Better Trilogy: Raimi's Spider-Man or Nolan's Dark Knight?

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Which do you think is better: Raimi's Spider-Man or Nolan's Dark Knight?

  • Raimi's Spider-Man

    Votes: 23 13.8%
  • Nolan's Dark Knight

    Votes: 144 86.2%

  • Total voters
    167
What Alfred did serve, which certainly wouldn't have had to be changed, is a counterpoint to John Blake and others who didn't feel that a man in Bruce's position was doing enough. Quitting for 8 years and letting orphanages lose their funding were BAD choices. Giving his life would have made up for those much more than donating a mansion that no longer meant anything to him.

Bad choices are a part of life...sometimes youre stuck for some reason or another...welcome to the real world
 
So a guy cant retire?

Of course he can. The discussion was whether or not the preceding 140 minutes or whatever were setting the hero up to die or retire. intothevoid said he HAD to retire for the movie to work. I disagree. It could have gone either way and still worked.
 
Tha ****.......:dunno

Remove "Tha" and you got it! :wink1:

24629384.jpg

YV7Fo.gif
 
Of course he can. The discussion was whether or not the preceding 140 minutes or whatever were setting the hero up to die or retire. intothevoid said he HAD to retire for the movie to work. I disagree. It could have gone either way and still worked.

I will agree on that...but I still liked the ending anyway
 
I will agree on that...but I still liked the ending anyway

I did too, though I can't help slightly feeling that Bruce comes off as the Tony Stark that Captain America criticized. The one who always has a way out and is afraid to make the sacrifice play.
 
Last edited:
I did too, though I can't help slightly feel that Bruce comes off as the Tony Stark that Captain America criticized. The one who always has a way out and is afraid to make the sacrifice play.

True...but it's like that for the rich and smart sometimes
 
I voted Spiderman, love TDK but it was the first time spidey got that hollywood treatment while the TDK was a new fresh take.

Still I like them both.
 
Why so we could have seen a Spidey villain flash mob? Because you know that's where the series was heading after 3. :lol

I'm certain if the execs had kept their opinions to themselves, we wouldn't have had to see Venom destroy SM3 and would likely be enjoying the 6th or 7th entry into the franchise instead of being force fed a remake of Raimi's film with a ********* Parker and laughable antagonist wanting to turn the world into lizard people.
 
But Venom isn't an inherently unfilmable villain. Raimi didn't have to MAKE it stupid.

He didn't have much of a choice. They wanted Venom in it last minute and to even shoehorn the Brock story in correctly would've required considerably more time than the studio was allowing.
 
Why so we could have seen a Spidey villain flash mob? Because you know that's where the series was heading after 3. :lol
LOL I kinda would like to see the logical extension of 2nd half of Spidey 3. If it gets even more bat**** crazy, then would it actually be bad, or could it somehow be awesome?

And while I agree that forcing Venom into the movie seemed to screw everything up, nothing justifies emo Parker. . .unless Raimi was really just giving the studio a huge middle finger, which is possible.
 
Unfortunately, S-M cannot possibly win if only because of the absolutely Lovecraftian horror that was S-M3. That was honestly one of the worst superhero movies I have ever seen.

When a third of your franchise is crap, crap MEGA-CRAP thats just all she wrote. Unfortunately I have to hand it to Bats this time out, the Nolan films are excessively convoluted and talky-talky, but overall more consistent in quality.

MJ and Harry making omelets, Peter jivin' down the street..... god I hate to even think back on it.
 
Unfortunately, S-M cannot possibly win if only because of the absolutely Lovecraftian horror that was S-M3. That was honestly one of the worst superhero movies I have ever seen.

When a third of your franchise is crap, crap MEGA-CRAP thats just all she wrote. Unfortunately I have to hand it to Bats this time out, the Nolan films are excessively convoluted and talky-talky, but overall more consistent in quality.

MJ and Harry making omelets, Peter jivin' down the street..... god I hate to even think back on it.

Yeah, it really is one of the greatest drops in quality from one film in a series to another in cinematic history. :lol Lots of trilogies have weak third entries, Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Alien, Terminator, but man it was like Spider-Man went from "The Empire Strikes Back" immediately to "Batman and Robin." :lol
 
Yeah, it really is one of the greatest drops in quality from one film in a series to another in cinematic history. :lol Lots of trilogies have weak third entries, Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Alien, Terminator, but man it was like Spider-Man went from "The Empire Strikes Back" immediately to "Batman and Robin." :lol
I dunno. The dropoff from T2 to T3 was pretty damn steep!
 
Back
Top