'Spider-Man' Sequel Filming Start Date Revealed; Jon Watts Confirmed To Return

[Prof. Warren]

New isn't always innovative.

And doing the same old thing is not productive.

There's five previous, non-MCU Spider-Man films that are there to view anytime anyone wants to. They're not going anywhere. Which is why repeating what they did isn't a smart way to go for the MCU.

As a longtime Spidey fan, I like the freshness of the MCU Spidey and the fact that it synthesizes many aspects of the comics while still doing its own thing.

Spider-Man movies are going to continue to be made for a long, long time. Past the point where Tom Holland hangs up his webs, maybe past the point where the MCU is still an ongoing thing, or maybe simply past the point where Sony collaborates with Marvel.

Point being, the current Spidey era is not the final stop for Spidey on screen. As with comic runs, you can hop off if this isn't to your taste and come back when a new team is producing another set of Spidey films.

[Arsenal]

Hopefully there will be a lab that Tony set aside for Peter where he can work on new costumes and gadgets in private.

In the trailer there's a shot of Peter messing around with a hologram of one of Iron Spider gauntlet things on his arm so maybe there will be some scenes of him playing around his new suit designs before leaving for Europe.

[SpiderClops]

[video=youtube;VktWPESnmTQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=40&v=VktWPESnmTQ[video]

MCU is 616? Good thing it's likely Beck's lying because BOY will there be confusion with hardcore comic fans

Not really. There can be multiple multiverses. That's the nerdy answer.

"I understood that reference!" True answer.

[Zeitgeist]

MCU is 616? Good thing it's likely Beck's lying because BOY will there be confusion with hardcore comic fans

Because hardcore comic fans are easy to confuse? Haha

If it's true, it's easy: MCU 616 =/= comic 616

[Revolutionary_Jack]

As for Ben, he's been alluded to as has Peter's motivating sense of guilt in relation to him and I think that's enough.

He hasn't been mentioned once in the films. I don't know what you mean by "alluded" there. That usually means direct references either verbal or visual. So far we haven't got anything.

Ben was so central to Raimi's and Webb's films that I think it's ok to not pound on that aspect as hard for a third go-round.

Ben was central to those movies for the same reason Spider-Man having spider-powers was central. It's an essential part of his character and story. There's a middle ground between going overboard and not mentioning it at all. Neither extreme is supportable. Especially since it amounts to subtracting Ben in favor of Iron Man and so on. In Spider-Man's solo movies, a conversation, a picture on the mantle, or some such thing, or even a quick montage and so on, should be enough to deal with that.

[Miles To Go]

Not really. There can be multiple multiverses. That's the nerdy answer..

That's what DC are doing.

[Derek Metaltron]

Not really. There can be multiple multiverses. That's the nerdy answer.

"I understood that reference!" True answer.

All of fiction (Marvel, DC, Star Wars, Star Trek etc) and everything else exists in what some call the Omniverse, which is comprised of infinite Multiverses. So it’s possible Marvel could say that the Comics Multiverse and the Cinematic Multiverse exist alongside each other, rather than the core MCU simply being Earth 199999 in the Comics Multiverse.

In an unrelated note, who wants to take a bet on the MCU Dmitri Smerdyakov/Chameleon being the missing fourth Skrull from Captain Marvel? Makes a lot of sense to me.

[Prof. Warren]

He hasn't been mentioned once in the films. I don't know what you mean by "alluded" there. That usually means direct references either verbal or visual. So far we haven't got anything.

In Civil War, Peter talks about how he learned that he has to use his powers for good and if he doesn't people get hurt, or words to that effect. It's clear what he's talking about.

Ben was central to those movies for the same reason Spider-Man having spider-powers was central. It's an essential part of his character and story. There's a middle ground between going overboard and not mentioning it at all. Neither extreme is supportable.

But it is supportable. Does every single Spider-Man comic reference Uncle Ben? No.

You can tell many, many Spider-Man stories without uttering a peep about Uncle Ben.

And movie audiences are not so dense that they need this element underlined and explained in every single movie any more than comic audiences need it in every single comic.

Especially since it amounts to subtracting Ben in favor of Iron Man and so on.

