Every Spider-Man Movie Ranked Worst To Best

Spider-Man had a big year in 2018. The animated "Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse" was a huge hit, Spidey offshoot "Venom" broke October sales records even though it was panned by critics, and Peter Parker's dusty death was one of the most lamented moments of "Avengers: Infinity War." Outside the theater, the PS4 exclusive video game "Spider-Man" decimated competition and proved the fastest-selling Marvel game of all time.

Heck, let's face it: Spider-Man has had a big century. Flash back to the late '90s, a time when Marvel was in bankruptcy, Hollywood considered superhero films poison, and even the likes of James Cameron couldn't figure out how to bring the webhead to the big screen. It is absolutely staggering to consider how far it has all come since then, much of it led by our Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man.

Even if you don't count the comics, the video games, or the animated shows, the last few decades have brought us a mixed bag of Spider Guys. We've had three different actors — Tobey Maguire, Andrew Garfield, and Tom Holland — portraying Spider-Man in live-action films, as well as Shameik Moore voicing Miles Morales in "Spider-Verse." That's four different versions of Spider-Man leading this renaissance in roughly 20 years (not counting all of those "Spider-Verse" alternates, of course). Some of these projects have been spectacular, some of it has been meh, and some of it has been downright awful. For a tour through this mix of all the Spidey features, the spinoffs, and even a parody, here's every Spider-Man movie, ranked worst to best.

"Spider-Man 3" stars Thomas Haden Church as Flint Marko aka Sandman, Topher Grace as Eddie Brock aka Venom, and James Franco as Harry Osborn aka New Goblin (who wins the award for laziest supervillain name ever). Franco appears in the first two films as Peter Parker's (Tobey Maguire) friend, but the others are new and their introductions are horribly rushed. One of the silliest plot points in the film is the way the Venom symbiote attaches itself to Parker — it falls out of space and randomly hits his scooter. Obviously, the comic book version — which involves a massive superhero crossover — wouldn't be a viable option, but considering Harry Osborn had just taken over his father's science corporation, it seems like there were plenty of more believable ways to introduce the insidious extraterrestrial oil slick.

While the overcrowding of villains is a chief complaint, it's hardly the only one. "Evil" Parker's dance number is so memorably mockable that even "Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse" takes potshots at it. But perhaps the worst crime "Spider-Man 3" commits is retconning the death of Peter's uncle. Toward the end of the film, we learn it was actually Flint Marko — and not the guy Parker let run past him in the first "Spider-Man" movie — who murdered Ben Parker. One of the things that makes Spider-Man stand apart from other heroes is that he actually is partially to blame for the traumatic death he tortures himself over. Pulling out the rug from under that makes him a very different dude.

When Christopher Orr reviewed "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" for The Atlantic, he wrote that the best thing about it was that it only took director Marc Webb "two films to reach the same exhausted, exhausting endpoint that [Sam] Raimi required three to achieve." Which is mean. Accurate. But still mean. But also accurate.

Like "Spider-Man 3," Webb's second "Amazing Spider-Man" entry has too many bad guys. There's Jamie Foxx as Electro, Dane DeHaan as Green Goblin, and Paul Giamatti ... kind of as the Rhino? He encounters Spider-Man early in the film as a gunman but doesn't show up as the Rhino literally until the last few minutes. Rather than the Hulk-sized baddie from the comics, he's just a dude in a big mech suit, and the movie ends without any resolution to his battle with Spider-Man.

"Amazing Spider-Man 2" feels like what it's a film whose potential is spoiled primarily by the focus on setting up sequels and other franchises. Foxx was great as Electro — as "No Way Home" proves — and if the film instead focused on the conflict between him and Spider-Man, Garfield might still be wearing the red and blue. Instead, the filmmakers were so focused on planting seeds for future projects, they didn't realize they were stomping all over what was already growing. 

Arguably, it was for the best. If "Amazing Spider-Man 2" hadn't been a failure, Sony probably wouldn't have been as receptive to the idea of partnering with Marvel Studios and the letting ol' webhead come home.

There is at least one Spider-Man adaptation that doesn't feature fit young men like Tobey Maguire, Andrew Garfield, or Tom Holland: the Australian-made parody "Italian Spiderman." YouTube was blessed with the first trailer for "Italian Spiderman" in 2007, and viewers were treated to a chubby, trumpet-playing, dancing, smoking, and occasionally flying version of Spider-Man who freaks out over toy snakes. The roar of some kind of wild cat regularly accompanies clips of "action" scenes, which could mean Italian Spiderman chasing the villain in the Wrestler mask, or it could mean the "hero" punching out the woman he just defended from a couple of cat-calling jerks.

