The first trailer for the newest chapter in the newest take of the cinematic webslinger has finally dropped. And... well, I'm already amazed. We got our first look at the new Spidey, played by Tom Holland, in Captain America: Civil War. And they were clever enough to use his introduction in that film as a brief "origin" story, sparing us yet another one of those films in theaters. This one seems to drop us right into Peter's career as a superhero.
And holy shit it looks like it has the potential to be the best Spider-Man film yet. I loved Tom Holland's character already in Civil War, thought he was absolutely perfect. I'm ready to watch him climb to new heights, because this trailer has shown off a lot of good. Iron Man's always welcome of course, though I do hope he doesn't steal the spotlight too much. He doesn't seem to, just feature in a couple of scenes. Either way, this should be a very good film and I'm even more excited. It seems to capture the awkward, geeky Peter as well as the confident, wise-cracking Spidey perfectly. Hell, we actually get to watch Peter grow as a superhero in a new and different way than the past films.
How many times does this character need to be rebooted this century? At this rate, in 2020, we'll have a new one where he plays a kindergartener and his mom's in her 20's.
For anyone complaining about how young he looks... He's in high school. He's always been in high school. Those kids are babies. Baaaaaaaaaabies. Tobey Maquire was waaaaaay too old looking to be Peter, to be honest.
For anyone complaining about how young he looks... He's in high school. He's always been in high school. Those kids are babies. Baaaaaaaaaabies. Tobey Maquire was waaaaaay too old looking to be Peter, to be honest.
We already had Andrew Garfield since then. Man, get with the times. /s
I actually thought Andrew Garfield was a good Peter/Spidey. It just seems that most people prefer the Raimi films. I mean, I can't blame them- they were actually really good at the time.
I honestly liked Tobey a lot, he played a geeky dork perfectly. I wasn't that sold on Garfield's take on Peter, and I thought he ran his mouth as Spidey a little too much, but I respect the guy because he campaigned for Sony to strike a deal with Marvel to allow Spider-Man to crossover into the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and even though circumstances led to his departure and another reboot, he was happy such a deal finally got through. So he's ultimately a good guy.
How many times does this character need to be rebooted this century? At this rate, in 2020, we'll have a new one where he plays a kindergartener and his mom's in her 20's.
Blame Sony. They're a very controlling company and they're the ones responsible for ruining two separate franchises. Sam Raimi didn't want to use Venom; Sony made him do it, and tried to enforce Spider-Man 4 to have tons of stupid plot issues. Raimi quit, Sony said "we're starting over." It got off on a decent foot, but then they bloated Amazing Spider-Man 2 while already making plans for their own Spider-Man Cinematic Universe to compete with Marvel, planning out tons of movies ahead of time without scripts or directors to have one film a year. And I think one of those would have been set in the 60s with Aunt May as a superhero. Amazing Spider-Man 2 was not very well-received either, suffering similar problems to Spider-Man 3 in that it was overstuffed.
Basically, Spider-Man needed the second reboot with Marvel's guiding hand in order to save him from Sony. I have faith in Marvel not to screw this up; I mean, they've kept the MCU afloat since 2008 with very, very successful movies commercially and critically. We're not likely to see another Spider-Man reboot until after the MCU dies, assuming that ever happens; if they stay the course, probably never, but that's a deeper discussion. Plus, this looks like it has the potential to be the best Spider-Man film franchise yet, so there's that.
I know some people will inevitably compare and contrast this with Sam Raimi's first two Spider-Man movies, but if it's at least the best thing since Spider-Man 2 then I'm totally on board. Heck, to be fair, I didn't even mind the Amazing Spider-Man movies (liked them better than the Thor movies), despite their notorious reputation. It would be unthinkable for Homecoming to follow the flaws of those last two movies, and with the MCU's consistency for success, I'm confident Marvel Studios can pull off a competent movie, even if its only the second or third best Spider-Man.
Edited by Titanium Justice, 10 December 2016 - 12:17 AM.
I have no troubles with reboots, you can overdo it, but what I have seen rebootwise so far seems original enough to stand alone. And after all it is far easier to accept a fullbody-pantihose if it is based on an already existing comic-hero. Not that I know much about the spider-lore.
