I am also a little bit tired of Ironman, but I prefer him over another standard Spiderman origin story
Spider-Man: Homecoming' anticipation thread
- Thread starter Turtletrekker
- Start date
I am also a little bit tired of Ironman, but I prefer him over another standard Spiderman origin story
Homecoming isn't doing the origin story.
I think that's what Firefly meant -- that it's better that Homecoming is telling a story about Spidey and Iron Man instead of giving us a third origin-story variation.
It is not as if the second variation differed much from the first one...
By the way, sometimes I feel t I am the only one who liked the tone of TASM. Someone else thought it was better than Raimi's first movie?
These days? Oh you poor ignorant, innocent little soul you.
Seriously, in terms of overall quality, trailers have never been better than they are now. There are still crap ones of course, but now studios are actively trying to out trailer each other the batting average has gone *way* up. Indeed, there's been a few notable instances lately where the entertainment value of certain trailers has surpassed the films they're advertising. Granted that's mostly because the trailers turned out to be rubbish, but for the most part, such trailers have not given away crucial plot details.
Wasn't me. The first Spider-Man movie is among my favorites in the superhero genre. ASM1 wasn't bad, per say, but I found it to most un-amazing and didn't really get hooked. It's the most generic superhero movie I can recall seeing (IMHO). (Being a fan of the Ultimate Spider-Man comics, I did like seeing the elements from that brought in -- Oscorp creating a lot of the villains, the fight at the school, etc., to be fair.)
You might be thinking of @Christopher? He has said nice things about the ASM movies earlier on the thread, but you'd have to ask him about that.
It's not like I was alive in those days. At least the trailer never shows you the shark and only focuses on particular moments of the movie. Batman V Superman, for instance, throws away any possibility of speculating with the fact that those two might not end up as best friends. Terminator Salvation gave away the big spin on Marcus's identity.
Neither was I. Yet, I managed to be informed nonetheless. Generally I prefer to know at least a little of what I'm discussing rather than talk out of my arse and make sweeping and demonstrably false generalisations. I'm fussy that way.
And like I said. The trailers for 'BvS: Dawn of Martha' & 'Terminator Who Gives a Crap' are in the clear minority. These days most studios go to great lengths to avoid spoilers leaking out and it's relatively rare that they'll let marketing just blurt out the third act twist. When it does happen, it usually seems to be when confidence in the film is low and they're overcompensating in an effort to attract a wider audience...or they're creatively bereft, or incompetent. Sometimes all of the above.
Point is, that's not the direction things are headed overall.
Suicide Squad comes to mind. The trailers were better-paced and more coherent than the final film. (And yes, I did finally see the film recently, upon finding it at the library. It has an incredibly clumsy structure in the first act, just churning out one disconnected origin story after another before bothering to establish any kind of plot or stakes. And most of the characters are one-note ciphers with no more personality revealed over 2 hours than we got in a 3-minute trailer. Although it does sort of come together better in the last act.)
Seriously? Anyone who's ever seen a "superhero vs. superhero" story knows that they start out fighting but end up joining forces. It's not like there was ever any suspense on that count -- especially since we knew from the subtitle alone that this was a setup for the later Justice League movie, so of course the heroes would end up, well, in league.
Civil War was a superhero vs. superhero movie and they end up sort of splitted. Of course, the finale implies the possibility of a future union, but it remains to be seen in a future film. It's in the closure itself, not in the beginning of the final act.
Still, most trailers do give up much of the movies plot, particullary blockbusters. In any case, its the common denominator. Nevertheless, it still takes some value out of the movie itself. It is not as if they were book adaptations where fans already know 100% what the whole thing is about. I don't know, maybe I just like my movies to have some degree of unpredictability.
I guess you have a point. No more criticism of a trailer over trifles for now, unless of course the trailer ends up being better than the movie itself, like Suicide Squad and Man of Steel (DC has a pattern here? I hope it does not apply to WW).
While reviewing the trailer, I realized Toomes talks about protecting his family. TASM films forgot about it when characterizing their villains (terrible mistake with Connors, it's not as if they could do much with Max). Osborn had his weakling son, Octavious his wife, and even Marko had his young daughter. Will they do something with Adrian? One of Friendly Neighborhood comics mentions his brother Marcus, taking care of his brother after the death of their parents....
While reviewing the trailer, I realized Toomes talks about protecting his family. TASM films forgot about it when characterizing their villains (terrible mistake with Connors, it's not as if they could do much with Max). Osborn had his weakling son, Octavious his wife, and even Marko had his young daughter. Will they do something with Adrian? One of Friendly Neighborhood comics mentions his brother Marcus, taking care of his brother after the death of their parents....
The Empire Strikes Back was pretty spoilery, showing Darth Vader in Cloud City, Lando's turn towards good (where they ambush and disarm the Storm Troopers), etc. It managed to keep Yoda out and obviously didn't reveal that Darth Vader is Luke's father, but it covered nearly everything else.
Not quite the same. I'm talking about the cliche where two superheroes meet for the first time, fight over some silly misunderstanding or manipulation by the villain, and end up as friends. BvS was just an overblown and exceptionally stupid rehash of that hoary trope. Civil War was a very different story, about heroes who knew each other well coming into conflict over something of genuine substance. (There was some manipulation by a villain involved, but only to cultivate and exacerbate the genuine sources of conflict.)
There's nothing new about that. Heck, '70s and '80s TV shows would routinely begin an episode with a preview of upcoming scenes, covering pretty much the whole plot, usually including scenes from the climax. They were called "teasers" for a reason -- giving you a glimpse of the story and the action so you'd be curious to see how the whole thing played out.
The value of a story is not in knowing what happens, it's in knowing how it happens. Knowing the plot structure in advance doesn't ruin the experience, because the experience is not just about the sterile facts, it's about the execution, the performances, the dialogue, the details. Yes, in some cases, knowing a certain fact in advance can damage the surprise, but that's only for certain types of thing in certain types of story.
That is indeed what I meant.
First clip...
First TV spot...
I think that Tony have maybe two or three scenes.
Similar threads
