If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot. More details on our policies, especially our Own the Source rule are available here. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.

Spider-Man: Homecoming (No Spoilers)
^ Exactly. But Nic was saying the movie should have focussed more on this. Character matters more than grades.
I loved the diverse cast of the movie - felt very real. I loved that they won the competition without him. I loved how everyone's life DIDN'T fall apart when Peter did (unlike the Raimi films) - but there was still enough of an angst between normal life and Spiderman life - particularly with the decision he needs to make at the end.
It's definitely up there with Spidey 1&2.
Reply
Quote:I loved the diverse cast of the movie

I HATE when people talk about forced diversification in movies. As if having a diverse cast in a film set in an A++ Global City is somehow more unbelievable than a human spider fighting a flying bird person.

My flatmate went on a rant about the new Magnificent Seven movie once, and I had to agree with him.  Filling this movie with a buncha white dudes, ffs? They need to stay true to the time period and the story they're telling, with 7 homogeneous Japanese men!
Reply
What I was saying is that the film should have had more focused/stronger themes so that it felt like it actually had substance. I just mentioned grades/resume because Peter Parker at his core is a poor kid struggling to balance super hero life, personal life, and taking care of his Aunt May.


Regarding how the class won the decathlon without him, that should have played bigger. This should have convinced him that what he does at school doesn't matter, and then later on when Tony takes the suit back, he believes that him being a hero shouldn't matter, making him want to join with the Vulture and make money however he can, only to realize that he was wrong, and managed to take out Vulture and earn Stark's approval anyway. Maybe Tony gives him business advice, and PEter goes on to actually patent his webbing and start Parker Industries like in the comics (with Tony remote controlling the Iron Spider suit to discredit the idea of Peter and Spider-Man being the same person.
Reply
This will likely be an unpopular opinion, but "Homecoming" is easily my least-favorite MCU movie thus far.

It is a good movie? Sure. Not great, but pretty good as a movie. Almost as good as "Iron Man 2" or "The Incredible Hulk". But as a Spider-Man movie? Terrible, in my opinion.

While Tom Holland is likable and gives as good a performance as he can with the material that he's been given, the whole "Wow! this is awesome! Whoa! What is that? Oh cool, that's amazing too!" shtick that they've saddled him with gets grating within the first five minutes of the movie. (I was already starting to get a little tired of how in awe he was of everything and everyone by the end of the airport scene in "Captain America: Civil War", so I had even less tolerance for it here.)

Also, the voice that Tom Holland uses sounds way too young. He sounds 12 instead of 16, and all of the other characters (understandably) realize that's he's not an adult even if they don't know his identity. Spider-Man has always been known as Spider-Man (rather than Spider-Boy) because everyone assumes that he's an adult. He's supposed to have a voice that sounds barely young enough to be a teenager, but also barely old enough to be an adult. One way of putting it is that he's supposed to sound like someone who, upon walking into a liquor store, would be told, "I'm not sure you're 21. I'll need to see some ID." But Tom Holland sounds like someone who would immediately be told, "Get out of here, kid! See that sign? No minors allowed."

The MCU Peter Parker/Spider-Man is the first screen version that I know of that seems to be intended to be portrayed as "cute" in the sense that a puppy or a small child is cute. There are many moments where it seems that the audience is supposed to go "Aww!". Since when is Spider-Man supposed to be that kind of character?

Furthermore, de-aging Peter so that he's only 15 when bitten by the spider (rather than about 17 or so like in the original Stan Lee/Steve Ditko comics) takes away from the coming-of-age aspect of the story. His transformation into Spider-Man works best when in coincides with (and is symbolic of) his transition from boy to man. Tom Holland is 20 years old, so there's no reason that he couldn't have played a 17, 18, 19, or 20 year old Peter Parker in "Homecoming". But Marvel Studios and Sony instead decided to go with the de-aging that was used in such modern versions of Spider-Man as the "Ultimate Spider-Man" comics, likely in order to have a long-lasting franchise in the vein of Harry Potter.

