Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456
Results 76 to 89 of 89
  1. #76

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SpiderClops View Post
    So you wanted for him to play a less important role than he did?
    Being Iron Man's caddy is low as they go in terms of importance. And in any case, Spider-Man being in the film gives him more importance than poor Hawkeye.

    Seeing that the earth parts were the less interesting and overall less important parts where the heroes didn't actually get to do much compared to the space heroes.
    The space heroes failed to stop Thanos. The earth heroes failed to stop Thanos. Don't see how one is more important than the other in IW.

    And he already interacted with many phase-1 heroes in Civil War. He actually got to interact with more heroes like Strange and GotG instead.
    Having Dr. Strange dismiss him as Tony's ward and the Guardians threaten to kill him and again use him as hostage to threaten Stark isn't interaction. Everything is centered on Tony's relation to Peter, and not Spider-Man as an independent agent and actor.

    Quote Originally Posted by Prof. Warren View Post
    I'm sure at the end of the day, Watts was perfectly happy to actually have Iron Man in Homecoming.
    Considering how much he had to redo to make his take on Spider-Man work in Homecoming, and him saying Peter doesn't have Spider-Sense and Feige and the Russos contradicting him hard...I don't think his actions show that to be the case.

    Quote Originally Posted by Prof. Warren View Post
    Actively looking to push Peter away from a character that he already has a relationship with in the midst of an already busy storyline just for the sake of...what, exactly?
    Allowing Peter to actually interact, on his own, outside his connection with Stark with the Phase 1 and Phase 2 people before some of them most likely kick the bucket in Endgame. I'd rather Spider-Man have limited screentime or you know no-screentime than bad screentime. I'd rather see Spider-Man in the cool one-scene scene-stealing cameo than him having endless scenes kowtowing to Iron Man.

    Inspired by the Bechdel Test, can we say that Peter has a conversation with another superhero that doesn't start with him alluding to Stark? .No we can't. Every dialogue and scenario has Peter in connection with Stark. In the airport battle, when Peter meets Cap, Peter tells Cap that Stark told him he's dangerous. He tells Falcon and Winter Soldier that he's doing this to impress Tony Stark. Then in Infinity War, Dr. Strange calls Peter Tony's ward and they don't exchange any real dialogue aside from that cheap gag about Doctor Strange being the made-up name. The Guardians treat Peter as a hostage to point a gun at during that tense stand-off.

    There was way more thought, heart, and humor seeing Thor bump into the Guardians, or when Thor met Dr. Strange in Ragnarok, or when Thor introduced Rocket and Groot at the end to Steve Rogers. We didn't see a percent of that in Spidey's interactions with everyone else.

  2. #77
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    6,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Being Iron Man's caddy is low as they go in terms of importance. And in any case, Spider-Man being in the film gives him more importance than poor Hawkeye.
    He isn't Iron Man's caddy. You clearly have, for whatever reason, some deep, pathological hang up when it comes to Tony and Peter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Allowing Peter to actually interact, on his own, outside his connection with Stark with the Phase 1 and Phase 2 people before some of them most likely kick the bucket in Endgame. I'd rather Spider-Man have limited screentime or you know no-screentime than bad screentime. I'd rather see Spider-Man in the cool one-scene scene-stealing cameo than him having endless scenes kowtowing to Iron Man.
    Again, your take on their relationship is so warped as to be invalid.

    If you have such an issue that you'd rather have Spider-Man not even be in the movie rather than share screentime with Tony, I think the problem lies with you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Inspired by the Bechdel Test, can we say that Peter has a conversation with another superhero that doesn't start with him alluding to Stark? .No we can't. Every dialogue and scenario has Peter in connection with Stark. In the airport battle, when Peter meets Cap, Peter tells Cap that Stark told him he's dangerous. He tells Falcon and Winter Soldier that he's doing this to impress Tony Stark. Then in Infinity War, Dr. Strange calls Peter Tony's ward and they don't exchange any real dialogue aside from that cheap gag about Doctor Strange being the made-up name. The Guardians treat Peter as a hostage to point a gun at during that tense stand-off.
    Given that Tony is the common ground between Peter and these other heroes, with whom he has limited interactions with to begin with, it makes sense that Tony's name would come up in mixed company.

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    There was way more thought, heart, and humor seeing Thor bump into the Guardians, or when Thor met Dr. Strange in Ragnarok, or when Thor introduced Rocket and Groot at the end to Steve Rogers. We didn't see a percent of that in Spidey's interactions with everyone else.
    In your personal opinion, which as we've established, is a bit less than rational on this count.

