I stumbled upon your channel and watched your Invincible breakdown. Just to be in time for this video. Keep up the great content homie I'm gonna binge watch your content.
You're right that people have misconceptions about Stan Lee's run, but it's incorrect to point the finger at the Raimi films for all changes. It's not as though Spider-Man stopped being published after Stan Lee left, nearly 400 more issues of Amazing Spider-Man were released before the first film, plus hundreds of spinoff and guest appearences, and these issues contained many retcons, reframings, and personality changes. Sam Raimi and David Koepp did not invent Uncle Ben telling Peter about responsibility, and it's not "wrong" to not stricly adhere to a small slice of a character's publishing history written nearly 4 decades prior.
@@mv9iksE7fr You're totally right, but for the purpose of this video it was crucial to use Spider-Man 2 as a case study for highlighting all of these misconceptions in a digestable way. As I mentioned at the end, the goal is not to place blame, but to shine on Stan Lee's original work and promote it as THE most reference point for understanding Spider-Man.
@@ImplicitlyPretentious I understand, hope my comment did not seem harsh, just felt like that aspect of the video might confuse people unfamiliar with the character's history. In a way it's actually not easy to create a truly comic inaccurate Spider-Man adaptation, because unless you make him rob banks gleefully and kill Uncle Ben out of boredom, your adaptation will probably be close enough to the way a writer has portrayed him in the mainline comic universe. I hope this video succeeds in convincing people to reexamine the other adaptations, especially Andrew Garfield's.
I just had a talk with a coworker yesterday about this. Saying how Garfield and Holland’s Spider-men are closer. The Raimi Spider-man is closer to the 90s cartoon. Probably every episode he talked about Ben and that line. I think that’s were they got it from for the Raimi movies.
So neither version has a bad message. There’s only so much you can portray in a roughly 2 hour film. So focusing on Toby’s Peter in the way it does makes sense for Sam’s version for sure. Considering how projects get canceled and rebooted all the time not putting the serialized crime aspect there makes sense. Though it would be nice if other characters were touched on. Speaking of that not sure having too many villains in SM3 was it’s main issue. It had more to do with Raimi not understanding Venom and the studio heads insistence to add this 1 villain muddied it up when it needed different beats for what SR was trying to get across. In some ways Venom works for the story in other way not really. My main issue is the recon of who kills Uncle Ben and what that means.
@Alexp. Yeah this dude has no clue. Steve Ditko made the character, not Stan. And Raimis version is pretty faithful to Ditkos original. Maybe less ”edge” as Peter had some attitude in the original run, but otherwise it seems to understand the character quite well. Unlike the MCU and it’s travesty.
@Christian Björck that’s another thing that bothers me about this video, just completely disregards ditko despite his many contributions to the character
I don’t think Sam’s interpretation of Spider-Man is lesser due to the inaccuracy, so much as it is it’s own take on the character. Though I find it annoying that people judge all versions of Spidey by Raimi’s like it’s a fundamental part of the character
I would say raimi's version is actually pretty accurate, just not to Stan lee's run, its honestly a lot like Gerry Conway's run with the overbearing guilt, and soap opera tone,
@@chance4827 tbh I never cared about comic accurate movies. It's only a problem when it's a subjectively bad idea. (I.e Adam Warlock never fighting Thanos basically making him useless to the plot )
@Change, it’s not so much that the inaccuracy bugs us, but the fact that they missed the point of the character in the MCU, Spider-Man never wanted to be spider-man, but he is responsible, he has to be Spider-Man, in these movies, his motivations are completely different to The Spider-Man I know and love, (Also, I’m not a Raimi fan boy, those movies are goofy as fuck)
Very succinct. I think the biggest difference is that Spider-Man 2 tells that Spider-Man No More story at a time where Peter is more immature. I wouldn't call it un-Spidey but just a take where they made him less mature and more introspective and self-sympathizing because of it. The original No More story was very much a product of the Romita run at a time where Peter underwent a huge deal of growth in self-esteem and social status, where the Raimi films held much more onto Ditko's characterisation for Peter, obviously aside from the greater inclusion of characters like Uncle Ben and the inclusion of MJ and Harry which are very Romita. I think as far as this adaptation goes, it works on its own two feet and is in no way a betrayal of the original source material, however, I really appreciate that you bring Raimi fans such as myself back down to Earth in that each film version of Spidey has its accuracies and deviations from the source material, each of which have their own stories to tell. (Which is also really helpful as I'm as fan of both Raimi and MCU Spidey and some folks just can't fathom that).
Very well said Pup. Im with you on enjoying multiple iterations. i love both Raimi and Webb films but my personal favorite is Tom Holland but i grew up on them all technically.
Great comment pup. I'm a huge fan of all three live action interpretations of the character, so I'm definitely in the minority lol. I love how distinct they all are with the stories they tell and where their focus lies and I don't think any of them are definitive. However, with Far From Home being my favorite iteration of the character from the films and having what I want to see most from Peter Parker, it's proof that the MCU Spider-Man can be awesome when he's written properly. Still, I love all the things Raimi, Webb, and Watts get right about the character, and honestly, they all do a great job.
I didn't mind Civil War MCU Spidey. I really didn't like Homecoming as a movie though. It felt like it was taking a crap on Peter, just because it could. It created huge inconsistencies. He's competent in Germany, but somehow not in his native New York. The suit redesign especially bothered me. Return of the back tick. Dull webbing. Teensy-Weensy chest spider. Baby eyes. Can't do anything right without Iron Man's help. Those for me were all a hard no. I could tolerate what they did with Ned and MJ; but then ramming Iron Man down our throats like that, and never even mentioning Ben, felt like betrayals. Awkward as the Garfield movies were, I wanted them to recover and do better. The second one's rushed ending was a disgrace; but a third film could've redeemed the series. I liked the idea of a kale-munching hipster Spidey, even if his first movie costume having yellow eyes was a big turn-off.
Agreed. I actually was a Raimi stan for a long time. I thought Tobey's Spider-Man was THE Spider-Man and anything else was trash. Last summer I watched every Spider-Man movie because I wanted to not be a bias fan boy. While I still enjoy Raimi's the best, I will say that I was wrong about MCU Spider-Man (Far From Home was spectacular) and I can enjoy certain elements from Amazing Spider-Man 2 as well. Each have their own style and take inspiration from different parts of the comics. All this to say, let Spider-Man be Spider-Man and enjoy whatever version you enjoy.
I think one thing people need to understand when talking about the cinematic Spider-man movies is that none of them are completely accurate to the Comic Book version and each make substantial changes to the character and his arc. Heck even Miles Morales from into the Spider-verse had some major changes from the version in the comics. One big thing I none of the films did and i don't think ever will is showing how Peter Parker before Spider-man was a vengeful guy who was out against the world. I don't think these changes are necessarily a problem, but it does make me role my eyes when I see people try to argue what film is more comic accurate as a reason why one series is better than the other when each series strays away form the comics in a major way.
People stay talking about the amazing spiderman and how he shouldn't have been hunting after the criminals, but that's litterally what he does in the comics. Wack
@@candycorn4912 I agree also unpopular opinion the amazing spiderman first movie suit is actually my favorite suit it just looks unique but not straying away from the look of spiderman and honestly it makes me appreciate the second suit a bit more because it show a contrast to how he started out
"Spider man isn't about how noble it is to hold on and stay the same. It's about the importance of changing your funsamental attitude with others when you hit a certain point in life" Well said. Spider man stories as whole are basically a coming of age story, showing a kid not just becoming a super hero but also growing into a mature and responsible man. I think this theme was even explored in the Spectacular Spider Man through the differences between Peter and Norman Osborn. In the series, Osborn main catchphrase is "Don't apologize. I never do", which represents his arrogance and refusal to recognize his mistakes. This "never apologize" is the polar opposite of Peter journey, who learns from his mistakes and change to a better person.
@@swanpride Yup. Captain America is the inspirational hero, the one people want to be like while Spider man is the relatable one, the one who represents the kid growing into the hero that fans want to be.
Spiderman 2 is not about staying the same. The ending of the movie is him finally getting with Maryjane. A massive change considering he's spent the whole movie convinced he has to pick spider-man or true love The movie is about how important it is to do the right thing, even if you have to give up your dreams. Not to say dreams can't come true or you can't change or be happy- the ending of the movie makes it clear you can have your cake and eat it too....
@@Courier_333 I got this and is a important and wonderful message. However I think the movie contradicts itself by having Peter and MJ together, so basically he didn't need to give his dream to be spider man (the right thing). Also, while I'm not against Peter and MJ being together, having her be his first and only love in the franchise really goes against Spider man theme, that life not always goes in the way the person expected. Peter plans are not always successful and things not always go the way he wants but, through his optimism, he is able to find the positives in this situation and evolve from them. Compare Peter and MJ situation with Peter and Betty Brant, his first love in the Stan Lee and Steve Ditko run. When Betty start dating and eventually was engage to Ned Leeds, Peter became a little disapointed but eventually accepted her decision to move onm recognizing that Betty was happy with Ned and that his attraction to her was no longer the same, with Peter find new love in girls like Gwen Stacy and Mary Jane (who in the first issues was mysterious girl who Peter didn't even wanted to meet due to his aunt trying to force him to go on a date with her, making their future romance much more ironic and surprising). Just like Betty, Peter moved on with his life as well and was still to find love in someone else.
All I can say is thank you for making these videos, bc if you didn't my dumb brain wouldn't understand a lot of the themes in that said movie. As well as other stuff XD
When looking at Peter's arc within the MCU, it's becoming more apparent how those movies are heavily based on the early works of Stan Lee and the different phases Peter had as he grew up. In _Homecoming,_ Peter was still a boy. He's going around solving low level crimes, he's immature, impatient, childish, and very new to everything. His double life isn't dramatic, it's comedic. He keeps losing his backpack, he gets caught in his Spidey suit, his shenanigans lead him to getting detention, and had his suit taken away like a parent taking away their kids phone. The world isn't beating him to the ground, and his sense of self worth as a hero is based on the Avengers (mostly Tony Stark). It isn't until he's in the rubble that he starts to look inward calling on his strength as Spider-man to save himself because he isn't defined by a fancy suit, he's defined by his actions. In _Far From Home_ Peter is starting to fully transition out of boyhood and becomes a young man. He has let go of his first crush and has moved onto a new love he finds in MJ, not because of how she looks or vague descriptions of her just being "the best", but because he likes who she is as a person. He is now in a world where the heroes are scattered as the Avengers appear to be disbanded after the 5 year gap and the events of _Endgame._ But he's still trying to hold onto a few things by looking for some other hero to look up to so he can have guidance. He has grown out of his desire to be in the big leagues because he's seen the kind of struggle that brings, and his self doubt makes him feel like he isn't up to the challenge. He isn't quitting being Spider-man out of fear, he is just trying to remain the rookie he was when Tony first recruited him because the times were much simpler back than (we've all had moments when we wish we could go back to being kids, less responsibilities, etc). It isn't until he learns Mysterio is a fraud and is given words of affirmation from Happy regarding the pedestal the world (Peter included) put Tony on, that he rises to the challenge and proves his capabilities not only to others, but to himself. He wasn't alongside other heroes facing the drone army, he was on his own, he used his own intuition, and his own abilities to save the day. From what we can see from _No Way Home,_ Peter's life is becoming more and more dramatic. The consequences he faces have gone from detention to being framed for murder. His double life is now becoming more conflicting as he tries to hang onto the few good things he's gotten (I have a feeling the end of the movie will have Strange complete the spell properly and the entire world forgets his identity, including his friends and Aunt May). He even starts to step away from saying "sir" because he is no longer the rookie. He has proven his worth and his place among the hero community, he is facing bigger enemies, and he is facing it alone (for the most part) There is a clear arc for MCU Peter as we watch him grow from a boy to a (spider-)man, and it's annoying when everyone keeps calling him "iron-boy jr" because he wasn't in his prime (both physically and emotionally) immediately after becoming Spider-man. While I do disagree with some details, the tone and arc of these movies is awesome
Well I think Sam’s Spidey is like Tim’s Batman it isn’t completely comic accurate but instead it reinvents the character so much and so well people believe that the original comics were just like how the movies are
I don’t think there’s enough of a through line between movies to define his storyline as an arc. He’s mostly the product of Tony’s arc throughout the infinity saga and now that that’s over, he going to be the product of the upcoming Dr. strange movie. He has yet to have an identity outside of other heroes.
Peter's over arching characte arc is the transition toward maturity. I think it will be PETER that finally says the iconic quote, "with great power comes great responsibility"; to himself. Peter must come to this relization himself to become an adult. Real maturity IS about accepting our responsibilities to others. No one can impart maturity, just help guide someone to that transition. The No Way Home trailer has Dr. Strange telling Peter that his double life is unsustainable. I think Peter will have to let go of his 'secret' identity and reconcile that he, Perter Parker, IS Spiderman. RDJ sort of set the entire tone of the MCU ditching superhero secret identities with one improvised line and the theme of personal identity has permeated every subsequent film since.
This is what I love about Spider-Man stories, neither are bad they’re just different. There’s different interpretations of the story for different people.
Seriously, thank you for this. I hate it when people complain about the newer Spidey movies because they're "not Spider-Man" when they have no context for what Spider-Man really is. I mean, he's a character that's been around for 60 years, he's been a heck of a lot of things, lol. The dogmatic devotion to the Raimi films really does come off as a reaction to backlash against them. Just as you said, it's perfectly OK to like them or love them, but to claim you do because they are more "true" to Spider-Man is just misguided.
I have read every single issue of Amazing Spider-Man and have been a huge fan for over 30 years. So I have PLENTY of context! And anyone that argues that the MCU Spidey is more true than the Raimi films (or even close to equal) is either ignorant or in denial. And I don't hate the MCU movies, I love Tom Holland. The Raimi movies may not have been identical to the comics but by god they were more accurate than I expected and still the most accurate on screen version of Spidey we have seen outside maybe the 90's animated show. I also love the Garfield movies. I love the Raimi movies most because 1. They are better movies. 2. Because they are the closest version of Spider-Man out of all the movies.