The choice to make Tony Stark Peter's mentor takes away a large part of his story. The necessity for Peter to learn everything on his own (with only snippets of advice from Aunt May, who he can't tell his secret to) has always been an integral part of what made his story and him as a character special, and the absence of that aspect here detracts from his character arc. Now, he's no longer the self-made hero that's he's always been, but instead Stark's protegé - almost a sidekick in his own story.

Michael Giacchino's musical score is underwhelming. His re-imagining of the 1960s Spider-Man theme is beautiful (albeit unfortunately marred by unneeded electronica not present in the original recording session), but only lasts 42 seconds out of the movie's over 2 hour running time. The theme for Spider-Man used within the movie itself is unmemorable (even James Horner's theme was better), and the lightweight playful tune (presumably Peter Parker's theme) that plays over and over throughout the movie quickly grows tiresome.

Jacob Batalon's Ned Leeds was an unnecessary annoying sidekick. Zendaya's Michelle was barely in the movie, but came across as an annoying snob in her brief appearances. I usually like Marisa Tomei, but she was given very little to do, and was very forgettable. Furthermore, the casting of such a relatively young actress for Aunt May changes her into a completely different character, and one that I don't find very compelling. Tony Revolori was better than I expected as Flash Thompson, but I would have preferred the classic beefy meathead version of the character. Angourie Rice was fine but unremarkable as Betty Brant. I can't comment on how well Liz was or wasn't portrayed, as Laura Harrier inherently irritates the living daylights out of me. It's not her fault, but she just happens to have a face and set of facial expressions that I find extremely unpleasant and off-putting for some subjective reason that I can't put a finger on - the visual equivalent of four or five sets of nails scraping across a blackboard at once. It seems that this must be a rare reaction, as most people seem to find her appearance very pleasant (based on Internet comments that I've seen).

The best parts of the movie by far were Adrian Toomes/The Vulture and Tony Stark/Iron Man. I had worried that Michael Keaton might see this as a paycheck role and phone it in, but I was wrong. He was appropriately creepy, yet also sufficiently likable to stay within the tradition of sympathetic villains in Spider-Man movies. The only thing wrong with Toomes/Vulture is that there wasn't enough of him. Throughout the movie, I kept waiting for the Peter Parker/Spider-Man scenes to end so I could see Toomes again. There's one particular Toomes scene (it's in an earthbound mode of transportation with two other characters - you'll know which one I mean if you've seen it) that's downright chilling - it's probably my favorite scene of the movie. Robert Downey, Jr. is great as usual, and there's an Iron Man scene toward the beginning that's downright hilarious and very much in keeping with what you would expect of Tony Stark.

That brings me to the humor. There was a lot of it (too much, in my opinion), some of which was funny. Unfortunately, most of it came from infantilizing Spider-Man, who bumbled his way throughout the majority of the movie. From a certain point of view, this is endearing (and I suspect that this is how most people saw it). But it felt very out-of-character for Spider-Man, in my view. The high-tech aspects of the suit, while funny, again detracted from this feeling like a Spider-Man movie.

I strongly disliked that both Ned and Aunt May discovered Spider-Man's identity, and especially that both discoveries were handled in a casual, humorous manner. The MCU (especially the movie side) is largely lacking in characters with a double identity, and Spider-Man would have been the perfect character to make an exception to that rule. He is a character for whom secrecy has always been very important. In "Spider-Man 2", the moment when Mary Jane finds out that Peter is Spider-Man packs a big punch, both because it didn't happen until the end of the second movie and because it was handled in a dramatic manner.
The action scenes were neither great nor bad. They were fine, but none came across as particularly original or thrilling.

In some ways, this movie continues the trend of Spider-Man movies feeling "corporate". But whereas the Marc Webb movies felt like a Sony checklist, this one feels like a handshake between Marvel Studios and Sony. It's too self-conscious about the fact that it's the first MCU Spider-Man movie. Even the title is a double entendre meant to advertise that Spider-Man has "come home" to Marvel.

Many reviews have stated that "Homecoming" brings Spider-Man into a new era and presents him to a new generation. That's true. Its tagline could very well have been, "This isn't your grandfather's Spider-Man". But whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is in the eye of the beholder. Most fans of Brian Michael Bendis' "Ultimate Spider-Man" and similar modernized versions of Spider-Man will probably love this movie. But for a person such as myself, who almost always prefers classic takes on material to modernized ones (and who considers the "Ultimate" comics to be an inferior retelling of the Spider-Man story), the modernized approach is more of a minus than a plus.

