Page 9 of 25 FirstFirst ... 567891011121319 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 364
  1. #121
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    710

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jewel Runner View Post
    That's not true in any way shape or form, the movies don't act like Tony's a perfect person who never did anything wrong, Tony himself wants Peter to do better than him because of his own screwups.
    In FFH Peter wasn't comparing himself to Tony the person, he was comparing himself to Iron Man the world saving superhero who just sacrificed his life to save the universe a few months prior, it's why Happy who is about the only person who knew Tony intimately has to remind Peter that Tony wasn't perfect, he made his own fair share of screw ups and mistakes and even he had problems living up to the he cultivated for himself.
    Couple of things:

    1. The problem is present in all five films and not just in FFH.

    2. It is inaccurate to say that Peter misses Iron Man the Superhero and not Tony the person, or that he unblindly looks up only to the Iron Man part of Tony, when he's had a personal relationship with Tony for four films and explicitly states he misses him.

    3. To the extent that FFH and Homecoming acknowledge that Tony made mistakes, it's only in the broad "all humans make mistakes" sense. As if Tony's mistakes are on par with Steve Rogers'.

    4. The overall context is what's most problematic about the Tony worshipping. The two villains he indirectly created aren't treated by the films with the same leniency and "all humans make mistakes" type of attitude. The effect of this is that the films give off classist undertones, whether it was intentional or not.

    5. Even when Happy gives Peter the speech on how Tony wanted him to be better, it's in the context of Tony choosing him over everyone else and how Peter should be honored by that. The film never abandons the classist undertones in Tony and Peter's dynamic.

    6. FFH specifically sends very mixed messages. The scene where Peter supposedly established his independence is followed up by Peter doing science in Tony-style and Back In Black playing.

  2. #122
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    64,047

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    That drives home the issue of MCU Spider-Man as an adaptation though.

    They adapted an element from the comics which was explicitly anti-corporate, and critical of capitalism i.e. in the common "supervillains are bad but corporate/business types are worse"...into something where the bad guy is shown to wrongly hate and attack the capitalist, where the movie frames it in a way that his grievance isn't justified or worthy of empathy.They did this again with Mysterio where the movie has you side with someone or rather that person's legacy, over a person whose life's work was taken from him and passed off as the work of somebody else.

    They took comics whose consistent theme through its most representative period was a broad sympathy and empathy for the struggling people on both sides of the law and made it into movies that engender hatred and contempt for the poor and the hardworking.

    And that kind of classism is right through the MCU Spider-Man movies.
    I think if anything the message is just people who have something bad happen to them or feel they've been wronged and then go in the worst way possible of resolving them. Sympathy can only go up to a certain point.

    I mean, you mention the stuff with Vulture in the comics, but that doesn't really negate the fact that Toomes is still kind of a terrible person. For all his love of his family in the movies he still vaporized a guy without a second thought and threatened to kill Peter and everyone he loved.

  3. #123
    Extraordinary Member Revolutionary_Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    7,922

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaitou D. Kid View Post
    To the extent that FFH and Homecoming acknowledge that Tony made mistakes, it's only in the broad "all humans make mistakes" sense. As if Tony's mistakes are on par with Steve Rogers'.
    Agreed.

    The overall context is what's most problematic about the Tony worshipping. The two villains he indirectly created aren't treated by the films with the same leniency and "all humans make mistakes" type of attitude. The effect of this is that the films give off classist undertones, whether it was intentional or not.
    Totally. I mean that's the thing why is Tony Stark's mistakes treated as a stumble to his personal redemption story while the stuff Vulture and Mysterio do is beyond the pale. Tony's responsible for more deaths, vastly so then these two by a big magnitude and yet their actions aren't treated as part of a larger tragic story of talented or capable being led astray. That's how Pepper Potts and Yinsen saw Tony in the first half of Iron Man after all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I think if anything the message is just people who have something bad happen to them or feel they've been wronged and then go in the worst way possible of resolving them.
    That's not what the original story's about though. In the original story, Vulture attacks Bestman and Spider-Man saves both but he and the police ensure that Bestman will get justice. The story ends up framing Vulture as a tragic victim.

