LogFAQs > #974199168

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.
VeesMcGees 06/16/23 1:12:50 PM #45:	TMOG posted... Just wait until you rewatch 2 and realize how much of that movie's beloved reputation is based entirely on nostalgia and being the only big superhero movie at the time (other than the first couple X-Men movies, which in my opinion hold up SO MUCH better) Its been a decade, but I rewatched Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2 around the time the phase 1 MCU movies were coming out, and they held up in everything other than visuals. The Spider-Man movies arent without flaws, but I cant even throw shade at them. Out of all superhero comic book movies, Spider-Man and Spider-Man are better than at least 50% of genre, if not 75% of the genre. Tom Holland is a better Spider-Man, but his movies are just meh (better than Andrew Garfields movies at least). <cite>VeesMcGees posted [p:974199168] in Man, Spide... [t:80476959]...</cite> <quote>TMOG posted... </cite><quote>Just wait until you rewatch 2 and realize how much of that movie's beloved reputation is based entirely on nostalgia and being the only big superhero movie at the time (other than the first couple X-Men movies, which in my opinion hold up SO MUCH better)</quote>Its been a decade, but I rewatched Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2 around the time the phase 1 MCU movies were coming out, and they held up in everything other than visuals. The Spider-Man movies arent without flaws, but I cant even throw shade at them. Out of all superhero comic book movies, Spider-Man and Spider-Man are better than at least 50% of genre, if not 75% of the genre.Tom Holland is a better Spider-Man, but his movies are just meh (better than Andrew Garfields movies at least).</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1