My latest big purchase was issue #101 Spider-Man Vs. Morbius (the vampire before vampires became all sparkly and gai.)
My point being, I have a pretty intense collection of the classic comics going.
I loved Toby Maguire and I still think he played the best Peter Parker. Sam Raimi got so many things right, it was the closest we ever got. Raimi
understood the characters and their environment. Yeah it wasn't all perfect though, and some studio meddling cut the franchise short.
Sony's stab at the brand was just...half-assed, like any major studio does these days. They put the half-ass in and that's all you get back, half an
ass. The potential was there, the execution was awful, and the opportunity was wasted.
And finally I just saw the new Marvel iterations of the wall-crawler. Michael Keaton was good but there wasn't enough of him in the film. I don't even
know what's going on in the 2nd film and can't be bothered. It's large CGI monsters and that shizz is boring.
It seems like the people in Hollywood are the last ones who should be in charge of creativity and writing. They seem to know less about what makes a
good movie than anyone. (I know, I know it's a business. It's not meant to be art.)
But why can't film be art too? Why does it have to be assembly line pig trough!
You know what would make a damn good Spider-Man movie? You know what I've been wanting for almost 20 years now?
Spider-Man vs. Kraven the Hunter.
I'm not even sure who would make a great Kraven, but the psychological drama and potential for deep-seated conflict is there. It could be another
Wrath of Khan. It could be powerful and emotional and moving.
But you know why it'll never be made?
Because the conflict is more personal and less explody. It wouldn't require GCI monsters, stunts, fireworks, or spastic camera operators.
It would require good writing and that's why it'll never happen in Hollywood.
edit on 12-9-2020 by NarcolepticBuddha because: (no reason given)
Tom Holland has done a great job with Spiderman. The problem with the newest SM movies is that Sony won’t release the rights and the MCU has had
the foot the bill and try to co-create the Spider-Man movies so they could use spidey in the Avengers movies. Sony won’t give up or sell the rights
and they’re trying to milk a cash cow that isn’t really there’s anymore.
Honestly my biggest problem with Spider-Man in the movies is that Sony forced a couple flops down our throats where “The Amazing Spider-Man”
sandwiched in between Toby McGuires version and Tom Holland’s version. It felt like all they were trying to do was replicate the success of the
first three without really trying. But the Tom Holland version works better when you look at him in the entirety of the MCU and the Sony movies.
Too bad I’m not willing to show you guys my iterations of spider man and how things turn out. I love the character morbius. I liked him in the
cartoon back in the 90’s when Parker started turning into a spider human mutant too
I'm a Marvel junkie of old days. What does that mean? I started reading comics when I was a kid in the late 60s. DC never interested me all that much,
but Spiderman was my childhood hero. At that time my favorites were Spidey, Ghost Rider and a few others but I collected and traded most of the
characters with other kids my age. I had an extensive collection up until 1980 when most of them were lost in a garage fire at our house.
After that I still bought them and have some today, and I pick them up at yard sales when I find them. Up until around 1991 that is. They changed a
lot of their staff along with the design of the characters, turning the men into dorks and the women into bimbos. They lost me at that point. I don't
watch the movies either after seeing the first Spiderman. Toby was a horrible choice, his persona in the movie was not like Parker's in the older
comic series. He tried to be cute and funny and that's not Spidey.
I'll just live with the older comics and memories. Oh the memories...
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.