    Sympathy can only go up to a certain point.
    Again why does the movie not extend the same standards to the movie version of Iron Man? How much sympathy and spectatorship to a redemption story can you sustain when several movies keep making Iron Man into a villain-making machine. That's what Kaitou was driving at, the movie asks the audience to apply standards to Iron Man while asking us at the same time to apply different standards to other characters. That strikes me as dubious at best, dangerous at worst because it inculcates terrible morals and poor life lessons to its fans. I mean it's more objectivist than Ditko.

    If we go by the comics, you have Hank Pym. And the stories repeatedly insist that no amount of superheroism can excuse all the messed up stuff he is done and is responsible for, either in his marriage, or creating Ultron.

  4. #124
    Mighty Member Jman27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,714

    Default

    already 9 pages and all we have is the title
    "He's pure power and doesn't even know it. He's the best of us."-Matt Murdock

    "I need a reason to take the mask off."-Peter Parker

  5. #125
    Boing Boing Baggies. Baggie_Saiyan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,802

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackspidey2099 View Post
    God I have absolutely no interest in this failure of a franchise. Hopefully this will be the last MCU Spider-Man movie.
    Yeah... the idea of Spider-man in the MCU kinda didn't work really. Use him in the crossover movies sure but make his stand alone ones actual stand alone.

    From a personal perspective Spider-man one of the few Marvel characters I care about and so like someone else mentioned having the solo movies driven by Stark was very frustrating to me. I don't care about him why is he in my Spider-man movie
    "Yes...Mondo Cool"- Vegeta.

  6. #126
    Brandy and Coke DT Winslow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    326

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SpiderClops View Post
    MCU Spider-Man is polarizing the same way Dan Slotts run is.

    As in, not really, but a vocal minority really really wants to(unsuccessfully) prove that it is.
    Yes, exactly. And somehow “prove” it’s bad.

  7. #127
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaitou D. Kid View Post
    Couple of things:

    1. The problem is present in all five films and not just in FFH.

    2. It is inaccurate to say that Peter misses Iron Man the Superhero and not Tony the person, or that he unblindly looks up only to the Iron Man part of Tony, when he's had a personal relationship with Tony for four films and explicitly states he misses him.
    I never said Peter only missed Iron Man, not once did I say that, I said the person he keeps comparing himself to and the person whose shoes he's expected to fill is Iron Man, of course he misses Tony Stark the person but when people ask if he's the new leader of the Avengers Peter isn't thinking of Tony he thinks of Iron Man [QUOTE]
    3. To the extent that FFH and Homecoming acknowledge that Tony made mistakes, it's only in the broad "all humans make mistakes" sense. As if Tony's mistakes are on par with Steve Rogers'.
    By this point you're just complaining that they don't bring up every bad thing he's ever done.
    4. The overall context is what's most problematic about the Tony worshipping. The two villains he indirectly created aren't treated by the films with the same leniency and "all humans make mistakes" type of attitude. The effect of this is that the films give off classist undertones, whether it was intentional or not.
    I fail to see how Tony making mistakes should be treated as the same as people who knowingly hurt and kill others Vulture and Mysterio aren't making mistakes, they know what they're doing and they know it's wrong, it is in no way the same thing nor should it be treated as such.
    5. Even when Happy gives Peter the speech on how Tony wanted him to be better, it's in the context of Tony choosing him over everyone else and how Peter should be honored by that. The film never abandons the classist undertones in Tony and Peter's dynamic.
    You completely cut out the context that Happy at that point is detailing how Tony is a mess of a person who ton of mistakes but choosing Peter is one of the decisions he made that he knew was correct because that's how good Peter is.
    6. FFH specifically sends very mixed messages. The scene where Peter supposedly established his independence is followed up by Peter doing science in Tony-style and Back In Black playing.
    No it doesn't the point is Peter doesn't need to try to be Tony, but that doesn't change the fact the two are similar in a few ways.
    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Agreed.



    Totally. I mean that's the thing why is Tony Stark's mistakes treated as a stumble to his personal redemption story while the stuff Vulture and Mysterio do is beyond the pale. Tony's responsible for more deaths, vastly so then these two by a big magnitude and yet their actions aren't treated as part of a larger tragic story of talented or capable being led astray. That's how Pepper Potts and Yinsen saw Tony in the first half of Iron Man after all.