Funny how nobody seems to mention the 90s animated series considering its the first place where ben said his great power line. Having grown up watching that series before the raimi movies i can say clearly that the raimi films are far more accurate than the mcu films simply by the fact that peter idolized iron man in those movies.
THANK YOU FOR MAKING THIS SERIES! I love the Raimi films but their effect on changing the perception of Spider-Man is undeniable. I think they get so much of the Spider-Man ethos correct in terms of that struggle between selflessness and selfishness but they forced the character into a box. All of a sudden Spider-man HAS to be miserable or he isn't accurate. He HAS to be driven solely by guilt or he isn't accurate. The Spider-Man of the comics is dynamic and relatable because he grows up and changes and learns and fucks up just like everyone else.
Exactly!! I had a working theory for so long that the Raimi films, good as they were, entirely changed what Spider Man means to a lot of people. Whereas The original Spider Man was about growth and change, everyone now seems to believe That Peter parker has to be miserable and poor and sad to be a good Spider Man,but that really isn't what it's all about.
Yes love the raimi movies. But they are an amalgamation of 616 and Ultimate. Ultimate spidey as fun as it is, isn't like 616. And every spidey fan will admit 616 is peak spidey.
@@sebastianhaney1425 kind of is though for the stan lee run. Todd McFarlane kind of changed it with peter getting married and the potential of him and MJ having kids. For 20 years the character was in limbo of late teen or early 20s.
To me, it depends. Spiderman to me, is the hero of hope. Iron man, Cap, Thor, they can get their asses kicked emotionally and physically. Spiderman is the hero who gets back up and when he gets down, it really means it, like Venom Saga and Gwen’s death.
This video really reinforces my belief that some hybrid of our three film adaptations of SM would be perfect. They all tackle a different aspect of the original work and make it the biggest part of their respective films
I know it's a simple short-hand to say that Stan Lee "wrote" all of these issues, but from everything we know about the "Marvel Method," and all the controversies that surround Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko and who created/wrote WHAT at Marvel, we should at least acknowledge that "Lee & Ditko" should be credited as writing the issues, and "Lee & Romita" credited with the others.
I'm really hoping we get three trilogies with Holland's Spider-Man. The 'Home' Trilogy and then two more that represent the different phases of his life. We're in the sitcom phase for now, which 'No Way Home' looks like it's gonna be transitioning from. Then we'll get the Melodrama phase in the next trilogy, and then an all-out crime saga for the final trilogy, which will likely inevitably end Ultimate Spider-Man style and give way for Miles Morales, which they're clearly aiming for.
Nine separate movies does seem like over kill, 5 or 6 at most would be fine. I think after NWH comes out, if Sony still let's Tom Holland's Spiderman be used in the MCU, we're gonna see more of Peter in his young adult phase, where more social aspects collide with his life as a hero, while also taking larger roles as a main hero in the universe. That's what I'm hoping for, but who knows with how the Sony contract might play out.
This. This is exactly why I like Tom Holland’s spider-man. He’s growing up like any other kid rather than the previous two who were growing up, but seemed to already be there already.
The other ones did grow up too normaly, they just did it faster because it wasnt like today that they leave almost everything to other movies and sequels, back then they created a story with the character evolving, learning and growing up, the end, and then if they can thet make a sequel and in that sequel he learns new things, now they want to put most of the development of the characters in the sequel, for me that feels like a waste of time and really looks inconvenient, its too slow and they feel like they have all the time and oportunities in the world to just do it later in a sequel or not do it at all
Tom Holland’s movies had little to no growth. I never felt any change in character and anything Peter did had zero consequences compared to the raimi’s trilogy. I feel that the essence of being Spider-Man is that it isn’t fun to be Spider-Man. He is relatable in a way that he has a life filled with consequences. I see Tobey’s Spider-Man and I think that he has it rough man. I can relate to that. I see Tom Holland’s Spider-Man and all I think about is how cool it would be if I were in his shoes. I mean the new movies are fun and all but as a movie, the Sam raimi Spider-Man were more enjoyable for me.
@@playerone4715 but thats the point, spiderman is supposed to be like captain america, a shining beacon of hope, not to be a beacon of "damn im sad", dont get me wrong i love the raimi trilogy, but i think with everything happening on spiderman media, i think it just gets too much credit to the point noone would like to see another spiderman movie becuase it isnt made my sam raimi and isnt set in the raimiverse
@@CaccyTheCactusman Nah, I see where you’re coming from but I disagree with your first point. Spider-Man was originally created by Stan Lee as a hero who is relatable. Back then, heroes were viewed as unattainable perfection. They were too “perfect”. Nothing wrong with a bit of escapism but it was about time to make a character that resonates with the audience. Stan Lee decided that just like average people, Peter would have a lot of problems. He had a tough time getting a girl, he had financial problems, he had friend problems, he had his parental problems etc. This is something that the average joe could relate to. Spider-Man was a beacon of hope not because of how perfect he is but because of how he chooses to be Spider-Man despite the problem it brings. No matter how badly Spider-Man causes Peter trouble, he still chooses to put on the mantle cause he believes it’s the right thing to do. That is the key to Spider-Man’s inspiration. Not by how great Spider-Man’s life is but by how tough it is. Being Spider-Man is the symbolic representation of doing the right thing. No matter the consequence of the ‘right thing’ we ought to do it.
@@playerone4715 yeah i like consequences and problems like that, the mcu peter have personal problems too, its not as big as raimis but there still is, all im saying is that people like to gloss over that and hate the mcu spiderman because of bias but i do agree with you with relatable spiderman, mcu spiderman is relatable in a diffirent way, its more of a child becoming a superhero relatable, his arc is making the ironBOY to a spiderMAN that kind of relatable
Yes andrew Garfield's spiderman/peter parker is comic accurate (been saying that for years) His beginning his uncle and all of that i can go on and on but im pretty sure you understand now
Being comic accurate doesn't change the fact that it's a poorly made movie. It's cool if you like it and disagree, but more things should matter in a film than accuracy
I have been completely unaware of various Spider-Man fan factions up until now. ... and I think I'll go back to being unaware of them. Dr. Strange, sir? I have a request!
Spidey does change in the Raimi movies. He definitely matures especially over Spiderman 2 and Spiderman 2 sets him up for his hubris in Spiderman 3. You can enjoy them both for their take on the Webslinger, and no one has ever said that the Raimi films aren't "Raimi's interpretation". People think they're closer to Stan Lee's vision than others but however true that may or may not be doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.
What I know about spider man is that he suffers. Peter questions staying spider-man a lot of times throughout the 60’s and 70’s. And I get the impression that in some way, Spider-Man 2 adapts both the Spider-Man no more arc and the If this be my Destiny arc, where the weight of being Spider-Man is shown as being more emotional than the physical weight shown in ASM 33. In that arc Peter is directly responsible for May getting sick, his friends all think he is a dismissive jerk, and it all culminates in him throwing off that massive weight to continue fighting. Spider-Man 2 carries the spirit of those books more than it does “Spider-Man no more.” It also takes from the first appearance of the Sinister Six and that four armed arc against morbius as well. I love spider-man 2 a lot. Watching Peter get dumped on in every conceivable way and still decide to be Spider-Man is, *chef’s kiss* wonderful. And I do think the burning apartment sequence does do a good job to show how Spider-Man needs to act. It’s heartbreaking to hear, and as Peter realizes that he let someone die for his own selfishness is phenomenal. I know it’s different from Lee’s run, but I cannot say it is not Spider-man. I am glad the other films are getting more credit for accurately adapting Peter though. Peter is a pretty immature jerk sometimes.
I don't think characters should be held to the same characterizations they were introduced with, like you imply in this video. Especially when you have a character that's decades old. Growth and rebirth is common thing with comic book characters, like Batman. Batman has been "remade", going through many iterations that apply the same principles (Bruce Wayne, orphan boy, trains his skills, Batman) but vary drastically in tone and story. And that's what Sam Raimi did with his trilogy. He made a different Spider-Man, one that could represent the themes he wanted to tell and not contained to the OG run. And the fact that his interpretation still stands as the baseline today shows how strong his stories were and how influential those movies are.
I think I can agree with you partially, I also don't think characters have to be held to the same characterization. However, I think what the video is trying to imply (haha) is that Sam Rami's films have replaced what was the original arc for Spider-Man into something popular, yes, but also as of writing this a replacement for the what the character was originally about. The problem isn't changing the the character to suit a new age or narrative, thats not what the video is trying to say. The problem that is being addressed is the people saying the Rami movies should be highest standard on the characterization of Spider-Man when it could be argued that the original comic books, which aren't being represented in the movies, should be the baseline. Then, these same people will stomp and scream (not all, but the ones who do, do it loudly) when other Spider-Man media does not live up to the principles of the Rami movies, even though those movies are in themselves changing the original portrayal of the character. Its hypocritical, to say the least and for those who think its what Stan Lee and Steve Ditko wanted for the character are just ignorant. Though I should say that, like all art, comic books are subjective.
It's curious, but every once in a while I go back to read the Lee run and it's some of the most fun I ever have with these stories. Glad to know there's always something new to identify each visit like you pont it out.
I’ve always imagined a live action adaptation of Lee and Ditko’s Spider-Man taking place in the 1960’s instead of the modern day like we’ve always had with every Spider-Man film over the years. That would be cool and refreshing to see.
Would be more true to Ditko’s character no doubt. Stan had nothing to do with the character though. Stan was bit of a hack that took credit for artists works.
I think its not taken into the account the fact that Spider-Man 2 borrowed from Amazing Spiderman #50 and Amazing Spiderman Annual #1 where Peter temporarily loses his powers due to wishing he didnt have them. Spiderman 2 combines these two stories
Exactly how do you loose biological powers by wishing them away. That's like saying you can wish your arm away by simply not liking it. His powers aren't magical you know
But those two are completely different storylines with no similarities to mix that's the point Even if he want to be Spider-Man he can't because his powers are gone I know he blabbers about it in comics but since this version is not talkative you never know what is happening that's what makes raimi movies mid because their Peter is so mid
@@lukeskywalker9506 almost forgot about this comment 😂. Get ur point about raimi peter being too silent but mixing comic storyline is a common thing like Iron Man 2 with Demon in the Bottle and Armor wars. Plus TASM 50 and TASM annual 1 both deal with a similar issue, being Peter wishing he wasn't Spiderman
This is something that I truly believe. Spider-Man is more than one character he is a template for people to create their own characters. Tom Holland is my favorite because we got to see the character arc of Peter Parker changing through phases of his life and grow into the role of Spider-Man. When we first see Peter in Civil War he is both very nervous to meet Iron Man in person and during the plane fight we can tell that he doesn't actually want to hurt anyone on Captain America's team. Homecoming is about him learning that he doesn't need to be recognized as a big time Avenger to help people, Tony takse away the Stark suit but he still defeats the Vulture in his homemade suit and Toomes respects him. Infinity War and Endgame show him working alongside Tony and Doctor Strange as equals but in his mind he fails here first because he died without stopping Thanos from killing half the universe and then because he couldn't save them without losing Tony. Far From Home is the result of him feeling like a failure Nick Fury knows that he is ready to be an Avenger but Peter doesn't believe it himself which is why he believed giving EDITH to Mysterio was the responsible thing to do and when he discovers Beck is a villain he immediately tries to warn Fury and take the glasses back
Ah, Rosie I love this boy! This is a very brilliant summary of MCU Spider-Man’s character arc, which is very interesting. And one that perfectly mirrors the Lee/Ditko era Spidey in his high school years, finding his place in a world populated by other big time superheroes. Johnny Storm/Human Torch was Peter’s idol and role model and has always been the first superhero he’d ever compare himself to when doubting himself as a superhero. The same goes for the MCU Spider-Man. MCU Peter has always looked up to Tony Stark/Iron Man and saw him as a role model and someone he wishes he was as popular as. And in times of quitting, both Peters learned that even the superheroes they grew up idolizing have flaws, imperfections, and aren’t perfect. And upon learning that, he always immediately regains the motivation to put on the mask again, go back out there, and try his best. MCU Spider-Man is actually way more brilliant than people give him credit for.
Also people needs to realize this not being comic accurate does not mean an end product is bad. Specially because this characters are more than just stories now. They are important icons. And writers would wanna try their vision on them you like it or not. İn my opinion only limit to these stories should be that it needs to protect the core of their character and even that can be subjective at times. For example I hate Zack Synder's take on Batman. I do think his take doesn't protect his core at all and ı would even argue about it. But ı see some can see it in a different way. For some his or her view on Batman is different and he enjoys it. Now what? This is the world we living in a world with different minds and different views. And in the end of the day you need to respect those views(if they don't hurt anybody... ı will write this just in case.) For me the core of Spider-man is that he is a relatable super hero that can just be us. A fan boy, a kid who just wants adventure, An adult trying to look for his family, A young adult who tries to understand how to live all by his or herself. You know everyone can wear the mask. And not just that but his stories are about growth. And with that his stories are showing different kinds of ideas and concepts about growth. Responsibilty to Fear of living up to some one to being able to manage all parts of your life and more and all can give different answers. Concepts and stories are limitless. And also this was an amazing video!
I would say that Zack’s Batman is in the fallen hero category and especially when in bvs Alfred mentions how much Bruce has changed into a more hardened, cold, violent person and how it’s not right for him to do the things that he’s doing in the film.
@@legoben98productions My Problem was we never saw the normal version of this take. Funny enough This batman's simple origin is given but his hero years is not so when we saw it on bvs it feels like this is what the normal version of this character. Basically ı can't compare the fallen hero if ı never knew the hero.