Your problem is that you think Tony is replacing Ben and he isn't. Peter has had many important male figures in the comics. They aren't all substitutes for Ben.

Tom Holland's Peter already had Ben. He learned the same lesson from him that Maguire and Garfield's Peters did. There could be a whole prequel film prior to Homecoming that showed that but we've already seen that story play out twice on screen. And recently at that.

In Spider-Man's solo movies, a conversation, a picture on the mantle, or some such thing, or even a quick montage and so on, should be enough to deal with that.

Unnecessary. Most audiences don't need to be spoon fed this information for the umpteenth time.

For what's it's worth, Ben's initials will be on Peter's suitcase in Far From Home so he'll be acknowledged in that manner at least.

[Frontier]

Your problem is that you think Tony is replacing Ben and he isn't. Peter has had many important male figures in the comics. They aren't all substitutes for Ben.

Granted, I don't think he's ever had a male figure primed as important and involved as Iron Man is in the MCU, at least at that point in his career.

Tom Holland's Peter already had Ben. He learned the same lesson from him that Maguire and Garfield's Peters did. There could be a whole prequel film prior to Homecoming that showed that but we've already seen that story play out twice on screen. And recently at that.

I'm probably one of the five people who wondered what happened just see how they would frame Holland's letting the burglar go.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

In Civil War, Peter talks about how he learned that he has to use his powers for good and if he doesn't people get hurt, or words to that effect. It's clear what he's talking about.

For his cameo in that film yes. Not so for his own individual films.

Does every single Spider-Man comic reference Uncle Ben?

In major stories yes, and on average, you can say every 10 issues, every five issues, or so references, or mentions Ben in some way or form. This was true even in the earliest comics, where the Lee-Ditko era didn't go on about "responsibility" and so on but Ben was mentioned multiple times. And definitely in the M-P saga, and he also figured in ASM#50 ("Spider-Man No More") where Spider-Man saving a civilian who resembles Ben makes him get his groove back.

Unnecessary. Most audiences don't need to be spoon fed this information for the umpteenth time.

Uncle Ben's importance isn't just for Peter's origins, it's a major emotional element of the stories. It's like doing Hamlet without mentioning the ghost. The entire relationship between May and Peter is centered on Ben Parker, his life and his death. That's what "The Conversation" (ASM #38 V.2) was all about, it's what "The Gift" (ASM #400) was about. Are you seriously arguing that Peter Parker would work if May Parker was just a lifelong single mother who was unmarried and so on?

Your problem is that you think Tony is replacing Ben and he isn't.

That literally happens in Homecoming. The lifting machinery scene from the M-P Saga is centered on Tony going "If you're nothing without the suit" on him. In the comics Peter thinks of Uncle Ben and Aunt May in that moment. Tony Stark literally replaced Uncle Ben in Homecoming in that moment. That is objective. You can't gainsay that.

There could be a whole prequel film prior to Homecoming that showed that...

I am not asking for a prequel. I am asking for Ben to be discussed, mentioned and acknowledged. ITSV did the origin in a short montage and mentioned Ben Parker there. That's all that was needed.

Granted, I don't think he's ever had a male figure primed as important and involved as Iron Man is in the MCU, at least at that point in his career.

No he didn't. Tom Holland's Peter is Iron Man's sidekick and the trailer for FFH says that he's seen as Iron Man's legacy character in the MCU. Spider-Man was the original non-sidekick solo hero. Now that's gone.

I'm probably one of the five people who wondered what happened just see how they would frame Holland's letting the burglar go.

Yeah. I mean you can't skip the hard part because actors sign up to play the character and not the brand version that fans make up on tumblr or promos and so on. You don't have to show the origin again or do a full prequel but you absolutely do have to mention Ben and his role as this important figure in Peter's life, and far more important than any superhero sugar daddy can ever be.

[Prof. Warren]

For his cameo in that film yes. Not so for his own individual films.

It counts as part of his MCU storyline.

Characters in the MCU don't just have their stories play out in their own individual films.

Their narratives are spread out over other franchises.