    That's not what the original story's about though. In the original story, Vulture attacks Bestman and Spider-Man saves both but he and the police ensure that Bestman will get justice. The story ends up framing Vulture as a tragic victim.



    Again why does the movie not extend the same standards to the movie version of Iron Man? How much sympathy and spectatorship to a redemption story can you sustain when several movies keep making Iron Man into a villain-making machine. That's what Kaitou was driving at, the movie asks the audience to apply standards to Iron Man while asking us at the same time to apply different standards to other characters. That strikes me as dubious at best, dangerous at worst because it inculcates terrible morals and poor life lessons to its fans. I mean it's more objectivist than Ditko.

    If we go by the comics, you have Hank Pym. And the stories repeatedly insist that no amount of superheroism can excuse all the messed up stuff he is done and is responsible for, either in his marriage, or creating Ultron.
    I like how you keep up with this whole thing even after I've proven you wrong.
    And are you really trying to use the Pym thing? Most people who actually know the character think it's stupid to keep throwing that in his face.
    Last edited by Jewel Runner; 02-28-2021 at 03:15 PM.

  8. #128
    Extraordinary Member Revolutionary_Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    7,922

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jewel Runner View Post
    I like how you keep up with this whole thing even after I've proven you wrong.
    I know the Trump era is over and bad habits have a way of sticking around long after the wrongdoer has left the stage, but it bears repeating and reminding here, in no way have you or anyone else here proven me or anyone wrong. You claiming multiple times that you have over and over again is
    A) Wrong.
    B) Not Good Form.
    C) The opposite of "proof".

    Words like "proof" and "logic" are not magic spells you can cast and change its meaning per your wishes. They have actual dictionary definitions and commonsense understanding of the same.

    Let me add that neither have I proven you wrong and in fact I've not tried to do so. I've simply presented my opinion and argued it to the best of my abilities, and counter-argued yours. That's how a message board debate is supposed to flourish.

    And are you really trying to use the Pym thing? Most people who actually know the character think it's stupid to keep throwing that in his face.
    I have read the original Avengers runs including the issues of Avengers #211-230 in detail, so I absolutely am among the "people who actually know the character" and indeed after reading the original run where he's clearly presented as an abusive husband multiple times in dialogue and images, it is far from stupid to throw that in his face, since the original run throws plenty of that and more on to Hank until he mans up and apologizes for his action.

    The only accurate adaptation of Hank Pym is that moment in SCOTT PILGRIM where the finale goes, "Scott Pilgrim earns self-respect" which Hank Pym does at the end when he defeats the Masters of Evil.

  9. #129
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    I know the Trump era is over and bad habits have a way of sticking around long after the wrongdoer has left the stage, but it bears repeating and reminding here, in no way have you or anyone else here proven me or anyone wrong. You claiming multiple times that you have over and over again is
    A) Wrong.
    B) Not Good Form.
    C) The opposite of "proof".

    Words like "proof" and "logic" are not magic spells you can cast and change its meaning per your wishes. They have actual dictionary definitions and commonsense understanding of the same.

    Let me add that neither have I proven you wrong and in fact I've not tried to do so. I've simply presented my opinion and argued it to the best of my abilities, and counter-argued yours. That's how a message board debate is supposed to flourish.
    No have in fact proven you wrong, your so called "counter arguing" never amounted to more than bringing up things Tony did or was involved in and completely exaggerating what he did to make it look more negative than it was.
    Like you keep going with this spiel about Tony stealing from Beck when I've proven Tony never claims to have built the tech, and of the things Beck rants about, Tony stealing it was never one of them, yet you keep insisting that's what happened, or with Vulture you keep insisting it's Tony's fault when he wasn't the guy who mocked Toomes to his face and made him feel like villainy was his only option, but the fact Tony was involved somehow makes it his fault.

    I have read the original Avengers runs including the issues of Avengers #211-230 in detail, so I absolutely am among the "people who actually know the character" and indeed after reading the original run where he's clearly presented as an abusive husband multiple times in dialogue and images, it is far from stupid to throw that in his face, since the original run throws plenty of that and more on to Hank until he mans up and apologizes for his action.

