Spider-Man 3: No Way Home

[Lukmendes]

Also, the idea that Spider Man is intrinsically anti corporate is a new one on me given how many fans were cheering on Peter Parker "leveling up" to be a Stark like genius with company and secret underground lair full of Spider Gear no matter how little sense it made.

If was up to the most vocal parts of Spider Fandom, Peter Parker would be designing Star Drives and would have designed himself a ZeroG Spider Suit, canon be damned.

???

Stark-lite Spidey was detested, the closest thing to something like that being liked was Horizon Labs, and that didn't make him super rich, just gave him a comfortable amount of money.

That's true but the problem is superheroes and these childish fantasies went from marginal and children's entertainment and pure fun to basically whole careers and only game in town. They could be excused when they were just for kids but not when it's for everyone. They have greater power now and you know what comes with great power.

I see it as just part of a cycle of what people are into, whatever cultures and eras change tastes, like how the big thing to be popular in Japan right now are Isekai animes, which contrasts with the 80's and 90's when they liked more action focused stuff.

So eventually, super-hero movies won't make as much money and, I dunno, maybe the next big thing will be space ninjas or whatever.

Rich heroes do tend to dominate and suck out the oxygen, like Batman has essentially destroyed the DC Universe and rebuilt in his image. His bad guys like Joker and Harley Quinn are bigger than Superman is these days.

Well, Stark's case is more of a recent thing, but yeah, Batman is too big, I remember hearing that there'll be 30 Batman related comics next year, and while that could be a lie, it really sounds like DC would try lol.

[Frontier]

I guess I just don't really have this hangup with corporate Superheroes? Like, Batman and Iron Man have a lot of money they throw at fighting crime. It's not that complex to me anymore than I can dive deep into the issues with other, non-rich, Superheroes.

The other issue is how in the MCU everything is absorbed into the Military-Industrial Complex, like Mysterio in the comics is a VFX artist who uses his talents for crime...in the movie they make him into a drone-bomber and so on. That sucks. You turned an artist into a weapons designer and in doing so expressed contempt for the fields of humanities and behind-the-line craftsmanship.

At the end of the day he was still a VFX guy trying to trick people into thinking he was a hero and using state of the arc cinematic tech to create illusions and holograms which he used to commit crimes and hoodwink people. The drones were just tools to that endgoal.

Even though he didn't lean hard into the theater background of comic Beck he was still basically a showman and fraud like comic Mysterio since he was acting the whole time.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

I guess I just don't really have this hangup with corporate Superheroes? Like, Batman and Iron Man have a lot of money they throw at fighting crime. It's not that complex to me anymore than I can dive deep into the issues with other, non-rich, Superheroes.

I have problems with how Batman and Iron Man are portrayed sometimes, but in principle I don't have a problem with them being rich either. I think what helps is that they're the only truly rich superheroes in their universe (yeah there's some other ones, but they don't really matter). Your average Marvel or DC superhero is closer to Spider-Man in budget than to Batman or Iron Man. I don't get the message that rich people are exceptionally good when I look at the superhero genre as a whole.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I guess I just don't really have this hangup with corporate Superheroes? Like, Batman and Iron Man have a lot of money they throw at fighting crime.

But never in a way that seems to affect their bottom line or have them make real sacrifices. That said, I do get it to some extent though.

I mean there's a certain fantasy attached to royalty and being a King that endures among people who would not want to be subjects to any king in reality. It's part of the Disney Princess thing, Disney Royalty thing, and to some extent that's there with Black Panther as well. And to some extent it's not beyond the realm of possibility that being a billionaire or a super-rich person can not someday become an obsolete harmless fantasy. Like Richie Rich and Scrooge McDuck are very much "poor people's idea of rich people" you know having everything made out of dollar signs, gems and so on, or having a bin of money to swim in. So maybe Batman and Iron Man could work in that dimension.

I said "could work" because I don't think Iron Man, in the MCU, works in that way these days.

At the end of the day he was still a VFX guy trying to trick people into thinking he was a hero and using state of the arc cinematic tech to create illusions and holograms which he used to commit crimes and hoodwink people. The drones were just tools to that endgoal.

Even though he didn't lean hard into the theater background of comic Beck he was still basically a showman and fraud like comic Mysterio since he was acting the whole time.

It doesn't really have the same connotation to it, not least because there's an entire Mysterio behind the scenes team when in the comics he was a one-man band. It subtracts more than it adds.

