A friendly reminder to our users, please make sure your account is safe. Make sure you update your password and have an active email address to recover or change your password.
When Gwen was about to go into her life changing interview, Peter couldn't shut up long enough to consider that maybe she has important things to do. This character lived in his own selfish world.
There's something off about that sentence, I thought it was tense, but I don't think it is, it's just reading weird to me, funny that
For me, the sticking point on Parker is not so much the actor but the script treatment given him. Parker does not really operate much within the lesson of "With great strength comes great responsibility". He toys with it, but always abandons it to get what he wants. And when Webb examines that principle, he does so in a extremely convoluted way. Example - Why have Parker do a no-show at Captain Stacey's funeral only to have him start flirting with her at the very end of the picture? Can Parker dismiss his sense of guilt that quickly?
They just put her dad in the ground while he ignores his memory to stay away from her, but then he's back flirting the next day in school? Sounds pretty disingenuous to me. And that's the problem. Webb doesn't allow these characters to sit in a reflective position for two minutes before he's ready to move them to the next act. So it comes off feeling like there is no accountability and Parker is right back to justifying what he wants.
I thought he did a much better job of flushing that out in ASM2, but once again the post-death chapter is too hurried. And although we understand Parker has suffered through several seasons at Gwen's grave site, once again Webb doesn't really hang on that very long because he wants him to get back into the role of Spider-man to advance the film, instead of giving the character time to heal IN FRONT of the viewer. I think Spider-man should not have returned at the end.
Parker had too much on his plate for Webb to end the movie by essentially saying, "Spidey's back." So I like the actor just fine. I just don't think Webb or his script writers give due diligence (or weight) to Parker's accountability in these situations that are essentially the foundation for why he is Spider-man anyway.
I was seriously disappointed with the way ASM showed Peter, it wasn't the Peter I grew up with. Sure he may be more relatable to today's angry high school nerds, but that's not the character. Peter is a goody two shoes, he has a brief moment of selfishness that's quickly turned into guilt that is the guiding force in his life. Peter isn't the teen who talks back to Aunt May, he's the one the goes out and gets a job to help provide for the family when Uncle Ben is gone. His quips are a defense mechanism, he's not doing it to just berate a mugger/car thief, hell, he probably wouldn't be making quips with a mugger/car thief. He uses it on supervillians to one calm himself down and two to throw the villain off their game. He wouldn't show up to dinner at Gwen's parents at Gwen's bedroom window (basically giving away his secret identity right there, although he does it right after dinner anyway), he wouldn't talk back to Captain Stacy and he'd definitely keep his promise to Captain Stacy longer than a couple days. This Spider-man was a cocky jerk and really for one reason, he never learned the great power, great responsibility thing and he doesn't feel the full burden of guilt for Uncle Ben's death. Peter should be portrayed as a stereotypical "good kid", not an arrogant teenager.
He was more moody and angsty in ASM as opposed to angry , but they were trying to have it both ways I feel.
They wanted him to be the tortured yet socially awkward outsider while at the same time being the sort of goofy and nerdy guy that Macguire was. I think Sony felt they should go the more angsty semi-rebel /outsider route with Peter while at the same time they also wanted him to be the science nerd of the comics. It kinda reflects Sony's attempt to have its cake and eat it too mentality with the reboot films in general.
IMO, they made Peter a layered individual. Just like a regular person. He wasn't a caricature or a simple one-two dimensional character.
I really didn't think so , at least not for ASM 1. Maguire's Parker had alot more layer's than Garfield's Parker did imo, but that has to do more with the scripts they were given. Macguire's Peter was the average person where as Garfield's always felt like a slick teen in a tv drama who was angst ridden. I think that's another reason why Macguire's Parker may appeal more to non comic fans as opposed to Garfield's.
He was layered and represented more the every man as opposed to the outsider that they were trying to go for in ASM 1 . He wasn't the best looking guy, or the funniest guy. He really was "average" and had more going for him than the "aw shucks" sterotype fanboys try to characterize him as. While I think Garfield is closer to the character of the comics in alot of ways, Macguire really captured Stan Lee's concept of the average joe getting these amazing powers and how he would stumble and struggle with them, yet ultimately triumph .
Maguire's Parker was a stick in the mud.
Franco's Harry was more interesting and charismatic.
What's so interesting about that?