Page 17 of 25 FirstFirst ... 7131415161718192021 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 255 of 364
  1. #241
    Peter Scott SpiderClops's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    7,445

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mistah K88 View Post
    Yeah, trying to base too much in realism has been the bane of comic book movies for a while (at least for me) as trying to explain every single minor thing starts to make things less plausible. Even that stitched together Catwoman outfit in Batman Returns probably cost quite the pretty penny to make in real life. Especially since that suit DEFINITELY wouldn't be functional in real life.




    Are they though? The Raimi trilogy just changed those to organic powers and not too many people batted an eyelash...if anything the same general public who feel that Peter idolizing Tony Stark make sense also thought that the natural abilities of a spider (webs) being transferred to a human make sense (to the point it even went to comics for a bit) If anything I'd say that a lot of Peter's gear (developing suit, developing mechanical webshooters, etc.) isn't as essential to him as things like his powers that stick through every medium like sticking to walls and the like.
    Maby I should've clarified.

    IF you're going with mechanical web-shooters, then Peter should make it on his own.

    Otherwise, I've never been bothered by organic webs. It's the most recognizable ability spiders have.

  2. #242
    Mighty Member Castle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    1,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Venus View Post
    Between the Raimi movies, the Webb movies, a string of successful video games from the 2000 one to the recent PS5 one to beloved animated show from the 90's one to Spectacular Spider-Man, Spider-Man easily has a bigger pop culture footprint than either Iron Man or Captain America whose successes are largely confined to the MCU. I think folks accept that this is a Spider-man and not the Spider-man, non of the non-MCU related Spider-man stuff that came out since Homecoming have really focused on the Stark connection. People know that it's there because of a combination of there being two previous Spider-man reboots and the strange joint-custody deal between studios to get him into the franchise in the first place. If it weren't for those two factors, Spider-man's MCU connection would probably be handled more like how it's done in Ant-Man, where Stark and Cap are mentioned and Cap's shadow looms large but they don't dominate the movie.
    I trust people already know this about spiderman but they will see any spiderman movie for entertainment, but if you ask the same people what they think or like about spiderman or his impact their views will likely be different.

    It is us fans that are more up in arms about how spiderman is treated in movies beyond entertainment purposes.

    I already said before, maybe this movie will be the lesser of the wrongs. if bringing back tobey and andrew again means I dont have to deal with tony stark baggage again in any spiderman flick even mcu. I can accept that.

  3. #243
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    710

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Venus View Post
    Between the Raimi movies, the Webb movies, a string of successful video games from the 2000 one to the recent PS5 one to beloved animated show from the 90's one to Spectacular Spider-Man, Spider-Man easily has a bigger pop culture footprint than either Iron Man or Captain America whose successes are largely confined to the MCU. I think folks accept that this is a Spider-man and not the Spider-man, non of the non-MCU related Spider-man stuff that came out since Homecoming have really focused on the Stark connection. People know that it's there because of a combination of there being two previous Spider-man reboots and the strange joint-custody deal between studios to get him into the franchise in the first place. If it weren't for those two factors, Spider-man's MCU connection would probably be handled more like how it's done in Ant-Man, where Stark and Cap are mentioned and Cap's shadow looms large but they don't dominate the movie.
    I mean, I was always expecting some unconventional MCU tie-ins. It's just that I wasn't expecting such a total 180 from the essence of Spider-Man.

    Plus, while it may have excited audiences in the short run, I don't know if this Spider-Man can survive in the long-run. Eventually the novelty of Spider-Man being in the MCU will wear off and become the status quo, and not all of his films can be follow-ups from an event film. When that time comes (if it hasn't already), Sony/Disney will be forced to find new novelties to breathe life into the franchise since current Film Spider-Man isn't much of a character. We're already starting to see some of this with them bringing in Doctor Strange and this film exploiting the Spider-Verse hype.
    Last edited by Kaitou D. Kid; 03-04-2021 at 08:14 AM.

  4. #244
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    27,180

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaitou D. Kid View Post
    I mean, I was always expecting some unconventional MCU tie-ins. It's just that I wasn't expecting such a total 180 from the essence of Spider-Man.