    The only accurate adaptation of Hank Pym is that moment in SCOTT PILGRIM where the finale goes, "Scott Pilgrim earns self-respect" which Hank Pym does at the end when he defeats the Masters of Evil.
    No it's incredibly stupid, when Hank hit Janet he was in the middle of breakdown and didn't think he was Hank Pym, he thought he was a supervillain who killed Pym, in addition to this Janet was using his breakdown as a way of getting him to marry her, throwing it into face over and over is nothing more than belittling his mental illness.

  10. #130
    Extraordinary Member Revolutionary_Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    7,922

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jewel Runner View Post
    Like you keep going with this spiel about Tony stealing from Beck when I've proven Tony never claims to have built the tech,
    That scene in CIVIL WAR was absolutely written, performed, and directed with the intention that Tony created that technology.

    By retconning that moment in FFH, the producers in effect made Tony a credit-stealing plagiarist.

    ...and of the things Beck rants about, Tony stealing it was never one of them,
    Quite obviously he had issues with Tony Stark asserting control over his invention and design, and naming that device (which he calls "my life's work") is part of that. The fact is that he created something, Tony asserted control over that and when Quentin complained he fired him and kept his stuff.

    And by the way, if I created some revolutionary technology and the asshole boss decides to rename it as a funny insult acronym in front of the whole world after you explicitly told him not to, then yeah that's definitely a major jerk move and something that many people in real life across several fields have found offensive and degrading to some extent or another.

    No it's incredibly stupid, when Hank hit Janet he was in the middle of breakdown and didn't think he was Hank Pym,
    The original comics say literally the opposite of this.

    ...he thought he was a supervillain who killed Pym, in addition to this Janet was using his breakdown as a way of getting him to marry her, throwing it into face over and over is nothing more than belittling his mental illness.
    1) You are confusing two storylines. One the debut of Yellowjacket, Two the "Trial of Yellowjacket". Those two are separate storylines years apart.

    2) Blaming the victim...wow! I did say that "Tony-worship" inculcated or revealed an immoral mentality among fans, but I was hoping for some benefit of the doubt.
    Last edited by Revolutionary_Jack; 02-28-2021 at 04:14 PM.

  11. #131
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    64,047

    Default

    I think it's important to point out that we're talking about Quentin Beck here, so we can never take anything he says at face-value or as the absolute truth.
    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Totally. I mean that's the thing why is Tony Stark's mistakes treated as a stumble to his personal redemption story while the stuff Vulture and Mysterio do is beyond the pale. Tony's responsible for more deaths, vastly so then these two by a big magnitude and yet their actions aren't treated as part of a larger tragic story of talented or capable being led astray. That's how Pepper Potts and Yinsen saw Tony in the first half of Iron Man after all.
    Because ultimately Vulture and Mysterio are self-serving and intentionally kill people? They also didn't go through half of what Tony has from his experience as a hero.
    That's not what the original story's about though. In the original story, Vulture attacks Bestman and Spider-Man saves both but he and the police ensure that Bestman will get justice. The story ends up framing Vulture as a tragic victim.
    I was talking about the story in the movies. And...again, Vulture might be a victim with a sense of tragedy to him, but he's still a terrible person.

    Case in point. He's a wonderful grandfather and didn't abandon his family like his son did. Is he still a terrible person? Yeah. Was he knocked down in life? Yeah. But that doesn't justify his crimes or the people he hurts.
    Again why does the movie not extend the same standards to the movie version of Iron Man? How much sympathy and spectatorship to a redemption story can you sustain when several movies keep making Iron Man into a villain-making machine. That's what Kaitou was driving at, the movie asks the audience to apply standards to Iron Man while asking us at the same time to apply different standards to other characters. That strikes me as dubious at best, dangerous at worst because it inculcates terrible morals and poor life lessons to its fans. I mean it's more objectivist than Ditko.
    Tony's mistakes come from unintended consequences while Toomes and Beck willingly commit their crimes.
    If we go by the comics, you have Hank Pym. And the stories repeatedly insist that no amount of superheroism can excuse all the messed up stuff he is done and is responsible for, either in his marriage, or creating Ultron.
    But there are just as many stories that balance that out and shows how much of a hero Hank Pym can be.

