First off, like you yourself acknowledge, CoIE is NOT the story that explores the "path not taken". Neither was "Flash of Two Worlds", for that matter, that was exactly the "bring back earlier versions as an alternate universe for nostalgia" that you complain about. So, why would you expect an adaptation of CoIE to do that?
All I meant was that the "bringing back previous adaptations as alternate timelines" gimmick has been done so often lately that I would find it a nice change of pace if a multiverse story
didn't do that. I'm not talking about my expectations for any specific work, just expressing a general opinion about the overuse of the device.
Second, Spider-Verse, as you yourself also acknowledged, did use largely alternate Spideys from the comics. Spider-Man Noir, Spider-Ham, even Miles Morales, really. So, while they hadn't been used in movies before, fans were still somewhat familiar with these characters and got a kick out of seeing them.
A successful comic book typically sells in the thousands or tens of thousands. A successful movie is seen by tens of millions at least. Most of the films' audience was being introduced to these characters for the first time.
Besides, everything we're talking about is an adaptation of
something from the comics, but what's under discussion here is the specific recent trend of bringing back actors and characters from
previous screen adaptations and pretending they're alternate timelines in a single metacontinuity. The specific versions of the comics characters seen in
Spider-Verse may have been based on the comics, but they were still reinterpretations of those comics characters, interpretations that had never been seen onscreen before. We've seen previous versions of Peter Parker and Miles Morales and Spider-Gwen in TV animation, but never the
specific versions seen in these movies. It's not the same as, say, the cameo of Josh Keaton's Spectacular Spider-Man or the store clerk from
Venom or whatever. There's a difference between creating a new interpretation of a character and bringing back a specific previous interpretation of that character.
Not to mention that an animated CoIE adaptation is freer to better include those earlier adaptations in the main story, as opposed to mostly cameos as they were in the Arrowverse version, because actor availability and costume budget aren't that much of an issue with animation.
Sure, and as I said, I'd be fine with that
if we hadn't already seen a version of CoIE done just 4 years ago and if the general trope hadn't already been run into the ground. Like I said, the whole exercise seems redundant at this point.
Also, an animated version would have the chance to actually depict the different animation styles. Aside from the differences in character design, the Super Friends versions, for example, could be depicted to move as stiff as in the original show.
It's been done. Two different
Ninja Turtles animated series have done it in their crossover movies with their predecessors.
Teen Titans vs. Teen Titans Go! did it, not only with the two title versions but with the DC Universe Animated Movies versions of the Titans. And of course that blending of styles is
Spider-Verse's whole bread and butter, even if it's mostly not based on previous animated productions.
Instead, we're getting the threat of a Multiverse extinguished which we don't already know. If the DCAU was threatened by the Anti-Matter universe, it would have higher emotional stakes for us as the audience.
See, that's exactly why I'm tired of nostalgia. Holding the audience's interest by bringing back older things they already care about is a lazy cheat. A good storyteller can make you care deeply about characters and situations you never encountered before. If the Tomorrowverse movies had done a better job making us care about this universe, they wouldn't need the crutch of bringing back the DCAU or the Super Friends or whatever to make us care about the story they're telling now.
Also, again, you can't assume the fanbase for the older things is the only audience. The primary target demographic for these movies is people who weren't even born yet when the DCAU ended. Pandering to nostalgia can only get you so far. You still have to make the story comprehensible and engaging to new audiences who have no attachment to or familiarity with the older productions. And that means the primary emotional investment has to be in the current characters and their reality, and that whatever you do with the returned characters has to be strong enough to work for everyone, not just the fraction of the audience that recognizes the past continuity being referenced.
I mean, I personally was deeply moved by the Arrowverse
Crisis giving the 1990 Flash that compelling moment of closure that resonated with the sacrifice of the comics' Barry in CoIE, but the objective part of me recognized that for Arrowverse viewers unfamiliar with those previous works, it might've had more impact if it had been Shipp's Jay Garrick in that role. Most viewers -- not to mention Earth-1 Barry himself -- would've had more emotion invested in Jay than in a doppelganger they'd only seen once before in
Elseworlds. That was a case where pandering too much to nostalgic viewers like me may have weakened the story for everyone else.