    I'm sure every viewer has their own perspective on what scenes in IW had more thought, heart and humor than others.

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Considering how much he had to redo to make his take on Spider-Man work in Homecoming, and him saying Peter doesn't have Spider-Sense and Feige and the Russos contradicting him hard...I don't think his actions show that to be the case.
    Do you know how many drafts screenplays go through before shooting begins? On every movie, not just Homecoming? It's a lot.

    And as for Spider-Sense, Watts never said that Peter didn't have Spider-Sense, just that he was downplaying it in his film. Spider-Sense is an ability that comes and goes in the comics whenever it suits the story so it's not out of bounds for Watts to choose not emphasize it in his film. Feige and Russo didn't contradict him hard on this, they just confirmed that, yes, Peter still has his Spider-Sense, even if it isn't prominently featured in Homecoming.

  3. #78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Prof. Warren View Post
    If you have such an issue that you'd rather have Spider-Man not even be in the movie rather than share screentime with Tony, I think the problem lies with you.
    The point of Spider-Man being in the shared universe was that he'd bounce off and interact with different characters. Had Homecoming gone with Fury, that would have been a step in that direction. But after three films of seeing just the Peter and Tony story, Homecoming's entire emotional center having Tony overwrite uncle Ben, having Peter get stuff handed down to him by Stark, and that silly attempt by fans to retcon that dumb kid in Iron Man 2 into being little Peter (That Kevin Feige had to nix because of rights issues...Sony would go "Where's my money, honey?" on them officially inserting Spider-Man into IM-2 because Disney/Marvel has to shell out cash for every live action appearance of Spider-Man) which Tom Holland got roped into...it gets too much.

    People wanted Marvel Team-Up, and all we got was a version of Civil War where Spider-Man didn't turn on Iron Man...so as a consumer, I didn't think I got what was promised.

    Given that Tony is the common ground between Peter and these other heroes, with whom he has limited interactions with to begin with, it makes sense that Tony's name would come up in mixed company.
    So you admit that Peter's not a free agent and independent actor when interacting with other heroes. In the comics that's always been the case in 616 or Ultimate.

    My feeling is that Spider-Man being in the MCU wasn' executed well, and seeing him entirely via Iron Man is reductive and disrespectful to the character.

    And its not just me. Patrick H. Willems, the video blogger analyst/critic says so as well: ''There were several times during Spider-Verse when I almost screamed with joy at what was happening. I can’t believe this movie exists and I’m so so so happy it does...it’s really nice to finally see a superhero movie where the main character isn’t a billionaire or royalty or government agent...I like Homecoming but it’s basically a movie about a guy trying to get promoted by his billionaire boss/mentor...My Spider-Man: Homecoming rewrite: remove all the Tony Stark and high-tech suit stuff. Just make it about Peter dealing with his responsibilities and not so much about trying to impress his billionaire boss."
    https://twitter.com/search?q=%22%40p...22+billionaire

  4. #79
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    6,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    The point of Spider-Man being in the shared universe was that he'd bounce off and interact with different characters. Had Homecoming gone with Fury, that would have been a step in that direction. But after three films of seeing just the Peter and Tony story, Homecoming's entire emotional center having Tony overwrite uncle Ben, having Peter get stuff handed down to him by Stark, and that silly attempt by fans to retcon that dumb kid in Iron Man 2 into being little Peter (That Kevin Feige had to nix because of rights issues...Sony would go "Where's my money, honey?" on them officially inserting Spider-Man into IM-2 because Disney/Marvel has to shell out cash for every live action appearance of Spider-Man) which Tom Holland got roped into...it gets too much.
    Peter has bounced off and interacted with different characters.

    Tony hasn't overwritten Uncle Ben. He's a very different figure in Peter's life than Ben.

    Nothing was "handed down" to Peter. It was made specifically for him. It's not Tony's hand me downs.

    If anyone tried to retcon the kid in IM2 into Peter, that just speaks to the myriad of dumb theories that clutter the internet.

    Feige didn't nix that because of "rights issues," he nixed it because it's stupid. Only an idiot would think the kid in IM 2 was supposed to be Peter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    People wanted Marvel Team-Up, and all we got was a version of Civil War where Spider-Man didn't turn on Iron Man...so as a consumer, I didn't think I got what was promised.
    As a consumer, your expectations were unreasonable. The comic Civil War was never going to be the comic Civil War anymore than Winter Solider or any other comic plotline were adapted verbatim to film. A comic-accurate CW isn't something that anyone promised to you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    So you admit that Peter's not a free agent and independent actor when interacting with other heroes. In the comics that's always been the case in 616 or Ultimate.
    I admit that the MCU puts Spider-Man in the company of heroes that he's never shared space with on screen.

