[cOe]

Everything from 2000s >>>>

[StonedSoulPicnic]

Tobey Maguire>>>Andrew Garfield

[Keon]

Internationally acclaimed award nominee Tobey Maguire is the superior Spiderman.

[Robert]

2010's>

2000's Spider-Man was good but Kristen and Tobey's acting was horrific (the dance scene )

[Bayonsay]

Let me go watch ASM real quick so I can judge.

[Rusty]

Originally posted by Keon

Internationally acclaimed award nominee Tobey Maguire is the superior Spiderman.

That gif is the reason that trilogy is treated as a joke now. That whole scene was such a flop...

[Rusty]

Originally posted by boxoffice

Totally agree with you. Although my selection would be SM2 > TAS > SM > TAS2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> X-Men The Last Stand >>>>>>>>>>>> SM3.
I'll never forgive them for ruining the Venom storyline with all those secondary plots and messT.

LOL poor Last Stand, it was a flop for the X-Men trilogy but miles better than SM3. I'd take X2 and First Class over any Spidey movie though... and DOFP looks to top them all

[the floacist]

Originally posted by santos

Basically the studio stomped over every creative decision with SM3 and that pissed off Sam Raimi. He refused to rush SM4, which was supposed to star Anne Hathaway as Felicia Hardy.
Since the studio needs to put out a SM movie every few years to keep the rights, they decided to just reboot the whole thing

That part isn't true.

Originally posted by Buddy

I don't give a **** about the hotness of Andrew. I think he is the better fit because Toby is extremely awkward and his acting is terrible. I don't understand why they picked him out of all people to play Spiderman.

In addition, I think the plotlines of TAS 1 and 2 are a lot better than the 2000s version.

Tobey is extremely awkward, but Andrew is not? His Peter spent half of TAS stuttering

Originally posted by Rami328

2010's in every aspect (well, besides probably villains)
The story is better
The acting is better
The characters are closer to the comics
Gwen>Mj
Andrew>Toby
The other trilogy was a cheesefest (but I still love it). I've been a Spidey stan since birth, and I'm so happy TASM is finally getting the right tone of the comics and nailing the characters and all.


You can take a seat. Some of us genuinely prefer the newer trilogy.


Peter barely had any friends in the comics. He's supposed to be a loner/outcast. Also, he didn't meet Harry, MJ, etc. until college.

Uncle Ben dying over milk is a better story?

[J03Y]

the very first Spider-Man was better than both of these new movies tbh

[Minny]

Originally posted by the floacist

That part isn't true.

it is

http://www.superherohype.com/news/17...n-spider-man-4

[Gavin.]

Except for Spider Man 3 I prefer the old trilogy


Mostly nostalgia I suppose

[Wafflecakes]

The latest film was horrible . So going with 2000's.

[ImmaSlave4u]

Tobey McGuire and Kirsten Dunst >>>>>

[Benjamin]

Andrew is the (MUCH) better Spiderman, and the Amazing Spider-Man movies are much better overall. Tobey's acting. The repetitive scripts.

Guess which of the original 3 movie's I'm talking about:

Peter struggles with his powers. Peter and Mary Jane break up. Mary Jane is in Trouble. Peter gets his powers back just in time to "save" the day. The main villain kills himself.

(Hint; I'm talking about all three.)

[P!nk]

Originally posted by phreshprince

watch all the twink lovers vote for andrew. god sometimes the gays can't leave out "who looks hotter" out of an argument.

.

[w.h.o]

The newer ones by FAR. It's no contest.

[Loghen]

Well, Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone have chemistry and, I guess that's it.

2000s >

[KORDEI]

2010s >>
Andrew > Toby
Emma as Gwen > Kirsten as Mary Jane

[Envy]

2000s Spiderman.

[MMMinaj]

SpiderMan > TAS > SpiderMan 2 > TAS2 > Spiderman 3