Why The Amazing Spider-Man is better than Spider-Man (2002)

Editorial Opinion

By TeamDarkAvenger - Aug 06, 2012 02:08 PM EST

Filed Under: Fan Fic

Source: ComicBookMovie.com

I have seen The Amazing Spider-Man twice now, and came up with reasons as to why it's better than Spider-Man (2002). Take it easy on me, its my first article.

1. Intelligence: TASM actually shows us Peter Parker's intelligence, rather than just telling us. In TASM, Peter builds his Mechanical Web-Shooters. Spider-Man (2002) simply had Peter use Organic webbing.

2. Spider-Man's personality: In Spider-Man (2002), Spider-Man did not taunt or make fun of criminals. In TASM, he does that. He was the Spider-Man that we know from the comics.

3. Love Interest: In Spider-Man (2002), Kirsten Dunst played Mary Jane, and was a horrible acting choice. She was just the damsel in distress who consonantly yelled at Peter. In TASM, Emma Stone plays an attractive, smart Gwen Stacy, whose intelligence rivaled Peter's own.

4. Realism: TASM was set in a realistic world.

5. Relating to the audience: In TASM, Peter can relate to many teens.

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 hits theaters May 2, 2014.

A.I. - Artificial Ironman: An all original WHAT IF...

Recommended For You:

DC & Marvel Team Up In Awesome Fan-Created "Infinite Crisis" Video

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

Do you have what it takes to write for us?

Want to contribute?

21 Comments

BrowniesExplode - 8/6/2012, 2:58 PM

I think andrew's peter should connect with aunt may more also this is good but i feel people should stop comparing this to raimi's trilogy

babyrhinos - 8/6/2012, 3:12 PM

@flamingopuree

The reason The Amazing Spider-Man is better than Spider-Man (2002) is mainly because The Amazing Spider-Man isn't so campy and cheesy. It's more believable, but it doesn't try to be dark and realistic. Instead, it shows the dark parts of Spider-Man's story, while still showing the great fantastical elements that any Spider-Man tale should have.

Also, the cast is better. Plain and simple. Even if Mary Jane didn't yell at Peter, she was still annoying. She couldn't make up her mind between two men. Flirting with Peter, while still dating Harry (for reasons unbeknownst to me, since she really didn't seem to care for him much at all). There are elements of Peter Parker that have been changed for The Amazing Spider-Man, just like elements were changed for Peter in Spider-Man (2002). Peter's character in the Raimi trilogy was awkward in all of the wrong ways, in my opinion. And he actually didn't tease the bad guys when he fought anymore than Batman did in The Dark Knight. That's wrong. The Amazing Spider-Man captured that Spider-Man is just the kind of superhero who doesn't shut up. Which I loved!

But yeah, it's all a matter of preference.

marvel72 - 8/6/2012, 3:42 PM

marvel72 - 8/5/2012, 7:03 AM

Why The Amazing Spiderman is not as good as Spiderman 2002 (no spoliers)

i bet there is an article in a week or so "why the amazing spider-man is as good as spider-man 2002"

abit quicker than i thought it would be.

nickoray - 8/6/2012, 7:58 PM

@flamingopuree

1. He gets the webbing, or the "biocable" from Oscorp. Those are the boxes we see in the movie. He does however, build the webshooters himself with watch parts, etc.

CaptainAmerica31 - 8/6/2012, 8:29 PM

I found it better for all those reasons but the major reason was the story was much better and fleshed out. Rather than Peter becoming the perfect spiderman after his uncles death it was more human in TASM it took the whole movie for him to develop into the spiderman Peter became after bens death in 2002. The characters developed in a much better way and more naturally. The cast was phenomenal and it being more real also helped very much. The whole movie pretty much shapes Peter into spiderman, in this he wasn't really spiderman by that I mean he didn't stand for justice or fighting for good the first half he was looking for revenge and the second half he just wanted to stop the lizard becasue of guilt. He didn't really care for ain't may becasue he was so self consumed in finding his uncles killer and stoping theizard he forgets about the poor lady, especially when her husband died. But in the end he learns his lesson brings aunt may her eggs and listens to his uncle bens last words which happend to be the whole responsibity speech but in a different type of format.

CaptainAmerica31 - 8/6/2012, 9:38 PM

Marc Webb is really good with characters and story development do I'm actually not so surprised

SAT - 8/6/2012, 10:12 PM

I will always love the 1st trilogy, it was my first introduction into superheroes, its the type of movie you sit & watch with the kids in your family during the holidays or on a road trip to Kentucky. The new movie is what you watch to actually entertain you.
Cool article.

marvel72 - 8/7/2012, 4:27 AM

i only thought the acting,some of the action scenes & the effects of spidey swinging through the city were actually the only part better than spider-man(2002).

spider-man(2002)was more like the source material than the amazing spider-man(2012)

breakUbatman - 8/7/2012, 1:35 PM

Both were hit and miss.

By default though TASM 'should' be better than Spider-Man because it came out years after and had lots of examples of how a Superhero movie should be done so...

1. TASM got Peter as an intellectual but failed to clearly explain his abilities, we are simply given Spidey the Bullet-Dodger or Superman without flight

2.We got the personality of Peter but I didn't care for his dick moments such as the shop scene, the "how dare you line" in his arguement or the basketball scene.

3. Concur

4. This is partly true but unfair, TASM was set in a realistic world because of the current trends in CBM's whereas Spidey was made at a time when the tastes of movie goers differed. Though campy, Spider-Man was more grounded than TASM, whereas TASM is way more out there...mutant lizards?

5. Unfortunately the Spider-Man audience isn't solely comprised of teens, which is why some people say he was acting like a brat.

TASM was better but the real comparison should be how does it stand up to Batman Begins, Iron Man, Thor, Cap, Kick-Ass and First Class ( don't know if I've left a modern CBM off aside from Green Lantern for obvious reasons).

nickoray - 8/7/2012, 2:05 PM

5. For me, he was being realistic. 17-18 yr old teen with angst that was gained from being abandoned from his parents.

Why The Amazing Spider-Man is better than Spider-Man (2002)