No hate intended but watching this really just conveyed to me that raimi really did understand the character and how to translate it into a different medium. Peter is smart at the start of the movie, he spouts random facts and no one cares, he gains powers and now has the ability to be a selfish douchebag, uncle Ben’s death brought him back down to earth, like an anchor. In Spider-Man two uncle Ben’s message is even further solidified. The plot points are made more subtle because it’s a movie and there are no thought bubbles. He didn’t want to just outright state the characters motivations because that would be dumb and not as impactful
Where does he say that the points need to be super obvious? Besides in the movie they are incredibly obvious. He has a literal prophet like dream with his uncle Ben. That shits pretty on the nose. He’s saying the the movie isn’t comic accurate. It’s a different character, that’s fine. It’s still a good take. But saying he “understood the character” is wrong. He made his own version of the character with the aspects he thought were important as well as making new ones. It wasn’t comic accurate, and it wasn’t meant to be.
@@yourfatboy5359 based off what? I don’t like mcu Peter because I don’t enjoy Tom Holland’s portrayal of him, plain and simple if u do that’s fine. I’m just stating opinions here. U seem like the type of guy to hate on people for doing that.
I still believe That Spider-Man 2 is The MOST "Spider-Man" Spider-Man film. Yes, you are right that It doesn't encapsulate Stan's Peter but it still represents aspects, but not just Aspects of Stan's but aspects of Stern's, Conway's, and even DeMatteis. The world lends itself to the retro 60s aesthetics reminiscent of the Original Cartoon but also draws influences from ALL of Spider-Man's stories. Another aspect is that the No More storyline is really half of the film, with the other half being dedicated to the philosophical dichotomy of Octavius and Peter. Even this aspect pulls from other comics Like "If This Be My Destiny" being seen in the train scene which I believe Thematically is done better here than in Homecoming, even using aunt May to tie together both themes of "Holding On" to what's most important, which I believe is What makes this the most important Spider-Man Film. Spider-Man is Responsibility driven, philosophically no matter what disparity or challenge peter comes across whether it pertains to him or not if he has the ability to help it is his upmost duty to do so, even if he has to give up what he wants le most even his dreams. Back to Octavius, He mirrors Peter as He is unwilling to make the sacrifice that Peter makes everyday, unwilling to use his powers responsibly as he would need to give up what HE values most. To Octavius he WAS "Holding On" like Peter, but the difference is to what; When Peter lost his powers he lost his reason for responsibility so he let go of them and with that he let go of Uncle Ben, his Moral Center. With Octavius He lost his Moral Center with Rosie but held onto His dreams, and with dreams comes power, Leaving Octavius with all the power but no responsibility and Peter with No Power and all the responsibility that He chooses to ignore, Two similar men that lead down two different pasts. The reason I see this as the MOST "Spider-Man" Spider-Man Film is that even through all the decades and all the writers one thing has persisted with the character and has been there since Issue #1, "With Great Power, there MUST also come Great Responsibility, and that is no more prevalent than with Spider-Man 2.
It's very interesting the fact that everybody always say that Tobey's and Holland's spidermen are the most accurate and yet thematically everything you mentioned is exactly what Andrew's Spiderman is about, actually the main differences you pointed out are the differences between Raimi's and Webb's Spiderman movies.
I’m honestly really glad for this video. Mostly because what you say is right, how you should be respectful to every interpretation of Spider-Man. Don’t get me wrong, I love the Raimi trilogy. Only a lot of the more toxic Raimi fans always seem to talk down to the fans of Garfield and Holland Spider-Man under the guise of saying that they are not “the definitive Spider-Man”. Either because Garfield is “too cocky” or “too confident” to be Peter Parker. Or because Holland doesn’t mention Uncle Ben which gives him that annoying “Iron Boy Jr” nickname. It’s heartbreaking to see some fans act so hateful to each other over which Spider-Man is the best, when we should just cherish how much media we have of the webslinger. It’s not that I’m glad that Spider-Man 2 was showed to be flawed in the video. I’m glad that the movie is brought down to Earth, seen more as another interpretation instead of a Holy Bible of who Spider-Man truly is like some fans seem to believe. But yeah. I really should read Stan Lee’s comic run of Spider-Man. It honestly sounds like an interesting read after watching this video.
That's a good point you made. It's not that the Raimi trilogy is flawed simply for using another interpretation for Spider-Man as a character, it's that it has been canonized into something that it is not. An infallible portrayal of Stan Lee's character that is the holy grail. It's simply another take on the character, but too many fans of the original trilogy fail to understand that.
@@ebenade1 Frankly, the issues I have with the Raimi trilogy have little to do with the interpretation of the character, but with the all over the place quality of the acting, the predictable plotting and the fact that they are basically telling the same story three times, resetting the character at every opportunity. Oh and the flags. I really can't watch that thing withoutout laughing about the ridiculous flags.
Also, in the comics Peter decides to stop being Spider-Man and in Raimi's SM2 he loses his powers because of his subconscious, taking away his agency and making him a passive character, which is something that has always bugged me about this film.
He loses his powers, he goes to the doctor to find out the issue in an attempt to get better. He originally thought he had no choice but to be Spider-Man because it was the responsible thing to do only to find out that he does have a choice to walk away if he chooses. He then makes the decision to quit being Spider-Man. How exactly is he a passive character in this situation?
you misunderstood, Peter in Spider-Man 2 lost his powers because he was sick of being Spider-Man but kept going because that's what uncle ben would've wanted but then when he realized that his life wasn't getting any better and after he went to the doctor, he chose to drop the suit.
People need to realize that there will never be a comic book accurate Spiderman on film, no matter how loudly the fans demand it, comic book, video game and cartoon adaptations will never be the same in live action. Spiderman 2 is perfect for what it did and I’m glad it made those decisions.
I think I like the spin Spider-Man 2 put on it. It made Peter’s non Spider-Man life better, so that Jane he decides to become Spider-Man again, it is a much more powerful sacrifice he makes.
@@ericdxfan511 this guy doesn’t even know what he’s talking about. He always makes these dogshit videos and it makes me wonder- does this guy actually pay attention to the comics, or does he only read them for the sole purpose of trying to discredit the Raimi films?
You might as well be complaining how different OG Iron Man is to his movie counterpart. things change over time an adaptation is just that and adaptation.
The biggest problem with the fetishization of the Raimi movies is that it causes people too see anything Spider-Man that's done differently in any other adaptation from the Raimi movies as somehow being untrue to the character. Like the whole premise of the MCU hatred being that Uncle Ben doesn't get enough attention only exists because of those movies
@@jmorales09 It's not, I love when adaptations take their own direction with the character, even if it isn't necessarily to my preference. At the same time though, it's not really the same thing since the comic is the source material, not the raimi movies.
I very much enjoyed this video. As someone that has grown up with the Raimi trilogy and someone that has grown up with Spider-Man, I’ve always wanted to know the differences because I’ve always found it hard to acknowledge which movie version I should like when I’ve ultimately come to the conclusion that I like all of them. Each of them have strong merits, but I’ve always been drawn to the MCU Spider-Man more. I don’t know, but there is just something that you’ve said in these videos that have helped me reaffirm my stance of just liking the character in general and helped me reaffirm my desire to like all versions of Spider-Man. I can’t wait for the next part of this series.
That’s the one thing I wish more people realized about the original run. Peter was a jerk. Before and after he got powers. He was a petty spiteful vengeful jerk. Being Spider-Man didn’t make him a hero. It was uncle ben’s death that made him realize the consequences of his actions. Spider-Man’s origin is a warning almost. Not an aspirational tale of a hero getting powers and doing good.
It' s bullshit,peter before obtaining the superpowers was a normal boy, marginalized and bullied by his peers whom he rightly detested.Calling him a jerk just because he wanted to be respected by those who mocked him or because he gave more importance to his family than the whole world shows how much hypocrisy there is among people.Many people in the same position as peter would think the same way, but that doesn't make them jerks but only human.Peter is just a self-centered, immature teenager who gets his head high about the superpowers he's got, but still remains a nice guy who doesn't make fun of others for no reason.The real asshole is Flash, and to say that peter is an asshole would be like putting them on the same level, but the truth is that Flash is thousand times worse.
For y'all to say that Peter letting go of being spider-man because people are essentially mean to him or because he gets tired it, is a better depiction of spider-man is crazy 😂. Peter letting go of spider-man because it's affecting his personal life on a critical level is far more relatable and understandable.
Everyone says that MCU Spider-Man isn’t comic accurate when the sam ones aren’t as well that doesn’t mean neither is worse than the other, I’m like you I like sams interpretation but doesn’t mean MCU is so bad
Being ridiculed for doing what you do and having the thought to quit is still relatable. People may not know it, because with negative emotions, someone says something negative can get to them really badly, these kinds of things are more relatable to people dealing with having negative thoughts with their surroundings.
actually him quitting being Spider-Man because of constantly being treated like crap and he gets tired of it, is relatable too. It's part of why many people quit being youtubers or other public figures deleting their online accounts because it becomes tiresome to do something if all the result of that is, is people constantly treating you like crap
He stopped being Spider-Man because he was losing his powers, nearly losing every job he got, lost his girl and countless more. This dudes misinterpreted Spiderman's struggle in the movie so hard. So what if uncle Ben wasn't too much of an anchor in the comic? It was a better change and it gave him far more depth one would expect from Spider-Man.
Brilliant analysis! This is a distinction that needs to be made (or at least more widely appreciated). Spider-Man’s origin story has become a meme at this point, but it’s interesting just how much that’s tied to the film adaptation and not the source material. But I guess that speaks more to the popularity and efficacy of Raimi’s film than anything to do with Lee’s work
The prominence of Uncle Ben in the Raimi films is inspired by Ultimate Spider-Man, a hugely important and popular other universe reboot of the character just two years before the release of Raimi's Spider-Man. Seven full issues are devoted to Peter's origin, and Uncle Ben plays a huge part. This version of Peter is a whole lot closer to Andrew Garfield's portrayal, however, which also has Uncle Ben play a prominent role. Spider-man was in no way as heavily and loyally associated to Johnny Storm as he is with Iron Man in the MCU. Johnny Storm was the other teenage superhero, so Peter paid attention to him and had his fair share of one-upmanship scenarios with him. But he was very much an individualist, and didn't ever feel he needed a role model
The prominence of uncle Ben is inspired by amazing Spider-Man, 616 continuity, mainly. Anyone who tries to say uncle Ben isn’t that important in main Spider-Man canon is out of their fucking minds lol
@@Awesomemusic19 But isn't it from later on in the original run with some of the 90s series too? Maybe it's because the story fast tracks him into college, so Uncle Ben's prominence is lined up to the point in Peter's life when his impact was felt the most.
@@Awesomemusic19 I'm not arguing that Uncle Ben didn't play a significant role to Peter Parker OVERALL. But the degree in which his impact is felt wanes depending on the interpretation and the point in Peter's life that interpretation takes place in. And it's not wrong for a different interpretation to do this. Period.
In my opinion, the differences between the three live action Spider-Men and Stan Lee's Spider-Man are what makes the movies interesting. Each version goes through different personal problems, therefore giving a new perspective each time and allowing for some sort of relatability. It's almost like opening the character up to more people. Obviously we all have our preferences, but where the comics are one continuous story with different arcs that may collide, the movies offer more confined arcs with less of the continuity.
This is an amazing video essay I.P my boi. I love Spider-man, words cannot describe what he meant to me growing up, thanks to the movies, games, and ultimate comics. This vindication of his origins pulls a string in my heart, a puts a smile in my face. Thank you. Indeed, the themes and narrative progression of this first issues deliver better the theme of growing up, being more grounded and resilient to be able to tackle human affairs and responsibilities more efficient and coming out standing.
The whole moving on vs. standing fast reminds me so, SO much of your analyses of Captain America and Tony Stark. There is so much tying these characters together and I am here for it.
@@thebestofthebest5724 They MCU films are more faithful to Stan's original first 100 issue run than Raimi's. Raimi's movies just shaped the idea of what Spider-man should be in most people's heads because their reach.
I'm glad you made this video. So many people try to shame Stan as a writer and say what he is/isn't responsible for. But his work on Spider-Man is undeniable and one of the best comic runs in history. What we love about Spidey all came from the man himself and it changed comic books forever.
You brought up so many things between the movies, comics and audiences that I’ve been thinking for such a long time. Thank you so much for this video essay!
Raimi was just finding a way to incorporate what he loved about the mytho's . cant be a play by play...Raimi made a cinematic love letter to how he see's spiderman . i love this video...peter parkers characterisation varies based on the iteration. He was more of a jerk in the 90's animated series...and he's more earnest and pure hearted in the spectacular spiderman. Depends on your interpretation as a reader...and also the people writing him at the time..but its true...peter does have a jerky/ selfish side...if you look at the character's entire history...his true struggle might really be about self improvement which just so happens to entail being more responsible with the great power fate has cursed or blessed him with. Hail cthulu
Personally, I think the tapestry of the character's history from the original comics is best viewed as a whole rather than trying to isolate just one section of the mythos because that's doomed to fail. Across the decades, what's the most enduring elements of the character, not nitpicking a single scene on screen for not matching up with whatever comic you select at the time. Contradictions happen but the character remains fairly consistent, for better or worse, in terms of actual characterisation. That's not to dismiss Stan Lee, because lord knows I adore the man, but after he left the flagship title, he stopped being the one steering Peter on his path. Comics are a collaborative medium after all. Arguably the influences of Ditko shaped Peter during his era, just as Romita changed Peter during his time as artist, and so on until the present.
Yeah, plus with spider verse and the backstory scenes, I think webb's films especially Tony (in a more forced way) reference alot of spider man's abilities over all these years from the comics (it's just that spider verse felt surpringly alot more natural for a multi-versal threat 😂)
I mean he's literally talking about the storyline the movie adapted. Plus Peter never gets reset like dc. He doesn't have another origin and these comics still are the canon of his time in high school ect.
