Spiderman 2002 vs Spiderman 2012

Spiderman 2002 vs Spiderman 2012 :

1. Tobey vs. Andrew

Tobey Maguire can be a very effective actor in the right part - Pleasantville, say, or Wonder Boys. Yet despite his committed performance I never 100% bought him as gawky Peter Parker nor as his action-hero alter ego.

Mr. Garfield, on the other hand, is dream casting. He nails the awkward high school outsider plus the wisecracking hero fans missed from the Raimi films. Garfield is also aces during the film's dramatic beats, which is good since the reboot has him crying more often than Demi Moore in Ghost.

Round One : The Amazing Spider-man (2012)

2. Green Goblin vs. The Lizard

This is a close match because both of these villains underwhelm. A pair of scientists who use themselves as guinea pigs and go all "I'll get you, Spider-man!" when the experiments go wrong. Both are played by renown character actors lost completely once they enter evil-mode. Rhys Ifans is replaced by a CGI dinosaur, while the mad genius of Dafoe disappears behind an immobile mask.

I'll give this round to Green Goblin because A) at least Goblin has some personality B) Dafoe is menacing out of costume whereas Ifans spends most of the film moping about his arm and C) Lizard's evil scheme to gas all of New Yorkers into becoming reptiles is truly lame.

Round Two: Spider-man (2002)

3. Kirsten vs. Emma

Tough call. Kirsten was ideal casting as Peter Parker's object of worship next door, Mary Jane Watson. She brought a lot of spunk to the role when she wasn't relegated to a standard shrieking damsel in distress, which was unfortunately often.

Stone isn't quite convincing as a high-schooler, and despite her obvious chemistry with Garfield their love scenes remain pretty lifeless since Gwen Stacy is so underwritten. Nevertheless, with due respect to Dunst, I'm giving this point to Gwen Stacy by a hair because she gets to be an active participant in the films action, and Emma Stone's formidable comedic chops elevate the movie at every turn.

Round Three : The Amazing Spider-man (2012)

4. Origin

A clear win for Raimi's Spider-man. The first movie has the wrestling match, the fumbling over rooftops and Peter trying to keep from shooting his webby load all over everything. Garfield's got a sort of amusing subway altercation and an uninspiring skateboarding montage that feels suspiciously like studio executives trying to give Peter Parker the Poochie treatment.

The reboot follows the beats of the original so closely from the bite to Uncle Ben's murder to the triumphing over school bullies that it only serves to highlight how much more energetic and fun it was in Raimi's hands. The ways in which it stands apart from the original - mechanical webbing instead of biological, a dour prologue involving Peter's mysterious parents - remain unexplored, and seem like thankless legwork for sequels.

Round Four : Spider-man (2002)

5. Uncle Ben + Aunt May

In the battle of Uncle Bens and Aunt Mays I'll give it to the newcomers since Martin Sheen and Sally Field get to play more notes than the benign support of the original couple. Plus Sheen is such a commanding presence he adds gravitas not necessarily in the screenplay.

Round Five : The Amazing Spider-man (2012)

6. Harry Osborn vs. No Harry Osborn

A point to Raimi's Spider-man by default. Not that the story so demands Harry Osborne but Webb's Amazing Spiderman offers nothing in his place. Is Peter such a social pariah the he doesn't have a single friend? This time around the high school scenes lack texture. We just drop in long enough to hit the plot points and we're out. Plus the lack of a love triangle drains a lot of the tension out of the romance.

Round Six : Spider-man (2002)

7. J. Jonah Jameson vs. Capt. Stacy

This one is closer than you'd think. Denis Leary proves surprisingly able in his role as Capt. Stacy, hunter of Spider-man and overbearing father of Gwen. His arc is probably the most convincing and moving of the whole film. That said, he is such a minor part of the Spider-man world, and JK Simmons is so inarguably perfect as J. Jonah Jameson that I've got to hand it Raimi's film again.

Round Seven : Spider-man (2002)

8. Romance

Marc Webb was hired on the strength of 500 Days of Summer so one would expect the romance to be the highlight of Amazing Spider-man, but, after an initial awkwardness, Gwen and Peter fall for each other without much spark or excitement. It's simply taken as a given. There is certainly nothing to compete with Tobey and Kirsten's upside down kiss.

Round Eight : Spider-man (2002)

9. Action

I feel bad comparing because Raimi is so clearly out of Webb's league when it comes to crafting action scenes. Raimi's movie pops with fun and energy. Webb's gets the job done.

It doesn't help that Amazing Spider-man is determined to ape the brooding color palette of Nolan's Gotham City. The drabness of the visuals only serve to drag down the film's energy further. Raimi's action scenes don't really soar until Spidey 2, but they are still head and shoulders above Webb's adequate but anonymously filmed action beats.

Round Nine : Spider-man (2002)

10. Ending (Spoilers)

2002: Peter fully accepts the burden of super-herodom even though it means sacrificing his true love and possibly his best friend, who believes Spider-man to have murdered his father.

2012 : Peter promises Gwen's dying father he will stay away rather than expose her to danger. Then two scenes later he's all, "Haha, Denis Leary, you're dead! Imma date your hot daughter!"

Also a shadowy man with a hat reminds the audience to care about the secret of Peter's parents. Why?Maniacal laugh! That's why.

Round Ten : Spider-man (2002)

"And after 10 rounds, the winner, by a definitive 7 to 3 knockout..."

Sam Raimi's Spider-man

I think a lot of people misunderstood the post I wrote last week defending the concept of quick reboots. I wasn't cheering the idea of shamelessly rehashing the same story over and over to grab a quick buck. I was making the point that if a reboot gives a fresh, worthy take on the material what does it really matter if it comes 5 or 10 or 15 years later?

If Batman Begins had been released within 2 or 3 years of Batman and Robin I doubt people would have complained. If, on the other hand, Batman Begins had featured The Joker getting dunked in a vat of toxic chemicals and Bruce Wayne having an affair with a blond reporter - and it did it all without Tim Burton's visual flair - then I imagine audiences would have been curious why anybody bothered.

The Amazing Spider-man has a lot of room to improve, but they didn't flub the basic components of the story and Garfield makes a terrific hero. As long as the reboot is following Raimi's films so closely, here's hoping they copy the part where the sequel is a huge improvement over the first.

Spiderman 2002 vs Spiderman 2012

Posted by: Risalahati Dedic Ahmad Updated at: 23:56