Spoilers Spider-Man: No Way Home - Review and Discussion Thread

Damn, I didn't know about those. They're hilarious.

I also hadn't realized that Betty was working for the Bugle during her brief appearance. I just figured she was still working for Midtown. Pity there wasn't more room in the film for that.

She really is. She was fantastic in Mare of Easttown, standing toe to toe with the likes of Kate Winslett and Jean Smart!

 

Another piece of art from the version of the movie from elsewhere in the multiverse...


Hard to tell but looks like America holding one of the cures.

Incidentally, other people have realised that it's actually Isabela Moner in the first piece of art not
Xochitl Gomez.

 

Given how much the US ( and most likely the world) is a fanboy of Cap i wonder how much the world knows about the background of Endgame, especially what went down in the final battle.

Might be hard to explain how a wizard decided to let half the universe lose 5 years of life because he saw it was the only way to defeat Thanos because he saw it due to a magical stone.

Otherwise all of the Avengers and all the others would probably have their faces carved somewhere in a mountain.

 

I'm pretty sure it does, but it just shows reality shows and stuff like Fresh Prince and Wayans Bros.

 

The broad strokes at least seem to be public knowledge. I mean for one thing ordinary people now know who Doctor Strange is, which tells me someone must have issued a press release post-clean up.
That said . . .

Spoiler: 'Hawkeye' spoilers

That Yelena was so easily mislead as to what happened to Nat indicates that not EVERY detail of what went down was made public. Not even some of the fairly important ones.

 

Jon Snow knew of Dr Strange in the Eternals. And he knows nothing.

 

How can I not give this film an A*. It gives us everything a fan could want.
William Dafoe was excellent. He's so evil in this.

What I took away from the film was how Spiderman was the hero who saved Peter Parker from himself and helped him deal with his grief. We saw something similar with 'Into the Spiderverse' but unlike that movie we have movies of Tobey and Andrew which show what they went though which just gives this film more weight to that theme. How they leave Tom's Spiderman at the end here is pretty heavy for the character. I wonder where they are going to go next... I know Spidey has got to stick around at least until 'Secret Wars'.

Part of me expected him to show up.

 

For e...i really hated the Amazing Spiderman movies because i KNEW they were mademainly to keep SOny's movie rights for Spierman... not because of the management's love for the character and IP.

Now, I really do like Andrew Garfield as an actor, but didn't like how he came across in his movies. But i absolutely loved him in No Way Home. And my respect for him grew a lot, as he seemed to roll with the jokes about his SPiderman being unloved. I also embraced his dramatic moments in the movie too, and would welcome him back again (and jokes about his unpopularity wouldn't be needed that time).


To those who LOVED his movies....VERY curious... do you feel like this felt like the SAME Spiderman you loved? Or did you hate it?


p.s. I am trying not to think too hard about the ending of the movie, since we won;t know for a while the true implications. I was looking though my 1st & 2nd grade class photos, and there are people i have NO IDEA who they were, despite being in my class for 9 months. So i am HOPING that was the effect on Peter. But i will wait to see if they figure it out.

p.p.s. Now that Wong has been promoted, should we start calling Dr. Strange #SorcererDeluxe? #PizzaLoversKnow

 

Garfield seemed fine to me. He mentions that he’s become a bit darker since the events of ASM 2 but you don’t really see it in this movie. There is a nice moment with Michelle that was well done.

I still think Garfield was the best at playing Spider-Man. From his mannerisms to the way he moved as said hero.

 

I wouldn't go as far saying I loved the Garfield movies. I think the first one is a good movie with a few missteps (mostly the forced mystery about Peter's parents and the unfortunate decision to not give Lizard his snout), but the filmed was elevated greatly by both Garfield and Stone...which remained the only good thing about the sequel. I loved his performance in his solo films and in this film to the same degree and I certainly hope we get to see more of him as Peter in the future in whatever form that might take.

 

While I certainly agree that Garfield and Stone's respective performances and shared chemistry were far and away the best part of two rather mediocre movies (and that's being VERY charitable to the second one), I did still have am issue with Garfield's version of Spider-Man. It wasn't the Spider-Man part (that was great), it was that I never bought him as Peter Parker. He was WAY too pretty, too trendy, and far too cool to be what's supposed to be a very nerdy misfit outsider. Mind you, I had the opposite problem with Maguire; great Peter/unconvincing Spidey. Of the three, Holand is the only one for my money that pulled both side of the character off right out of the gate.

For context: I never watched either movie back when they came out. SM3 left a bad taste (haven't rewatched it to this day) and nothing about the trailers at the time made we want to sit though another two. It was only a few years ago, just after 'Homecoming' was released that I got around to it and watched them both back-to back.

I should also add that in fairness, any reservations I had for Maguire and Garfield in their own movies don't carry over into this one. They both grew into their respective version of the character very well, and it helps that they're now older. Also the differences in all three approaches actually helped throw the commonalities of what is essential to Peter Parker/Spider-Man into stark relief, and was a masterful bit of interplay and chemistry from all three.