This is great. I’m in a time in my life where I need to let go and move forward with a lot of things, and this essay was such a great outlook on the role of change in life. :)
Thank you for this video. When I was a teen, my brother and I collected what was an almost complete run of Silver Age and early Bronze Age Spider-Man as they appeared. He was the real Spider-Man fan, but I read all of those comics several times. My contact with Spider-man over those many years since has been mainly through the films, the TV series (not the cartoon) and The Avengers comics, particularly New Avengers and Civil War. I have never shared the enthusiasm for Spider-Man 2, though I liked Spider-man well enough. Having seen your video, for which many thanks, I think it must have been residual memories of the early comics that stopped me loving it as so many did. I love the Tom Holland Spider-man, and do see much of the original themes in those early comics reflected there, but I think that in the context of the MCU, it would always be easier go with the spirit of the comics and not the details. Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy was, superficially, a transfer of the comics to the screen. Instead, it has become the default, because fewer people have read the early comics and fewer still have bothered to think about them. So I'm thanking you for putting the work and the thought into this subject that I haven't. I'm sure you're right.
I really appreciate this video. I think your final conclusion is correct in that many (including myself) write off the other iterations of Spider-Man too quickly because they don’t fit within what we assume is a more comically-accurate Spidey in the Raimi films. However, I don’t think Raimi’s films fundamentally change Stan Lee’s run of the character. I just think many of the changes that were made had more to do with the confines of the medium. For example: 1. I don’t think we can say that Peter is *not* kind of a jerk before he gets his powers, because he still immediately uses his powers for self gain when he gets them. Would a completely nice guy do that? Also, in a comic book, you have more time to flesh out a character. There’s only so much time in the first film to show who Peter is, set up the story, and make us emphasize with him, as we should. 2. The uncle Ben critique doesn’t make much sense to me. I think it’s pretty simple: making the famous quote come from an actual character in the movie that is important to Peter is more powerful than if it was said non-diegetically in some narration like in the comics. That doesn’t change anything fundamental about him or his motivations. Also, Peter’s origin is *still* wrapped up in Uncle Ben’s death in the comics. I’m not sure how that’s entirely different from what we see in the Raimi films. It just made us care about Uncle Ben more and gave him more of a moral thrust on Peter. I need to rewatch this and finish my thoughts…but would love to hear what you think. I just think it’s harsh to say the Raimi films are not really Spider-man-like when they still contained the basic message, IMO. They just had to package it differently.
Thank you for this. I always found myself puzzled whenever I tried to compare Stan Lee's original work to Sam Raimi's adaptation and you beautifully highlighted what those differences are. Excited to hear more from your Stan Lee Retrospective!
This is a really great video. I honestly don’t think this makes Spider-Man 2 a lesser film at all. I think they make the concept work, although I can’t help but love the true meaning of Spider-Man giving up his characters in the comics- as you said, his life doesn’t actually improve, but the crime world does, it grows. Also what you said about uncle Ben was actually pretty great. This is definitely a hard video for a Raimi fan, but I can’t help but agree with what you say. Overall, both the comic and the film are great imo. But yeah, Spider-Man 2 isn’t a perfect adaptation of the story, or even the comics as a whole. I honestly feel like the trilogy more or less gets the character right😳 although all in all, you can’t beat the source material 😎
I still don't see how his life improved when he stopped being Spider-Man. I mean he was able to catch up with his university and aunt may forgave him, but let's be real she was gonna forgive him anyway. Other than that, quitting the mantle of Spider-Man still left him with a dead end job, late on rent, mj was still going to get married to someone else and harry still hated him. I get that after he throws the costume away they try to have a happy montages of him walking around, but his life never really became better when he stopped being Spider-Man.
@@junaydfisher211 I think it was mainly to do with the school stuff and the fact that he could at least attempt to be there for MJ. But looking back on it, they didn’t dive too much into it ig
i think the stan story is definitely a better message for a hero, but as someone who has their kindness taken advantage of them Spider-Man 2 has a much deeper meaning. The movie is a reminder that you gotta have a balance of looking after yourself and other people, because if you slave yourself for others trying to people please youll be miserable. But if you abandon everyone, youre no better than the people that take advantage of you and you dont put any positivity into the world. That results in other good people being hurt or taken advantage of. Spider-Man 2 represents the balance between self help & the responsibility to help others. And when you need a second to catch your breath and do something for yourself, the good people youve helped that value your help will be there to pick you up and put you on your feet
Holland’s movies are great, I just wish his Spider-Man was more independent. That’s a core trait of Spider-Man: he finds it so hard to open up to other people. Holland’s Spider-Man isn’t lonely or troubled. He doesn’t have to go through all his changes and have to work his way through all these huge troubles by himself. He doesn’t overthink. He’s not alone. Even when Peter interacted with the torch and such, no one understood him. He was alone. But Holland’s Spider-Man flashes around his secret identity just like that- heck, all of shield knows. Everyone seems to know. He has all these other people… he isn’t lonely. Peter Parker being a lonely, guilt ridden guy just working his way through is something that these movies don’t capture, and yet I identify with and relate to so much. In the comics, sure, Spidey and the avengers and such lived in a shred universe, but Peters villains and love life and things were all his own. Not everything was tied back to one Tony stark. Homecoming Spider-Man is a Spidey who was dropped into a world where the villain has a vendetta for Spider-Man and isn’t allowed to go against Tony stark. It’s not up to Ironman. It’s up to Peter Parker to take inspiration from a far and work his way through, covering it up in that 60s Spider-Man way. I don’t know if this is all making sense like I want it to, but I just don’t like Mcu Spider-Man’s storyline. I wish they had just cut Ironman and happy from the movie altogether, and just leave in the funny references like that of the captain America training videos. I can’t stand the entire government and superhero base k owing his identity. Keep it to Tony knowing (cause it was set up in civil war) and maybe Ned, but no other avengers or shield
This is so good! Thank you for your hard work analyzing why the writing for the original Spiderman comics had such great characters! I would love to see a video on how Mary Jane as a character grew so much through the comics
So I always felt a disconnect with the rami trilogy, but couldn't ever put my finger on what turned me off until you spent it out for me here. I personally have a lot of anxieties about becoming stagnant in my life and just running in circles, getting so attached to the ways things are I'll fight to avoid change. I think that internal struggle is why I always super related to spiderman, but feel put off by the rami trilogy. Both have that same message underline core of change, but rami's trilogy answered with stay the same as the world changes while comic spidy is more about changing with the world and taking the opportunity that arise.
@@laststrike4411 if you're question is how does comic spidy change while rami spidy doesn't some easy answers would be how Peter started out as a spiteful child blaming his problems on others. He then got the powers and decided to take what he though he deserved and paid a price for it. He became a good person afterwards. Rami spidy starts as a good kid who starts to use his powers for personal gain before paying a price and having to return to being a good kid after. Besides that peter barely changes in the whole trilogy. He's always a good hearted kid who tries his best to help others and is often oblivious to how others are feeling around him. Compare that to the comics where spidy has to constantly grow and evolve. He began as a nerd with no confidence and the first thing he tries to do as a hero is join other hero teams for validation. He then gives up being spiderman because he's not confident enough to ignore Jameson. He final gains that import self confidence after learning how capable he really is and begins to grow both as a hero and a man. He moves on from high-school flings and finds a girl with similar intrest as him. And after loosing her he reconnects with MJ as they have both finally grown enough to be a healthy relationship
I really enjoy these videos of comparing the comics with the movie adaptations. I’d love to see you to do this with other characters at some point. For example I’d love a video comparing iron man extremis and iron man 3, or iron man 2 and demon in a bottle.
Well, Aldrich Killian dies at the beginning of Extremis and Tony doesn't use Extremis himself, so wildly different. Although I have to thank your you for at least knowing Iron Man 3 is an Extremis adaptation. Most people still think it is supposed to be a Mandarin story.
To be fair, I’ve always felt I’m the only spider-man fan who thought this movie was just awful so I’m biased to like this video, but still- really great analysis!!!
I see your point. In the comics, giving up Spiderman has no consequences for himself but huge consequences for the city. In the movie, giving up Spiderman has huge consequences for himself, but not really that much for the city. Aside perhaps Doc Ock.
The movie has a big, in-your-nose shot of a newspaper saying that crime rates have risen up. Followed by a scene where Peter goes into a house on fire and later learns someone died in that fire. Seems like you and that guy have fragmentary memory when it comes to these films. You only want to remember what will suit your point.
Peter's life doesn't really improve when he gives up the costume in Spider-Man 2. I mean sure he gets up to date with his college work, and aunt may forgives him, but let's be honest, aunt may was gonna forgive him anyways, he didn't need to lose the costume for that. Other than those 2 things everything else in his life is still bad. He was still stuck with a dead end job and was still late on rent, living in a shifty apartment, mj was still engaged to someone else and didn't want to date him, and harry still hated him. And lots of crime was shown in the city, a building was lit on fire and he couldn't save the person inside, there were scenes of people getting beat up in alleyways and he had robforce himself to look away and everyone kept asking where Spider-Man was because they needed him more that ever, even aunt may has a dialogue with Peter about where Spider-Man is before he jumps back into the suit.
The point of showing Peter's life getting better is that not having the big responsability of spiderman in his back takes away a lot of his problems, and then the message is that life as a superhero is hard and will always be hard so he has to learn the hard way that having great responsability is really damn difficult Atleast that's how i see it
This video is both a follow up to Part 1 of my Stan Lee retrospective and stands on its own: ruclips.net/video/9cY2_IxRlgs/видео.html
I stumbled upon your channel and watched your Invincible breakdown. Just to be in time for this video. Keep up the great content homie I'm gonna binge watch your content.
@@dantegill9380 Aww thank you so much! I plan to do loads more season sized essays like the Invincible video in the coming weeks! 😁
You're right that people have misconceptions about Stan Lee's run, but it's incorrect to point the finger at the Raimi films for all changes. It's not as though Spider-Man stopped being published after Stan Lee left, nearly 400 more issues of Amazing Spider-Man were released before the first film, plus hundreds of spinoff and guest appearences, and these issues contained many retcons, reframings, and personality changes. Sam Raimi and David Koepp did not invent Uncle Ben telling Peter about responsibility, and it's not "wrong" to not stricly adhere to a small slice of a character's publishing history written nearly 4 decades prior.
@@mv9iksE7fr You're totally right, but for the purpose of this video it was crucial to use Spider-Man 2 as a case study for highlighting all of these misconceptions in a digestable way. As I mentioned at the end, the goal is not to place blame, but to shine on Stan Lee's original work and promote it as THE most reference point for understanding Spider-Man.
@@ImplicitlyPretentious I understand, hope my comment did not seem harsh, just felt like that aspect of the video might confuse people unfamiliar with the character's history.
In a way it's actually not easy to create a truly comic inaccurate Spider-Man adaptation, because unless you make him rob banks gleefully and kill Uncle Ben out of boredom, your adaptation will probably be close enough to the way a writer has portrayed him in the mainline comic universe. I hope this video succeeds in convincing people to reexamine the other adaptations, especially Andrew Garfield's.
I'm glad someone is pointing out this differences between Raimi movies and Stan Lee's run.
Be prepare for more videos like this, I've filled an entire notebook with issue to issue notes, formulas and diagrams from how much they differ
I really like Lee's run. I wish the concept of spiderman wasn't blurred thru the dozens and dozens of reinterpretations and retellings
I just had a talk with a coworker yesterday about this. Saying how Garfield and Holland’s Spider-men are closer. The Raimi Spider-man is closer to the 90s cartoon. Probably every episode he talked about Ben and that line. I think that’s were they got it from for the Raimi movies.
@@ImplicitlyPretentious questionable.
Bro it’s not just stans run Steve ditko also worked on this run
So stan's spidey is changing and growing up. Sam's spidey is holding on to your principles.
Bro why do you call it stans spidey when Steve ditko also worked on this run
So neither version has a bad message. There’s only so much you can portray in a roughly 2 hour film. So focusing on Toby’s Peter in the way it does makes sense for Sam’s version for sure. Considering how projects get canceled and rebooted all the time not putting the serialized crime aspect there makes sense. Though it would be nice if other characters were touched on.
Speaking of that not sure having too many villains in SM3 was it’s main issue. It had more to do with Raimi not understanding Venom and the studio heads insistence to add this 1 villain muddied it up when it needed different beats for what SR was trying to get across. In some ways Venom works for the story in other way not really. My main issue is the recon of who kills Uncle Ben and what that means.
Do you think the two are mutually exclusive? The guy in the video says they are many times
@Alexp. Yeah this dude has no clue. Steve Ditko made the character, not Stan. And Raimis version is pretty faithful to Ditkos original. Maybe less ”edge” as Peter had some attitude in the original run, but otherwise it seems to understand the character quite well. Unlike the MCU and it’s travesty.
@Christian Björck that’s another thing that bothers me about this video, just completely disregards ditko despite his many contributions to the character
I don’t think Sam’s interpretation of Spider-Man is lesser due to the inaccuracy, so much as it is it’s own take on the character. Though I find it annoying that people judge all versions of Spidey by Raimi’s like it’s a fundamental part of the character
Kinda weird then how the biggest complaint about MCU Spider-Man are the inaccuracies.
I would say raimi's version is actually pretty accurate, just not to Stan lee's run, its honestly a lot like Gerry Conway's run with the overbearing guilt, and soap opera tone,
@@chance4827 tbh I never cared about comic accurate movies. It's only a problem when it's a subjectively bad idea. (I.e Adam Warlock never fighting Thanos basically making him useless to the plot )
No.
@Change, it’s not so much that the inaccuracy bugs us, but the fact that they missed the point of the character in the MCU, Spider-Man never wanted to be spider-man, but he is responsible, he has to be Spider-Man, in these movies, his motivations are completely different to The Spider-Man I know and love, (Also, I’m not a Raimi fan boy, those movies are goofy as fuck)
Very succinct. I think the biggest difference is that Spider-Man 2 tells that Spider-Man No More story at a time where Peter is more immature. I wouldn't call it un-Spidey but just a take where they made him less mature and more introspective and self-sympathizing because of it. The original No More story was very much a product of the Romita run at a time where Peter underwent a huge deal of growth in self-esteem and social status, where the Raimi films held much more onto Ditko's characterisation for Peter, obviously aside from the greater inclusion of characters like Uncle Ben and the inclusion of MJ and Harry which are very Romita.
