? Maybe you should take your own advice there bub as I've already left it.

yes i am, since this isn't the first time i've seen you address someone this way , specifically on this topic. When get angry it is with good reason, and not because i think my opinion is the right one.

Online
#89 Edited by ssejllenrad (12847 posts) - - Show Bio

People who diss on TASM don't really do it because they didn't want a reboot. I think they do it because it was a reboot that was too close to the last outing of the franchise it restarted. And that the plot, peeling away the outer layers, is a just basically the same as the Raimi plot. Not as much as a bad reboot, it was good, just an unnecessary reboot. So I don't think it's much about not letting go of the past or rejection of the new... Just the pointlessness of the supposed reinvigoration of the seemingly damaged franchise.

#90 Posted by Bobsjonjon (224 posts) - - Show Bio

Nicholas Hammond was the best Spidey !

#91 Posted by TheThe (1729 posts) - - Show Bio

Tobey made my childhood.

#92 Posted by buttersdaman000 (9491 posts) - - Show Bio

Tobey and the Raimi movies were just all around better in my opinion. The only arguments I see for Garfield and TASM are minor nitpicks like Garfield being funnier and moving like a spider, Emma Stone fangirl obsessions, or an unfounded hatred for Tobey and his acting.

#93 Posted by DeathpooltheT1000 (9549 posts) - - Show Bio

Tobey and the Raimi movies were just all around better in my opinion. The only arguments I see for Garfield and TASM are minor nitpicks like Garfield being funnier and moving like a spider, Emma Stone fangirl obsessions, or an unfounded hatred for Tobey and his acting.

Is not unfounded, he is a terrible actor, why you think he made nothing after he leave Spiderman?.

Terribly bad acting, he is DiCaprio friend that why he still gets acting jobs.

Also all the Unfounded love to Raimi and Tobey is based on nostalgia.

Raimi is Tim Burton for Spiderman, dont matter how good work other guys do, nostalgia is always going to be in his side.

People just ignore and overlooks Tobey terrible acting and Raimi mistakes, that is called nostalgia, the guys is not Steven Spielberg is Tim Burton and everybody know what that means, after his nostalgia power run out, he will get shit loads of hate.

#94 Posted by buttersdaman000 (9491 posts) - - Show Bio

@deathpoolthet1000:

Terrible actor? I guess you've never seen Brothers. Or are you just ignoring the fact that he's been nominated for about 4 Best Actor Saturn Awards, 2 of which came from the first two Spider-Man movies. And I don't know why he doesn't make as many movies. I do know that he owns his own production company and has a lot of hand in producing movies. But besides that you're argument is weak. Just because an actor doesnt have as many roles doesnt mean he/she can't act. Going by that logic, you must consider Daniel Day Lewis a horrible actor too.

Unfounded love? There's nothing unfounded about a great cast of actors and a great director coming together to make great films. You can call preference for the Raimi films nostalgia, which it isnt, but dont be surprised when your ramblings against Raimi in favor of TASM are tossed aside as fanboyism....which it sounds like

#95 Edited by Vaeternus (9410 posts) - - Show Bio

Tobey. Garfield wasn't horrible, but overall acting wise Iike Tobey's better. I won't bash anyone's acting skills however, because I'm pretty sure those bashing either of these guys can't act with training...I'm very much into voice acting and have done stage acting, let me tell ya something it's NOT easy. In fact you need the talent for it, sure there's people who got acting jobs because of their parents being actors or who they know but there are genuine actors out there.

My only issue with Tobey's that Garfield's did better IMO was he had a sense of humor and was way more "wise/jokey" like he is in the comics. Tobey only did this in two scenes throughout the entire trilogy. First movie fighting Buzzsaw and the second film fighting Doc Oct saying "Here's your change!!"

Like really? Spiderman is not that serious a character, he cracks jokes or is a wiseass half the time I thought the original trilogy didn't address this well. That is one thing I did like about Andrew's Spidey more.

#96 Edited by DeathpooltheT1000 (9549 posts) - - Show Bio

@buttersdaman000: I did saw Brothers and i has always found his movie terribly bad compared with the original, it just the fact it had Natalie Portman that made people belive it was so good, not only said that but Portman and Gyllenhaal give a more powerfull performances that him, also he was doing the exact same thing he always does, just more intense and crazy.