    Plus, while it may have excited audiences in the short run, I don't know if this Spider-Man can survive in the long-run. Eventually the novelty of Spider-Man being in the MCU will wear off and become the status quo, and not all of his films can be follow-ups from an event film. When that time comes (if it hasn't already), Sony/Disney will be forced to find new novelties to breathe into the franchise since current Film Spider-Man isn't much of a character. We're already starting to see some of this with them bringing in Doctor Strange and this film exploiting the Spider-Verse hype.
    I think we're getting a head of ourselves here. It all likely is due to the fun of seeing Peter interact with Dr Strange and other Spider characters not because there isn't anymore to MCU Peter by himself.

  5. #245
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    710

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    I think we're getting a head of ourselves here. It all likely is due to the fun of seeing Peter interact with Dr Strange and other Spider characters not because there isn't anymore to MCU Peter by himself.
    This would be the sixth overall film and third solo film all about the fun of seeing Spider-Man interact with other popular characters. By this point Holland will have played Spider-Man in more films than the previous two actors combined.

    What does it say about this franchise that they essentially have to rely on this?
    Last edited by Kaitou D. Kid; 03-04-2021 at 08:35 AM.

  6. #246
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    27,180

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaitou D. Kid View Post
    This would be the sixth overall film and third solo film all about the fun of seeing Spider-Man interact with other popular characters. What does it say about this franchise that they essentially have to rely on this?
    We've had five Spider-Man movies of him just being solo. Of course they're going to take advantage of the opportunities him being in a shared universe provides. They do this for pretty much every MCU character.

  7. #247
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    710

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    We've had five Spider-Man movies of him just being solo. Of course they're going to take advantage of the opportunities him being in a shared universe provides. They do this for pretty much every MCU character.
    I think this is a false equivalency. The other characters are fully-fleshed out characters, are allowed to have opinions, and are not 180 inversions of who they're supposed to be.

  8. #248
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    63,877

    Default

    To be honest, I'm just glad they haven't thrown in a bunch of other Spider-Heroes into the MCU movies.

  9. #249
    Really Feeling It! Kevinroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    California
    Posts
    8,600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    To be honest, I'm just glad they haven't thrown in a bunch of other Spider-Heroes into the MCU movies.
    They tend not to do a whole lot of characters like that in the MCU. We're only NOW getting She-Hulk.

    (I wonder if the contracts between Marvel and Sony prevent such characters from appearing in the MCU.)

  10. #250
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    To be honest, I'm just glad they haven't thrown in a bunch of other Spider-Heroes into the MCU movies.
    Yeah, I agree. As much as I love ITSV, I'm getting a little tired of the Spider-people team-ups that have been dominating the cartoons. I like the idea of Peter having a legacy character in Miles Morales or Mayday, but that is the extent of it for me.

    The MCU may also be jumping on the Spider-verse bandwagon if the rumors are true.

  11. #251
    Anyone. Anywhere.Anytime. Arsenal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    3,025

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaitou D. Kid View Post
    This would be the sixth overall film and third solo film all about the fun of seeing Spider-Man interact with other popular characters. By this point Holland will have played Spider-Man in more films than the previous two actors combined.

    What does it say about this franchise that they essentially have to rely on this?
    Probably that the franchise is shared between two different companies and compromises were made in order for the deal to exist. Plus there's no guarantee that they will have an opportunity to do it again once this deal concludes so I imagine that both parties want to take advantage of it while they can.

  12. #252
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    63,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevinroc View Post
    They tend not to do a whole lot of characters like that in the MCU. We're only NOW getting She-Hulk.

    (I wonder if the contracts between Marvel and Sony prevent such characters from appearing in the MCU.)
    Well, when applicable.

    Rhodey appeared in the second Iron Man movie but Hulk never got any solo films.

    I guess his supporting cast is enough to fill the "sidekick" role.