I think as far as this adaptation goes, it works on its own two feet and is in no way a betrayal of the original source material, however, I really appreciate that you bring Raimi fans such as myself back down to Earth in that each film version of Spidey has its accuracies and deviations from the source material, each of which have their own stories to tell.
(Which is also really helpful as I'm as fan of both Raimi and MCU Spidey and some folks just can't fathom that).
Very well said Pup. Im with you on enjoying multiple iterations. i love both Raimi and Webb films but my personal favorite is Tom Holland but i grew up on them all technically.
Great comment pup. I'm a huge fan of all three live action interpretations of the character, so I'm definitely in the minority lol. I love how distinct they all are with the stories they tell and where their focus lies and I don't think any of them are definitive. However, with Far From Home being my favorite iteration of the character from the films and having what I want to see most from Peter Parker, it's proof that the MCU Spider-Man can be awesome when he's written properly. Still, I love all the things Raimi, Webb, and Watts get right about the character, and honestly, they all do a great job.
Okay?
I didn't mind Civil War MCU Spidey. I really didn't like Homecoming as a movie though. It felt like it was taking a crap on Peter, just because it could. It created huge inconsistencies. He's competent in Germany, but somehow not in his native New York. The suit redesign especially bothered me. Return of the back tick. Dull webbing. Teensy-Weensy chest spider. Baby eyes. Can't do anything right without Iron Man's help. Those for me were all a hard no. I could tolerate what they did with Ned and MJ; but then ramming Iron Man down our throats like that, and never even mentioning Ben, felt like betrayals.
Awkward as the Garfield movies were, I wanted them to recover and do better. The second one's rushed ending was a disgrace; but a third film could've redeemed the series. I liked the idea of a kale-munching hipster Spidey, even if his first movie costume having yellow eyes was a big turn-off.
Agreed. I actually was a Raimi stan for a long time. I thought Tobey's Spider-Man was THE Spider-Man and anything else was trash. Last summer I watched every Spider-Man movie because I wanted to not be a bias fan boy. While I still enjoy Raimi's the best, I will say that I was wrong about MCU Spider-Man (Far From Home was spectacular) and I can enjoy certain elements from Amazing Spider-Man 2 as well. Each have their own style and take inspiration from different parts of the comics. All this to say, let Spider-Man be Spider-Man and enjoy whatever version you enjoy.
I don’t think either way is better or worse than the other, just different ways of telling the story
Tell that to the MCU haters
I'd the original Lee story feels more realistic and more layered personally
@ I'd argue you could still do in feature length an example would be superman 2
@@babaracus9583 What are you talking about?
@@scottchaison1001 how the Rami version isn't that realistic compared to the og?
I think one thing people need to understand when talking about the cinematic Spider-man movies is that none of them are completely accurate to the Comic Book version and each make substantial changes to the character and his arc. Heck even Miles Morales from into the Spider-verse had some major changes from the version in the comics. One big thing I none of the films did and i don't think ever will is showing how Peter Parker before Spider-man was a vengeful guy who was out against the world. I don't think these changes are necessarily a problem, but it does make me role my eyes when I see people try to argue what film is more comic accurate as a reason why one series is better than the other when each series strays away form the comics in a major way.
Is not about the changes is about feeling like the character
Which is why TSSM and Insomniac's Spidey are better than the movies
People stay talking about the amazing spiderman and how he shouldn't have been hunting after the criminals, but that's litterally what he does in the comics. Wack
I've said this from day one glad theres people who actually get it
@@candycorn4912 I agree also unpopular opinion the amazing spiderman first movie suit is actually my favorite suit it just looks unique but not straying away from the look of spiderman and honestly it makes me appreciate the second suit a bit more because it show a contrast to how he started out
To be fair, there was an Uncle Ben's cult way before the Raimi's movies. There were writers in the comics who treated him like a saint.
Rumor has it HiTop is still seething with rage from this video.
Him to his Raimi poster "you can't count on anyone, especially your heroes"
@@downspiralLOL
"Spider man isn't about how noble it is to hold on and stay the same. It's about the importance of changing your funsamental attitude with others when you hit a certain point in life"
Well said. Spider man stories as whole are basically a coming of age story, showing a kid not just becoming a super hero but also growing into a mature and responsible man. I think this theme was even explored in the Spectacular Spider Man through the differences between Peter and Norman Osborn. In the series, Osborn main catchphrase is "Don't apologize. I never do", which represents his arrogance and refusal to recognize his mistakes. This "never apologize" is the polar opposite of Peter journey, who learns from his mistakes and change to a better person.
Yep, if one wants a story about a noble hero stayign true to his close to flawless principles, one should turn to Captain America.
@@swanpride Yup. Captain America is the inspirational hero, the one people want to be like while Spider man is the relatable one, the one who represents the kid growing into the hero that fans want to be.
@@swanpride The thing is Cap is the one we should look up to and spiderman is the one we would turn out to be because of that
Spiderman 2 is not about staying the same. The ending of the movie is him finally getting with Maryjane. A massive change considering he's spent the whole movie convinced he has to pick spider-man or true love
The movie is about how important it is to do the right thing, even if you have to give up your dreams. Not to say dreams can't come true or you can't change or be happy- the ending of the movie makes it clear you can have your cake and eat it too....
@@Courier_333 I got this and is a important and wonderful message. However I think the movie contradicts itself by having Peter and MJ together, so basically he didn't need to give his dream to be spider man (the right thing).
Also, while I'm not against Peter and MJ being together, having her be his first and only love in the franchise really goes against Spider man theme, that life not always goes in the way the person expected. Peter plans are not always successful and things not always go the way he wants but, through his optimism, he is able to find the positives in this situation and evolve from them.
Compare Peter and MJ situation with Peter and Betty Brant, his first love in the Stan Lee and Steve Ditko run. When Betty start dating and eventually was engage to Ned Leeds, Peter became a little disapointed but eventually accepted her decision to move onm recognizing that Betty was happy with Ned and that his attraction to her was no longer the same, with Peter find new love in girls like Gwen Stacy and Mary Jane (who in the first issues was mysterious girl who Peter didn't even wanted to meet due to his aunt trying to force him to go on a date with her, making their future romance much more ironic and surprising). Just like Betty, Peter moved on with his life as well and was still to find love in someone else.
All I can say is thank you for making these videos, bc if you didn't my dumb brain wouldn't understand a lot of the themes in that said movie. As well as other stuff XD
P.S. Your entire self is a mood and I love it XD
When looking at Peter's arc within the MCU, it's becoming more apparent how those movies are heavily based on the early works of Stan Lee and the different phases Peter had as he grew up.
In _Homecoming,_ Peter was still a boy. He's going around solving low level crimes, he's immature, impatient, childish, and very new to everything. His double life isn't dramatic, it's comedic. He keeps losing his backpack, he gets caught in his Spidey suit, his shenanigans lead him to getting detention, and had his suit taken away like a parent taking away their kids phone. The world isn't beating him to the ground, and his sense of self worth as a hero is based on the Avengers (mostly Tony Stark). It isn't until he's in the rubble that he starts to look inward calling on his strength as Spider-man to save himself because he isn't defined by a fancy suit, he's defined by his actions.
In _Far From Home_ Peter is starting to fully transition out of boyhood and becomes a young man. He has let go of his first crush and has moved onto a new love he finds in MJ, not because of how she looks or vague descriptions of her just being "the best", but because he likes who she is as a person. He is now in a world where the heroes are scattered as the Avengers appear to be disbanded after the 5 year gap and the events of _Endgame._ But he's still trying to hold onto a few things by looking for some other hero to look up to so he can have guidance. He has grown out of his desire to be in the big leagues because he's seen the kind of struggle that brings, and his self doubt makes him feel like he isn't up to the challenge. He isn't quitting being Spider-man out of fear, he is just trying to remain the rookie he was when Tony first recruited him because the times were much simpler back than (we've all had moments when we wish we could go back to being kids, less responsibilities, etc). It isn't until he learns Mysterio is a fraud and is given words of affirmation from Happy regarding the pedestal the world (Peter included) put Tony on, that he rises to the challenge and proves his capabilities not only to others, but to himself. He wasn't alongside other heroes facing the drone army, he was on his own, he used his own intuition, and his own abilities to save the day.
From what we can see from _No Way Home,_ Peter's life is becoming more and more dramatic. The consequences he faces have gone from detention to being framed for murder. His double life is now becoming more conflicting as he tries to hang onto the few good things he's gotten (I have a feeling the end of the movie will have Strange complete the spell properly and the entire world forgets his identity, including his friends and Aunt May). He even starts to step away from saying "sir" because he is no longer the rookie. He has proven his worth and his place among the hero community, he is facing bigger enemies, and he is facing it alone (for the most part)
There is a clear arc for MCU Peter as we watch him grow from a boy to a (spider-)man, and it's annoying when everyone keeps calling him "iron-boy jr" because he wasn't in his prime (both physically and emotionally) immediately after becoming Spider-man. While I do disagree with some details, the tone and arc of these movies is awesome
Well I think Sam’s Spidey is like Tim’s Batman it isn’t completely comic accurate but instead it reinvents the character so much and so well people believe that the original comics were just like how the movies are
I don’t think there’s enough of a through line between movies to define his storyline as an arc. He’s mostly the product of Tony’s arc throughout the infinity saga and now that that’s over, he going to be the product of the upcoming Dr. strange movie. He has yet to have an identity outside of other heroes.
@@timy9197 Yeah I agree, sometimes people give the MCU a little bit too much Credit. Honestly we haven’t had a completely Accurate live action version
I've heard Stan Lee himself approved Tom Holland's Spiderman..
But whatever, we have Spiderverse, guys.. many story variants will be told and retold
Peter's over arching characte arc is the transition toward maturity. I think it will be PETER that finally says the iconic quote, "with great power comes great responsibility"; to himself. Peter must come to this relization himself to become an adult.
Real maturity IS about accepting our responsibilities to others. No one can impart maturity, just help guide someone to that transition.
The No Way Home trailer has Dr. Strange telling Peter that his double life is unsustainable. I think Peter will have to let go of his 'secret' identity and reconcile that he, Perter Parker, IS Spiderman.
RDJ sort of set the entire tone of the MCU ditching superhero secret identities with one improvised line and the theme of personal identity has permeated every subsequent film since.
This is what I love about Spider-Man stories, neither are bad they’re just different. There’s different interpretations of the story for different people.
This video is already a classic
☺️☺️☺️
is already a straight garbage
Seriously, thank you for this. I hate it when people complain about the newer Spidey movies because they're "not Spider-Man" when they have no context for what Spider-Man really is. I mean, he's a character that's been around for 60 years, he's been a heck of a lot of things, lol. The dogmatic devotion to the Raimi films really does come off as a reaction to backlash against them. Just as you said, it's perfectly OK to like them or love them, but to claim you do because they are more "true" to Spider-Man is just misguided.
Now Luke Skywalker...thats a different story.
I have read every single issue of Amazing Spider-Man and have been a huge fan for over 30 years. So I have PLENTY of context! And anyone that argues that the MCU Spidey is more true than the Raimi films (or even close to equal) is either ignorant or in denial. And I don't hate the MCU movies, I love Tom Holland. The Raimi movies may not have been identical to the comics but by god they were more accurate than I expected and still the most accurate on screen version of Spidey we have seen outside maybe the 90's animated show. I also love the Garfield movies.
I love the Raimi movies most because 1. They are better movies. 2. Because they are the closest version of Spider-Man out of all the movies.
Raimi>Stan
There is one true Spider-Man: the original by Steve Ditko. So yeah, the new films have no idea who the character is supposed to be.
Funny how nobody seems to mention the 90s animated series considering its the first place where ben said his great power line. Having grown up watching that series before the raimi movies i can say clearly that the raimi films are far more accurate than the mcu films simply by the fact that peter idolized iron man in those movies.
Don't forget Steve Ditko and John Romita influence in the Stan Lee run, it's their run on Spider-Man too
THANK YOU FOR MAKING THIS SERIES! I love the Raimi films but their effect on changing the perception of Spider-Man is undeniable. I think they get so much of the Spider-Man ethos correct in terms of that struggle between selflessness and selfishness but they forced the character into a box. All of a sudden Spider-man HAS to be miserable or he isn't accurate. He HAS to be driven solely by guilt or he isn't accurate. The Spider-Man of the comics is dynamic and relatable because he grows up and changes and learns and fucks up just like everyone else.
Exactly!! I had a working theory for so long that the Raimi films, good as they were, entirely changed what Spider Man means to a lot of people. Whereas The original Spider Man was about growth and change, everyone now seems to believe That Peter parker has to be miserable and poor and sad to be a good Spider Man,but that really isn't what it's all about.
Yes love the raimi movies. But they are an amalgamation of 616 and Ultimate. Ultimate spidey as fun as it is, isn't like 616. And every spidey fan will admit 616 is peak spidey.
@@sebastianhaney1425 kind of is though for the stan lee run. Todd McFarlane kind of changed it with peter getting married and the potential of him and MJ having kids. For 20 years the character was in limbo of late teen or early 20s.
To me, it depends. Spiderman to me, is the hero of hope. Iron man, Cap, Thor, they can get their asses kicked emotionally and physically. Spiderman is the hero who gets back up and when he gets down, it really means it, like Venom Saga and Gwen’s death.
@@dylantennant6594 I agree. He has the strongest will among all Marvel heroes. Imo.
This video really reinforces my belief that some hybrid of our three film adaptations of SM would be perfect. They all tackle a different aspect of the original work and make it the biggest part of their respective films
Or is it an adaption that adapts to the writer's point of view in life which in the case of the film works well?