In major stories yes, and on average, you can say every 10 issues, every five issues, or so references, or mentions Ben in some way or form. This was true even in the earliest comics, where the Lee-Ditko era didn't go on about "responsibility" and so on but Ben was mentioned multiple times. And definitely in the M-P saga, and he also figured in ASM#50 ("Spider-Man No More") where Spider-Man saving a civilian who resembles Ben makes him get his groove back.

Issue #50...an anniversary issue very early in ASM's run.

Point being, Uncle Ben does not play a part in every important Spider-Man arc or issue. Not even close.

And as there's been seven Spider-Man films so far and Ben has been mentioned in five, on average he's doing fine.

Uncle Ben's importance isn't just for Peter's origins, it's a major emotional element of the stories. It's like doing Hamlet without mentioning the ghost.

Hamlet is one story with a beginning, middle and end.

If Hamlet's story went on without end for, what, 800 plus issues or whatever ASM is up to now - not counting the hundreds of satellite titles, guest appearances, appearances in a multitude of outside media, you might have a few times where the ghost isn't mentioned either.

Comparing an ongoing serialized narrative to a play is a terrible analogy.

The entire relationship between May and Peter is centered on Ben Parker, his life and his death. That's what "The Conversation" (ASM #38 V.2) was all about, it's what "The Gift" (ASM #400) was about. Are you seriously arguing that Peter Parker would work if May Parker was just a lifelong single mother who was unmarried and so on?

Who the fu*k is arguing that?

I'm not suggesting that Peter's origin be changed. I'm just saying we don't need it re-iterated every time out.

Every Spider-Man story doesn't have to have a reminder included that "By the way, in case you forgot, Peter feels really guilty about his Uncle Ben."

That literally happens in Homecoming. The lifting machinery scene from the M-P Saga is centered on Tony going "If you're nothing without the suit" on him. In the comics Peter thinks of Uncle Ben and Aunt May in that moment. Tony Stark literally replaced Uncle Ben in Homecoming in that moment. That is objective. You can't gainsay that.

The moment in the movie and the moment in the comics are two different things.

Yes, the movie visually alludes to the moment in "The Final Chapter" but it is telling a different story.

It isn't replacing Ben or May, it's just coming from a different emotional moment.

I am not asking for a prequel. I am asking for Ben to be discussed, mentioned and acknowledged. ITSV did the origin in a short montage and mentioned Ben Parker there. That's all that was needed.

Is Ben Parker your dad? You seem very attached to this imaginary person.

What you need seems to be much more than most people need in connection with this character.

No he didn't. Tom Holland's Peter is Iron Man's sidekick and the trailer for FFH says that he's seen as Iron Man's legacy character in the MCU. Spider-Man was the original non-sidekick solo hero. Now that's gone.

Peter is not Iron Man's sidekick. He was a friend and mentor. Not the same as "sidekick."

Yeah. I mean you can't skip the hard part because actors sign up to play the character and not the brand version that fans make up on tumblr or promos and so on. You don't have to show the origin again or do a full prequel but you absolutely do have to mention Ben and his role as this important figure in Peter's life, and far more important than any superhero sugar daddy can ever be.

You have a very weird, distorted perspective on Tony and Peter's relationship. What personal baggage you have is on you but Tony is not a "sugar daddy" to Peter.

Their relationship is not about Tony's money. If it were, Tony would move Peter and May out of Queens and into Avengers Tower or Stark Manor and give them a pampered lifestyle.

They're friends. I don't know if that's a hard concept to wrap your head around but you have two people who like and admire each other in their own ways.

And no, you really don't have to mention Ben to tell a Spider-Man story. You can assume that the reader or viewer already brings that knowledge with them and move on and tell a new story. It happens all the time.

[Frontier]

The moment in the movie and the moment in the comics are two different things.

Yes, the movie visually alludes to the moment in "The Final Chapter" but it is telling a different story.

It isn't replacing Ben or May, it's just coming from a different emotional moment.

I think in the context of what the moment is meant to represent it definitely replaces Ben and May (with Iron Man).

Peter is not Iron Man's sidekick. He was a friend and mentor. Not the same as "sidekick."