  13. #253
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    710

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arsenal View Post
    Probably that the franchise is shared between two different companies and compromises were made in order for the deal to exist. Plus there's no guarantee that they will have an opportunity to do it again once this deal concludes so I imagine that both parties want to take advantage of it while they can.
    I mean, that's kinda the source of the problem for all this and why they rebooted so soon when they shouldn't have. There is too much fixation on short-term revenue due to the the fragility of the deal that there just isn't towards the rest of the MCU properties.

    It's understandable if you're a shareholder, but not from a storytelling perspective. From a storytelling perspective, it would be best for the films to be fully made by only one company (and probably Marvel, given Sony's not-too-good live-action record).

  14. #254
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    63,877

    Default

    I do think Spider-Man's place in the MCU is, for one reason or another, adversely effected because of the co-ownership status of MCU Spider-Man and how that dictates his stories or how he's effected (or effective) within the actual movies.

  15. #255
    Extraordinary Member Revolutionary_Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    7,894

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaitou D. Kid View Post
    I mean, that's kinda the source of the problem for all this and why they rebooted so soon when they shouldn't have. There is too much fixation on short-term revenue due to the the fragility of the deal that there just isn't towards the rest of the MCU properties.
    Even with that in mind, their choices can be judged and found vaunting. With the restrictions in play, the idea of getting the most out of a deal, means that they should have had Spider-Man team-up with everyone across the MCU instead of being an Iron Man subfranchise. The deal never gave us what was promised. Like where's the iconic bit of Spider-Man and Cap teaming up, why is it that Far From Home revolves around "Nick Fury" (and not even the real one) rather than Paul Rudd's Ant-Man (who'd be a better fit for a story about a tech-driven illusionist), heck why not have Spider-Man team up with T'Challa in Far From Home, which considering Boseman's passing, is obviously never ever going to happen, and a forever lost opportunity, and a damning example of the flagrant misuse of the character. Considering that the sequel has Peter go abroad, you could have easily had him come in T'Challa's radar, and connect Mysterio's tech to Wakanda's cloaking and illusion tech. Or you know, Spider-Man and Hulk, Mark Ruffalo's Hulk who did show up prominently in Ditko's run, and having Spider-Man meet another great scientist, one without Iron Man's alpha male affects, would have been awesome.

    These could have been fun cool movies dealing with a 'gets-to-be-fun' version of Spider-Man. This will surprise quite a few but I genuinely liked Spider-Man in Captain America Civil War, that to me is the only satisfying showing of Spider-Man in the MCU. He got to be cool, he got in the faces of Ant-Man, Winter Soldier, Falcon, his best exchange with any superhero ("Queens...Brooklyn") and the airport battle is genuinely up-there with the Raimi films in terms of Spider-Man in battle and action.

    The airport battle is kind of interesting because the Russos introduced Spider-Man in that scene and they wanted to do the iconic Spider-Man so he comes off a lot more competent than he does in the Watts movies and in the IW-Endgame movies (where he's frankly annoying*). Heck, Watts had to retcon CW in HOMECOMING to make Holland Spider-Man come off as more petulant and immature than he was originally, which basically shows that somewhere they decided that no they don't want Spider-Man to be fun after all. The airport battle also shoots Spider-man in broad daylight so we get to see him in action, and it manages to work while avoiding superficial realism (i.e. airports being flat terrain should not give Spider-Man many places to swing around and yet he does and nobody cares).

    From a storytelling perspective, it would be best for the films to be fully made by only one company (and probably Marvel, given Sony's not-too-good live-action record).
    I think that kind of observation is too unfair. Sure Sony has made some weak Spider-Man movies but they are in the business of making other kinds of movies and not just Spider-Man, unlike Feige who has never had to face the tests and challenges of a real movie producer. The Russos recently claimed that they were the ones who pushed for Tom Holland while Sony execs were skeptical, and fundamentally I do think Holland is miscast, so I am not sure the flaws of the movie are entirely down to one party alone.


    ** About Spider-Man being annoying in IW and Endgame...Don't @me about the "I don't feel good" scene. Seriously don't @me about that.
    Last edited by Revolutionary_Jack; 03-04-2021 at 01:56 PM.

Posting Permissions

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