[Frontier]

I have problems with how Batman and Iron Man are portrayed sometimes, but in principle I don't have a problem with them being rich either. I think what helps is that they're the only truly rich superheroes in their universe (yeah there's some other ones, but they don't really matter). Your average Marvel or DC superhero is closer to Spider-Man in budget than to Batman or Iron Man. I don't get the message that rich people are exceptionally good when I look at the superhero genre as a whole.

Superhero royals (Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Black Panther etc.) are rich. Wasp/Janet Van Dyne, Iron Fist, Ted Kord, etc.

But never in a way that seems to affect their bottom line or have them make real sacrifices. That said, I do get it to some extent though.

Aside from when the storyline demands it like every time they've lost their company or their money only to get it back because of the status quo and that's naturally how the characters work.

I mean there's a certain fantasy attached to royalty and being a King that endures among people who would not want to be subjects to any king in reality. It's part of the Disney Princess thing, Disney Royalty thing, and to some extent that's there with Black Panther as well. And to some extent it's not beyond the realm of possibility that being a billionaire or a super-rich person can not someday become an obsolete harmless fantasy. Like Richie Rich and Scrooge McDuck are very much "poor people's idea of rich people" you know having everything made out of dollar signs, gems and so on, or having a bin of money to swim in. So maybe Batman and Iron Man could work in that dimension.

I said "could work" because I don't think Iron Man, in the MCU, works in that way these days.

I see a lot of people being self-conscious about comic book royals and I think to some extent they're just missing that part of it is just the "cool" factor it adds to those characters and storytelling potential. Like, Black Panther being the king of an advanced African Nature with all the power and responsibility that entails and ditto Aquaman being king of the entire sea.

It doesn't really have the same connotation to it, not least because there's an entire Mysterio behind the scenes team when in the comics he was a one-man band. It subtracts more than it adds.

Think of it in production terms. He had an entire production team making Mysterio the spectacle it needed to be with him as the primadonna director but it was all his idea and technology.

That whole toast scene where Beck tells them all how they pulled it off was basically the equivalent of a wrap party with a film crew.

His entire costume was a mo-cap suit aside from the one he used to fool Peter. I mean, I didn't love that, but it made perfect sense in terms of capturing modern-day filmmaking.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

Superhero royals (Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Black Panther etc.) are rich. Wasp/Janet Van Dyne, Iron Fist, Ted Kord, etc.

Royals like Wonder Woman, Aquaman, and Black Panther come from different societies with different economic systems, though. They're arguably not great examples of "rich" in the way we think of rich. I mean, Black Panther for example isn't a king in the traditional sense, and Wakanda's economy is socialist instead of feudal (Marvel will never admit it but it's easy to read in between the lines).

With Janet Van Dyne it's rarely emphasized. Fair point about Iron Fist and Ted Kord.

Among the "main" A-list superheroes, though, only Batman and Iron Man are rich and have their wealth emphasized.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I see a lot of people being self-conscious about comic book royals and I think to some extent they're just missing that part of it is just the "cool" factor it adds to those characters and storytelling potential.

Right.

Like, Black Panther being the king of an advanced African Nature with all the power and responsibility that entails and ditto Aquaman being king of the entire sea.

'Course occassionally you run into problems. Doctor Doom is demonized for being a royal tyrant in Europe when more or less that's the kind of absolute authority that say, Thor has over Asgard, Namor has over Atlantis, T'Challa over Wakanda (or at least, before Coates' run where it transitioned to a constitutional monarchy with devolved powers). Maybe it's an unintentional metaphor for US foreign policy, where some dictators are opposed and demonized for their human rights abuses but other dictatorships and authoritarian rulers have their human rights' record swept under the rug because they are our allies.

Think of it in production terms. He had an entire production team making Mysterio the spectacle it needed to be with him as the primadonna director but it was all his idea and technology.

That whole toast scene where Beck tells them all how they pulled it off was basically the equivalent of a wrap party with a film crew.

His entire costume was a mo-cap suit aside from the one he used to fool Peter. I mean, I didn't love that, but it made perfect sense in terms of capturing modern-day filmmaking.

I'd prefer he be an actual movie director and creative artist, i.e. literally into showbiz as the character in the comics.

Steve Jobs' Apple Presentations as well as Elon Musk's are patterned and based on showbiz movie director tropes already, so the metaphor has become too widespread as to lose all its original application. The mo-cap suit for instance isn't so far from VR and AR presentations you might see in convention centers.

So it loses its cleverness. When a metaphor is scattered and gets diffuse, the best thing is to counter it by being literal and going back to the origins.

[Agent Z]

Huh...which fans are these, because the entire Parker Industries era is the one part of Slott's run even Slott's defenders don't like and which his detractors cite as proof "see we were right that he never got the character all along"?