  12. #132
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    That scene in CIVIL WAR was absolutely written, performed, and directed with the intention that Tony created that technology.

    By retconning that moment in FFH, the producers in effect made Tony a credit-stealing plagiarist.
    Again even in Civil War it's stated he funded the tech, not that he created it, you can't use the retcon argument here.
    Quite obviously he had issues with Tony Stark asserting control over his invention and design, and naming that device (which he calls "my life's work") is part of that. The fact is that he created something, Tony asserted control over that and when Quentin complained he fired him and kept his stuff.
    Except Tony never actually named it, he jokingly pointed out the initials of the tech spell out Barf, that's not asserting control that's making a joke for the crowd.
    And when Beck decided to work and develop tech for a company like Stark Industries, he signed away the right to be the sole owner of anything he created while working for them.
    And by the way, if I created some revolutionary technology and the asshole boss decides to rename it as a funny insult acronym in front of the whole world after you explicitly told him not to, then yeah that's definitely a major jerk move and something that many people in real life across several fields have found offensive and degrading to some extent or another.
    Beck never asked Tony to not call it that, Tony called it that as minor joke for a bunch of college kids not to take the piss out of him and it didn't get more than a few complimentary chuckles from crowd
    And it's one thing to be find it offensive, but when the response to that is to hijack a ton of drones, stage a bunch of attacks on cities and then try to kill a teenager and his friends it becomes clear Beck wasn't stable at all.

    2) Blaming the victim...wow! I did say that "Tony-worship" inculcated or revealed an immoral mentality among fans, but I was hoping for some benefit of the doubt.
    Who am I supposed to see as the victim here?
    The man having a mental breakdown or the woman using said breakdown to get him to marry her?

  13. #133
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    710

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jewel Runner View Post
    I never said Peter only missed Iron Man, not once did I say that, I said the person he keeps comparing himself to and the person whose shoes he's expected to fill is Iron Man, of course he misses Tony Stark the person but when people ask if he's the new leader of the Avengers Peter isn't thinking of Tony he thinks of Iron Man.
    Sure, but I don't see how any of this contradicts what I said.

    By this point you're just complaining that they don't bring up every bad thing he's ever done.
    I think by this point certain people are just complaining that I bring up the bad things he's done.

    I fail to see how Tony making mistakes should be treated as the same as people who knowingly hurt and kill others Vulture and Mysterio aren't making mistakes, they know what they're doing and they know it's wrong, it is in no way the same thing nor should it be treated as such.
    To quote one of my favorite professors (Chomsky), we can distinguish three categories of crime: "murder with intent, accidental killing, and murder with foreknowledge/[negligence] but without specific intent." Tony would fall into the third category along with every defense contractor. At best a lot of Tony's shadier actions would fall under manslaughter, which is still pretty serious and not at all a joke.

    You completely cut out the context that Happy at that point is detailing how Tony is a mess of a person who ton of mistakes but choosing Peter is one of the decisions he made that he knew was correct because that's how good Peter is.
    This would only be true if Peter at any point in these films had his T'Challa moment, but he doesn't. You know that moment in Black Panther when T'Challa realizes he blindly admired his father and has a change in worldview? That's what this Peter requires for his breakoff from Iron Man to feel real and for it to be an actual part of his story, but he hasn't had it because Disney and Sony don't want him to.

    Actually I lied... Remember how Peter rejected Tony at the end of Homecoming? If you go back and look at what Feige and Watts said at the time, that's exactly what that was supposed to be...it was Peter's "T'Challa moment" where he stops idolizing Iron Man.

    But again, that's not what the suits at Sony and Disney want, so the next three films had to retcon his entire character arc and push him back into Iron Boy territory... Can we seriously trust Sony and Disney to turn things around after doing that? They had no problem turning the ship around after already fixing the main issue most fans have with this Spider-Man.

    Just what does that suggest about how committed (or not committed) these two companies are to eventually turning Holland into a Spider-Man we're more familiar with? Is there any way you see them really doing that without this version's novelty wearing off and them being forced to rely on the strength of the character again?