I know it's a simple short-hand to say that Stan Lee "wrote" all of these issues, but from everything we know about the "Marvel Method," and all the controversies that surround Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko and who created/wrote WHAT at Marvel, we should at least acknowledge that "Lee & Ditko" should be credited as writing the issues, and "Lee & Romita" credited with the others.
I'm really hoping we get three trilogies with Holland's Spider-Man. The 'Home' Trilogy and then two more that represent the different phases of his life. We're in the sitcom phase for now, which 'No Way Home' looks like it's gonna be transitioning from. Then we'll get the Melodrama phase in the next trilogy, and then an all-out crime saga for the final trilogy, which will likely inevitably end Ultimate Spider-Man style and give way for Miles Morales, which they're clearly aiming for.
You want 9 Spider-Man films? Jesus Christ. Ever heard of over-saturation?
@@zacrast16 I WANT SPIDER-MAAAAAAAAANN!!
@@zacrast16 people back in 2009 you want an entire series of comic book movies all connected to each other ever hear of over-saturation
Nine separate movies does seem like over kill, 5 or 6 at most would be fine. I think after NWH comes out, if Sony still let's Tom Holland's Spiderman be used in the MCU, we're gonna see more of Peter in his young adult phase, where more social aspects collide with his life as a hero, while also taking larger roles as a main hero in the universe. That's what I'm hoping for, but who knows with how the Sony contract might play out.
@@ebenade1 I think if they can make 8 Harry Potter movies, 9 Spider-Man movies isn't really a stretch.
This. This is exactly why I like Tom Holland’s spider-man. He’s growing up like any other kid rather than the previous two who were growing up, but seemed to already be there already.
The other ones did grow up too normaly, they just did it faster because it wasnt like today that they leave almost everything to other movies and sequels, back then they created a story with the character evolving, learning and growing up, the end, and then if they can thet make a sequel and in that sequel he learns new things, now they want to put most of the development of the characters in the sequel, for me that feels like a waste of time and really looks inconvenient, its too slow and they feel like they have all the time and oportunities in the world to just do it later in a sequel or not do it at all
Tom Holland’s movies had little to no growth. I never felt any change in character and anything Peter did had zero consequences compared to the raimi’s trilogy.
I feel that the essence of being Spider-Man is that it isn’t fun to be Spider-Man. He is relatable in a way that he has a life filled with consequences. I see Tobey’s Spider-Man and I think that he has it rough man. I can relate to that. I see Tom Holland’s Spider-Man and all I think about is how cool it would be if I were in his shoes.
I mean the new movies are fun and all but as a movie, the Sam raimi Spider-Man were more enjoyable for me.
@@playerone4715 but thats the point, spiderman is supposed to be like captain america, a shining beacon of hope, not to be a beacon of "damn im sad", dont get me wrong i love the raimi trilogy, but i think with everything happening on spiderman media, i think it just gets too much credit to the point noone would like to see another spiderman movie becuase it isnt made my sam raimi and isnt set in the raimiverse
@@CaccyTheCactusman Nah, I see where you’re coming from but I disagree with your first point.
Spider-Man was originally created by Stan Lee as a hero who is relatable. Back then, heroes were viewed as unattainable perfection. They were too “perfect”. Nothing wrong with a bit of escapism but it was about time to make a character that resonates with the audience.
Stan Lee decided that just like average people, Peter would have a lot of problems. He had a tough time getting a girl, he had financial problems, he had friend problems, he had his parental problems etc.
This is something that the average joe could relate to. Spider-Man was a beacon of hope not because of how perfect he is but because of how he chooses to be Spider-Man despite the problem it brings. No matter how badly Spider-Man causes Peter trouble, he still chooses to put on the mantle cause he believes it’s the right thing to do.
That is the key to Spider-Man’s inspiration. Not by how great Spider-Man’s life is but by how tough it is. Being Spider-Man is the symbolic representation of doing the right thing. No matter the consequence of the ‘right thing’ we ought to do it.
@@playerone4715 yeah i like consequences and problems like that, the mcu peter have personal problems too, its not as big as raimis but there still is, all im saying is that people like to gloss over that and hate the mcu spiderman because of bias but i do agree with you with relatable spiderman, mcu spiderman is relatable in a diffirent way, its more of a child becoming a superhero relatable, his arc is making the ironBOY to a spiderMAN that kind of relatable
"Spider-man doesn't look back, he always looks forward" God your videos are amazing, I've watched like all of them in two weeks lmao
This video completely changed my opinion on Andrew Garfield’s Spider-Man. Well done.
Yes andrew Garfield's spiderman/peter parker is comic accurate (been saying that for years)
His beginning his uncle and all of that i can go on and on but im pretty sure you understand now
Being comic accurate doesn't change the fact that it's a poorly made movie. It's cool if you like it and disagree, but more things should matter in a film than accuracy
@@jmorales09 tasm 1 was good
I have been completely unaware of various Spider-Man fan factions up until now. ... and I think I'll go back to being unaware of them. Dr. Strange, sir? I have a request!
nah you really educated me, and now i have an even greater appreciation for the character. thank you!
This did blow my mind! You make good points between the comic and the film. Good stuff.
Spidey does change in the Raimi movies. He definitely matures especially over Spiderman 2 and Spiderman 2 sets him up for his hubris in Spiderman 3. You can enjoy them both for their take on the Webslinger, and no one has ever said that the Raimi films aren't "Raimi's interpretation". People think they're closer to Stan Lee's vision than others but however true that may or may not be doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.
What I know about spider man is that he suffers. Peter questions staying spider-man a lot of times throughout the 60’s and 70’s. And I get the impression that in some way, Spider-Man 2 adapts both the Spider-Man no more arc and the If this be my Destiny arc, where the weight of being Spider-Man is shown as being more emotional than the physical weight shown in ASM 33. In that arc Peter is directly responsible for May getting sick, his friends all think he is a dismissive jerk, and it all culminates in him throwing off that massive weight to continue fighting. Spider-Man 2 carries the spirit of those books more than it does “Spider-Man no more.” It also takes from the first appearance of the Sinister Six and that four armed arc against morbius as well. I love spider-man 2 a lot. Watching Peter get dumped on in every conceivable way and still decide to be Spider-Man is, *chef’s kiss* wonderful. And I do think the burning apartment sequence does do a good job to show how Spider-Man needs to act. It’s heartbreaking to hear, and as Peter realizes that he let someone die for his own selfishness is phenomenal. I know it’s different from Lee’s run, but I cannot say it is not Spider-man. I am glad the other films are getting more credit for accurately adapting Peter though. Peter is a pretty immature jerk sometimes.
This is exactly what I've been thinking
I don't think characters should be held to the same characterizations they were introduced with, like you imply in this video. Especially when you have a character that's decades old. Growth and rebirth is common thing with comic book characters, like Batman. Batman has been "remade", going through many iterations that apply the same principles (Bruce Wayne, orphan boy, trains his skills, Batman) but vary drastically in tone and story. And that's what Sam Raimi did with his trilogy. He made a different Spider-Man, one that could represent the themes he wanted to tell and not contained to the OG run. And the fact that his interpretation still stands as the baseline today shows how strong his stories were and how influential those movies are.
He just ignored every other time peter mourned uncle ben before the raimi movies came out.
@@rigzmoviediaries654 he just talked about og run until the end of No more spider-man arc.
I think I can agree with you partially, I also don't think characters have to be held to the same characterization. However, I think what the video is trying to imply (haha) is that Sam Rami's films have replaced what was the original arc for Spider-Man into something popular, yes, but also as of writing this a replacement for the what the character was originally about.
The problem isn't changing the the character to suit a new age or narrative, thats not what the video is trying to say. The problem that is being addressed is the people saying the Rami movies should be highest standard on the characterization of Spider-Man when it could be argued that the original comic books, which aren't being represented in the movies, should be the baseline. Then, these same people will stomp and scream (not all, but the ones who do, do it loudly) when other Spider-Man media does not live up to the principles of the Rami movies, even though those movies are in themselves changing the original portrayal of the character.
Its hypocritical, to say the least and for those who think its what Stan Lee and Steve Ditko wanted for the character are just ignorant. Though I should say that, like all art, comic books are subjective.
@@rigzmoviediaries654 No he didn't. He is focusing on the first leg of the original run.
andrew garfield…..
It's curious, but every once in a while I go back to read the Lee run and it's some of the most fun I ever have with these stories. Glad to know there's always something new to identify each visit like you pont it out.
Literally saw the title and my first thought was: “man these rami fanboys are about to pissed like never before” 🤣
I’ve always imagined a live action adaptation of Lee and Ditko’s Spider-Man taking place in the 1960’s instead of the modern day like we’ve always had with every Spider-Man film over the years. That would be cool and refreshing to see.
Would be amazing if they did Spider-Man Life Story as a live action series. And every decade being a separate movie!
That´s what fan-film Spider-Man Lotus is doing! Look it up, it hasn´t come out yet but I belive it´s gonna be great
@@juaniferritto3249 Oh I looked that up. Seems like it inspired by Spider-Man Blue. 😊 Thanks for the rekommendation 👌
Would be more true to Ditko’s character no doubt. Stan had nothing to do with the character though. Stan was bit of a hack that took credit for artists works.
I think its not taken into the account the fact that Spider-Man 2 borrowed from Amazing Spiderman #50 and Amazing Spiderman Annual #1 where Peter temporarily loses his powers due to wishing he didnt have them. Spiderman 2 combines these two stories
Exactly how do you loose biological powers by wishing them away. That's like saying you can wish your arm away by simply not liking it. His powers aren't magical you know
@@dhakshkamra1553 true 😂 but it seemed to be a psychological thing. U can read about it in Amazing Spiderman Annual No. 1
But those two are completely different storylines with no similarities to mix that's the point
Even if he want to be Spider-Man he can't because his powers are gone
I know he blabbers about it in comics but since this version is not talkative you never know what is happening that's what makes raimi movies mid because their Peter is so mid
@@lukeskywalker9506 almost forgot about this comment 😂. Get ur point about raimi peter being too silent but mixing comic storyline is a common thing like Iron Man 2 with Demon in the Bottle and Armor wars. Plus TASM 50 and TASM annual 1 both deal with a similar issue, being Peter wishing he wasn't Spiderman
This is something that I truly believe. Spider-Man is more than one character he is a template for people to create their own characters. Tom Holland is my favorite because we got to see the character arc of Peter Parker changing through phases of his life and grow into the role of Spider-Man. When we first see Peter in Civil War he is both very nervous to meet Iron Man in person and during the plane fight we can tell that he doesn't actually want to hurt anyone on Captain America's team. Homecoming is about him learning that he doesn't need to be recognized as a big time Avenger to help people, Tony takse away the Stark suit but he still defeats the Vulture in his homemade suit and Toomes respects him. Infinity War and Endgame show him working alongside Tony and Doctor Strange as equals but in his mind he fails here first because he died without stopping Thanos from killing half the universe and then because he couldn't save them without losing Tony. Far From Home is the result of him feeling like a failure Nick Fury knows that he is ready to be an Avenger but Peter doesn't believe it himself which is why he believed giving EDITH to Mysterio was the responsible thing to do and when he discovers Beck is a villain he immediately tries to warn Fury and take the glasses back
Ah, Rosie I love this boy! This is a very brilliant summary of MCU Spider-Man’s character arc, which is very interesting. And one that perfectly mirrors the Lee/Ditko era Spidey in his high school years, finding his place in a world populated by other big time superheroes. Johnny Storm/Human Torch was Peter’s idol and role model and has always been the first superhero he’d ever compare himself to when doubting himself as a superhero. The same goes for the MCU Spider-Man. MCU Peter has always looked up to Tony Stark/Iron Man and saw him as a role model and someone he wishes he was as popular as. And in times of quitting, both Peters learned that even the superheroes they grew up idolizing have flaws, imperfections, and aren’t perfect. And upon learning that, he always immediately regains the motivation to put on the mask again, go back out there, and try his best. MCU Spider-Man is actually way more brilliant than people give him credit for.
Okay, boomer normie.
@@devinjabairemoss cap.
@@ventusvanitas7544 No need to be toxic my guy
@@train4292 you late
YESSS I love this series!!
Prepare for a really really really strong focus on Stan Lee's comics this season 😁
@@ImplicitlyPretentious aw heck yeah!!
Also people needs to realize this not being comic accurate does not mean an end product is bad. Specially because this characters are more than just stories now. They are important icons. And writers would wanna try their vision on them you like it or not.
İn my opinion only limit to these stories should be that it needs to protect the core of their character and even that can be subjective at times.
For example I hate Zack Synder's take on Batman. I do think his take doesn't protect his core at all and ı would even argue about it. But ı see some can see it in a different way. For some his or her view on Batman is different and he enjoys it. Now what? This is the world we living in a world with different minds and different views. And in the end of the day you need to respect those views(if they don't hurt anybody... ı will write this just in case.)
For me the core of Spider-man is that he is a relatable super hero that can just be us. A fan boy, a kid who just wants adventure, An adult trying to look for his family, A young adult who tries to understand how to live all by his or herself. You know everyone can wear the mask. And not just that but his stories are about growth. And with that his stories are showing different kinds of ideas and concepts about growth. Responsibilty to Fear of living up to some one to being able to manage all parts of your life and more and all can give different answers. Concepts and stories are limitless.
And also this was an amazing video!
I would say that Zack’s Batman is in the fallen hero category and especially when in bvs Alfred mentions how much Bruce has changed into a more hardened, cold, violent person and how it’s not right for him to do the things that he’s doing in the film.
@@legoben98productions My Problem was we never saw the normal version of this take.
Funny enough This batman's simple origin is given but his hero years is not so when we saw it on bvs it feels like this is what the normal version of this character.
Basically ı can't compare the fallen hero if ı never knew the hero.