The trailer appeared to be just a parody of foreign films using American characters without permission, like 1973's "3 Dev Adam" (which featured Spider-Man and Captain America) or 1987's Hindi "Superman." No one imagined an "Italian Spiderman" film would actually be made, but in May 2008 the first episode of 10 was uploaded to YouTube. All told, "Italian Spiderman" was just over 45 minutes long and ends on a cliffhanger.  Every second is as wonderfully ridiculous as the trailer. "Italian Spiderman" director Dario Russo went on to make the Australian action comedy "Danger 5," which starred and was co-created by David Ashby, the same mustachioed maniac roaring through "Italian Spiderman" as the hero.

"Italian Spiderman" would be a contender for the top spot on this list if it were an official Spider-Man vehicle. It isn't dead last, simply because it's not "Spider-Man 3."

Though Venom's origin was divorced from his comic book beginnings for 2018's "Venom," the symbiote is still firmly in Peter Parker's world — so much so that "Venom" director Ruben Fleischer called a Venom vs. Spidey confrontation "inevitable." Even with the white version of the Spidey logo missing from Venom's chest, it's difficult to look at those eyes without seeing more maniacal versions of the eyes on Spider-Man's mask. 

"Venom" is not the best movie ever made, and the critics noticed. In spite of the marketing arguing that "the world doesn't need another superhero," one of the more common criticisms of "Venom" was a formulaic script. Sure, Venom eats people, and sure, once Eddie Brock (Tom Hardy) starts talking back to Venom, he has the tendency to seem less Superman and more Son of Sam, but regardless, "Venom" feels like a standard superhero flick. But audiences didn't seem to care. Old and new fans filled seats and broke ticket sales records. 

At the end of the day, formula-driven or not, "Venom" accomplishes its goals. Hardy and his CG half create a genuine, interesting dynamic, and while the CGI isn't always perfect — it's surprising so much advertising includes the shot of Venom's tongue licking a criminal's face, considering it's one of the least convincing CG shots in the film — some of the effects shots are incredible, and it's a fun flick.

You couldn't say Andrew Garfield's first shot in Spidey's red-and-blue getup received universal praise, but it's certainly better received than its sequel. "Amazing Spider-Man" showed up five years after Tobey Maguire hung up the tights, and while it's good, it never quite manages to escape the strangeness of a franchise rebooted while its predecessor was still relatively fresh in the culture's collective mind. "The Amazing Spider-Man" has to walk a tightrope of being different enough from the Maguire films that it distinguishes itself, but not so different that it's polarizing and unrecognizable.

There are definitely some benefits of the reboot for comics purists. "The Amazing Spider-Man" jettisons the hero's organic web-shooters and makes it so Parker himself invented mechanical one for his crimefighting. Rather than tacking on a halfhearted Gwen Stacy as Sam Raimi did in "Spider-Man 3," Emma Watson starred as the doomed love interest from the get-go.

You can argue back and forth about whether Garfield or Maguire was better as ol' webhead, but there's at least one way in which Garfield's portrayal simply is superior, and there's no argument: he's funny. Now, Raimi's "Spider-Man" films have lots of humor, but Maguire's Peter Parker is never very funny himself. At least not intentionally. One of Spidey's defining characteristics is his wisecracking in the face of danger. That's something Garfield delivers on, and it goes a long way toward making "The Amazing Spider-Man" feel more authentic to the comics.

With the glut of superhero movies we see today, it's easy to forget how important the first "Spider-Man" was to everything that followed. "X-Men" had been released two years before, and "Blade" two years before that. But "Blade" was a grittier, more violent superhero and the X-Men had a cool rebel vibe unique to the franchise. And of course they were all dressed in black leather. 

"Spider-Man" was the first 21st century superhero movie success to feature a more traditional crimefighting hero in bright red and blue. Peter Parker's coming-of-age story proved that the less edgy superheroes like Iron Man, Thor, and Captain America could thrive on the big screen under the right direction. 

It wasn't perfect, but it created the framework every Spider-Man movie that followed — including the ones with Tom Holland and Andrew Garfield — would need to reference. Even its mistakes served to improve all the superhero movies that came after. Perhaps the biggest fault of "Spider-Man" is that the filmmakers went out of their way to cast the brilliant Willem Dafoe and then stuck him in a green plastic helmet that made him look like a "Power Rangers" villain. Every time you notice how relatively dynamic Ryan Reynolds' mask is in "Deadpool" or its sequel? Those are lessons learned from "Spider-Man." 

