The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Sam Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy is so much better than The Amazing Spiderman

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
benshapirohero has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/14/2016 Category: Movies
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 525 times Debate No: 94708
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




I've always loved the Spider-Man trilogy, and you better believe I was excited about the then upcoming Amazing Spiderman reboot.
To put it mildly, I wasn't to impressed, and I think The Amazing Spiderman doesn't do Spider-Man justice.

First, I don't want to hear, "it's just a matter of opinion, so you can't say either one is better than the other."
That's called killing a debate.

Second, I'd appreciate it if you post your arguments first. I'm genuinely interested in your arguments for The Amazing Spiderman 1-2 and/or against Spider-Man 1-3.

"Spidey, love the new outfit! Give me some of that web action."


A wise man once said, "New is always better". Barney Stinton.

The Amazing Spiderman is better than the original Spider man trilogy for many reasons: These are the 2 of them.

*The graphics are more realistic and the animations are much better. Its no longer the same boring graphics graphics. One of most important animation that the "Spider-man" movie in general should have is the web swinging animation. That is clearly won by The Amazing Spider Man.

*Most superhero movies add humor or comedic relief's which makes the movie more interesting. One of the funny statements Peter Parker used from the Amazing Spiderman is, "if your going to steal the car, don't dress like a thief" (Link for video:
Debate Round No. 1


The Amazing Spiderman 1 and 2 try to dazzle us many times by heavily using CGI. Sometimes the movie just feels like a video game at times and is completely unbelievable. Not to mention they completely overdo using slowmo.

Spider-Man 3 has only one slow-mo scene, and it actually makes it believable by not relying so heavily on computer graphics-

As for comedic relief, Spider-Man has plenty of funny moments:

Also, the amazing spider-man fails to include J. Jonah Jameson, who is comedic gold:


My opponent said, "The Amazing Spiderman 1 and 2 [tried] to dazzle us many times by heavily using CGI. Sometimes the movie...and is completely unbelievable."
I rebuttal that sentence because isn't marvel superhero movies suppose to have unbelievable moments. Isn't that what super hero movies are all about. Superheroes are suppose to do those unbelievable stuff. For example, saving a crashing airplane, catching many peoples are out a falling building. That is why superhero movies are exciting. If my opponent believes superhero movies shouldn't have many slow-mo scenes, I doubt that he has seen many Marvel/Dc movies.

Additionally another thing The Amazing Spider-man did better that the trilogy is they made Peter Parker seem like a teenager
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by JimShady 1 year ago
Can I accept this debate, if you don't want me too it's fine.
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.