No hate intended but watching this really just conveyed to me that raimi really did understand the character and how to translate it into a different medium. Peter is smart at the start of the movie, he spouts random facts and no one cares, he gains powers and now has the ability to be a selfish douchebag, uncle Ben’s death brought him back down to earth, like an anchor. In Spider-Man two uncle Ben’s message is even further solidified. The plot points are made more subtle because it’s a movie and there are no thought bubbles. He didn’t want to just outright state the characters motivations because that would be dumb and not as impactful
Where does he say that the points need to be super obvious? Besides in the movie they are incredibly obvious. He has a literal prophet like dream with his uncle Ben. That shits pretty on the nose. He’s saying the the movie isn’t comic accurate. It’s a different character, that’s fine. It’s still a good take. But saying he “understood the character” is wrong. He made his own version of the character with the aspects he thought were important as well as making new ones. It wasn’t comic accurate, and it wasn’t meant to be.
Yet you seem like the guy who would trash any other version of spiderman for doing anything slightly more comic accurate
@@yourfatboy5359 based off what? I don’t like mcu Peter because I don’t enjoy Tom Holland’s portrayal of him, plain and simple if u do that’s fine. I’m just stating opinions here. U seem like the type of guy to hate on people for doing that.
@@Chevycamaroman317 I said it’s more subtle than a 60s comic, that’s not saying much.
@@Ansharky3 now who said i was talking about mcu Spiderman
I still believe That Spider-Man 2 is The MOST "Spider-Man" Spider-Man film. Yes, you are right that It doesn't encapsulate Stan's Peter but it still represents aspects, but not just Aspects of Stan's but aspects of Stern's, Conway's, and even DeMatteis. The world lends itself to the retro 60s aesthetics reminiscent of the Original Cartoon but also draws influences from ALL of Spider-Man's stories.
Another aspect is that the No More storyline is really half of the film, with the other half being dedicated to the philosophical dichotomy of Octavius and Peter. Even this aspect pulls from other comics Like "If This Be My Destiny" being seen in the train scene which I believe Thematically is done better here than in Homecoming, even using aunt May to tie together both themes of "Holding On" to what's most important, which I believe is What makes this the most important Spider-Man Film. Spider-Man is Responsibility driven, philosophically no matter what disparity or challenge peter comes across whether it pertains to him or not if he has the ability to help it is his upmost duty to do so, even if he has to give up what he wants le most even his dreams.
Back to Octavius, He mirrors Peter as He is unwilling to make the sacrifice that Peter makes everyday, unwilling to use his powers responsibly as he would need to give up what HE values most. To Octavius he WAS "Holding On" like Peter, but the difference is to what; When Peter lost his powers he lost his reason for responsibility so he let go of them and with that he let go of Uncle Ben, his Moral Center. With Octavius He lost his Moral Center with Rosie but held onto His dreams, and with dreams comes power, Leaving Octavius with all the power but no responsibility and Peter with No Power and all the responsibility that He chooses to ignore, Two similar men that lead down two different pasts.
The reason I see this as the MOST "Spider-Man" Spider-Man Film is that even through all the decades and all the writers one thing has persisted with the character and has been there since Issue #1, "With Great Power, there MUST also come Great Responsibility, and that is no more prevalent than with Spider-Man 2.
It's very interesting the fact that everybody always say that Tobey's and Holland's spidermen are the most accurate and yet thematically everything you mentioned is exactly what Andrew's Spiderman is about, actually the main differences you pointed out are the differences between Raimi's and Webb's Spiderman movies.
That's why Andrews' portrayal is my favourite. I wish his movies weren't so underrated.
@@commanderspyder5432 same
@@commanderspyder5432 So true. Andrew only has a couple changes, but they aren't too distracting. I really want them to make a third movie.
I think he actually made a video saying that Andrew’s Peter is the most accurate (and his favorite)
I’m honestly really glad for this video. Mostly because what you say is right, how you should be respectful to every interpretation of Spider-Man.
Don’t get me wrong, I love the Raimi trilogy. Only a lot of the more toxic Raimi fans always seem to talk down to the fans of Garfield and Holland Spider-Man under the guise of saying that they are not “the definitive Spider-Man”. Either because Garfield is “too cocky” or “too confident” to be Peter Parker. Or because Holland doesn’t mention Uncle Ben which gives him that annoying “Iron Boy Jr” nickname.
It’s heartbreaking to see some fans act so hateful to each other over which Spider-Man is the best, when we should just cherish how much media we have of the webslinger. It’s not that I’m glad that Spider-Man 2 was showed to be flawed in the video. I’m glad that the movie is brought down to Earth, seen more as another interpretation instead of a Holy Bible of who Spider-Man truly is like some fans seem to believe.
But yeah. I really should read Stan Lee’s comic run of Spider-Man. It honestly sounds like an interesting read after watching this video.
And I am tired of always having to defend myself for not liking the Raimi Trilogy.
That's a good point you made. It's not that the Raimi trilogy is flawed simply for using another interpretation for Spider-Man as a character, it's that it has been canonized into something that it is not. An infallible portrayal of Stan Lee's character that is the holy grail. It's simply another take on the character, but too many fans of the original trilogy fail to understand that.
@@ebenade1 Frankly, the issues I have with the Raimi trilogy have little to do with the interpretation of the character, but with the all over the place quality of the acting, the predictable plotting and the fact that they are basically telling the same story three times, resetting the character at every opportunity. Oh and the flags. I really can't watch that thing withoutout laughing about the ridiculous flags.
@@swanpride okay, boomer normie.
If you read the actual comics, it’s the opposite of this man’s videos.
Also, in the comics Peter decides to stop being Spider-Man and in Raimi's SM2 he loses his powers because of his subconscious, taking away his agency and making him a passive character, which is something that has always bugged me about this film.
He loses his powers, he goes to the doctor to find out the issue in an attempt to get better. He originally thought he had no choice but to be Spider-Man because it was the responsible thing to do only to find out that he does have a choice to walk away if he chooses. He then makes the decision to quit being Spider-Man. How exactly is he a passive character in this situation?
you misunderstood, Peter in Spider-Man 2 lost his powers because he was sick of being Spider-Man but kept going because that's what uncle ben would've wanted but then when he realized that his life wasn't getting any better and after he went to the doctor, he chose to drop the suit.
Hitop Films is having an aneurysm watching this😂
I'm tired of people thinking adaptations are flawed because they differ from the the source material
People need to realize that there will never be a comic book accurate Spiderman on film, no matter how loudly the fans demand it, comic book, video game and cartoon adaptations will never be the same in live action. Spiderman 2 is perfect for what it did and I’m glad it made those decisions.
I think I like the spin Spider-Man 2 put on it. It made Peter’s non Spider-Man life better, so that Jane he decides to become Spider-Man again, it is a much more powerful sacrifice he makes.
His life got better in the comics moreso than it did in the movie. I dont know what this guy is talking about.
@@ericdxfan511 this guy doesn’t even know what he’s talking about. He always makes these dogshit videos and it makes me wonder- does this guy actually pay attention to the comics, or does he only read them for the sole purpose of trying to discredit the Raimi films?
You might as well be complaining how different OG Iron Man is to his movie counterpart. things change over time an adaptation is just that and adaptation.
The biggest problem with the fetishization of the Raimi movies is that it causes people too see anything Spider-Man that's done differently in any other adaptation from the Raimi movies as somehow being untrue to the character. Like the whole premise of the MCU hatred being that Uncle Ben doesn't get enough attention only exists because of those movies
But isn't that exactly what you're doing with the original comic?
@@jmorales09 It's not, I love when adaptations take their own direction with the character, even if it isn't necessarily to my preference. At the same time though, it's not really the same thing since the comic is the source material, not the raimi movies.
I very much enjoyed this video. As someone that has grown up with the Raimi trilogy and someone that has grown up with Spider-Man, I’ve always wanted to know the differences because I’ve always found it hard to acknowledge which movie version I should like when I’ve ultimately come to the conclusion that I like all of them. Each of them have strong merits, but I’ve always been drawn to the MCU Spider-Man more. I don’t know, but there is just something that you’ve said in these videos that have helped me reaffirm my stance of just liking the character in general and helped me reaffirm my desire to like all versions of Spider-Man. I can’t wait for the next part of this series.
@Moowii-K🌀🔥 same, I literally grew up with the raimifilms (idk I loved spiderman 3 before) yet I'm much more drawn to MCU spidey
Guess people needs to read actual comics and not rely on edited videos.
"Spider-man never looks back" you never read 'Spider-man Blue'
That came out around the same time as the movies
it sucks as a spider-man story tbh. feels way too cw and also it's written by a racist.
That’s the one thing I wish more people realized about the original run. Peter was a jerk. Before and after he got powers. He was a petty spiteful vengeful jerk. Being Spider-Man didn’t make him a hero. It was uncle ben’s death that made him realize the consequences of his actions. Spider-Man’s origin is a warning almost. Not an aspirational tale of a hero getting powers and doing good.
It' s bullshit,peter before obtaining the superpowers was a normal boy, marginalized and bullied by his peers whom he rightly detested.Calling him a jerk just because he wanted to be respected by those who mocked him or because he gave more importance to his family than the whole world shows how much hypocrisy there is among people.Many people in the same position as peter would think the same way, but that doesn't make them jerks but only human.Peter is just a self-centered, immature teenager who gets his head high about the superpowers he's got, but still remains a nice guy who doesn't make fun of others for no reason.The real asshole is Flash, and to say that peter is an asshole would be like putting them on the same level, but the truth is that Flash is thousand times worse.
Spider-Man #1 wasn't Spider-Man's debut. It was Amazing Fantasy #15.
I hate how Peter let that guy get mugged in Spider-Man 2.
That's the point. Peter is selfish and it causes harm to those around him. You're supposed to hate it
For y'all to say that Peter letting go of being spider-man because people are essentially mean to him or because he gets tired it, is a better depiction of spider-man is crazy 😂. Peter letting go of spider-man because it's affecting his personal life on a critical level is far more relatable and understandable.
I mean, he DOES get tired of it in Spider-Man 2 which is partially why his powers started acting up (which happens in the earlier comics).
Everyone says that MCU Spider-Man isn’t comic accurate when the sam ones aren’t as well that doesn’t mean neither is worse than the other, I’m like you I like sams interpretation but doesn’t mean MCU is so bad
Being ridiculed for doing what you do and having the thought to quit is still relatable. People may not know it, because with negative emotions, someone says something negative can get to them really badly, these kinds of things are more relatable to people dealing with having negative thoughts with their surroundings.
actually him quitting being Spider-Man because of constantly being treated like crap and he gets tired of it, is relatable too. It's part of why many people quit being youtubers or other public figures deleting their online accounts because it becomes tiresome to do something if all the result of that is, is people constantly treating you like crap
He stopped being Spider-Man because he was losing his powers, nearly losing every job he got, lost his girl and countless more. This dudes misinterpreted Spiderman's struggle in the movie so hard. So what if uncle Ben wasn't too much of an anchor in the comic? It was a better change and it gave him far more depth one would expect from Spider-Man.
There is…so much about this video that I have strong disagreement with. I don’t even know where to start.
This video is genuinely terrible, I can't tell if he's trying to be disingenuous on purpose or not.
Same bro 🤦🏿♂️🤦🏿♂️🤦🏿♂️🤦🏿♂️
@@unknownninja4239 It is? How’s that?
Brilliant analysis! This is a distinction that needs to be made (or at least more widely appreciated). Spider-Man’s origin story has become a meme at this point, but it’s interesting just how much that’s tied to the film adaptation and not the source material. But I guess that speaks more to the popularity and efficacy of Raimi’s film than anything to do with Lee’s work
The prominence of Uncle Ben in the Raimi films is inspired by Ultimate Spider-Man, a hugely important and popular other universe reboot of the character just two years before the release of Raimi's Spider-Man. Seven full issues are devoted to Peter's origin, and Uncle Ben plays a huge part.
This version of Peter is a whole lot closer to Andrew Garfield's portrayal, however, which also has Uncle Ben play a prominent role.
Spider-man was in no way as heavily and loyally associated to Johnny Storm as he is with Iron Man in the MCU. Johnny Storm was the other teenage superhero, so Peter paid attention to him and had his fair share of one-upmanship scenarios with him. But he was very much an individualist, and didn't ever feel he needed a role model
The prominence of uncle Ben is inspired by amazing Spider-Man, 616 continuity, mainly. Anyone who tries to say uncle Ben isn’t that important in main Spider-Man canon is out of their fucking minds lol
@@Awesomemusic19 But isn't it from later on in the original run with some of the 90s series too? Maybe it's because the story fast tracks him into college, so Uncle Ben's prominence is lined up to the point in Peter's life when his impact was felt the most.
@@immanuela209 uncle Ben is majorly important to Peter Parker in all eras of Spider-Man, period. Since, and including, the beginning.
@@Awesomemusic19 I'm not arguing that Uncle Ben didn't play a significant role to Peter Parker OVERALL. But the degree in which his impact is felt wanes depending on the interpretation and the point in Peter's life that interpretation takes place in. And it's not wrong for a different interpretation to do this. Period.
@@immanuela209 depends on what you’re trying to imply with this.
Seeing how different the comic Spider-man is from the movie adaptation is just mind bogling
In my opinion, the differences between the three live action Spider-Men and Stan Lee's Spider-Man are what makes the movies interesting. Each version goes through different personal problems, therefore giving a new perspective each time and allowing for some sort of relatability. It's almost like opening the character up to more people. Obviously we all have our preferences, but where the comics are one continuous story with different arcs that may collide, the movies offer more confined arcs with less of the continuity.
Bro does no one know about Steve ditko
This is an amazing video essay I.P my boi. I love Spider-man, words cannot describe what he meant to me growing up, thanks to the movies, games, and ultimate comics. This vindication of his origins pulls a string in my heart, a puts a smile in my face. Thank you. Indeed, the themes and narrative progression of this first issues deliver better the theme of growing up, being more grounded and resilient to be able to tackle human affairs and responsibilities more efficient and coming out standing.