Is Cage Rage!!!

This is like Nicolas Cage that most of his movies you see him going crazy or soft, but he does acting in some other movies, still Cage gets unholy amounts of hate.

Saturn Awards arent real awards, Hayden Christensen was nominated for Anakin if i remember well.

Daniel Day Lewis in the same level that Maguire?, REALLY?, Daniel Day Lewis could be nuts, but every single of their performance is a diferent performance and it dont looks generic.

A great casting dont make a good movie, several times great casting mean terribly bad movies.

Dunst does nothing with MJ.

James Franco is pointless most of the movies.

Again the villains give better acting, but this is based on the fact they were by far superior actors that the rest of the casting and get better scenes.

Aunt May was generic and pointless.

The Romance goes no place until Spiderman 3.

Everybody liked Spiderman and people dont fear him, the comic book point Spiderman is an outcast and has to deal with it.

JJ Jamenson is a joke.

Robbie Robertson is a useless character.

Spiderman was plain, i mean, what happened with the Spiderman that had to deal with real life problem meanwhile he deals with superhero problems.

All the villains die in the most pointless way they find.

The movie revolves in 3 character, but there is barely any character development in the trilogy, there is more character development for Tony Stark in one movie that for this 3 in all the trilogy.

The CGI was bad for the time.

The Hospital Scene was so damn bad i dont even going to talk about it.

The Green Gobin had no reason to do thing, i mean the whole i am crazy is pointless, other villains are insane but have a reason to do things.

Terrible family dynamic in the first movies and it was pointless again.

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fan_fic/news/?a=71911

#97 Posted by buttersdaman000 (9491 posts) - - Show Bio
#98 Posted by frogdog (3240 posts) - - Show Bio

@frogdog: I don't know who that guy is and im afraid people will make fun of me if i asked. Imagine that being said in hushed tones.

Josh keaton, voice actor of spider-man

#99 Posted by impossibilly (884 posts) - - Show Bio

I think Spider-Man 2 is the best of the Spider-Man movies, but I think that Andrew Garfield is the better Peter Parker.

#100 Edited by LimpoyzLoan (1630 posts) - - Show Bio

And here is why the Raimi trilogy is better than Sony's Spidey:

-Characters are more sympathetic and realistic. Anyone who says the Garfield Spidey is better must have left the theatre at Uncle Ben's death. In the old movie, his death devestates Peter. It pretty much ruins his life for the first 2 movies, and he has this look of torture. And yes, his crying was part of that. In the new version, Garfield has the same reaction you might get when your COMPUTER CRASHES IN THE MIDDLE OF AN ESSAY

-Interesting villains without being overdone. Webb really had no idea what to do with the Lizard. He didn't know whether he wanted to make him an evil scientist, a misguided soul who thinks he's a savior, or a tortured personality. It was like a much weaker, less interesting version of Spider-Man 2's Dr. Octopus, whose conversion actually made sense near the end as Peter reminded him why he became a scientist in the first place and why it's important ("It should be used for the good of mankind...") Let's forget Spidey 3 existed.

-The responsibility thing made sense. In the new Spidey, he wasn't doing something that bad. Yes, he lied to his Aunt and Uncle but it was in the sake of knowledge. In the original, it was for the sake of greed and lust, which makes me feel like I can sympathize more with him, especially during the "I'm responsible" scene in No. 2.

-Tobey is a better Spidey. I'm sorry, but it's true. I already ranted about the Uncle Death scene, but I'll go even further. Garfield seemed really confused on how to play Peter Parker. He didn't know if he wanted to be funny or awkward, and we end up with a weird fusion of the two. Maguire managed to play hints of both which resulted in a much more charming character.

-The confusing ending to Amazing Spider-Man. I REALLY hated this one. It just felt like Webb wanted to remake the original Spider-Man but didn't want to be too obvious, so we ended up with the "Are they or aren't they" mess of an ending that REALLY didn't work

-The score. That Danny Elfman Spider-Man score is classic IMO. THAT is what I think of when I think of the Spider-Man theme.

So much of this. Andrew Garfield was just way too awkward and the guy can barely act. With Toby, you felt like he was really Spider-Man.