    He's obviously not going to be the same loner that he is in the comics. That would be a huge waste of collaborating with Sony.

    Also, the movies have their own continuity. Having Spider-Man with the rest of the MCU - especially joining it well into its inception - is naturally going to lead to storylines and relationships playing out in a different way than the comics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    My feeling is that Spider-Man being in the MCU wasn' executed well, and seeing him entirely via Iron Man is reductive and disrespectful to the character.
    Your feelings aside, it isn't. Not reductive. Not disrespectful.

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    And its not just me. Patrick H. Willems, the video blogger analyst/critic says so as well: ''There were several times during Spider-Verse when I almost screamed with joy at what was happening. I can’t believe this movie exists and I’m so so so happy it does...it’s really nice to finally see a superhero movie where the main character isn’t a billionaire or royalty or government agent...I like Homecoming but it’s basically a movie about a guy trying to get promoted by his billionaire boss/mentor...My Spider-Man: Homecoming rewrite: remove all the Tony Stark and high-tech suit stuff. Just make it about Peter dealing with his responsibilities and not so much about trying to impress his billionaire boss."
    https://twitter.com/search?q=%22%40p...22+billionaire
    Let's be honest. When you have to turn to a video blogger to back your opinion up, you've already lost.

  5. #80
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Especially when it's so easy to find another video blogger who has the exact opposite opinion.
    I really wish people stop trying to use such things as if they're automatic "I win the argument" cards, because am I supposed to care about this person's opinion because they can say words into a camera? What makes them the supreme authority whose word has more merit than anyone else's?

  6. #81
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    37,246

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Prof. Warren View Post
    And as for Spider-Sense, Watts never said that Peter didn't have Spider-Sense, just that he was downplaying it in his film. Spider-Sense is an ability that comes and goes in the comics whenever it suits the story so it's not out of bounds for Watts to choose not emphasize it in his film. Feige and Russo didn't contradict him hard on this, they just confirmed that, yes, Peter still has his Spider-Sense, even if it isn't prominently featured in Homecoming.
    Well, I think they have conflicting takes on it.

    I don't think Watts' Spider-Man really has Spider-Sense otherwise the villains getting the drop on him would not have been as common as he did, but it's a lot more clearer if you look with the Russo's that Spider-Sense is actually a thing.

    I also think the Russo's just in general do a better job of displaying Spider-Man's abilities in action then Watts does.
    Quote Originally Posted by Prof. Warren View Post
    Tony hasn't overwritten Uncle Ben. He's a very different figure in Peter's life than Ben.
    Without Ben actually being mentioned at all and with how Tony has been handled in Peter's life it does feel like Tony is more important then Uncle Ben is to MCU Spider-Man at the moment.

    If they kill Tony off and stop mentioning him in Spider-Man movies, then it will be a different story.
    Nothing was "handed down" to Peter. It was made specifically for him. It's not Tony's hand me downs.
    So maybe a "Tony Stark giveaway" ?
    I admit that the MCU puts Spider-Man in the company of heroes that he's never shared space with on screen.

    He's obviously not going to be the same loner that he is in the comics. That would be a huge waste of collaborating with Sony.

    Also, the movies have their own continuity. Having Spider-Man with the rest of the MCU - especially joining it well into its inception - is naturally going to lead to storylines and relationships playing out in a different way than the comics.
    I think they probably could have still made him the independent loner he is often portrayed as while still mining the shared universe aspect. As it stands I don't think Holland's Spidey is a strong a depiction of Spider-Man in a shared universe as it could be, especially compared to the more standalone Spidey's.

    I look at Black Panther and I see a stronger and more balanced solo film then I think Homecoming is, since it doesn't have another major MCU hero playing a focal role and allows the protagonist and his world to come out more naturally while still acknowledging the shared universe aspect.

