[Dr Kain]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boy Blunder

I am in full agreement. Specifically, he was a great 60s/70s-era, "nothing goes right for sadsack Parker" version.

Which, I think we can all agree, needed a change. That era is long gone.

I don't know. I'd say he was a better 80s version of Peter whereas Holland is easily the 60s version. Garfield was like the 2000s cool Peter. Though, Garfield did look closer to pulling off the high schooler bit than Maquire did. Tobey was too old for the high school schtick.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black Arbor

Liking Tobey as Spider-Man has nothing to do with nostalgia, at least for me.

Maybe not you specifically, but there are many out there that think Tobey was the best because he was their first.

Quote:

He was/ is the embodiment of the silver age Spidey, and had a quiet charm to boot!

I will say they did embody elements of the Silver Age run even though as I said, I feel like Tobey was more 80s Peter.

Quote:

The movies hold up as well, because you can tell they were made with love, and not as a puzzle piece for a big movie tapestry like the MCU Spidey or Garfield's Spidey.

Well Amazing Spider-man 2 was utter horseshit, so that alone completely ruined Garfield.

However, Holland is by far closer to Stan Lee's Peter in personality, nerdiness, and science geek than Maquire and Garfield.

Quote:

I'd never tell people that like Godfather, Goodfellas, Clockwork Orange, Casablanca, etc... that they're being blinded by nostalgia, even though those movies do nothing for me haha

That's because all of those movies are utter perfection. I watced three of those for the first time in 2009 and The Godfather trilogy for the first time in 2013. Long after I reached adulthood, so there is no nostalgia for me to bank off on.