The original "Venom" had all the warning signs of a disaster. Reshoots, out-of-left-field stars who ran the risk of being overwhelmed by wild comic book material, a main character who would be almost entirely CGI — but then the film somehow emerged all that as an enormous, unexpected hit. All the eccentric mugging, the disturbingly dark humor, the not-really-the-comics dynamic between Eddie and Venom make it feel more like "All of Me" as a horror film rather than a superhero popcorn flick — it gives "Venom" a unique flavor that makes it stand out from all those other comic book flicks. So you could be given for feeling déjà vu when you sat down to watch the sequel. How could they ever re-capture that anarchic, seemingly spontaneous, over-the-top vibe so perfectly set by Hardy's body-be-damned performance as a ragdoll for an alien symbiote? Somehow, they did it — and arguably, even better.

"Let There Be Carnage" is a slimmed-down, cut-the-fat sequel that steps on the gas in its opening sequence and never relents. Woody Harrelson is clearly having so much fun updating his "Natural Born Killers" persona for the comic book age, Stephen Graham chews some great scenery as a hardboiled cop, and Naomie Harris is a blast as Shriek. But once again, it is Hardy who shines, giving a performance that is quickly making his Eddie Brock downright iconic. 

If you love superhero movies, you have to love "Let there Be Carnage." If you love watching unbridled madness, you have to love "Carnage." And if you've ever dreamed of watching a head-chomping alien symbiote take the stage during an LGBTQ-pride rave and rant about its toxic relationship with a sweaty guy who feeds him chickens, well ... you should probably tell your therapist. Seriously. Oh, and be sure to watch the end credits ... where you'll finally see this Venom's universe crossover into Spidey's.

Tom Holland is Spider-Man. With his fearlessness and confidence in his heroic abilities contrasted with his awkward insecurity when it comes to facing any other aspect of his life, his desperate need to please Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.), and that all-important snarky bravado, neither of the other two 21st-century Spider-Man actors so embody exactly what we think of when we think of Peter Parker.  

By dialing down the age of Parker's actor, we get a much better, more authentic look at what it's like for Peter to be a superhero and a teenager. And unlike the Tobey Maguire Parker, who was almost completely friendless, Holland has his own small circle of outcasts — but the fact that he has friends highlights exactly how alone he is when he puts on the suit. The same can be said of Iron Man's involvement in the story. Knowing that Holland's Spidey exists in the same world as Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and Captain America (Chris Evans) makes it feel that much more precarious for the young hero when he's the only one trying to take down the Vulture, even though it's all of those other heroes' stuff the guy's trying to steal.

The casting of Michael Keaton as the Vulture adds a nice bit of brilliance. Keaton plays villains well, and more directors should cast him as bad guys. Not to mention that Keaton's involvement with "Birdman" — and that film's director's less-than-generous views on superhero films — makes it that much more delicious that Marvel Studios cast the "Batman" star as another winged, costumed dude.

As the first MCU entry to follow "Avengers: Endgame," 2019's "Spider-Man: Far from Home" not only had a tough act to follow, it had a lot more jobs than "Homecoming." While "Homecoming" is also connected to the MCU, it didn't need to accomplish anything specific in terms of the larger narrative. "Far from Home" pulls double duty — it needs to tell its own story as well as act as kind of an unofficial epilogue to "Avengers: Endgame." It answers the bothersome questions arising from the "blip," and usually does it in humorous ways that further Peter's story, like the young Brad (Remy Hii) who grows from freshman to stud during the five-year span between "Infinity War" and "Endgame" and now acts as Peter's rival for MJ's (Zendaya) affections. And it still manages to be a funny, suspenseful, and emotional film all on its own.

Jake Gyllenhaal is perfect as the deceptive Quentin Beck, and the revelation that he and his followers are disgruntled Stark employees is brilliant. Really, all the surprise reveals of "Far from Home" are done well, and they are, for the most part, genuinely surprising. It likely doesn't shock anyone that Mysterio is a bad guy, though few probably guessed exactly who he was. Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) and Maria Hill (Cobie Smulders) being unmasked as Skrulls, Spidey's secret identity broadcast to the masses, and (perhaps most of all) the crowd-pleasing return of J.K. Simmons to the role of J. Jonah Jameson — they're all handled perfectly.

When you consider all the demands placed upon "No Way Home," it's a minor Marvel miracle that the film turned out as well as it did. As the third Tom Holland "Home" film, it needed to bring closure to that trilogy. It also needed to set the stage for a new era of the MCU grappling with the multiverse, juggle over a dozen main characters, and then drop in cameos featuring familiar faces from other movies (Doctor Strange, played by Benedict Cumberbatch), other studios (Venom, Charlie Cox's Daredevil) and even other "Spider-Man" series.