 

Folks who say that Peter Parker is supposed to be a nerdy, genius outsider never read past issue 12 or so of Amazing Spider-Man back in 1964.

That is how he began in Amazing Fantasy #15 and in the first couple of years of the main book but the confidence he felt as Spider-Man soon bled through to his Peter side and he matured into a rounded character with a vibrant social circle and friends. It’s not just his rogues gallery which was extentsive. And if he’s got the second best rogues gallery after Batman, he’s had and got perhaps the best set of supporting characters in comics full stop.

In this way, Andrew’s Peter is by far the most “comics accurate” because, you can see budding confidence beginning already where he talks Flash out of bullying that other kid in ASM1 and through both movies.

There’s no way you’d buy Maguire’s Parker doing that, because he’s playing a caricature of Peter Parker in Amazing Fantasy up to ASM 5 or 6. In all three films.

There are problems with Andrew’s movies. But they’re all in the script and studio mandated creative direction level. His Peter, masked and in action or otherwise is leagues above Tobey’s. And probably Tom’s, though Tom’s got the prospect of a longer run (if he wants Sony’s money and to is ok with putting the time in, which he’s sounded less sure about) in which to get there, he was on the way. But Andrew did it in two films already.

 

A month ago, I posted some thoughts in another thread about the Garfield films. I wouldn't say I loved them -- both are flawed in different ways -- but I liked them more than the Maguire films, largely because of Garfield's chemistry with Emma Stone. But I also liked his approach to the role -- the snarky quips and casual confidence as Spider-Man, the clear intelligence but also evident pain as Peter -- and the psychological aspect of the films really appalled to me.

On those terms, I thought Garfield was fine in No Way Home and in line with the psychological take on the character. Garfield's Spider-Man is haunted by ghosts in his two films -- his parents' abandonment, Uncle Ben, Captain Stacy, Gwen -- and they're still haunting him. I didn't like the staging of his rescue of the falling MJ; Gwen's death sequence in ASM2 is visually spectacular and emotionally wrenching, and Watts' direction of it was, frankly, perfunctory. We don't know how long for him it's been since the events of ASM2 -- and maybe never will -- but I'd like to think it's been a bit of time and Garfield's Spider-Man is closer to his real age now. So, yes, i felt Garfield was playing the same Spider-Man, plus ten-ish years.

If we do see Garfield again as Spider-Man, I hope we get to see his Peter as an adult, which is new territory for the character on film though not for the comics, no matter how much Marvel tries to pretend that Peter is younger than he really is. Maybe he'll be working at a tech start-up. Maybe he'll be a high school science teacher. Maybe he'll be in a relationship with Michael B. Jordan's MJ (which was Garfield's suggested casting for the role).

 

So I watched this again at the cinema tonight and there were two things I noticed at the end. In the scene where MJ and Peter kiss, MJ tells Peter to wait and say "I L*ve you" when he finds her again. But just after they kiss you can see Tom's lips move, it's inaudible but there is a slight reaction, almost a smile from Zendaya. It looks like Tom says "I l*ve you" for real. Recorded forever in cinematic history. Awwww
The other scene was Happy and Peter at the grave. Happy says "nice to meet you" and Peter just remains silent as he walks away. Nice little touch.

 

Andrew Garfield even lied to Emma Stone about appearing in No Way Home. She called him a "jerk" when she found out the truth.

I'm glad they're still good friends. They were a cute couple.

 

That's so adorable.

I love those two.

 

I got the impression he had gone a little dark, but had since recovered. ASM 2 was many years ago now...

 

Another piece of concept art from the original version.

 

Finally got to see this last night, only my second cinema trip since the pandemic began (the first being NTTD because no way was I missing a Bond film on the big screen) and while I get the plot holes people are talking about, on an emotional level I thought it was wonderful.

For saying it's a riff on Into the Spiderverse and that 'three spidermen pointing' meme it worked really well. Defoe proves once again that he didn't need to stupid outfit in the first film, he's scary enough and Goblin enough with just his face! He was superb and I'm glad Osbourne got some hint of redemption, same with Doc Ock.

As a fan of the Garfield films (mostly, as others have said for me he was a far better Peter than Maguire) it was great to see Andrew in the role again, and Tobey too. Would have been very easy for them to be merely cameos but thankfully the films gives them some great stuff to work with. Tom and Andrew's horror/fascination with Tobey's webs was very funny.

I know it's just adding to a fan service and would have made the film even longer (not that it felt long) but it would have been fun if Ned had created one more portal and found Nicholas Hammond (but it closes before he can get through)

The ending was sad but as someone who's always been a little miffed that this Spiderman had rich uncle Tony and a whole heap of gadgets to help him (much as I think Holland is perfect casting) the image of him at the end in his homemade suit, looking straight out of the comics, was wonderful.

I'd really like to see Garfield pull on the spider suit again some day.

That being said I really hope Peter can reconnect with MJ and Ned

 

I think I’ve been to the cinema 13 times since the pandemic. It hasn’t put me off at all but my local cinema is never that busy.