Willem Defoe didn’t care for ‘The Amazing Spider-Man’ either


I’ve mostly exhausted my disdain for Marc Webb’s “The Amazing Spider-Man” and spent a good portion of this year praising the improvements I’ve noticed in the materials for the upcoming sequel but there are still a few excerpts of opinions making their ways to the internets. The latest is Norman Osborn himself Willem Defoe chiming in with his impressions of the premise of the film.


Total Film has now caught up with Willem Dafoe, who played Norman Osborn in Raimi’s “Spider-Man,” and also asked for his opinion on “The Amazing Spider-Man.” His answer is not very surprising.

I saw a trailer for the first ‘Spider-Man’ reboot and I thought, ‘This is crazy! It’s not shot for shot, but it’s the same story,’” he explained. “I thought, ‘This is sort of a cynical approach to making money.’ The way Sam Raimi approached it, it was pure in its intentions.

There you have it Ryan. I know, you never responded to our AvsR but that’s salt in the wound. Even  villains thought that movie was lacking!


‘Nuff said…


Source: Worst Previews



Comment with Facebook

About Anthony Whyte

Content Manager | Senior Editor | Daydreamer | Keep your head on a swivel and don't blink

17 thoughts on “Willem Defoe didn’t care for ‘The Amazing Spider-Man’ either

  1. Raimis movies did not suck period you are crazy. Spiderman and spiderman 2 were awesome when everyone first saw them. The third won definitely slacked and wasn’t too good but these new spidey movies are fur sure let downs. I agree with Dafoe and I don’t care what his past projects were. I love spidey as much as anyone else and I want these new movies to shine but I just feel like marvel hasn’t let enough time go by to reboot these films that it’s way too soon. Won thing Nolan did was wait a good amount of time before throwing out his next bat film. And he took his time I between telling great stories. No other batman film told the full origin of batman like he did in begins and the where he took it after that was just phenomenal. Idk if Marc Webb can do what Nolan did but like I said I sure hope this next spidey is good. I want it to be, just think it probably will be another let down. Like ironman 3 was.

  2. This coming from a guy who did xXx: State of the Union and Speed 2. Two lame retreads of their predecessors.

    Of course it’s the same basic story, it’s the classic origin written by Stan Lee and Steve Ditko over 50 years ago. It’s not plagiarism, it’s reverence.

    This is like hating Batman Begins just because they did the same basic origin as the first Batman and Batman Forever. I critique a film on its OWN merits, not its suspected derivativeness.

  3. Um, they did have that. But movies don't have the benefits of years and years to get that through. What you want girls to finally like him in what? Part six?

  4. So you are saying that Peter Parker/Spiderman in "The Amazing Spiderman" became Poochie, a character on The Itchy & Scratchy Show from the Simpsons. The network executives decided that the show needed an "update" to keep the interest of its audience, so they devised Poochie, a cartoon dog "with an attitude"!

  5. I watched the movie. I didn't care for it. Here is why: The Spiderman from the last movie is, consistent with the Ultimate Spiderman (at least the Ultimate Spiderman with Peter Parker as Spiderman). I just don't care for that version. Spiderman, in his original incarantion, was intended as a social outcast. He was supposed to be a character that was ostracized and ridiculed by his peers because he was a "bookworm". He wasn't cool in any sense of the word. He was bullied by the High School jock, Flash Thompson, and ignored by the girls as undesirable (Liz Allen proving the exception until she was written out upon Peter's Graduation).

    The whole charm of Peter's transformation into Spiderman was that he could be outgoing, virile, athletic and tough, even envied by his greatest tormentor, Flash, while he was in that persona. It was the perfect dichotomy: The power and strength that Peter was able to display as Spiderman, while on the other hand, riddled with self-doubt, insecurity, and fear as Pete Parkerr.

    This movie effectively erased that diametrically oppsed personality aspect by having Peter and Flash become best buddies by the first third of the movie and having him sneaking into Gwen Stacey's room (The hottest girl in his entire High School) for make out sessions. Talk about completely obliterating a characterization for something far more commercial! Peter is now portrayed as a skateboarding hipster who spends as much time judging and rejecting his peers as they ever did his former incarnation.

    The greatest irony of the original Spiderman character was, despite his enviable powers and abilities, he still ended up being rejected and ostracized as a superhero, no matter what he did. In the movie, the entire city goes out of it's way to aid and support him.

    The whole nature of who Spiderman and Peter Parker were supposed to be is completely subverted in the new movie for something unrecognizable to fans of the original.

    I'm not sayingthat the Ultimate Spiderman is terrible, I'm saying that his characterization is unrecgnizable compared to what made the original so endearing to so many.

    1. In the comics, Parker wasn’t really the loser people like to imagine. Even in the very beginning, yeah, Parker was kind of bullied, be he was also always willing to defend himself. He was super nerdy, but despite this managed to land gorgeous women, like that bombshell journalist he dated – yeah, nerdy Parker dated a beautiful older woman when he was in high school.

      I don’t think it’s fair to criticize the new movie for making Parker too cool because, when you really go back and read the original comics, he was kind of pretty fucking cool – even without the mask.

Leave a Reply