The result is a fast-paced, audience-approved blockbuster that keeps the fan service zooming coming at you as frequently as the "thwip" of webs. Jamie Foxx redeems a flat, unfunny character with his refreshed take on Electro, Willem Dafoe reminds us how much we've missed his demented cackle, and Alfred Molina shines as a Doc Ock newly confused about whether he should still want to kill a Peter Parker he doesn't even recognize — but it's Tom Holland who truly shines, bringing newfound depth to his character in the face of tragedy, then starting anew as we watch his growth and anticipate a more mature, stripped-down Spider.

Sure, the script doesn't always hold up to close scrutiny. But at the end of the day, it's impossible to not get chills when Andrew Garfield's Spider-Man gets a second chance, tears in your eyes when Peter and MJ say goodbye, or cheer when three Spider-Men swing into action together atop the Statue of Liberty. If your tingle thing tells you that this is the most fun "Spider-Man" movie ever made, it's unlikely anybody would argue the point.

"Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse" is to American feature animation what "The Matrix" was to the action blockbuster back in 1999 — a masterpiece of pop art that pushed the limits of its medium, inspired a string of imitators, and became the benchmark by which they were judged. There's before "Into the Spider-Verse," and there's after "Into the Spider-Verse." The success of its expressionistic, comic book-influenced visuals and the remarkable artistry and technology that brought them to life has encouraged other animation studios to get more creative and ambitious, putting an end to the tired, homogenous era of Hollywood animation that's so long resisted growing beyond the formulas of Pixar and DreamWorks.

So it's only appropriate that its sequel, "Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse," would be, essentially, its "The Matrix Reloaded." It's a colossal, visually dazzling endeavor that expands the world(s) of the original both outward and inward, pushing the technological envelope, challenging audience preconceptions, and making us wait months to see how the damn thing ends. The action is even bigger and arguably better, and the stakes and emotions are higher, but the story ends in a cliffhanger and is left incomplete, and therefore hard to judge on its own merits.

Compared to the first film, "Across the Spider-Verse" is heavy stuff. Miles is growing up, and his secret double life is complicating his future and his relationship with his family, which is the beating heart of the movie. While the eye-popping action and a gajillion Spider-People are the film's most obvious draws, it's the intimacy of the personal drama among Miles, his parents (Brian Tyree Henry and Luna Lauren Vélez), and Spider-Woman Gwen Stacy (Hailee Steinfeld) that really brings this one home.

Before Tom Hiddleston won audiences' hearts as Loki, few movie supervillains were simultaneously as ruthless, brutal, and sympathetic as Alfred Molina as Otto Octavius aka Doctor Octopus. Visually, he manages to be both more human than the Green Goblin and more menacing. While it may look a little choppy compared to today's effects, in 2004 the extended battle between Doc Ock and Spidey on a moving train is intense and amazing.

As a middle chapter, "Spider-Man 2" hit all the right notes. The conflict between the life Peter wants and the one his life as a hero demands, the revelations Harry Osborn comes to about his best friend and his father, and the setup for the next (disappointing) chapter are executed perfectly. Since visual effects are so important to superhero films, this might not be so true today, but in 2004, "Spider-Man 2" felt like a movie made just to show everyone else exactly what a superhero movie should be. 

Its biggest flaw may be that the last half hour or so can sometimes feel like nothing but an endless series of scenes showing Spider-Man revealing his secret identity to different people, but the overall quality doesn't suffer too much for it.

There may be a better Spider-Man movie than "Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse." But if so, it was released in another universe.

There are many differences between "Into the Spider-Verse" and the 2014 comic book event, "Spider-Verse," it's loosely based on. One thing it has in common is the cast of parallel-reality Spider-heroes (though the comic book version had a ton more), and another is the delight it takes in the medium of comics and its long history. Not only does "Into the Spider-Verse" feature a teenage hero of color alongside an aging Peter B. Parker (Jake Johnson), but there's a cartoon pig Spider-Ham (John Mulaney), the anime and manga-inspired SP//dr (Kimiko Glenn), Spider-Gwen, and of course Nicolas Cage: Spider-Man Noir.

Unburdened from live action and from the continuity restraints of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, "Into the Spider-Verse" is action-packed, hilarious, has a tangible emotional core, and is kid-friendly while still complex enough for adults to appreciate and enjoy. It introduces diversity to the Spidey franchise as naturally as Miles Morales swinging from one building to the next. And if you didn't tear up a little at Stan Lee's cameo or laugh your head off at the post-credits scene, thaw your frozen heart already.