Moviebob vs. Nos-Critic: Spider-Man

  • Welcome to the Devil May Cry Community Forum!

    We're a group of fans who are passionate about the Devil May Cry series and video gaming.

    Register Log in

Which Spider?

  • Maguire

    Votes: 4 40.0%
  • Garfield

    Votes: 6 60.0%

  • Total voters
    10

Demi-fiend

Metempsychosis
Supporter 2014
Feb 9, 2013
8,212
8,644
17,165
I said I would never watch Movieslob again, but I think it's important to explore why Maguire wasn't as bad as the Critic says he is.


--------


--------

No, I didn't like it when everyone started throwing debris at the Green Goblin, but if you ignore the... "forced patriotism" aspects of it (like I did) then you'll just see it as a bunch of guys helping a superhero out.

Nothing more, nothing less.
 
Is this poll based on looks alone? Cause otherwise I don't see how it's fair to include Holland there when the movie he's featured in hasn't come out yet.
 
@LordOfDarkness

Could you fix the poll so that Holland is taken out? I was just thinking of personal preference since everyone's gone crazy over him and have declared that Spider-Man their favorite simply because he's in the marvel cinematic universe.
 
Movie Bob actually likes Spider-Man 3 and has had a clear massive bias towards the Amazing Spider-Man films from the get go just because those movies aren't directed by Sam Raimi. He's mainly a big Raimi fanboy. Seriously, he unrealistically hates on those movies. Screw his stupid opinion.

With confidence, I can say I'm a bigger Spider-Man fan than most of you here. Which is why I say Andrew Garfield was the better Spider-Man. He really did capture the playful nature of Spidey. Sure his Peter Parker could have used some work, but his Spider-Man was spot-friggin-on.

Don't get me wrong, I still love the first two Raimi movies and actually like Maguire as Spider-Man, but you're simply wrong to act like he was better than Garfield in the role. Why? Just because he was first? Garfield was clearly a Spidey fan and knew how to bring him to life.

And yea, I'll say it. The first Amazing Spider-Man film stands with Spider-Man 1 and 2.
 
@Chancey289

I picked those two "critics" because I didn't know who else to pick.

To be honest, I don't think other internet pundits (like Angry Joe) would've fit the bill because they never did any extensive videos on the first two Spider-Man movies.

Moviebob and I didn't pick Maguire because he was first -- it was because he was careful. You don't just slide into Spider-Man's spandex like you own it -- it has to be earned, in my opinion.

At this point, I'd even pick Hammond over Garfield because I don't think he was a proper fit.

So, do me a favor: tell me what you think of movieblob's video. Even though I hate him, I still agreed with what he said (outside the "forced patriotism" stuff).

------

Also, there's nothing wrong with liking Spider-Man 3 -- it's as good as the Amazing series, from my perspectie.

Tropher Grace's Venom might've been a geek, but it was better than the 'roided out psycho thug that I had to put up with in the comics. I liked the Ultimate version of Venom better because it showed Parker and Brock as friends.
 
Last edited:
As someone who grew up on the 90's Spider-Man cartoon, I prefer Christopher Daniel Barnes over both of them.
Me too, actually. I lived for that show and was beyond devastated when it ended on... sort of a cliffhanger.

They never said if he got to see MJ again.

Anyway:

http://www.gamesradar.com/spider-man-costume-captain-america-civil-war/

--------------------

My favorite comment from the second Civil War vid:

"When Spider-Man said "hey everyone" it low key sounded like a 13 year old talking in a $20 headset entering a call of duty match on Xbox live"
 
Last edited:
people actually said maguire bad? maguire wasn't bad at all imo, he's good, and his spiderman movies are very enjoyable, in fact all cast in em are fit for their roles.. maguire is so nerdy and turned fun when he's in the suit..

i prefer maguire than garfield.. but on garfield's favor, superhero movies really don't need to start the origin allover again.. basically we should know the how and why, maybe just do some flashbacks for the new audience..

but yeah, garfield's spiderman movies sucked, and i never liked the other casts..
 
people actually said maguire bad?
maguire wasn't bad at all imo, he's good,
This is what it basically boils down to, people having different opinions on two versions of the same character.

There's no real right or wrong answer to which you prefer, or if you dislike both of them.
 
This is what it basically boils down to, people having different opinions on two versions of the same character.