In a nutshell, my opinion is that it's a good movie (albeit one of the MCU's weakest entries), but a poor adaptation of the Spider-Man character and story.
Courage, men! we've not sunk before, and we'll not sink now!
Reply
I mostly agree with hbenthow with this. I personally thought this latest Spider-Man movie was underwhelming. Yes, it was a good movie, definitely fun. But I don't think "good enough" was good enough. Not to say that I wanted bigger set pieces, more exciting action and stuff. On the contrary, I thought that Spider-Man being like a "Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man" was a great decision. But I'm talking about character interactions not being very engaging.

Don't get me wrong, I liked the arc Peter Parker goes through here, I just don't think it's too special. Everyone was raving that we wouldn't ever see an origin story for Spidey again, because we know everything, "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility" yada yada yada... But what we've essentially got is the same idea, just told differently.


Two months after the events of Civil War, Peter is still under the effect of being with and fighting the Avengers, and he's still waiting for a call from Tony Stark for their next mission as he was told. At this point he's too ambitious and sometimes gets kind of egotistical about his abilities. So when a new villain, Vulture, emerges, Peter decides to track him down and try to prove himself to Tony Stark. Eventually, Peter gets to a point where he endangers too much lives and Tony takes away his suit, stating "If you're nothing without the suit, then you shouldn't have it" (You know which scene I'm talking about) I loved how this was not only a nod to Tony's character development, especially in Iron Man 3, but also treated as a blow to Peter and something important for him to think about. After a moral dilemma, Peter decides the right thing to do would be to chase down Toomes, only this time he's not doing it to prove himself, but because he believes it's the right thing to do; as with great power, there must also come great responsibility.

Good enough right? Well, not really. Before I get into the missed opportunities, if you're not interested in my ideas, you can skip to two paragraphs later where I review the story on its own. So anyway: Everything interesting introduced in Civil War is tossed away here. What about the fact that Peter was being manipulated by Tony in Civil War (cuz that totally was not just shoehorned in there, right?) What about the accords and how it affects Peter as well? Maybe driving a wedge between them? I even hated how Tony and Pepper got back together, and got engaged. What about all the character development, all the sad moments in Civil War with Tony? I know he wasn't the point, but at least don't throw what was set up, to the garbage.

I would have loved to see a movie that continued Peter and Tony's relationship from Civil War properly. A character story that explores the morals of Peter and Tony, exploring Tony that he might have manipulated Peter, but the motivation for doing this is so that he can see Peter as a son, and try to make him better than he ever was. Peter could see Tony as a father figure but learn he's not perfect etc. Confronting him about the accords, manipulating him, etc. Important stuff from the Civil War comic story that couldn't be included in Captain America: Civil War due to time constraints, shoehorning Spider-Man in (despite how great it worked) and the focus not being on them. Peter and Tony would have a great father-son dynamic, both of which had less than stellar experiences with father figures in the past. The parallels are there, why won't you use them?! Something similar to what I supposed, while also incorporating what worked in Homecoming, like the high school element, coming of age, and the villain, would make a perfect continuation to Civil War. Alas, we got this underwhelming dish.

But you know, you have to judge a movie on it's own. The actual story and Peter's development do work well. It's just that they're too basic, generic and just underwhelming. One big problem I had with Peter's development on its own, is the lack of acknowledgement for Uncle Ben and the responsibility message. It is clear that what the movie's doing is basically the responsibility message. It's just that the film is trying so hard to be different that they completely ignore those and try to tell it their own way. Problem is that what makes Spider-Man Spider-Man, and what makes him responsible, is the guilt he has for indirectly causing the death of his dear uncle, because of his irresponsibility. That's important now: guilt. Peter Parker literally spelled it out in Civil War. Now how do you f that up? Trying to create a different reason for Peter's morality.