Most sidekicks are friends with their mentors, on-top of the obvious father figure connotations (which Peter and Tony still exhibit) .

You have a very weird, distorted perspective on Tony and Peter's relationship. What personal baggage you have is on you but Tony is not a "sugar daddy" to Peter.

I wouldn't go with "sugar daddy" even though Tony gives Peter a lot, way more then he usually gets as Spider-Man.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Their narratives are spread out over other franchises.

The way the MCU works or the way the shared universe of the comics goes is that the actual ongoing story contains the meat and bones of the character, his supporting cast, settings and personal interior story. In a big event story, those elements don't, as a rule, factor in unless it is tied to the overall plot. In Captain America Civil War, Peter was introduced in a flash, and in hasty way. There was no need to mention his origin and Uncle Ben there. But that doesn't mean that Homecoming gets a pass or is judged by those same standards. At the end of the day, while the MCU is a shared universe, it is experienced as a series of individual films and meant to be understood as a series of individual films. And given that Jon Watts changed and retconned elements of the Civil War fight for Homecoming, he brought this on himself.

Hamlet is one story with a beginning, middle and end.

The stuff with the ghost happens in the opening act and first scene. In a serialized story, it's all Act 2, or if we are using Elizabethan Five Act Structure, it's Acts 2-3 with 4-5 reserved only for alternate universes and What Ifs. The fact that Hamlet noticably ages between Acts 3 and 4, and comes back as an older character in the final bits makes it interestingly enough a good comparison since that's a highly serialized play all about delaying what is the logical endpoint of the story (Hamlet killing the Uncle) because Shakespeare likes the character, his supporting cast, and wants to stretch their interactions as much as he can before he can wrap it out.

I'm not suggesting that Peter's origin be changed. I'm just saying we don't need it re-iterated every time out.

Every Spider-Man story doesn't have to have a reminder included that "By the way, in case you forgot, Peter feels really guilty about his Uncle Ben."

You again missed my point. Ben Parker is important and crucial for the relationship between Peter and Aunt May. Without that, you can't do that relationship any amount of justice on screen. Ben's story isn't important just for the sake of origins unlike the death of Batman's parents, it's there as a constant reminder, driving force, and lingering issues between Peter and May. Ben and May Parker were the most selfless people that Peter knew and he repaid that by getting Ben killed and depriving May of the love-of-her-life. That kind of stuff is irrevocable and not really something that can be gotten over. Every Spider-Man writer knew that, since it was the kind of flawed, adult element that made Marvel richer in emotional texture than DC's stuff. Looking at Ben's death as an origin story is seeing things only from a plot perspective. From a character perspective, from the sake of emotional logic, it's a different perspective.

And no, you really don't have to mention Ben to tell a Spider-Man story. You can assume that the reader or viewer already brings that knowledge with them and move on and tell a new story. It happens all the time.

If you have Aunt May as a major supporting character, you do need to mention it. If you have a teenage high school Peter Parker, you do need to mention it, since Uncle Ben was a major presence in his life until very recently. If you don't have May, you focus on Peter living alone in his apartment in the city as he did for a long time in the Bronze Age or him married to MJ as in the newspaper strip, you can de-emphasize or downplay it as they did, likewise since the character was older in that time.

[Prof. Warren]

The way the MCU works or the way the shared universe of the comics goes is that the actual ongoing story contains the meat and bones of the character, his supporting cast, settings and personal interior story. In a big event story, those elements don't, as a rule, factor in unless it is tied to the overall plot. In Captain America Civil War, Peter was introduced in a flash, and in hasty way. There was no need to mention his origin and Uncle Ben there. But that doesn't mean that Homecoming gets a pass or is judged by those same standards. At the end of the day, while the MCU is a shared universe, it is experienced as a series of individual films and meant to be understood as a series of individual films. And given that Jon Watts changed and retconned elements of the Civil War fight for Homecoming, he brought this on himself.

You're making way, way too much out of a slight alteration of the airport fight from CW to Homecoming. Comics regularly fudge details in recounting the events of one comic in another. Panels don't always line up exactly.

Peter's introduction is in CW. He alludes to Ben in it. They don't need to repeat it in Homecoming just to appease people who want to dictate "how things work."

