Quote Originally Posted by Jewel Runner View Post
I question in what way it's not downplaying the success by saying the movies have done well because of novelty.
And when you're saying stuff like that don't talk to me about blanket statements
Obviously the films have a decent level of quality to them, otherwise novelty wouldn't have been enough. Both Homecoming and FFH are well done on a technical level.

As far as whether or not novelty was a factor in their success, I don't think there is much debate there. The marketing for both films relied heavily on the association with the MCU and of each film being a follow-up to major MCU events. This is a neutral observation and not an inherently negative one (they're not the only superhero films to rely on novelty, and a film relying on it doesn't mean it can't be a good movie on its own).

The real question is if this is a Spider-Man that can continue to captivate audiences going forward without the novelty factor present. My opinion is no, as I find this Spider-Man to be pretty empty and not a fully-fleshed out character once his Tony Stark connections are gone.

This was done by design as they deliberately designed this Spider-Man to revolve around Tony's character arc and the greater MCU, as I'm sure you know.

Going forward, they can continue to breathe new novelty and gimmicks into the films, or they can prioritize making Holland's version a fully-fleshed out character that can carry a film on his own...the Spider-Verse connection and the presence of Doctor Strange leads me to believe they picked the former instead of the latter.