The whole moving on vs. standing fast reminds me so, SO much of your analyses of Captain America and Tony Stark. There is so much tying these characters together and I am here for it.
My Dad (Who’s a life long Spider-Man fan) once said on the topic of the Rami Trilogy: “They’re fine movies, just not good Spider-Man movies.”
Your Dad is freaking right. I may have grown up on the Raimi movies and I still love them to bits, but after reading the comics, I agree with him
There still better then what came after for the most part
Me to HiTop films after reading this: well well, how the turn tables.
Are you sure he ain’t getting confused with the MCU films? Lmfaooo
@@thebestofthebest5724 They MCU films are more faithful to Stan's original first 100 issue run than Raimi's. Raimi's movies just shaped the idea of what Spider-man should be in most people's heads because their reach.
I'm glad you made this video. So many people try to shame Stan as a writer and say what he is/isn't responsible for. But his work on Spider-Man is undeniable and one of the best comic runs in history. What we love about Spidey all came from the man himself and it changed comic books forever.
3:00 in the comic, everything goes wrong except the romance
In the movie, everything goes well except the romance
You brought up so many things between the movies, comics and audiences that I’ve been thinking for such a long time. Thank you so much for this video essay!
wow, the more you explain, the more I like the sam raimi movies
I am very glad someone finally put it so eloquently. Well done.
Raimi was just finding a way to incorporate what he loved about the mytho's . cant be a play by play...Raimi made a cinematic love letter to how he see's spiderman . i love this video...peter parkers characterisation varies based on the iteration. He was more of a jerk in the 90's animated series...and he's more earnest and pure hearted in the spectacular spiderman. Depends on your interpretation as a reader...and also the people writing him at the time..but its true...peter does have a jerky/ selfish side...if you look at the character's entire history...his true struggle might really be about self improvement which just so happens to entail being more responsible with the great power fate has cursed or blessed him with. Hail cthulu
Personally, I think the tapestry of the character's history from the original comics is best viewed as a whole rather than trying to isolate just one section of the mythos because that's doomed to fail. Across the decades, what's the most enduring elements of the character, not nitpicking a single scene on screen for not matching up with whatever comic you select at the time. Contradictions happen but the character remains fairly consistent, for better or worse, in terms of actual characterisation. That's not to dismiss Stan Lee, because lord knows I adore the man, but after he left the flagship title, he stopped being the one steering Peter on his path. Comics are a collaborative medium after all. Arguably the influences of Ditko shaped Peter during his era, just as Romita changed Peter during his time as artist, and so on until the present.
Yeah, plus with spider verse and the backstory scenes, I think webb's films especially Tony (in a more forced way) reference alot of spider man's abilities over all these years from the comics (it's just that spider verse felt surpringly alot more natural for a multi-versal threat 😂)
I mean he's literally talking about the storyline the movie adapted. Plus Peter never gets reset like dc. He doesn't have another origin and these comics still are the canon of his time in high school ect.
This is great. I’m in a time in my life where I need to let go and move forward with a lot of things, and this essay was such a great outlook on the role of change in life. :)
Thank you for this video. When I was a teen, my brother and I collected what was an almost complete run of Silver Age and early Bronze Age Spider-Man as they appeared. He was the real Spider-Man fan, but I read all of those comics several times. My contact with Spider-man over those many years since has been mainly through the films, the TV series (not the cartoon) and The Avengers comics, particularly New Avengers and Civil War. I have never shared the enthusiasm for Spider-Man 2, though I liked Spider-man well enough. Having seen your video, for which many thanks, I think it must have been residual memories of the early comics that stopped me loving it as so many did. I love the Tom Holland Spider-man, and do see much of the original themes in those early comics reflected there, but I think that in the context of the MCU, it would always be easier go with the spirit of the comics and not the details. Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy was, superficially, a transfer of the comics to the screen. Instead, it has become the default, because fewer people have read the early comics and fewer still have bothered to think about them. So I'm thanking you for putting the work and the thought into this subject that I haven't. I'm sure you're right.
I still stand by that the Raimi Spider-Man movies are the best superhero movies 😗
This is a really good video. It’s always interesting to see different points of view. You made really good points
I really appreciate this video. I think your final conclusion is correct in that many (including myself) write off the other iterations of Spider-Man too quickly because they don’t fit within what we assume is a more comically-accurate Spidey in the Raimi films. However, I don’t think Raimi’s films fundamentally change Stan Lee’s run of the character. I just think many of the changes that were made had more to do with the confines of the medium. For example:
1. I don’t think we can say that Peter is *not* kind of a jerk before he gets his powers, because he still immediately uses his powers for self gain when he gets them. Would a completely nice guy do that? Also, in a comic book, you have more time to flesh out a character. There’s only so much time in the first film to show who Peter is, set up the story, and make us emphasize with him, as we should.
2. The uncle Ben critique doesn’t make much sense to me. I think it’s pretty simple: making the famous quote come from an actual character in the movie that is important to Peter is more powerful than if it was said non-diegetically in some narration like in the comics. That doesn’t change anything fundamental about him or his motivations. Also, Peter’s origin is *still* wrapped up in Uncle Ben’s death in the comics. I’m not sure how that’s entirely different from what we see in the Raimi films. It just made us care about Uncle Ben more and gave him more of a moral thrust on Peter.
I need to rewatch this and finish my thoughts…but would love to hear what you think.
I just think it’s harsh to say the Raimi films are not really Spider-man-like when they still contained the basic message, IMO. They just had to package it differently.
Thanks for this retrospective. I totally missed this. To grow is to change into someone who is better than you were previously.
Thank you for this. I always found myself puzzled whenever I tried to compare Stan Lee's original work to Sam Raimi's adaptation and you beautifully highlighted what those differences are. Excited to hear more from your Stan Lee Retrospective!
I don't see Raimi changing the story like this as a bad thing, it should be different as the original story already exists
This is a really great video. I honestly don’t think this makes Spider-Man 2 a lesser film at all. I think they make the concept work, although I can’t help but love the true meaning of Spider-Man giving up his characters in the comics- as you said, his life doesn’t actually improve, but the crime world does, it grows. Also what you said about uncle Ben was actually pretty great. This is definitely a hard video for a Raimi fan, but I can’t help but agree with what you say.
Overall, both the comic and the film are great imo. But yeah, Spider-Man 2 isn’t a perfect adaptation of the story, or even the comics as a whole. I honestly feel like the trilogy more or less gets the character right😳 although all in all, you can’t beat the source material 😎
I still don't see how his life improved when he stopped being Spider-Man. I mean he was able to catch up with his university and aunt may forgave him, but let's be real she was gonna forgive him anyway. Other than that, quitting the mantle of Spider-Man still left him with a dead end job, late on rent, mj was still going to get married to someone else and harry still hated him. I get that after he throws the costume away they try to have a happy montages of him walking around, but his life never really became better when he stopped being Spider-Man.
@@junaydfisher211 I think it was mainly to do with the school stuff and the fact that he could at least attempt to be there for MJ. But looking back on it, they didn’t dive too much into it ig
i think the stan story is definitely a better message for a hero, but as someone who has their kindness taken advantage of them Spider-Man 2 has a much deeper meaning. The movie is a reminder that you gotta have a balance of looking after yourself and other people, because if you slave yourself for others trying to people please youll be miserable. But if you abandon everyone, youre no better than the people that take advantage of you and you dont put any positivity into the world. That results in other good people being hurt or taken advantage of. Spider-Man 2 represents the balance between self help & the responsibility to help others. And when you need a second to catch your breath and do something for yourself, the good people youve helped that value your help will be there to pick you up and put you on your feet
Holland’s movies are great, I just wish his Spider-Man was more independent.
That’s a core trait of Spider-Man: he finds it so hard to open up to other people. Holland’s Spider-Man isn’t lonely or troubled. He doesn’t have to go through all his changes and have to work his way through all these huge troubles by himself. He doesn’t overthink.
He’s not alone. Even when Peter interacted with the torch and such, no one understood him. He was alone.
But Holland’s Spider-Man flashes around his secret identity just like that- heck, all of shield knows. Everyone seems to know. He has all these other people… he isn’t lonely.
Peter Parker being a lonely, guilt ridden guy just working his way through is something that these movies don’t capture, and yet I identify with and relate to so much.
In the comics, sure, Spidey and the avengers and such lived in a shred universe, but Peters villains and love life and things were all his own.
Not everything was tied back to one Tony stark.
Homecoming Spider-Man is a Spidey who was dropped into a world where the villain has a vendetta for Spider-Man and isn’t allowed to go against Tony stark.
It’s not up to Ironman.
It’s up to Peter Parker to take inspiration from a far and work his way through, covering it up in that 60s Spider-Man way. I don’t know if this is all making sense like I want it to, but I just don’t like Mcu Spider-Man’s storyline. I wish they had just cut Ironman and happy from the movie altogether, and just leave in the funny references like that of the captain America training videos. I can’t stand the entire government and superhero base k owing his identity. Keep it to Tony knowing (cause it was set up in civil war) and maybe Ned, but no other avengers or shield
U forgot to mention trauma
Thank you for making this video. I can now definitively say I prefer the way Raimi did it regardless of how comic accurate
one of your best videos so far man! actually changed my viewpoint
I just want to say you're fantastic man. You're an amazing essay writer.
Thanks for making videos. You're awesome.
Soooo Spider-man: Life story is affected by Raimi movies? Because there's clearly stated that all Peter ever wanted was to save his uncle.
This is so good! Thank you for your hard work analyzing why the writing for the original Spiderman comics had such great characters! I would love to see a video on how Mary Jane as a character grew so much through the comics
Raimi fans are now upset that comic book Spider-man isn't comic accurate.
The irony 💀
@@wordswordswords413 IKR
So I always felt a disconnect with the rami trilogy, but couldn't ever put my finger on what turned me off until you spent it out for me here. I personally have a lot of anxieties about becoming stagnant in my life and just running in circles, getting so attached to the ways things are I'll fight to avoid change. I think that internal struggle is why I always super related to spiderman, but feel put off by the rami trilogy. Both have that same message underline core of change, but rami's trilogy answered with stay the same as the world changes while comic spidy is more about changing with the world and taking the opportunity that arise.
Literally how?
@@laststrike4411 if you're question is how does comic spidy change while rami spidy doesn't some easy answers would be how Peter started out as a spiteful child blaming his problems on others. He then got the powers and decided to take what he though he deserved and paid a price for it. He became a good person afterwards. Rami spidy starts as a good kid who starts to use his powers for personal gain before paying a price and having to return to being a good kid after. Besides that peter barely changes in the whole trilogy. He's always a good hearted kid who tries his best to help others and is often oblivious to how others are feeling around him. Compare that to the comics where spidy has to constantly grow and evolve. He began as a nerd with no confidence and the first thing he tries to do as a hero is join other hero teams for validation. He then gives up being spiderman because he's not confident enough to ignore Jameson. He final gains that import self confidence after learning how capable he really is and begins to grow both as a hero and a man. He moves on from high-school flings and finds a girl with similar intrest as him. And after loosing her he reconnects with MJ as they have both finally grown enough to be a healthy relationship
Was about to sleep but now i need to watch this! :)
Aww don't stop on my account! 🙃☺️
Great video. I knew about the famous line didn't actually came from Ben, but i had no idea he was so irrelevant for Peter's early career.
@@toxin4609 early career
Comic accuracy doesn't matter in a superhero movies especially when the final product is better with changes
Man oh man... How can you say something so controversial with which I agree 100%? Once again, great job!
I always said the trilogy was over rated but not bad
exactly after a recent rewatch it's really overrated by many fans, i still love it but holy shit it's not a perfect spider-man
Whatever version of Spiderman it is, I'll always love him.
yes ok but PLEASE HYPHENATE SPIDER AND MAN
I really enjoy these videos of comparing the comics with the movie adaptations. I’d love to see you to do this with other characters at some point. For example I’d love a video comparing iron man extremis and iron man 3, or iron man 2 and demon in a bottle.
Well, Aldrich Killian dies at the beginning of Extremis and Tony doesn't use Extremis himself, so wildly different. Although I have to thank your you for at least knowing Iron Man 3 is an Extremis adaptation. Most people still think it is supposed to be a Mandarin story.
I really thought I was going to hate you, but damn you’re right. You’re goddamn right.
To be fair, I’ve always felt I’m the only spider-man fan who thought this movie was just awful so I’m biased to like this video, but still- really great analysis!!!
I see your point. In the comics, giving up Spiderman has no consequences for himself but huge consequences for the city.
In the movie, giving up Spiderman has huge consequences for himself, but not really that much for the city. Aside perhaps Doc Ock.
The movie has a big, in-your-nose shot of a newspaper saying that crime rates have risen up. Followed by a scene where Peter goes into a house on fire and later learns someone died in that fire. Seems like you and that guy have fragmentary memory when it comes to these films. You only want to remember what will suit your point.
Peter's life doesn't really improve when he gives up the costume in Spider-Man 2. I mean sure he gets up to date with his college work, and aunt may forgives him, but let's be honest, aunt may was gonna forgive him anyways, he didn't need to lose the costume for that. Other than those 2 things everything else in his life is still bad. He was still stuck with a dead end job and was still late on rent, living in a shifty apartment, mj was still engaged to someone else and didn't want to date him, and harry still hated him. And lots of crime was shown in the city, a building was lit on fire and he couldn't save the person inside, there were scenes of people getting beat up in alleyways and he had robforce himself to look away and everyone kept asking where Spider-Man was because they needed him more that ever, even aunt may has a dialogue with Peter about where Spider-Man is before he jumps back into the suit.
LOVED THE VIDEO, love to see the differences between the Raimi trilogy and Stan Lees work!
The point of showing Peter's life getting better is that not having the big responsability of spiderman in his back takes away a lot of his problems, and then the message is that life as a superhero is hard and will always be hard so he has to learn the hard way that having great responsability is really damn difficult
Atleast that's how i see it
He anyway gets mj at the end 😂😂😂