Which was better, pic related, or "not my policy"?

Which was better, pic related, or "not my policy"?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=83CCOJILuHQ
youtu.be/DmdyydaGL-c?t=150
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Both were good, but Tobey's stung more.

Also, why was the clerk being such a dick over one penny? I'm a gas jockey and theee is literally never a time when a one cent difference prevents a sale.

Why was the wrestling ring guy being such a dick over three minutes?

Why was professional wrestling presented as being a legitimate sport? I find that more unbelievable than getting super powers from a spider bite desu

To me, 'better" is a matter of context. The purpose of that moment is to show how much of a petty asshole Peter is.

In both acting and writing, ASM has the bigger petty asshole Peter.

He was a dick and saw an opportunity to lord over someone to unload his frustration.

I disagree, tobey was justified, while andrew was just being a whinny bitch

kek

But seriously, you know what bothers me more? The police officer gets mad at Peter for not stopping a guy with a gun.

I mean, yeah, Peter is Spider-Man, but it's not like the cop knows that. What was he supposed to do? Tackle the guy and then get shot?

Uncle Ben's death could have been prevented with $0.01 ;_;

A stone cold stunner stops anybody in their tracks

I haven't seen ASM for a while but I remember being annoyed about how little Peter was involved in Ben's death

Raimi's Spider-man had Peter be very clearly "responsible" for it
The fact that he was obviously "right" and pulled a gotcha on the shitty manager made it even better

But if he's justified then he's not being petty.

I missed the part where that's my policy, OP

He wasn't justified.
>The clerk wouldn't sell him chocolate milk because he was a penny short.
>The robber comes in right after him and robs the store and Peter takes a free chocolate milk as a bribe.
Just because someone is mean to you doesn't justify being an accessory to a crime which Peter most defonitely was.

He was right.

That's the whole point

Just like it'd be right if Peter stayed at home and jerked off with super-strength. He has no obligation to go out superheroing. You couldn't blame him if he just lived a normal life.

But he was "right" and Uncle Ben died.
So being "right" isn't enough

He would rather be jerking off on MJ that's why Uncle Ben died

>tumblr
its time for you to get the fuck out

Don't get mad at me I don't control google image search

Like I have just random gifs of a 15 year old movie saved on my computer for shitposting while watching said movie.

>I missed the part where that's my problem, you ass-eating faggot

How did Raimi get away with this?

Oh you agreed with his point, very nice.

I still see gifs from the ten year old camrip of spidey3 posted here.

Mendela effect?

how the fuck is Tobey maguire a real actor?

he has the enthusiasm of a fucking toilet seat

Why do you think we don't see him anymore in movies. I always get a laugh when people say he or snaggletooth dunst were good.

Berenstein or Berenstain Bears user? That is the question.

Tobey
The whole thing seems like a far bigger crime and by association more dickish that Peter wouldn't stop it or help. I get Peter feeling obligated to help and do something after that.
The grocery store was a petty crime making Ben's death less connectable as a result of Peters actions. If you're not of the mindset that all criminals of any level are scum, then for me there's a how was peter supposed to know this guy was dangerous at all.
For Amazing at least I felt they could have changed it to underground MMA. As I believe it was still illegal at the time in NY and just the kind of operation that could have been robbed.
Why is this a thing?

>people say Raimi Spider-Man was good
>zero bants
>gets cucked by every guy in the universe
>just lets everyone shit on him in and out of costume
>never displays any kind of intelligence whatsoever despite being a smart character

>zero bants
>"that's a cute outfit."

>why is this a thing?
hey nice dress, did your husband make it for you? and it spiraled from there.

That remark was quite homophobic, Raimi probably wouldn't have gotten away with it if the movie was made today

Oh, Do we give Archer shit too?

youtube.com/watch?v=83CCOJILuHQ

Or we just don't expect better from them to begin with.

Bahgawd, Spidey's gone nuts! Get the officials out here! It's a slobberknocker!

Moonbeam city looks better

But it has the quality and content of a wet rag.

Uncle Ben dying over chocolate milk is idiotic.

delete your post

Delete your shit taste first.

I think ECW wrestler Raven once wrote a backup or short story about the guy Spidey wrestles way back then. The first time I read it in a trade I thought it would make for a nice subplot in a movie reboot or something.