???

Stark-lite Spidey was detested, the closest thing to something like that being liked was Horizon Labs, and that didn't make him super rich, just gave him a comfortable amount of money.

Judging by the sales and reviews, the people who hated Parker Industries were a vocal minority.

[Agent Z]

Right.



'Course occassionally you run into problems. Doctor Doom is demonized for being a royal tyrant in Europe when more or less that's the kind of absolute authority that say, Thor has over Asgard, Namor has over Atlantis, T'Challa over Wakanda (or at least, before Coates' run where it transitioned to a constitutional monarchy with devolved powers). Maybe it's an unintentional metaphor for US foreign policy, where some dictators are opposed and demonized for their human rights abuses but other dictatorships and authoritarian rulers have their human rights' record swept under the rug because they are our allies.



I'd prefer he be an actual movie director and creative artist, i.e. literally into showbiz as the character in the comics.

Steve Jobs' Apple Presentations as well as Elon Musk's are patterned and based on showbiz movie director tropes already, so the metaphor has become too widespread as to lose all its original application. The mo-cap suit for instance isn't so far from VR and AR presentations you might see in convention centers.

So it loses its cleverness. When a metaphor is scattered and gets diffuse, the best thing is to counter it by being literal and going back to the origins.

Namor is demonized just as much as Doom is. Thor and T'Challa don't kill people for failing or disobeying them, or because of a temper tantrum (to say nothing of them lacking most of the flaws Doom has). And there authorities have never really been absolute even before the 2010s.

Comparing T'Challa and Thor to Doom and Namor makes about as much sense as trying to say Superman is the same as Omni-Man or Homelander.

But then again, the superhero genre's issues aren't really down to the hero's economic status.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Judging by the sales and reviews, the people who hated Parker Industries were a vocal minority.

The entire post-Superior era of Slott's run actually saw overall lower sales than the previous periods. Stuff like Spider-Verse was popular but the actual meat and potatoes wasn't at all popular.

[Frontier]

'Course occassionally you run into problems. Doctor Doom is demonized for being a royal tyrant in Europe when more or less that's the kind of absolute authority that say, Thor has over Asgard, Namor has over Atlantis, T'Challa over Wakanda (or at least, before Coates' run where it transitioned to a constitutional monarchy with devolved powers). Maybe it's an unintentional metaphor for US foreign policy, where some dictators are opposed and demonized for their human rights abuses but other dictatorships and authoritarian rulers have their human rights' record swept under the rug because they are our allies.

At the end of the day it's the difference between a hero and a villain in similar roles. Like you get heroic CEO's, rulers, or scientists to contrast with versions that are evil.

(And nobody really cares that much about constitutional Wakanda. I think even Coates forgot about it).

I'd prefer he be an actual movie director and creative artist, i.e. literally into showbiz as the character in the comics.

Steve Jobs' Apple Presentations as well as Elon Musk's are patterned and based on showbiz movie director tropes already, so the metaphor has become too widespread as to lose all its original application. The mo-cap suit for instance isn't so far from VR and AR presentations you might see in convention centers.

So it loses its cleverness. When a metaphor is scattered and gets diffuse, the best thing is to counter it by being literal and going back to the origins.

That's more or less what he was with the holographic tech, just minus a theater background. But I felt it was a pretty clear modernization of the kind of character Mysterio is.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

At the end of the day it's the difference between a hero and a villain in similar roles.

Perhaps. But it still creates a mess of contradictions. Take the Inhumans, they ruled over Attilan that had this caste system, their hero Black Bolt is a polygamist. On paper if you had to choose between living in Latveria or Attilan, you would have to choose Latveria as the better place and yet Attilan are the good guy faction.

(And nobody really cares that much about constitutional Wakanda. I think even Coates forgot about it).

Yeah. Coates's first story "A Nation Under Our Feet" is a great story and comic, but somehow that kind of stuff didn't go far after that but certainly it was a story that addressed the issue of T'Challa a supposed good guy also being a King in the 21st Century, and Wakanda not having any kind of democratic system or checks and balances. Wakanda has to be bigger than the royal bloodline of a single family.

That's more or less what he was with the holographic tech, just minus a theater background. But I felt it was a pretty clear modernization of the kind of character Mysterio is.

Somethings don't need modernization imo, I mean VFX technology are a bigger deal now than in the 1960s.

And the idea that creative fields are inherently some backward thing that must give away to drone programs doesn't sit right with me.