I watched the original (?) 1 and 2, it was enjoying, I liked it, far more than most of the "actual" (I am a lot behind ) hero-movies. I watched the "amazing" 1 without being really amazed, but I would still call it worthwhile and likeable. This trailer though... I know it isn't but I can't stop to think it must be a parody. Some movements in the costume, the enemy/weapon-design and the comedy elements just seem really, really silly. I don't know the comic, but unlike the first two spiders this time the hero really looks like a teenage-geek. Not that I have troubles with it, but because of that I have a bit of a difficult time to accept the hero beeing that musculary and it seems the movie is not adressing school life of an uncool child in the big city up to date,
He gets muscular from the spider bite. It gives him the proportional strength of a spider, making him, what, roughly 8 times stronger than the average human? Maybe more? Either way, he always starts off as a scrawny nerd because that's what he always is, he's not that muscular because he secretly spends 10 hours a day at the gym. Also, don't assume a trailer that's a couple minutes long that doesn't show him getting bullied means he won't be, either, because it's literally always been a plot point at the start of a new Spider-Man. He will, for sure. It's always a plot point that he gets bullied, gets the spider-bite, and uses it against the bully and knocks him out cold or breaks his hand.
Also take some advice- this is a story about a guy who gets superpowers from a spider bite. If you're thinking that's supposed to be more serious than silly, this probably isn't the series for you. Spider-Man always threads the line between comedic timing and serious events- it's what makes it what it is.
Also goddammit we have to watch Uncle Ben die AGAIN. I feel like Uncle Ben is about to be put on the endangered species list.
It looks amazing. I'm so glad Spidey is finally home. It's the best thing that could have happened in terms of the MCU, hands down.
That said, I'm the guy who doesn't like the Raimi movies, and I honestly loved the first Amazing Spider-Man. Garfield was great, far better than that weird blonde hitchhiker from Fear and Loathing. I didn't think the second movie was as much of a train wreck as many did, though I almost feel like I have a natural bias because that movie helped ensure that Sony and Marvel got together with that deal, so that may have affected the way I look at the movie. Heh. Though at the same time, I also didn't think the third Raimi movie was the worst, and that is almost unbelievable considering it had Topher Grace as Venom, which is probably the single worst idea Hollywood has ever had.
Either way, Tom Holland looks to be the definitive Spider-Man so far. His parts, along with Paul Rudd's were some of the best moments in Civil War, and if they manage to keep that up then this is going to be awesome.
Also short theory: so his friend in the trailer has the same name as Hob Goblin. What if his father later becomes the Hob Goblin, and they effectively skip the whole Harry/Norman part of the Osborn story? I don't doubt that they're going to include both Norman and Green Goblin eventually, somewhere down the line, but we have seen that story twice now haven't we? I don't know, I'm probably wrong, but if that kid's name has any meaning other than being an easter egg, then I doubt that he is going to be the one ending up being a villain. Who knows though, Marvel (and now Sony) is in this for the long game, so they could be looking to get back to this 15 years from now for all we know.
To be fair about the comedy elements, Spider-Man was always one of the most lighthearted comic heroes in the business. It makes perfect sense. Hell, I love that scene in the trailer when he encounters the crooks wearing Avengers masks. Also, in regards to Peter's popularity or lack thereof, I mean, that one girl just outright called him and his friend losers, so I don't think it was entirely ignored in this trailer.
But yeah. Ned Leeds, who would become one of many people to take up the Hobgoblin mantle in the comics. Do wonder if the same will happen in this universe, as Robin mentioned above. Honestly I have my doubts that the MCU wouldn't take advantage of Spidey's greatest villains at some point in this version; Venom, Doc Ock, Carnage, Goblins galore, Lizard... Although I do hope we see some other examples that don't get much love as well, such as Kraven the Hunter. Of course, that's all far off in the future, and I just want this first film to succeed before we can think about a successful future for the series. I have very little doubt Homecoming will be great, but still, one film at a time.
Oh yeah, forgot this thread existed. Saw the movie last night finally, much belatedly.
It was awesome. It hit almost all of the right notes and, best of all, doesn't rehash a single plot point point from the other five Spider-Man films. "What about the 1977 TV movie?" I SAID THERE WERE ONLY FIVE SPIDER-MAN FILMS BEFORE THIS.
But yeah, plot's totally original from the other films. I mean, there are recurring beats that are just core elements of Spider-Man, but overarching plot points aren't reused. They even upgrade the setting a bit, and throw in plenty of references to things from the comics that weren't in other films, such as Spidey's gadgets (as hinted by in the trailer). It's... the most faithful adaptation of the comic books while at the same time making it fresh and new, as well as up to a modern standard. It was all-in-all an incredible film and one of the best Spider-Man films out there; in my opinion, easily better than both "Amazing" films, and at least better than Spider-Man 3. I'm not sure if I like it more than Raimi's first two films, but it also feels a bit unfair to compare because they're very different kinds of films.
