Amph Marvel's Daredevil (Born Again, Again, Being Filmed Again)

I have that one. That was a great scene.

Half Peter Parker's life is that he's selfish. His whole reasoning for using the costume and powers in the first place was to make money. Not to go out and be like the Fantastic Four, who were already publicly established. Or to follow the path of Captain America, whose comics Peter had read growing up. So, too, did it follow in the Raimi films and even in the Webb series. Then you get to his power Ben Parker years, where he struggled between being selfish and being selfless. If he didn't have that struggle, then he wouldn't be as interesting as he is.

Not the first time he made a vow and broke it. The comics version, he vowed to George to take care of her and he screwed that one up anyway.

 

Wocky thinks Spiderman II is accurate in its depiction of Peter.

 

Spider-Man 2 is still one of the greatest superhero movies ever made, so what's your point?

 

Irrelevant.

Let me put it this way; the Dark Knight is also considered one of the best superhero movies made, but when he talks about how crucial Rachel Dawes is to the Batman mythos, you know there's a disconnect.

SM2's quality is not determined by how accurately they portray Peter on-screen, which is fortunate, because they manage not to.

 

Rachel Dawes is crucial to the Batman mythos...



















... said no one ever (except J-w).

 

Yeah, except it's not a "struggle" if one side--the selfish one, in this case--wins every single time, and so overwhelmingly you didn't realize another alternative existed.

Also, I've never said Rachel Dawes was "crucial" to the mythos. It obviously predated her. That said, Katie Holmes was certainly a worthwhile addition to the franchise that in many ways enhanced and normalized the whole story. Unfortunately, this would all go off the rails by the next few films.

 

I for one am happy Jon Favreau won't be Foggy Nelson in this show.

 

Well, that's because he will clearly be Robin to Batffleck...

 

I'd watch it.

 

Let's look back at the first film.

-Peter smashing the backboard comes from Ultimate Spider-Man who showed off his powers in a similar fashion. That's not exactly selfish, but rather a part of him that wanted to finally stand up for himself. Not much different from in the normal universe when he decked Flash twice.

-Not doing anything about the robbery? Same in both films as he doesn't care and is actually given a reason to not care, whereas in the comic origin, he just didn't think it was any of his concern at all. The opposite of vindictiveness.

-Sure, he only goes after the thief because Ben was shot, which wasn't different from the norm. The only difference is that it was dragged out rather than being done in one night as in the Raimi film and in the comics. That doesn't make it wrong. It just takes a different track in his reasoning for being a costumed hero.

Then there's the sequel.

-Peter does his best to keep Gwen out of it, but the fact is that he loves her and chooses happiness over his duty as Spider-Man and so they get back together. Yes, this results in her death, but it will drive forward a conflict in future films over his happiness with Mary Jane or whoever else shows up, versus the personal threats to them. Gwen's death in both versions serves as a stark reminder of the personal failures that Spidey endures in his war on crime.

-Alternatives, sooner or later someone would figure out the connection between the two of them. Just as it did in the Raimi films and each time, MJ was put in danger because of it. Yet they stayed together, save for Harry's machinations, because they believed in their ability to make it work over the threats to her.

 

Vincent D'Onofrio is The Kingpin

 

dpformen has tongue firmly in cheek.

 

Your whole post excuses this seminal difference between the new films and every other version of Spiderman. It's not a small point. In Raimi's movie, like the original story, Peter Parker's turning point was realizing the identity of Uncle Ben's murderer. That drove home the "with great power comes great responsibility" line for him in a way that nothing else ever could, and filled him with a survivor's guilt that is central to his rationale for being a superhero. This is the point where Peter makes the transition from vigilante to an honest-to-goodness superhero that actually cares about helping other people.

In the new films, this never happens. He goes on being incredibly selfish, never helps other people, and spends no time reflecting on the significance of his Uncle's advice. That's not even the same story.

 

Except Peter makes the transition at the end of his confrontation with the Lizard on the Williamsburg Bridge and calls himself Spider-Man. He isn't burdened so much by guilt but by the realization that his inaction in the store lead to his uncle's death. Now, he has realized that his actions in saving people from the Lizard's attempt to kill Ratha is the best course of action and as such, he dedicates himself to using his powers to help others rather than hunt down his uncle's killer. This carries over into the sequel when he stops for five months following Gwen's dead before listening to Gwen's speech which makes him go out after the Rhino.

Peter's actions in both the original film and in the comics is not based on survivor's guilt, but the guilt of inaction when he was capable of action. The new films take it in a different direction, by having Peter change his reasons for going out as Spider-Man from vengeance to compassion without finding the killer. This also might come back down the line with it being tied into the murders of his parents and his father's work. That Ben wasn't just killed randomly, but intentionally.

 

Take it to the Spider-Man thread guys. Every comic thread doesn't need to turn into a Spider-Man argument.

 

Thank you. Back to the matter at hand, surely you must concede Superman had to at least cause some of the mass damage for the greater good of the earth?

 

Yeah, seriously. Enough. You are the worst derailer, Wocky.

 

Yes, well.

I look forward to this second iteration of this superhero whom the blind can relate to because of his superpower of Not Actually Being Blind.

 

Not being blind is a super power?

I shall call myself...The EYEBALLS.

 

Definitely an interesting choice; I hope he knocks it out of the park. I probably won't be watching this live, since I don't have a Netflix subscription...but I look forward to its eventual release on DVD or Blu-Ray.

 

Nobody watches Netflix live.

 

I meant "live" as in the original broadcast, not being filmed live.