If you have to compromise the integrity of a character in order to achieve a dramatic, emotional result, best not to do that particular scene.  I had a HUGE problem with this in SM2.  The biggest problem of the entire movie for me.  Want to see Maguire act?  Rip off the offending eyepiece, leaving half a mask, rather than strip the entire mask off and exposing himself not only to a train full of people, but to Doc Ock, who was still a threat.  Peter has always been about protecting his family and those close to him.  It's part of who he is, learned immediately after Uncle Ben dies.  There is no way in hell that Peter would allow himself to be seen, putting them in jeopardy, when there are other options available to him.  They were also open to the producers, director and screenwriters as well IF someone thought about character first.  Instead, they thought about their multi-million dollar star and how to get him some more face time.  I know that scene is supposed to pack an emotional wallop, but his very actions diminish it where you, Brendan, say they heighten it.

Usually artists cheat by making the mask, the eyes, etc. change so as to express emotion.

I think the scene on the subway was meant to be symbolic-I didn't particularly like that they all saw the mask, but it was meant to be a scene that these peopole are so happy and thankful, especially since it is just a kid, that they would never reveal what they saw.  Besides the fact he isn't a household name anyway.

Voice-over narrative during a life-or-death action sequence? You really think that would work?

Matt Reed wrote: If you have to compromise the integrity of a character in order to achieve a dramatic, emotional result, best not to do that particular scene.  I had a HUGE problem with this in SM2.  The biggest problem of the entire movie for me.  Want to see Maguire act?  Rip off the offending eyepiece, leaving half a mask, rather than strip the entire mask off and exposing himself not only to a train full of people, but to Doc Ock, who was still a threat.  Peter has always been about protecting his family and those close to him.  It's part of who he is, learned immediately after Uncle Ben dies.  There is no way in hell that Peter would allow himself to be seen, putting them in jeopardy, when there are other options available to him.  They were also open to the producers, director and screenwriters as well IF someone thought about character first.  Instead, they thought about their multi-million dollar star and how to get him some more face time.  I know that scene is supposed to pack an emotional wallop, but his very actions diminish it where you, Brendan, say they heighten it.

My emotions were heightened by seeing the anquish on Maguire's face, so I don't think this is quite as black-and-white as you imply. It works on a visceral level, even if it doesn't stand up to intellectual examination. 

John Byrne wrote: I suspect the removal of the mask at strategic points had less to do with drama than with dollars. Pay Tobey Maguire umpety-ump millions of dollars, and have huge amounts of screen time played out by stunt men and CGI? Not likely!

It could be true. During the  Golden Age of the classic American cinema, in the actors' contracts was specified the number of scenes featuring their face (it could be simpler if I knew how to say in English "primo piano"... When you see only the face of the character, I mean. Sigh). It's true that in the 40s or 50s actors didn't wear spider masks...! Using a mask during the movie is not so good for an actor. 

Matt Reed wrote: Again, if you have to compromise the character to make a scene work on an emotional, visceral level, it is black and white.  Don't compromise the character.  Make the scene work within the confines of the character or don't do the scene at all, regardless of how it feels emotionally.

Then I guess Peter shouldn't have taken off his mask at the end of "The Kid Who Collected Spider-Man." And he should have asked Dr. Strange to erase Mary Jane's knowledge of his identity from her memory.

I'm being snarky, but my point is that there is wiggle room in these thing, and I don't think it was a crime against the character. If he had pulled off his mask in front of a TV camera and announced "I'm Peter Parker," then I would be furious. Peter Parker would never do that. But the idea of Peter throwing all caution to the wind to save a train full of strangers, and watching him nearly die as a result, and being able to see the anquish and exertion -- it all worked for me.

What Matt says is true, but in the world of the movie, the train people were so amazed and grateful, they vowed never to reveal what they know.  Because of that, I would not bring the real world into it.  In the movie world, nobody is revealing anything.

What I would have preferred though, was for only the two kids to have seen his face and to have given him back his mask.  I think it owuld have worked a little better.  Or maybe even to have had to web up his whole face, except for his eyes, afterwards. 

The problem is that the same movie had MJ, Harry, Dr. Octopus, and possibly Aunt May know who he is as well, so it was a bit much.  Especially for a character whose secret identity has been so important over the years.