I could make a succinct breakdown of the feel of each series' atmosphere though. Raimi's films are very much "comic book" films, with a lot of similar storytelling and world-building aspects, erring a bit on the goofy end of things. The "Amazing" films try to be more grounded in reality and a bit more serious. Homecoming blends both aspects perfectly, being a colorful and silly adventure with some grounded aspects when appropriate. It's a perfect feel.
There are some nitpicks. I found it was being a little too funny in the first act or so, and what I mean by that is they cram a joke into every scene almost. None of the jokes are bad, but there's such a thing as "too much"; makes it hard to breathe, doesn't allow us to properly absorb the humor. Also it was weirdly... dirty, especially when I can't honestly remember a single overt lewd reference in either Raimi's films or the "Amazing" films. I'm sure they were there, but they were certainly not in as large a volume across all five movies combined as they were in this one. Hell, I think it might be the dirtiest of the MCU films apart from Iron Man's. Granted, bear in mind, it's still fairly tame overall, but for a Spider-Man film, a franchise that's also aimed at kids, I'm surprised at how much they stuffed in there.
But other than that it's... almost a perfect movie. And it gave us possibly the best Spider-Man villain on film. Yes... I just said the Vulture is the best Spider-Man film villain. I'm as shocked as you are. Best MCU villain for sure, but I always thought the MCU was weak when it came to its portrayal of villains overall. But Keaton plays a phenomenal character, and I'm not gonna say more. Seriously, Alfred Molina's Doc Ock was my favorite before, but Vulture barely edges him out.
The single way this movie could have been any better... was if J. K. Simmons was back as J. Jonah Jameson.
Also goddammit we have to watch Uncle Ben die AGAIN. I feel like Uncle Ben is about to be put on the endangered species list.
On this note... well, dunno if this is a spoiler but hiding it anyway.
Spoiler
They... don't mention him by name one bit. Or really allude to him, except for one line that could be interpreted as a very indirect reference to his death. I gotta admit, this does bug me a bit; they handle Peter's growth a little different and it's done well, but not a single reference to Ben is mildly upsetting.
... come to think of it, he got less involved in each reboot. He was a big part of the plot in the first Raimi film (as he should have been), he was in Amazing 1 but was underplayed in comparison (didn't even get to say the line, his death scene came and went rather quickly, and Peter just sort of abandons the hunt with little provocation), and he barely exists at all in the MCU (gets a line reference in Civil War and that's it, don't remember if they even named him or specifically referenced it being his uncle). Wonder if he'll get some retrospective in a future film...
I agree that Keaton was excellent, very threatening in a chilling way, and I'm so glad his character name has an actual meaning beyond "He flies, name him after something that flies". I did feel a bit similar to you on the 'dirty' humor bits, but I also feel they were mostly there just to capture an up-to-date modern high-school vibe, and yeah that stuff is present in that environment so I gave it a pass.
Not sure how I felt about his suit-tech. I do like his ability to craft web-objects a lot, but the AI is probably there a bit too frequently for my taste.
As to negatives, they really shoved the theme of "nothing without the suit" in our faces too hard. If Tony didn't say it clearly enough, we actually get it in an audio flashback which I didn't need at all, I still had that in mind, thanks. This movie grapples with the question of where Spider-Man's place in the world is since he's not one of the major superheroes, and I'll reserve judgement on that until I see his next movie.
As for Aunt May, I'm not really on the hype-train. She seems all-different and I don't know if that's a good thing or not. She does kind of annoy me. One thing is for certain, she's NOT hot. Have you completely lost it Tony? And Peter's secret identity is blown so easily in this movie it feels like a joke (Michelle must know since she seems like the smartest character here). I do think it would be great if Peter wore glasses even though he doesn't need them, they would help him look the original part and also help throw suspicion... if we were doing that...
I did feel the Amazing series had enough good aspects that I wanted one more entry but that ship's sailed.
Also in Homecoming, did you notice Shocker's coat had yellow diamonds on the sleeves? These things are important. They did make a confusing reference to Cap's shield- aren't Cap and Tony still on the outs 'cause of Civil War?
P.S.
I personally refer to this movie as Batman v. Spider-Man
) hero-movies. I watched the "amazing" 1 without being really amazed, but I would still call it worthwhile and likeable. This trailer though... I know it isn't but I can't stop to think it must be a parody. Some movements in the costume, the enemy/weapon-design and the comedy elements just seem really, really silly. I don't know the comic, but unlike the first two spiders this time the hero really looks like a teenage-geek. Not that I have troubles with it, but because of that I have a bit of a difficult time to accept the hero beeing that musculary and it seems the movie is not adressing school life of an uncool child in the big city up to date,