    No it doesn't the point is Peter doesn't need to try to be Tony, but that doesn't change the fact the two are similar in a few ways.
    The fact you admitted they're similar in only "a few ways" kinda proves how forced this was. Peter and Tony's similarities have always been very superficial. Literally 'science geniuses' and 'like to quip' are all they have in common (and 'like to quip' wasn't even a thing for Iron Man before the MCU). Peter as a person has always had more in common with Steve Rogers and most other Marvel heroes than he ever had with Tony. But that fact isn't what brings in the most revenue for Sony and sells the most toys for Disney, so we have to contrive a Tony/Peter relationship for that purpose.

    I mean, JMS' run during Civil War - the same run that supposedly inspired this relationship - is a run that goes out of its way to show just how much these two guys wouldn't get along. Talk about someone missing the message of the source material they're adapting.
    Last edited by Kaitou D. Kid; 02-28-2021 at 08:46 PM.

  14. #134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ursalink View Post
    "No Way Home". With a title like that, I'm already quite worried. It would be interesting if it means the alternative Spider-Men (in case the theory about the Multiverse is true) will stay in the MCU. Three Spider-Men together could actually work as a "clone saga". Maguire and Garfield could have roles similar to Ben Reilly and Kaine, except there won't be problems about "who's the real one", as they are all real. I would really like to see the three Spiders fighting together.
    we'll have to see.

    I suspect that there will be at least one more newly shot scene with Gyllenhaal.

    I'm surprised that things have been successfully kept a relative secret by now. I wonder when a real trailer will come out, since the film is due in December? September? Hmm. (get all the CGI right or else there will be nonstop howling from reactionary fandom).

    If Peter is put on trial, I hope it is not for the entirety of the film.

    No mention if Happy Hogan is involved in this one.

    I presume this is a new york city based adventure again (though, I suppose it could go elsewhere, especially if Peter is on the run...)

  15. #135
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaitou D. Kid View Post
    Sure, but I don't see how any of this contradicts what I said.



    I think by this point certain people are just complaining that I bring up the bad things he's done.



    To quote one of my favorite professors (Chomsky), we can distinguish three categories of crime: "murder with intent, accidental killing, and murder with foreknowledge/[negligence] but without specific intent." Tony would fall into the third category along with every defense contractor. At best a lot of Tony's shadier actions would fall under manslaughter, which is still pretty serious and not at all a joke.



    This would only be true if Peter at any point in these films had his T'Challa moment, but he doesn't. You know that moment in Black Panther when T'Challa realizes he blindly admired his father and has a change in worldview? That's what this Peter requires for his breakoff from Iron Man to feel real and for it to be an actual part of his story, but he hasn't had it because Disney and Sony don't want him to.

    Actually I lied... Remember how Peter rejected Tony at the end of Homecoming? If you go back and look at what Feige and Watts said at the time, that's exactly what that was supposed to be...it was Peter's "T'Challa moment" where he stops idolizing Iron Man.

    But again, that's not what the suits at Sony and Disney want, so the next three films had to retcon his entire character arc and push him back into Iron Boy territory... Can we seriously trust Sony and Disney to turn things around after doing that? They had no problem turning the ship around after already fixing the main issue most fans have with this Spider-Man.

    Just what does that suggest about how committed (or not committed) these two companies are to eventually turning Holland into a Spider-Man we're more familiar with? Is there any way you see them really doing that without this version's novelty wearing off and them being forced to rely on the strength of the character again?



    The fact you admitted they're similar in only "a few ways" kinda proves how forced this was. Peter and Tony's similarities have always been very superficial. Literally 'science geniuses' and 'like to quip' are all they have in common (and 'like to quip' wasn't even a thing for Iron Man before the MCU). Peter as a person has always had more in common with Steve Rogers and most other Marvel heroes than he ever had with Tony. But that fact isn't what brings in the most revenue for Sony and sells the most toys for Disney, so we have to contrive a Tony/Peter relationship for that purpose.

    I mean, JMS' run during Civil War - the same run that supposedly inspired this relationship - is a run that goes out of its way to show just how much these two guys wouldn't get along. Talk about someone missing the message of the source material they're adapting.
    If you're compare Tony making mistakes while trying to help people to criminals who murder and sell arms to criminals while knowing it's wrong as if it's the same thing you can stop right there because I'm not even gonna pretend to take you or anything you say even remotely serious.

Posting Permissions

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