LogFAQs > #974145528

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, Database 12 ( 11.2023-? ), Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Man, Spider-Man (2002) is kinda... not great, in retrospect.
TMOG 06/14/23 2:55:17 AM #14:	Glob posted... The second was never as good as the first. Its hilariously bad in parts and Ive never understood how people hold it in such high regard. Like I said, nostalgia, and back in 2004 there wasn't a lot to choose from when it came to superhero movies, and most of what you did have was simply awful. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_based_on_DC_Comics_publications https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_based_on_Marvel_Comics_publications You didn't even have the Christopher Nolan Batman trilogy at that point. If Spider-Man 2 came out a few years later than it did, nobody would have given a shit about it. It was just a case of good timing. <cite>TMOG posted [p:974145528] in Man, Spide... [t:80476959]...</cite> <quote>Glob posted... </cite><quote>The second was never as good as the first. Its hilariously bad in parts and Ive never understood how people hold it in such high regard.</quote>Like I said, nostalgia, and back in 2004 there wasn't a lot to choose from when it came to superhero movies, and most of what you did have was simply awful.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_based_on_DC_Comics_publicationshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_based_on_Marvel_Comics_publicationsYou didn't even have the Christopher Nolan Batman trilogy at that point. If Spider-Man 2 came out a few years later than it did, nobody would have given a shit about it. It was just a case of good timing.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1