They try to use Tony's words to motivate Peter, to give him the responsibility to take on Vulture. This doesn't work because Tony himself didn't want Peter to take on the Vulture. So Peter chases Vulture down inspired by Tony's words... The same person that told him not to chase Vulture down. "If you're nothing without the suit, then you shouldn't have it" is true, but it doesn't really relate to Peter. It's used to compensate for the responsibility line I guess, but it doesn't work because these words have nothing to do with Peter's responsibility. Nothing else is emphasized that shows Peter a reason to chase down Vulture. We all know the real reason he does it, but within this movie it's never emphasized and it just comes off like Peter wants to prove himself still, and continues to endanger lives because of it. That isn't what happens of course. But what if Vulture wasn't captured? What if the plane crashed, Vulture escapes, maybe people are injured or even dead, and Tony is pissed? I mean, why did Tony change his mind? Just because Vulture is captured?

Of course it's meant to be like; Peter impresses Tony in a different way than intended before. He proves to him that he does what he does because he believes it's the right thing, because with great power comes great responsibility. Tony understands and sees Peter has matured, emphasized as well when he decides to be a "Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man". Notice what I've bolded is completely unclear. There is a clear difference between subtle and just non-existant. And that's the problem. There is no seal to Peter's character development. The same mistake was made with Amazing Spider-Man 1 where there is no seal to Peter realizing that hunting the person who killed Uncle Ben isn't heroic, and truly becoming the Spider-Man by saving the people in the bridge. There should have been something, even as simple as ripping the picture of the guy who killed Uncle Ben. But it was unclear, therefore it comes off as abandoned. It's the same here. Because there is no guilt, because there is no responsibility lesson, because there is no Uncle Ben, there is no seal to Peter's development. And the compensation doesn't work.

Let's talk about the good stuff though. Tom Holland gives a great performance as Peter Parker/Spider-Man. I gotta say, this is probably the best performance of both characters I've seen. While Tobey Maguire nailed the nerd outcast aspect of Peter, he couldn't quite do a convincing performance of a confident, quippy, fun Spider-Man. On the other hand, Andrew Garfield was a fantastic Spider-Man with his fun nature, but his Peter Parker just felt too cool, as in, too confident, good looking, a bit hipster-ish, etc. He just wasn't a convincing nerdy outcast. Right here though, Tom Holland nails both aspects. I have no doubt in saying that Tom Holland is the best performance of Peter Parker/Spider-Man we've seen on the big screen. Character story-wise, my favorite is still Tobey, followed by Andrew, but performance-wise, Tom Holland is king.

Michael Keaton as the Vulture was surprisingly good. He was cold, menacing, has good motivations. I was surprised to see him as the father of Liz Allen (what a coincidence though, and why do they have different surnames? Step-father maybe?). It worked very well, though, because of both the connection between Adrian and Peter, and also because it gives him a great motivation with family that makes us truly understand what he's going through. His backstory with being screwed over by higher authorities and Stark, and his profession as a scavenger, helps very much as well. Easily the best MCU movie villain since Tom Hiddleston's Loki (does the Mandarin being an idea and having Americans-- ahem, A.I.M. as the controllers, work as a great villain as well? I loved that).

Anything I didn't mention, I agree with hbenthow. It is a decent movie. Overall though, I just felt like this film played it too safe, didn't take enough risks. I even think Spider-Man 3 engages me more than this does, with more interesting character arcs, interactions themes, etc. Granted, Homecoming is overall better than 3 (3 has a lot of things that weigh it down), but my point still stands.

For context, my favorite to least favorite Spider-Man movies are like this:

  1. Spider-Man 2 - 9.7/10
  2. Spider-Man - 9.2/10
  3. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 - 9/10
  4. The Amazing Spider-Man - 8/10
  5. Spider-Man: Homecoming - 6.7/10
  6. Spider-Man 3 - 5.8/10
So yeah this is all coming from a guy who loves The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (For good reason!)
Reply

(07-16-2017, 05:19 PM)Masirimso17 Wrote: Everything interesting introduced in Civil War is tossed away here. What about the fact that Peter was being manipulated by Tony in Civil War (cuz that totally was not just shoehorned in there, right?) What about the accords and how it affects Peter as well? Maybe driving a wedge between them?