I really disliked Far From Home's take on Mysterio. The Mysterio costume is good, on paper Jake Gyllenhaal isn't bad casting, but the actual writing of the character took him even further away from the comics version.

With Homecoming, all the stuff they did with Vulture had a basis in the comics, they just inserted Tony Stark into the role of a clear heel and completely changed the message in the process. Granted the costume sucked so it's like a single step forward and other steps backward at the same time.

But Mysterio going from special effects to weapons designer, being driven to resentment by Tony stealing credit for his work, having a support system and team...all of that diminished him in the process.

The best version of Mysterio is still the 2000 Activision Game.



As the meme goes, this is peak performance. You may not like what it looks like, but this is what it is.

[Frontier]

Perhaps. But it still creates a mess of contradictions. Take the Inhumans, they ruled over Attilan that had this caste system, their hero Black Bolt is a polygamist. On paper if you had to choose between living in Latveria or Attilan, you would have to choose Latveria as the better place and yet Attilan are the good guy faction.

I think the Inhumans are more morally ambiguous than good guys, which is part of why their major heroic push at the time fell flat. Wakanda would be the better comparison.

Yeah. Coates's first story "A Nation Under Our Feet" is a great story and comic, but somehow that kind of stuff didn't go far after that but certainly it was a story that addressed the issue of T'Challa a supposed good guy also being a King in the 21st Century, and Wakanda not having any kind of democratic system or checks and balances. Wakanda has to be bigger than the royal bloodline of a single family.

Tell that to Black Panther fans .

Somethings don't need modernization imo, I mean VFX and technology are if possible a bigger deal now than in the 1960s.

And the idea that creative fields are inherently some backward thing that must give away to drone programs doesn't sit right with me.

I really disliked Far From Home's take on Mysterio. The Mysterio costume is good, on paper Jake Gyllenhaal isn't bad casting, but the actual writing of the character took him even further away from the comics version. With Homecoming, all the stuff they did with Vulture had a basis in the comics, they just inserted Tony Stark into the role of a clear heel and completely changed the message in the process, but Mysterio going from special effects to weapons designer, being driven to resentment by Tony stealing credit for his work, having a support system and team...all of that diminished him in the process.

I think you're focusing too much on the drones just because he used them to attack people. It wasn't supposed to be some commentary on drone strikes or promoting attack drones. At the end of the day he was still an illusionist using tech and holograms to trick people into thinking he was a good guy because he didn't get the attention or credit he felt he deserved and that eventually drove him to try to kill and discredit Spider-Man. He wasn't trying to sell weapons, he was trying to sell himself and make money off of it.

I don't think the team were really a "support system," they were just a means to an end.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I think you're focusing too much on the drones just because he used them to attack people.

Should I not focus on what I see and hear in the movie?

I mean the entire drone program is a big part of the film. The drone program which Iron Man bequeathed to Peter for some reason is a big part of the story. Granted that's absurd on many levels (that Iron Man would have such a program to start with, that he would bequeath it to Peter) I suppose Tony wanted Spider-Man to order strikes on criminals (it's f--ked up that's an unironic interpretation one can form on the basis of RDJ's character in the MCU).

It wasn't supposed to be some commentary on drone strikes or promoting attack drones.

It was supposed to build up and make Mysterio into some kind of threat and so on.

At the end of the day he was still an illusionist using tech and holograms to trick people into thinking he was a good guy because he didn't get the attention or credit he felt he deserved and that eventually drove him to try to kill and discredit Spider-Man.

It's also similar to the motivations and plot of the bad guy from INCREDIBLES 2.

Like I said it was an example of a story and plot that I didn't agree needed to be done the way they ultimately did it. I don't accept this was the best way to "modernize" Mysterio.

[Frontier]

Should I not focus on what I see and hear in the movie?

I mean the entire drone program is a big part of the film. The drone program which Iron Man bequeathed to Peter for some reason is a big part of the story. Granted that's absurd on many levels (that Iron Man would have such a program to start with, that he would bequeath it to Peter) I suppose Tony wanted Spider-Man to order strikes on criminals (it's f--ked up that's an unironic interpretation one can form on the basis of RDJ's character in the MCU).

The whole Edith thing with Peter was ridiculous, but in terms of Mysterio it was just tech he was using.

It was supposed to build up and make Mysterio into some kind of threat and so on.

Again, it was just tech he was using.

It's also similar to the motivations and plot of the bad guy from INCREDIBLES 2.

Like I said it was an example of a story and plot that I didn't agree needed to be done the way they ultimately did it. I don't accept this was the best way to "modernize" Mysterio.

Doesn't that just mean the Screenslaver was just riffing off Mysterio?