The stuff with the ghost happens in the opening act and first scene. In a serialized story, it's all Act 2, or if we are using Elizabethan Five Act Structure, it's Acts 2-3 with 4-5 reserved only for alternate universes and What Ifs. The fact that Hamlet noticably ages between Acts 3 and 4, and comes back as an older character in the final bits makes it interestingly enough a good comparison since that's a highly serialized play all about delaying what is the logical endpoint of the story (Hamlet killing the Uncle) because Shakespeare likes the character, his supporting cast, and wants to stretch their interactions as much as he can before he can wrap it out.

Hamlet is a self-contained narrative.

Spider-Man is an open-ended serialized story.

Two completely different things.

The vast majority of Spider-Man stories do not deal with the events of his origin.

You again missed my point. Ben Parker is important and crucial for the relationship between Peter and Aunt May. Without that, you can't do that relationship any amount of justice on screen. Ben's story isn't important just for the sake of origins unlike the death of Batman's parents, it's there as a constant reminder, driving force, and lingering issues between Peter and May. Ben and May Parker were the most selfless people that Peter knew and he repaid that by getting Ben killed and depriving May of the love-of-her-life. That kind of stuff is irrevocable and not really something that can be gotten over. Every Spider-Man writer knew that, since it was the kind of flawed, adult element that made Marvel richer in emotional texture than DC's stuff. Looking at Ben's death as an origin story is seeing things only from a plot perspective. From a character perspective, from the sake of emotional logic, it's a different perspective.

Again, you could do a whole prequel set in the MCU that deals with that. It's still Peter's backstory.

But it doesn't have to be dealt with because everyone is already familiar with it.

If you have Aunt May as a major supporting character, you do need to mention it. If you have a teenage high school Peter Parker, you do need to mention it, since Uncle Ben was a major presence in his life until very recently. If you don't have May, you focus on Peter living alone in his apartment in the city as he did for a long time in the Bronze Age or him married to MJ as in the newspaper strip, you can de-emphasize or downplay it as they did, likewise since the character was older in that time.

No, you don't have to mention it.

As much as it might bug you personally that they don't, it's clearly a non-issue for most viewers.

[Agent Z]

For his cameo in that film yes. Not so for his own individual films.



In major stories yes, and on average, you can say every 10 issues, every five issues, or so references, or mentions Ben in some way or form. This was true even in the earliest comics, where the Lee-Ditko era didn't go on about "responsibility" and so on but Ben was mentioned multiple times. And definitely in the M-P saga, and he also figured in ASM#50 ("Spider-Man No More") where Spider-Man saving a civilian who resembles Ben makes him get his groove back.



Uncle Ben's importance isn't just for Peter's origins, it's a major emotional element of the stories. It's like doing Hamlet without mentioning the ghost. The entire relationship between May and Peter is centered on Ben Parker, his life and his death. That's what "The Conversation" (ASM #38 V.2) was all about, it's what "The Gift" (ASM #400) was about. Are you seriously arguing that Peter Parker would work if May Parker was just a lifelong single mother who was unmarried and so on?



That literally happens in Homecoming. The lifting machinery scene from the M-P Saga is centered on Tony going "If you're nothing without the suit" on him. In the comics Peter thinks of Uncle Ben and Aunt May in that moment. Tony Stark literally replaced Uncle Ben in Homecoming in that moment. That is objective. You can't gainsay that.



I am not asking for a prequel. I am asking for Ben to be discussed, mentioned and acknowledged. ITSV did the origin in a short montage and mentioned Ben Parker there. That's all that was needed.



No he didn't. Tom Holland's Peter is Iron Man's sidekick and the trailer for FFH says that he's seen as Iron Man's legacy character in the MCU. Spider-Man was the original non-sidekick solo hero. Now that's gone.



Yeah. I mean you can't skip the hard part because actors sign up to play the character and not the brand version that fans make up on tumblr or promos and so on. You don't have to show the origin again or do a full prequel but you absolutely do have to mention Ben and his role as this important figure in Peter's life, and far more important than any superhero sugar daddy can ever be.

Do you know what "sugar daddy" actually means?