  7. #82
    Astonishing Member theoneandonly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    3,696

    Default

    man this thread is starting to turn into a Tony Stark hate fest. granted he has a grating personally and isn't everybody's cup of tea still.....
    The Self is the only existing reality

  8. #83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by theoneandonly View Post
    man this thread is starting to turn into a Tony Stark hate fest. granted he has a grating personally and isn't everybody's cup of tea still.....
    No one would have issues if Peter has doubts and criticism and goes, "Say...Mr. Stark created those weapons all those decades, and then Ultron and that means he killed about tens and thousands of Uncle Bens...but he's trying to do the right thing, and I respect him for that, and hey at least I learned my lesson at 15 rather than 40." There are good in character reasons for Peter to relate to, and align himself with Tony. He sees himself in the flawed and constantly screwing up Tony Stark more than Cap, Thor, and the Hulk. I can get that. But none of that is given in the movies...and Peter basically acts as if Tony is some kind of great guy, and the only explanation for that is brand politics.

  9. #84
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Because Tony is a great guy, and it only makes sense for Peter to think that, he's a person who puts his life on the line and has saved the world multiple times, then comes and offers Peter the opportunity of a lifetime.
    Peter has no reason to care Tony used to make weapons for the military, and there's no indication that Tony being involved with the creation of Ultron is common knowledge, you can keep saying brand politics but so far there is no in-universe reason for Peter to think of Tony as anything other the cool billionaire superhero who has saved multiple lives

  10. #85

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dicer View Post
    ...there's no indication that Tony being involved with the creation of Ultron is common knowledge,
    That lady who accosts Tony at the start of Civil War will have words with thee.

  11. #86
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    6,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I look at Black Panther and I see a stronger and more balanced solo film then I think Homecoming is, since it doesn't have another major MCU hero playing a focal role and allows the protagonist and his world to come out more naturally while still acknowledging the shared universe aspect.
    You're comparing apples and oranges.

    Black Panther was the first solo movie for T'Challa. It fell on that movie to establish everything about the character, his origin, and his world.

    Spider-Man: Homecoming may be the first movie in the MCU with Spider-Man but in reality, it was the sixth film starring the character within a fifteen year period, the second reboot of the franchise, and it starred the third actor to portray Peter Parker. While I'm sure everyone involved in the MCU would have loved to have been the first to bring Spider-Man to the screen, the reality is they weren't. The classic iconography of Spider-Man had already been established. And been done so very well. Two times over, in fact.

    Retreading anything that had been in the Raimi or Webb films would have been an enormous waste of time, not just creatively, but on a commercial level as well.

    On top of that, the MCU was deep into its own continuity by the time their arrangement with Sony allowed Spidey to enter that world. So characters were well established and larger storylines were already in play. Bringing Spider-Man into that world at that point meany that there was going to be changes from the continuity of the comics. Peter had to be woven into an existing, complex continuity rather than be part of it from the start.

    And on a third point, while Black Panther is always guaranteed to be a part of the MCU, Spider-Man isn't. While the deal with Sony seems very amicable and mutually beneficial, there's no absolute guarantee it will last forever so it would be a mistake to not take full advantage of Spider-Man's inclusion in this larger universe while the deal is in place. And it wouldn't just be a mistake creatively, because a literal whole new world has opened up for the character on screen for the first time ever, it would be a mistake on a business level. Sony isn't going to agree to let Marvel bring Spider-Man into their cinematic universe only to have Marvel keep Spider-Man isolated in his own corner. If that's what these movies were going to be under Marvel, Sony would have just kept the character under their own umbrella. Sharing Spider-Man with Marvel means putting Spider-Man squarely in the MCU, whether it be through having Tony in Homecoming, Nick Fury in Far From Home, or whatever other MCU character is featured in the next film.

    So, the reality behind the Black Panther movies and the MCU Spider-Man films are very different.

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    No one would have issues if Peter has doubts and criticism and goes, "Say...Mr. Stark created those weapons all those decades, and then Ultron and that means he killed about tens and thousands of Uncle Bens...but he's trying to do the right thing, and I respect him for that, and hey at least I learned my lesson at 15 rather than 40." There are good in character reasons for Peter to relate to, and align himself with Tony. He sees himself in the flawed and constantly screwing up Tony Stark more than Cap, Thor, and the Hulk. I can get that. But none of that is given in the movies...and Peter basically acts as if Tony is some kind of great guy, and the only explanation for that is brand politics.
    "Brand politics" is a meaningless phrase in this context. I mean, it literally means nothing. If you want to say "corporate branding" or "product branding"...maybe that would be a little bit more accurate but it's still an empty, junk assertion.

    The simple truth is that Peter likes Tony in the movies because Tony is likable in the movies. There's no nefarious corporate shenanigans behind it.

