Although there were a few differences, I think this film's version of Spider-Man and Peter Parker was pretty much the same version as in the Garfield films, a lot of aspects were very similar or the same, I don't see how either the writers or actor did much that was different or better.
Spoilers Spider-Man: Homecoming-- Grading and Discussion
- Thread starter Turtletrekker
- Start date
I take it that having him use that squeaky voice is to suggest "nerdy youth" when Parker would not risk exposing his ahe range while in costume. One of the smart inventions of the 1967-70 Spider-Man cartoon was voice actor Paul Soles purposely changing his voice to a deeper, more commanding one while voicing Spider-Man, but changing it to a younger, distinct one as Parker, adding the degree of identity separation suggested by the comics of that period.
That was not to be found in Homecoming, as the team behind it was too concerned with selling the "nerdy youth" angle whether Parker was in costume or not.
You act like Maguire and Garfield changed their voices too, they didn't. In fact, no version of Peter in animation did it either except Paul Soles.
^ No one mentioned Maguire or Garfield. The point you missed is that Paul Soles--the first actor to take on the role of Parker / Spider-Man--understood why his voice should be changed while in costume. By now, three film franchises in, one would imagine producers would see the need for Parker to alter his voice. Instead, he's exactly the same "nerdy youth" voice, which anyone (in-universe) would peg as a starting point of learning who he might be behind the mask.
Last edited:
They acknowledged that in the movie. Peter used the suit to make his voice all bad ass and intimidating. The guy took him even less serious, a fake voice sounds fake. Makes him look like a stupid person in costume.
You can change your voice without it sounding like someone "playing superhero", but anything would be better than the voice coming from the mask sounding like the kids you hear on the street everyday, or worse, like someone you know in the neighborhood.
Take it up with the comics and every live action adaptation then. It happens there without complaint.
I've never seen any adaptation where Peter changed his voice as Spider-Man, and I've seen all the movies, at least one episode of all of animated series the since Spider-Man and his Amazing Friends, and I've played about a half dozen to a dozen video games with him in them.
Last edited:
Yes, uh MATE, I watched it as I've written. I thought film was okay I didn't say it was horrible, terrible, the worst movie I'd ever seen, the the turds or turds which needs to be flushed; it was okay--nothing as good like The Winter Soldier or the first Iron Man IMO.Mate, did you even watch the movie?
Maybe I just don't get it... So sounding like a "nerdy youth" behind the mask is considered "bad ass" & "intimidating??? Do you know of anyone besides Mike Tyson* who has a nerdy youth voice who sounded "bad ass" and "intimidating"? I'm not saying the actor should fake a voice, I'm saying I would like the actor and stunt man have the voice dubbed or what was done with Ben Affleck's soft voice as Batman. If the character is called Spider-Man shouldn't he have the persona of what Peter would consider... is a man?
I mean Christian Bale's Bat-voice sounded fake and not intimidating in the least to me and I'm a girl. He looked like a stupid person in costume every time he opened his mouth as Batman. I thought Kevin Conroy and Val Kilmer conveyed a convincing transformation in the tone of each persona of the alter ego in my opinion, the Marvel guys are too interested in the Hollywood actors being themselves in the roles cast than becoming the characters (with the exception of Chris Evans and Benedict Cumberbatch.)
Anyway, "nerdy youth" voice does not sound all bad ass or intimidating but sounds unsure and not very confident, and not much of the persona of Spider-Man.
*I asked this question before with friends and one of them mentioned him? I couldn't stop laughing because I don't believe his voice is "bad ass" or "intimidating" but his historical persona is.
Principal's wouldn't have the authority to refuse state or school district requirements. Lying about a state requirement would be grounds for dismissal and possibly criminal action as well.
I didn’t say that. I said, that he tried changing his voice even with tech assistance and it didn’t work.
Have you ever heard an average teenager trying to sound like an adult?
It doesn’t work, so why bother.
Besides Peter is still trying to come into his own and figure all this superhero info out. He is too preoccupied to try to act as an adult.
I find that way more believable that he takes a while to grow into the cool and confident Spider-Man persona over time.
His costume is not a magic feather.
I grew up with Spider-man and enjoyed his cartoons and comics for over a decade.
Sounding 'bad-ass and intimidating' is not what Spider-man is about. Eventually, when he's older, he learns to sound more confident in himself, but I can't recall a single time in any medium when Spider-man ever sounded 'bad-ass' or 'intimidating'. Not every hero has to be Batman.
As I said, in the movie he failed at trying. So he didn’t bother with it anymore.
They even played it for laughs at how bad he was at Batman-ing the interrogation scene.
At various points, heroes suggest destroying Stones to stop Thanos. Stark suggests sticking the Time Stone down a garbage disposal, and Vision suggests destroying the Mind Stone.
What if those Stones had been destroyed? They were the last two Thanos got, so he’d still have had the other four.
With only four Stones, Thanos couldn’t have disintegrated half the universe in a snap. But he still could have killed them slowly, planet by planet as he had done in the past. With control of four Stones, and the other two destroyed so they can’t be used against him, he’d have been too powerful to stop, wouldn’t he?
Safe to say that destroying the Time and Mind Stones happens in some of the 14,000,604 possible futures that don’t work out so well?
What if those Stones had been destroyed? They were the last two Thanos got, so he’d still have had the other four.
With only four Stones, Thanos couldn’t have disintegrated half the universe in a snap. But he still could have killed them slowly, planet by planet as he had done in the past. With control of four Stones, and the other two destroyed so they can’t be used against him, he’d have been too powerful to stop, wouldn’t he?
Safe to say that destroying the Time and Mind Stones happens in some of the 14,000,604 possible futures that don’t work out so well?
Yep. He'd likely have been unstoppable and spent the rest of his life enforcing his ideas on the whole galaxy. Strange willingly gave him the time stone because he saw in the future that the only way to defeat Thanos was to let him win - for now. Presumably the key to turning the tables will come from Thanos letting his guard down because he's already completed his destiny. (Or Thanos may defeat himself in a way.)
Exactly. In the comics, Spider-Man's witty and often nerdy banter had always been a way for him to build confidence and hide his nervousness (from himself) with the effect of being a distraction to his opponents.
He'd still have the Power Stone (to destroy planets), Space Stone (go anywhere), Reality Stone (control things on a molecular level) and Soul Stone (control souls/find souls anywhere). That's more than enough to perform his "cleansing".