What Kind Of Jacket Does Andrew Garfeild Have In The Amazing Spiderman

Is Andrew Garfield the best Spider-Man?

For right now, yes. Tom Holland will probably take this title as the best but I’ll reserve that judgment until next month when his film comes out. As for Garfield, he was great as Spider-man and great as Peter.Most who didn’t like him as Peter must not be very familiar with the comics because Andrew’s Spider-man was based more off Ultimate/Spectacular Spider-man compared to the 616 Spidey most are use to. His attitude was also close to how Peter was in the books. When Peter first became Spider-man, he had quite the chip on his shoulder. I don’t think words could describe how arrogant he was..Spidey was quite full of himself until he mellowed out over the years.It wasn’t until situations like when Gwen died that Peter’s attitude started to change to become the Peter most of you know todayOther than his attitude, Garfield’s Spider-man was also pretty accurate in that his Peter actually dabbled about making his gadgets and such unlike Toby’s organic shooters.

With the two Andrew Garfield Spider-Man offerings suggesting the public may be growing tired of Parker, why not make the bold decision of introducing fan-favorite Morales into the Cinematic Universe?

First off, the public clearly wasn’t tired of Peter Parker. Spider-Man: Homecoming made $880 million dollars.The problem was that the Amazing Spider-Man movies were just not very good. They were poorly constructed with way, way too much emphasis on plotlines that only existed to be sequel bait and attempts to create their own cinematic universe.Take the entire plot about Peter’s parents. Two movies had a running plotline about Peter’s parents performing some sort of secret experiment and then being murdered for it… none of which actually went anywhere. Then there was a bunch of stuff about the Sinister Six that only existed to set up the puzzling idea of a Sinister Six movie.And let’s not forget how goofy they made Electro.Seriously, who okayed this design?Now let’s move on to the MCU. One thing the MCU does correctly is that it ditches any flash-in-the-pan versions of a character in favor of the most iconic, timeless, and classic versions of them.The Ultimate Universe was a comic book line that was created explicitly as springboards to movies. They were modern, updated versions of the characters. And you can see shades of the Ultimate Universe across all the movies. But the movies quietly dumped most of the Ultimate Universe influence in favor of Marvel classic.Captain America is a paragon of virtue and compassion, instead of a deranged right-wing lunatic killer. Thor is an otherworldly deity instead of a hippy environmentalist. Hank Pym is a scientist mourning his lost wife instead of a psychopath who beats his wife. And so on.The architects behind the MCU were clearly not going to replace the most popular and iconic character in their main cash cow with a character that essentially no one had heard of from a sub-line of comics. Anyone expecting that has not been paying attention to the movies that came before.But clearly they have faith in the character of Miles Morales because he is getting a big splashy animated movie to debut in.

Who played Spider-Man best among Tobey Maguire, Andrew Garfield, and Tom Holland?

Let’s take a look at each of them.Tobey MaguireThe first ever spiderman movie starGreat stories,Great villains and good fight scenes.The scene I admire is this oneHe used some sort of glue for sticking the plate and the rest was AWESOME.Concluding A good Trilogy.Andrew GarfieldTakes down the lizard,Electro,GoblinI was hoping for the third movie with sinister six in itScrewed the second movie by killing GwenBetter GraphicsThis meme was bornTom HollandShowed up with the AVENGERShis dialogues try to be sarcastic but end up bad,ofcourse he is shown as a teenagerEagerly waiting for his homecoming.I will choose for Tobey right now,hopefully my choice might change after the new movie.Regards..

Was Andrew Garfield really that bad as Spider-Man? (Read the additional details.)

No, Garfield was a great Spider-Man but his films were hampered by two crucial issues:His Peter Parker was too cool.A huge part of the Spider-Man appeal is that Peter Parker is a nerdy, awkward kid. This is supposed to act as a contrast with the powerful, cool, quick witted Spider-Man, who can be everything Peter isn't. Tobey McGuire was great at this, you really believed that he was a nerd who really revelled in his new powers (he first uses them to beat up bullies, get money for a car and impress a girl!). This guy however:Doesn't really strike the right note.2. The second film was a confusing messNot Garfields fault, but the second film was a complete mess, it was clear that Sony were more interested in launching an ill advised ‘spiderman cinematic universe’ they were about telling a coherent story. The plot jumps from:Gwen Stacey is leaving town!Peter finds out his parents were assassinated!Peter’s father left clues to his research!Electro is attacking the city!Harry is the Green Goblin!The Rhino is attacking the city!Harry killed Gwen!Peter defeated Electro!Peter defeated Harry!Peter quit being Spider-Man!Peter starts being Spider-Man again!Peter defeated The Rhino!Harry forms the Sinister Six!Despite all this, Garfield was still great in the parts where he actually had the costume on, he has the right comedic tone and physical characteristics for the role. I think with better scripts and direction, his films could have been much better.