Spider-Man 2 seems good until you really realize that every single Raimi film is literally just "Peter wants to be with MJ but he caaaaaan't oh noooooo."
Which leaves you with Doc Ock to carry Spidey 2, and Alfred did a wonderful job acting the role. Unfortunately the Doc Ock in the film has evil voices in his head telling him to be bad and he's a super genius yet his entire plan consists of STEALING MONEY in order to then BUY EQUIPMENT. Good thinking Otto. Not to mention the entire, silly, and somewhat pointless (it had a point but it could have been easily made any other way) subplot of Peter losing his powers because...he doesn't believe in himself or doesn't want to be Spider-Man?
At the time Spidey 2 was wonderful and as a film, it has aged very well. But I think compared to what superhero films are like now, it just doesn't hold up in a fight.
Agreed on this entirely. I found anything MJ was in to be extremely boring and redundant. It added a bit of conflict, but it only truly came to a head in 3 where she was just horrible. Nothing ever was done with her character as she was the the perpetual Ruby Sparks of the film franchise. Anything Peter wanted her to do , she'd do, but if not, he goes insane or emo and vice versa. The problem with any relationship like this is where the woman in it is completely boring and just a shallow husk of a person that only exists to have him have some "conflicts" in his teenage life. Or I mean his college life. On the other hand, he only exists as a plot device at the result of other plot devices that conveniently guide him to become a hero.
In Amazing Spider-Man, despite its few flaws like Man of Steel, it actually modernizes the original character without compromising anything for cheap Kirsten Dunst and Tobey Maguire cut-outs. In contrast, the TASM film makes it actually clear how awkward Parker really is and he fits in the real world, unlike the highly unlikely Maguire.
Having Parker deal with issues and not really winning in TASM was a great change of pace. Flash wasn't the stereotypical bully, the school was to be honest OK [though I wished they had borrowed more from Ultimate in his fight with Flash] and Parker lived in a realistic environment that was nothing like the idealized pulp nonsense of the us versus them mentality with the jocks versus the nerds like was usually done in many films. If anything, had Cameron done Spider-Man, having Parker as a sociopath would be a great critique of the superhero nerd teenager because Spider-Man could have easily went the other way. And it showed in some of the Raimi trilogy. However, since Garfield's Parker actually faced real conflicts and challenges to his persona that actually face teenagers and real "super"heroes, he was more relatable than Maguire as it was grounded.
Everyone in the Raimi series just accepted Spider-Man as their god, but at least in TASM, Chief Stacy actually brought a nice foil to Parker that I felt should have reverberated throughout the trilogy, while Aunt May actually cared about her surrogate son's injuries, and Gwen actually has a personality. In my opinion, they should just merge Mary Jane and Gwen to a single character this time around and have her be the checks and balances with Parker. He not only needs someone equal to him or greater in intelligence, but someone who can stand up for herself. How the second film is leading seems to be fantastic because in my opinion, having the rich heir of a multi-billion organization have zero knowledge or input into Oscorp and be able to redevelop and master a second version of the Goblin suit was unconvincing.
This is where I heavily disagree with Japaneseseriesfan. Making a film towards that tight of a niche and you might as well make it on the budget of the Bollywood version of Superman in the 80's where it will look like a parody from Adult Swim. After the cussing and the whole "I hate the entirety of the population" bit, I could not take this seriously and see this as ample reason why even well-meaning producers would not listen to those like this. It is quite ironic when someone who hates those like that acts like what they despise. There's one sense to make a film embrace itself, but a whole other to be a fanservice. That's why many superhero films based on Japanese classic superheroes have flopped in its home country. They are either complete fanservice or they deviate so much from the original that they were only used for their license.
Comic adaptations today are far better than they were in the 80s not only because of said effects , but because they acknowledged the irreality and reality of their universes as well like in Marvel in a manner that acknowledged the general audience, but respected the material.
Many complaints such as this arise with how Hollywood, like any other industry, thrives on profit. To be honest, Transformers was a glorified 20 minute commercial, Power Rangers was a glorified TV commercial, and many other series of their type were glorified commercials, even Gundam [They colored the classic RX-78 and others for profit] . Add to the fact that the majority of the mythos was created until after G1 in Beast Wars [ a series that fans hated for no reason] there was really not much to derive from honestly. Its not insanity if people keep profiteering from these films because it is a sure sell, but insanity to think Hollywood would curb cutting their profits to serve a highly niche audience that cannot serve its interests globally.
If we were to go back to how comics were done in the 80s, we'd hear complaints of why don't they do it like the past? Because they decided to gear it towards people who barely make 2-10% of the population, that's why. Comics never were exactly mainstream geared until video games, TV shows and films came along because it brought it audiences that would likely either never get the comics, or do not even know of them. If comics were so successful on their own, comic companies would not have struggled or need to have been bought out by wealthier studios. Same goes for books such as Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter or Twilight or shows like Power Rangers or Mission Impossible.
Without popular adaptations, I like most Americans, let alone the world's general audience, would have not even batted an eye and kept on walking without ever coming into contact with their sources or otherwise being influenced by them. Without producers or other rich people to back these productions, many would probably never been nerds or geeks from these influences in the first place. Most producers are adhering to the source because that is where the demand lies because of backlash from previous attempts.