I would have loved to see a...character story that explores the morals of Peter and Tony, exploring Tony that he might have manipulated Peter, but the motivation for doing this is so that he can see Peter as a son, and try to make him better than he ever was. Peter could see Tony as a father figure but learn he's not perfect etc. Confronting him about the accords, manipulating him, etc. Important stuff from the Civil War comic story that couldn't be included in Captain America: Civil War due to time constraints, shoehorning Spider-Man in (despite how great it worked) and the focus not being on them. Peter and Tony would have a great father-son dynamic, both of which had less than stellar experiences with father figures in the past. The parallels are there, why won't you use them?! Something similar to what I supposed, while also incorporating what worked in Homecoming, like the high school element, coming of age, and the villain, would make a perfect continuation to Civil War.



I hadn't actually thought of that. I know Tony brought up how he's trying to treat Peter differently than his father taught him, but I guess they just couldn't afford RDJ for so many days/balance screentime between Peter and Tony without Tony overshadowing PEter and this becoming Iron Man 4 (or, after Civil War, Iron Man 5?).



Quote: The actual story [is] too basic, generic and just underwhelming. One big problem I had with Peter's development on its own, is the lack of acknowledgement for Uncle Ben and the responsibility message. It is clear that what the movie's doing is basically the responsibility message. It's just that the film is trying so hard to be different that they completely ignore those and try to tell it their own way. Problem is that [the filmmakers] create a different reason for Peter's morality.

They try to use Tony's words to motivate Peter, to give him the responsibility to take on Vulture. This doesn't work because Tony himself didn't want Peter to take on the Vulture. So Peter chases Vulture down inspired by Tony's words... The same person that told him not to chase Vulture down. "If you're nothing without the suit, then you shouldn't have it" is...used to compensate for the responsibility line I guess, but it doesn't work because these words have nothing to do with Peter's responsibility. Nothing else is emphasized that shows Peter a reason to chase down Vulture. We all know the real reason he does it, but within this movie it's never emphasized and it just comes off like Peter wants to prove himself still, and continues to endanger lives because of it.What if the plane crashed, Vulture escapes, maybe people are injured or even dead, and Tony is pissed? I mean, why did Tony change his mind? Just because Vulture is captured?

Exactly. The suit feels less like a metaphor for Peter's responsibility than it does for Peter's competent. It's why, when he decides to turn down Liz to go after her dad, it feels less like he went through intense soul searching and more like he needed to take a break to detox the humiliation he went through (which is not compelling at all).


Quote: Of course it's meant to be like; Peter impresses Tony in a different way than intended before. He proves to him that he does what he does because he believes it's the right thing, because with great power comes great responsibility. Tony understands and sees Peter has matured, emphasized as well when he decides to be a "Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man". Notice what I've bolded is completely unclear. There is a clear difference between subtle and just non-existant. And that's the problem. There is no seal to Peter's character development. The same mistake was made with Amazing Spider-Man 1 where there is no seal to Peter realizing that hunting the person who killed Uncle Ben isn't heroic, and truly becoming the Spider-Man by saving the people in the bridge. There should have been something, even as simple as ripping the picture of the guy who killed Uncle Ben. But it was unclear, therefore it comes off as abandoned. It's the same here. Because there is no guilt, because there is no responsibility lesson, because there is no Uncle Ben, there is no seal to Peter's development. And the compensation doesn't work.

Imagine if, after the D.C. incident, there were news reports citing stories like "Spider-Man has gone from Youtube Sensation to a True Hero", acknowledging that, after doing menial tasks in Queens and trying to stop Vulture when no one was looking,  Peter believes that he has become heroic enough and everyone's talking about it (I feel like the movie did something like this with the school newscast or something, but imagine if it were being reported by whatever hybrid between the Daily Bugle and Cable News would look like). Then, when word gets out that Spider-Man caused the ferry incident, everyone (media included) turns on him, which would 'cause even more soul searching. Also, the D.C. incident inspires Flash's fanboy appreciation of Spider-Man, and the ferry incident doesn't shake him off because "hey, he couldn't have known what would happen, and every single video of him on youtube has him helping people. He made a mistake, but that doesn't mean he's bad, right?"