    Protagonists in films tend to be likable, even when all their actions aren't entirely sympathetic. You don't have characters carrying a franchise over the course of multiple films who the audience isn't quite sure how they feel about. Tony may have made a few slip-ups in the course of the MCU but no one - at least no one the audience completely sides with - sees him as a bad guy.

    And this is just as true in the comics in that other characters don't spend all their time reminding Tony of all the crap he's been responsible for. Which, in the comics, would be much more justifiable.

    They don't do this because it's nothing to disproportionately dwell on. Constantly bringing up old baggage only gets in the way of telling new stories.
    Last edited by Prof. Warren; 03-17-2019 at 09:40 AM.

  12. #87
    Fantastic Member Jman27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    That lady who accosts Tony at the start of Civil War will have words with thee.
    She just blame him for the death of her son. No mentioning of Ultron in her statement.but overall looking at all of these post I really don’t see how Marvel would’ve change Spiderman in the mcu since Marvel Studios and Sony goal was to introduce him in Civil War. And during Civil War it was the whole skovia issue so remembering the movie the government wants to sanction the avengers only. Cap had to help stop Zemo and form his team then Iron man recruits Spiderman to help him. If the situation was reversed and Cap recruits Spiderman then the title of this thread will then be is Spiderman Caps sidekick? If not that at best he will be a cameo like he somehow sees the news that cap and iron man had a fight in Germany but he won’t have any interactions with them. Which defeats the whole purpose of Marvel and Sony sharing the character also it will be basically like the Netflix uniform they live in the world but have no interactions.meaning he shouldn’t have a reason to be in infinity war or any real team up film since he was minding his own business. Also when it was announced that spiderman will be in the mcu I’m pretty sure the main idea was for him to work with other heroes. It’s like the only reasons why people love the avengers and the mcu is because of the interactions and relationships.

  13. #88
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    37,246

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Prof. Warren View Post
    Black Panther was the first solo movie for T'Challa. It fell on that movie to establish everything about the character, his origin, and his world.
    As any solo movie should.
    Spider-Man: Homecoming may be the first movie in the MCU with Spider-Man but in reality, it was the sixth film starring the character within a fifteen year period, the second reboot of the franchise, and it starred the third actor to portray Peter Parker. While I'm sure everyone involved in the MCU would have loved to have been the first to bring Spider-Man to the screen, the reality is they weren't. The classic iconography of Spider-Man had already been established. And been done so very well. Two times over, in fact.

    Retreading anything that had been in the Raimi or Webb films would have been an enormous waste of time, not just creatively, but on a commercial level as well.

    On top of that, the MCU was deep into its own continuity by the time their arrangement with Sony allowed Spidey to enter that world. So characters were well established and larger storylines were already in play. Bringing Spider-Man into that world at that point meany that there was going to be changes from the continuity of the comics. Peter had to be woven into an existing, complex continuity rather than be part of it from the start.

    And on a third point, while Black Panther is always guaranteed to be a part of the MCU, Spider-Man isn't. While the deal with Sony seems very amicable and mutually beneficial, there's no absolute guarantee it will last forever so it would be a mistake to not take full advantage of Spider-Man's inclusion in this larger universe while the deal is in place. And it wouldn't just be a mistake creatively, because a literal whole new world has opened up for the character on screen for the first time ever, it would be a mistake on a business level. Sony isn't going to agree to let Marvel bring Spider-Man into their cinematic universe only to have Marvel keep Spider-Man isolated in his own corner. If that's what these movies were going to be under Marvel, Sony would have just kept the character under their own umbrella. Sharing Spider-Man with Marvel means putting Spider-Man squarely in the MCU, whether it be through having Tony in Homecoming, Nick Fury in Far From Home, or whatever other MCU character is featured in the next film.

    So, the reality behind the Black Panther movies and the MCU Spider-Man films are very different.
    I get the differences going into the approach of both characters, especially in Spidey's case because of how many other films he had been in prior, but I don't think that necessarily should have prevented them from being able to establish a more standalone and independent Spider-Man in the MCU which is more character-accurate.

    I feel like that's one thing that works against Homecoming compared to past Spider-Man movies.

  14. #89
    Extraordinary Member WebLurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    5,144

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by theoneandonly View Post
    man this thread is starting to turn into a Tony Stark hate fest. granted he has a grating personally and isn't everybody's cup of tea still.....
    Some of us have zero problems with how the movies handled the characters. We just don't have the need to talk about it that much, I guess?
    Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
    X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
    (All-New Wolverine #4)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •