Into the Spider-Verse would like a word with you.
Spidey OUT of MCU
- Thread starter Flying Spaghetti Monster
- Start date
Into the Spider-Verse would like a word with you.
I trust the company that had the sense to have a true fan of the source--Raimi--adapt Spider-Man as close to the source as possible--and succeed in doing that. It happened before, and it can happen again. Unlike the MCU where Spidey-Lad was wrong from the start with his "c-can I join you M-mister Stark?" glorified sidekick business.
You mean the film that basically IS an MCU movie except it uses Alternate Universe characters instead of other MCU characters? What made that story stick out what it's amazing animation quality more than the storytelling.
The 1960s sources, not the 70s onwards sources. There's more to Spidey than the 60s.
And shoot itself in the foot, which is what happened to Raimi Spidey and ASM Spidey. Sony couldn't go two movies with Raimi before messing things up, and with ASM they were even quicker to screw up.
By your logic, Thanos should've stayed with his "Loves death" schtick, Bucky should've been a teenager, Captain America should've been misogynistic to Peggy and Sharon, etc.
MCU Spidey was basically just a less broody take on Ultimate Spidey, with Stark serving as a replacement for Fury.
wat
Now, let's just for the heck of it suppose that that's true. Does this now mean that Sony did, in fact, learn from Feige how to do these movies successfully, like they said?
Remains to be seen. Judging by Venom - not yet.
I agree that the Raimi movies are the best Spider-Man life action movies, but the last one in the series was released twelve years ago. Since then, I've watched the two Amazing Spider-Man movies, which I found terribly boring, and from what I gather about Venom, I wouldn't have particularly liked it. Into the Spider-Verse was produced by a different production company, as someone said upthread. As far as I'm concerned they really don't have the best track record in the past decade, so I'm not sure if I'd trust them to do a whole lot of good stuff with Spider-Man.
To vbe fair, putting Spider Man into the MCU DID help Sony revitalize the filmed version of the character for them. Whether the next film solo produced by Sony is as big (or a bigger) box office success remains to be seen - and no, there's no evidence pointing to it doing any better or worse then the last two MCU films; but again, there are people upset on BOTH sides of the aisle (IE some made at the MCU, some mad at SONY over teh end of the agreement).
We won't knpow intil the film is close to release as to how the above will affect its Box Office numbers one way or the other.
Foe myself: Had the latest Tom Holland Spiderman films been Sony only, I doubt I would have paid to see them - not because I don't like the character, but after Sony's post Toby McGuire stuff (Hell, I don't recall the lead actor who they got for their last reboot) I didn't care for their take on the character (and I didn't pay to see them in a theater.)
I AM disappointed the agreement fell through, but I like Tom Holland in the role, and if Sony keeps the general feel of the characters the same - I may go see their next Spiderman film.
True.
That's all they need to focus on--the best of any Sider-Man adaptation, which they released, and as one would expect, ignore the failure of the Garfield movies, and take no inspiration from whatever the MCU thought they were doing with the character.
It's about villains trying to open portals to another dimension so Spidey has to team up with other heroes to stop this threat to the fabric of reality.
Sounds like an MCU plot to me, since it isn't about sadsack Peter worrying about the bills or Aunt May's health.
Yeah, the MCU didn't invent the trope of villains trying to open dimensional portals and heroes joining together. Not even Marvel Comics invent that. And Spider-Man comics have used these exact tropes. I mean, shit, one of the first threats comic book Spidey had to deal with was an alien invasion.
And, really, worrying about real life stuff like paying bills and an elderly family members health, if anything, is more relevant today than it was in the 60s. Besides, those were always side-plots. The main story was always about supervillains, dangerous inventions going awry, saving John Jameson from a malfunctioning space rocket, dealing with clones, all that stuff. I mean, you gonna complain about Peter having trouble dealing with girls, too? Because that has been a far bigger part of the Spider-Man movies than May's health or having to pay bills.
It did codify it in live action, and it's very much not a "True" Spidey plot by the Raimi fanboys' standards.
If they were that side-plotish then the MCU haters wouldn't complain so much about the MCU not having that stuff.
They tied his girl trouble into the bigger plot in Homecoming at least. And at least his connections to the Avengers meant that his connections to his villains in these movies weren't as coincidentally contrived as they were in the Raimi movies.
Here we go again with the "Raimi fanboys". Seriously, you do this all the time. Whether it's the "Nolanites" or the "Snyder fans", every time somebody expresses a view that differs from "the MCU way is the one and only way superhero movies should ever even be attempted, and anything that isn't like the MCU is utter shit that should be burned from the history books", you put a label on them to put them all in one limited category that you can then denounce.
Now, it is true, several posters have expressed their preferrence of the Raimi movies over the MCU-Spidey movies, one or the other even quite vocally (and we all know who those are), but even they show some variety in their tastes. Like, @TREK_GOD_1 is one of those "Raimi fanboys" you keep referring to, but he's also expressed in other threads how much he likes the early DCEU. Now, say what you want about them (and I'm sure you will), but Raimi's Spider-Man films and Snyder's DC films are very, very different.
So, instead of strawmaning some kind of "Raimi fanboys' standards", maybe try some honest arguments and respect for differing views. And, yes, @TREK_GOD_1 could sometimes use some of that advise, as well.
I'm kind of drawing a blank, so would you be so kind to refer me to some of those complaints about the MCU May not being unhealthy (something that the "Raimi fanboys" surely wouldn't complain about, since the only time her health was adressed was her stay in the hospital in the first movie resulting from injuries from the Green Goblin's attack on her). And nobody wants to see Peter doing his taxes, but generally being depicted as not having a lot of money, which actually is kind of undermined by him having access to Stark technology and private jet.
Nonononono, I wasn't complaining about Peter having dating troubles. I brought this up as an example of something that is a far bigger thing in the Raimi films than May's health or making rent, and wondered why you had no issue with that?
So, science student Peter Parker writing a paper on top scientist Otto Octavius = contrived; the girl Peter's dating turning out to be the Vulture's daughter = not contrived. Yeah, I call double standards on this one.
This isn't any more accurate now than it was the last time you tried to float this nonsense.
In fact the explicit idea of "Spider-Man teaming up with alternate versions of himself" has been part of Spider-Man stories since the mid-90s, with The Animated Series doing it first, and then the Spider-verse comics back about 5 years ago.
The basic plot of Into the Spider-Verse was a pretty standard modern superhero story, but what made it unique, even from the MCU, was the style.
And having multiple heroes team up is not unique to the MCU, we've gotten team up stories in the comics, and on TV shows like the DCAU cartoons, and Smallville for decades before the MCU started.
And having multiple heroes team up is not unique to the MCU, we've gotten team up stories in the comics, and on TV shows like the DCAU cartoons, and Smallville for decades before the MCU started.
Exactly.
Characters designed as artwork, rendered in motion as artwork. Inconceivable!
I'd rather see a Fantastic Four movie done this way* than everything Marvel will put out for the next two years.
*Sadly, Brad Bird already did it off-brand. Well, not that sadly, since the first movie was wonderful.
Yawn
At a minimum, Raimi was also a fan of, from after the '60s comics, the Black Cat and the Harry Osborn Green Goblin.
Ultimate Spider-Man was a character whose creator Bendis wasn't interested enough in to not kill him off. And even Ultimate Spider-Man was much less admiring of or deferential to Nick Fury than MCU Spider-Man was of Tony Stark.
Last edited:
Well considering how hot aunt may looks now, she may not have problems paying bills, just get a webcam.