Quote: Michael Keaton as the Vulture was surprisingly good. He was cold, menacing, has good motivations. I was surprised to see him as the father of Liz Allen... It worked very well, though, because...it gives him a great motivation with family that makes us truly understand what he's going through. His backstory with being screwed over by higher authorities and Stark, and his profession as a scavenger, helps very much as well.

Part of the reason while Keaton was the best thing in this movie while simultaneously also feeling wasted was because every encounter between him and Peter before Homecoming was them behind masks (they're just obstacles to each other, not people).

Here are a number of things I would have done differently:

1. Peter Parker. My take on the character for this film would be a sort of deconstrustion of the Webb Series Peter Parker, he's still kinda self-absorbed and arrogant, wondering why the world seems to treat him as it's chew toy (I actually like this more than I thought, since it would be a bigger, less obvious homage to Ferris Buller). He also kinda took the wrong lesson from Uncle Ben's death. To him, "great power/responsibility" is him trying to use his powers anyway he can and profit off of them somehow in a non-descript way. To Peter, joining the Avengers is the fastest way to setting him and May for life.

2. Ned Leeds. In addition to providing comic relief, he's also the guy who films youtube videos of Spider-Man (referencing how he's a photographer in the comics), and he monetizes those videos because he knows they'll make a lot, causing a 60/40 profit split favoring Peter (because it was his idea and Ned is well off enough that he doesn't even need the money). Of course, Peter and Ned are friends the same way Ferris Buller are friends (kinda one-sided). Things do kinda deteriorate throughout the film though, the starting point of this being when Ned's recording drone (which was Ned's idea that he paid for, btw), is destroyed in that bank robbery with the Fake Avengers.

3. Vulture. Peter and Adrian, if not immediately knowing who each other is, would definitely meet earlier in the film, him and Liz actually dating (or maybe Peter and her do homework together). She invites him for dinner, he offhandedly mentions the "Stark Internship," and Toomes goes on a less-hand-showing but still passionate speech about how Stark has never had to "really" work a day in his life, and how his actions don't do anything to protect the little guy. Peter asks isn't it important that Stark still manages to save people still a god thing, only for Toomes to snide that Peter "doesn't understand how the world works (this would be a repeated line throughout the film.). Basically, this is a dark mirror of the dinner scene between Peter and Otto Octavius from Spider-Man 2.

4. Iron Man. Still a limited role appearance but his first appearance now takes place after the equivalent of the D.C. scene (which happens much earlier), which consists of him telling Peter to watch himself, because people might come to get him to sign the Sokovia Accords, to which Peter thinks is great, because it get him closer to being an official Avenger, only for Tony to tell him "you don't know how the world works." This scene also ends with Peter finding out Vulture is Toomes.

5. Big Gamble. After getting chewed out by Stark and "becoming a hero," Peter is agitated because, hey, he's a smart guy and just wants to provide for his Aunt May, dammit. At this point, Peter and Ned are on thin ice, and Peter actually considers going Vulture in order to make a big profit (which he does). Ned decides to get his second, newly acquired drone to figure out where Peter is going. This leads to the drone being discovered by the Tinkerer, Ned realizing he has nowhere to hide (in hindsight, trying to hide at the Statue of Liberty wasn't a great idea), aerial fight that ends up on a boat (Spider-Man manages to damage a wing and get Vulture to retreat before they get to the Island), but Peter,  and damaged alien tech. Boat scene, Stark comes in to save Peter's ass, manages to make Ned's tech untraceable, but Stark takes away Peters suit, BANS him from being an Avenger, and Ned and Peter's relationship is shattered. Oh, and Stark remotely accessed Peter's suit so that May learns everything, too.