Let me look for it to storytime it, I don't remember if it was a backup or an issue from that old anthology title.

Tobey Maguire's Spider-Man didn't really joke often but he was kind of a savage when he had the black suit on.

youtu.be/DmdyydaGL-c?t=150

Mandela effect or not, I clearly remember him saying "I missed the part where that's my goddamn problem".

>basically just "Hah, gay!"

Spider-Man can do better than that.

>Spiderman shows his true colors
what did J jonah Jameson mean by this?

As much as I think Symbiote Peter was dumb in that movie, I did like the moment where Harry breaks down and laments Peter taking his father.

And you'd expect Peter to maybe come to his senses or try to fix things.

Nope. He tells him his father always hated him and then blows up half of his face.

In hindsight, Peter was a massive shithead to Harry.

Harry was too to be fair. Knows he likes a girl bangs her anyway, lives with the guy and never tells him.

Through the first two movies you (I) get the distinct impression that Harry keeps him around so that there's something about him that impresses his father,even if that's just a friend.

No, that's pretty much the exact level Pete's "banter" is usually at.

The bantz were poor, mostly due to poor delivery.

>can't land a punch so just backhands him
Should not be as funny as it is.

>"I protected you in high school and now I'm gonna kick your little ass!"
>mocking pretend scared "oooh"
That part always fucking gets me.

Peter's irresponsibility in Raimi's Spiderman is multi-leveled. He want to impress Mary Jane by buying a car, which is a pretty poor decision in its own right. He then uses his powers for personal gain, which is irresponsible. On top of this, he uses his powers for personal gain in a very questionable and sketchy way, literally fighting a man for money. And of course, he lets the robber go for revenge when he easily could have stopped him. This makes Peter feel guilty for Ben's death on multiple levels, which is touched on in SM2 when Peter confesses that he didn't even go to the library but instead went somewhere where he "thought he could win some money." Ben dies because Peter is not only vengeful, but also selfish. ASM Peter runs away from home, which I guess makes him somewhat responsible, but that isn't really a morally dubious act in and of itself. He then lets a petty thief go after being bribed with milk. I guess maybe ASM Pete feels guilty about being one cent short.

Raimi Peter's irresponsibility is much more compelling and lends much more to the character. Peter learns that
1. being responsible often means ignoring your personal desires, even if there isn't necessarily anything inherently wrong with those desires (Peter's desire for Mary Jane is now forever tied to Ben's death)
2. using your powers for personal gain is wrong (Peter using his strength and durability to win money is now tied to Ben's death)
3. negative emotion or ignoble intent has consequences (Peter's desire for revenge results in Ben's death)
4. you are obligated to do the right thing in every situation, even if you'd prefer to do nothing (Peter allowing the thief to escape when he had the power to stop him leads to Ben's death)

Good post.

how do you think spider-man could have turned out if they retconned Spider-man 3

And Chocolate Milk is fucking stupid.

It seemed like no one was supposed to actually win that prize and he just made up that excuse to get out of paying.

The fact that Tobey was justified is exactly why I think it doesn't work as well. The entire point is that Peter's a big baby until Uncle Ben dies and then he has to man the fuck up. And even then, he's constantly struggling against his baser instincts.

Raimi Peter is just TOO pure.

I'm pretty sure I saw Amazing Spider-Man but I have absolutely no recollection of any store cashier or chocolate milk or even how Uncle Ben died in that one. This leads me to conclude that Tobey's version must have been much better since I saw it as a kid and I still remember it

I think it goes to teach him that he should do the right thing whenever he's in power to do so, regardless of his personal stand on the matter. Kind of a very extreme way to drive home the "great responsibilities" speech

TBF, Dunst has been pretty good since then.

it shows that even in the face of injustice you can't let personal shit get in the way of doing the right thing. Peter has to be justifiably angry, but fail at doing the right thing despite his anger.

Peter was mad at Uncle Ben or some shit and went to a Quick-E-Mart. He didn't have change for a milk, and the cashier made fun of him.

The cashier gets robbed at gunpoint, and Peter's just like "Haha, faggot." Then Uncle Ben gets shot.