TheBoost said:
Vaderisnothayden said:
He was a self-satisfied twerp for like 5 seconds yeah, but not a guy whose whole nature is self-satisfied twerp. Nor creepy the way I mean it, like paedophile creepy. Nor even self-satisfied the way I'm talking about. No, the character in the movies is not at all the one in the comics. The guy in the movies could never grow into the good guy he became in the comics. The guy in the movies would be stuck forever as a creepy self-satisfied twerp. Total warping of the character. It's bogus to say the character in the comics was like that.

C3PX said:
I am really curious in what way the first Spider-Man film is not accurate to the comic, or in what way Toby's Peter Parker is completely different from the comics? The origin of Spider-Man and the Green Goblin are both spot on.

The Peter Parker character in the comics did not come off like he was going to start pinching little girls' bottoms. The character in the movie did. Similarly, the other characters in the movie do not come off like their on-paper versions. You seriously want to tell me that Kirsten Dunst came off like Mary Jane Watson? Dunst's lifeless performance was nothing like the character.

That the origin of the Spider Man and Green Goblin characters fitted the comic book story doesn't mean that everything else in the film fitted to the tone and mentality of the comics or made the best use of the comics' material. The idea with a comic book movie is to make something with as much depth as the comic story, or, better yet, to elevate the story by maximizing its virtues to effect of improving its depth. Why not make the best one can out of the material? But here we get lets make dumb shit out of the material.

I'm really just a bit wierded out by your Spider-Man/pedophilia connection. What I'm hearing from you is you just didn't like the performance of Toby Maguire. But how do you deny that he DOES grow into the hero he is in the comics when he... I don't know... becomes a hero, saves the day, and sacrifices his chance at love with MJ because he understands that WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY which is the driving center of the character for the 40+ years he's been published.

The movie character may grow into a hero in the films, but he's never remotely convincing as a hero and he continues to come off like a self-satisfied creepy guy.

C3PX said:
Yeah, where does this whole pedophile thing come from? I don't see it by a long shot. Pinching little girl's bottoms? Where did anything in the film happen to even suggest that in the slightest? I really fail to see anything creepy or self satisfying in the character in the movie. Care to give a few examples of what makes him seem like a self satisfied punk who likes small girls?

It's not in the story of the film. It's in the performance. The character is played as this creepy self-satisfied guy. Really off-putting.