6. Act Three. Peter's social and career life is pretty much over. May and Peter have a talk about why Peter did what he did (MAy's money troubles), only for May to tell him what Uncle Ben really would have wanted from Peter, and hat he needs to take things slow and understand how the world works. After school on Homecoming Day, Toomes actually comes and helps Peter get prepared to take Liz to the dance (he's figured out who Peter is, so basically he's kidnapped Peter to show Liz a good time). From there, the movie basically proceeds as normal, only after Vulture drops Peter and Liz off and gives Peter his ultimatum, we actually do flashback to when Uncle Ben was shot (it was over something trivial like in the Amazing series which Peter witnesses, but it was an accidental murder as was revealed in Spider-Man 3). Now, when Peter's trapped under the rubble, he's confronted with all the bad things he's done through the movie, and he rises above them when  he lifts the building up (so now that moment actually means so much).  And when he turns down Tony, he has become more responsible and decides to take things easier, smaller. Life moves pretty fast, but if you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.

7. Pepper Potts. Now, I did spoil myself a little before seeing the movie, so I knew Pepper was going to be in the movie and Tony was going to propose to her, but they way I read it, I thought she as part of the press conference crowd and Tony singled her out, and his asking Happy for the ring was him deciding to do something spontaneous and in the moment. We don't actually see him doing it, so it leaves the question of whether he's successful in winning her back.

So there's what I would have done differently, and I hope I havn't upset anyone with a borderline unlikable Peter Parker (hey at least the movie would acknowledge he's a jerk. Kinda like how the first Iron Man knew Tony was a jerk pre-shrapnel). Wink
Reply
Great ideas Nic, I completely agree.
Reply
(07-17-2017, 04:32 AM)Masirimso17 Wrote: Great ideas Nic, I completely agree.

Thanks. Other things I forgot to mention (as spoiler-free as possible) is that the film *DOES*bring up the Accords, but it's either as background noise (as a history lesson Peter's not really paying attention), or as a joke (like hanging a lampshade on why does the school still show trailer-moment Captain America PSAs when he's a global fugitive?).

As for the Vulture,

 nearly every other Spider-Man film at least sets up a personal dynamic between Peter and his enemies...except for The Rhino.





Now, when the film just shows Peter on his own or Adrian on his own, it's enjoyable,but when they come face to face? Before Act Three, they're just obstacles for each other, not people.
Reply

Rhino was supposed to be just an obstacle and he worked. Anyway, I think Vulture works very well as just an obstacle, always causing trouble for Spidey's life, while he tries to balance it out. He still works great as a villain, and his connection with Spidey works very well.
Reply

I have an outrageous, highly controversial take on the movie: I quite enjoyed it.

I do think that Watts' and Feige's comments about how this would be a John Hughes-esque movie were pretty overblown - apart from the obvious reference or two, and despite the charmingly small scale of the action and stakes (even the events of Ant-Man could have been hugely consequential had the Pym tech gotten into HYDRA hands), this really didn't feel John Hughes-ish to me at all. (What, Peter's suit's AI couldn't have been voiced by and/or named after a Hughes actress/character?) In fact, I get far more of a Hughes vibe from ASM1, with its great Peter-Gwen relationship based on awkward flirtation and even (gasp!) family class differences, and teenage angst. The Homecoming high school stuff felt more like a TV sitcom - not a bad thing per se, it's just the whole "Hughes-ian flavor" seems like false advertising. Maybe a more honest promoting of a "Saved by the Bell flavor" didn't test as well?

My favorite moment, though, was

Pepper's return - I was totally surprised and unreasonably happy to see that she and Tony, two fictional people, were back together. It makes complete sense that they'd have been on pause during Civil War, so that Tony'd be at his lowest, but I'm glad they worked things out (again). And I also had started to think the suit and press conference offer was a test, so the reveal that it wasn't was damned funny also.

So, I liked it. Safe, lightweight, and entirely enjoyable: B+. My personal Spider-ranking:
1. ASM1
2. Tie: SM:H and SM2
[...]

4. ASM2
5. SM1
6. SM3

SM2 is almost certainly a better movie than SM:H, but though I'd have to rewatch SM2 to be sure, I'm pretty sure I prefer SM:H. Raimi's MJ at her best pales next to ASM1 Gwen, and I even prefer ASM1's Connors to Doc Ock, even if the former was in large part a ripoff of the latter. And for all SM2's very real strengths, I don't like SM1 or SM3 much at all, which sours things. Anyhow, a strong start, and I look forward to more depth next time around. (We'll just all pretend that recruiting a minor to be a child soldier isn't a real-world war crime, yeah?)
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)