There's no real right or wrong answer to which you prefer, or if you dislike both of them.

yeah, but seriously i never knew people think maguire is bad
 
  • Like
Reactions: Demi-fiend
i preferred garfield. he FELT more like the peter parker from the comics i read growing up (bendis's ultimate spider-man). toby...i don't blame him. he worked well with what he was given, but in the end, he was given "white urkel". and peter parker isn't "white urkel". yeah, he's into science. but being a science nerd in the 21st century is totally different than what it was in the mid 20th century. because NOW it's cool. so, the thing that's "uncool" is being socially awkward. he has a nervous stammer. he has a hard time relating to people. and i feel like that works far better than the old "i wear glasses i'm such a lozer" crap.

with all that said, i'll say this. the writers of the TASM movies understood the CHARACTER of peter parker far better than the raimi films, but couldn't craft a cohesive narrative. whereas the writers of the raimi trilogy had the opposite problem.
 
@Jak
Now, in Maguire's favor, he was too socially awkward. Very socially awkward. I'd say even more than Garfield's (heck, Garfield's Peter hits on Gwen practically right away while Maguire's takes an entire movie with Mary Jane, for example). It wasn't just "I'm a loser cuz glasses". That was the point in Spider Man 3, with the symbiotic parasite getting rid of his awkwardness, even though the actual realization there was facepalmy.
 
One of the very few times Chancy and I are on the same side

I prefer Andrew Garfield any day.

Now don't get me wrong, I liked Toby Maguire when I was a kid, I mean come on, I was like 8, and Spider-Man had a movie made about him.

That being said, the only problem I have with Garfield is he wasn't dorky enough before he became Spider-Man.

Peter Parker before he becomes Spider-Man is suppose to be a weak, scrawny, teenage, nerd, who had acne, dandruff, and needed glasses and everyone picked on.

Which you don't really get with Garfield, who even before he gets bit by the spider, is already a bit of a smart-a$$.

Once he gets bit and becomes Spider-Man, well personally, I agree with everything the Critic said. Garfield's got the humor, he's more charismatic, confident, and doesn't whine/mumble as much
 
  • Like
Reactions: VampireWicked
@Foxtrot94 true. true. but peter parker in the comics is what i like to call "sexy awkward". he's that guy who's socially awkward, but is so handsome, he gets the puss no matter what. even if he doesn't want it, his awkward attitude attracts girls. and it's not a thing of fiction because i've seen it happen before. and garfield was that to a tee (or is it "t"...the world may never know...ok it might, but i don't know). toby just felt...awkward. kind of in a gringy way. and i know that's what the director was going for, but it...it didn't feel like peter parker to me
 
For me, Maguire was a better Peter Parker. He was more nerdy/dorky/dweeby, which made him a social outcast, and an easy target for bullies to pick on. Then everything turns itself around when he's bitten, and he gets the chance to finally stand up for himself. However, he can get his own back on the bullies, and he can fight crime and bad guys, but he still has to listen to authority figures in his life - Aunt May, J. Jonah Jameson, his college professors, etc.

So although he now has that power (and responsibility), he's still not above everyone else. He still has to listen to those that matter and concern his life. He has an education and a job, but has to juggle all of that with the huge responsibility of being Spiderman. I thought Maguire handled that well enough in that respect.

Don't get me wrong, I liked Garfield's Spiderman also. I honestly think they're both great at it. But if I ultimately had to pick one, I'm going for Spider-geek...I mean, Maguire.
 
I don't care who did or didn't like these films. I liked them.

As a Spider-Man fan, the Amazing Spider-Man films did things I wanted to Raimi films to do such as focusing on how Peter was a genius when tackling problems, to the custom built web shooters. Not to mention, like I said, Garfield was the better Spider-Man, period.

I'm not knocking the Raimi films, I still enjoy Spider-Man 1 and 2 thinking they still hold up to this day, but I'll give credit where credit is due. The Amazing Spider-Man was better than it had any right being considering it was just Sony trying to hold on to the rights. The second Amazing film had its fair share of problems, but I still enjoyed it as I thought the Spidey action in it was some of the best yet.

So yea, just keep telling yourself that Tobey was a better Spider-Man. You're wrong. Andrew Garfield did a fine job as the web slinger.
 
IMO, The First Amazing Spider-Man's the best out of all of them, followed by Spider-Man 2, Amazing Spider-Man 2, the first Spider-Man, and Spider-Man 3 dead last
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jak
nether of them are my perfered Spide-man
like @WolfOD64 90's Spider-man is my Spiderman

i mean as much as i like the movies
they'll never be at the level of awesome that the end of Spider-Man 64/PS1 was

call me when this is at the end of a Spider-Man moive
latest
 
  • Like
Reactions: WolfOD64