Spoilers Spider-Man: Homecoming-- Grading and Discussion

[Turtletrekker]

So the time has finally arrived! Spider-Man: Homecoming will be in theaters in a few short days. The reviews have all been glowing and positive and this looks to be the best received Spider-Man movie since Spider-Man 2.

Post your spoilery comments and reviews in this thread and post your grade above.

As for me, I have my tickets for Thursday, and will largely avoid this thread until then except to post some review threads.

ETA: Here are the first four minutes of the film...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

It's really just a recap and expansion of Peter's involvement in the Civil War story. It actually contradicts Civil War in two different places. First, it loses Peter's "Holy shit!" reaction to Giant Man, and Peter doesn't have the black eye that we saw in the CW tag when he returns home. Also, the events in Germany were very public, so May should know exactly where Tony Stark was when he was supposedly with Peter.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

I realized yesterday that I won't be able to see this until sometime next week at the earliest because I'll be at the beach for four days. I know, woe is me.

 

[Turtletrekker]

Homecoming is currently sitting at 93% at Rotten Tomatoes. It must be all of those people that Marvel pays to write reviews.

 

[kirk55555]

Homecoming is currently sitting at 93% at Rotten Tomatoes. It must be all of those people that Marvel pays to write reviews.

Based on the trailers, I almost want to give that stupid conspiracy theory some credit this time, even as a huge MCU fan who considers the least good MCU film to still be pretty good.

 

[Turtletrekker]

Looks like the best since Spider-Man 2 to me, perhaps better. It's certainly the first Spider-Man movie I've given a rat's ass about since then.

 

[kirk55555]

Well, its not hard to be the best spider-man movie since Spider-Man 2 Personally, I'm thinking it will be worse then Spider-Man 3 (which I thought was ok but hugely flawed) but better then Amazing Spider-Man (which was extremely mediocre). I haven't seen ASM2 so I don't know how it would rank, but since most people say ASM2 is worse then ASM1 then Homecoming would also be better then that.

 

[ichab]

To be honest I've enjoyed all the Spiderman movies up to now. Looking forward to this one as well.

 

[Relayer1]

Just seen it. Was going to give it B+ but that just seemed mean, so A- it is.

Not perfect - it wasn't going to be, having to stay so far from some of the core mythology, but it's been overused recently and they had little choice.

Who's going to want to see Uncle Ben die again and Norman show up ? Maybe later.

It's hard to see how they could do much better with the hand they were dealt, and I enjoyed the hell out of it.

 

[Turtletrekker]

The voice of KAREN, the A.I. in Peter's Stark suit, was provided by Jennifer Connelly. Connelly, of course, is married to Paul Bettany who provided the voice of JARVIS before becoming the Vision.

Connelly also played Betty Ross in Ang Lee's Hulk movie.

 

[Captaindemotion]

I love Spider-man and didn't hate the last 3 movies as much as the rest of you. Loved him in Civil War. So this gets an unashamed A+ from me. Great cast, great humour, great action and fitted nicely into the MCU without feeling like it came off a conveyor belt or assembly line. There were enough references to and appearances by other characters to remind us that this wasn't the Toby or Andrew Spider-men but without small universe syndrome setting in.

No massive surprises with the plot but enough twists to stop it being totally predictable. Oh and do wait until the end credits roll entirely.

 

[Turtletrekker]

Keep in mind that I won't see the movie until tomorrow...

I didn't "hate" the last three movies, I just felt that they were extraordinarily "meh" and perhaps just a little repetitive. A little? In a lot of ways they made the same movie five times.

And while it would have been amazing for the hardcore fans if Marvel could have given us a more comics-accurate presentation of Peter's life in the MCU, the honest truth is that it's been done.

This is the sixth Spider-Man movie since 2002. The last thing that either Kevin Feige or Amy Pascal want are for people, especially casual movie-goers, to think is that they've already seen this before. "Oh, another re-make." How to avoid this? Look at what's been done.

Uncle Ben/ Power and responsibility? Done.
Peter/Harry/MJ triangle? Done.
Gwen Stacy? Done.
J. Jonah Jameson? Done.
Green Goblin? Done.
Doctor Octopus? Done.

The trick for Marvel is to make the character seem fresh to old audiences while still making him recognizable as Peter Parker. The best way to do that is to give the audience something new. And Spider-Man's mythology is deep enough to support doing this. Hell, it's deep enough to support it's own spin-off universe!

The things that are unavoidable such as Aunt May? Do it different. Make her much younger and attractive. Flash Thompson, Cyber-Bully? Why not? Green Goblin/Osborn family much? Spider-Man has an amazing rogues gallery that's barely had the surface scratched in five movies.

So, in the end, I will say that while I would have loved for the MCU Spider-Man to be a more "traditional" and "comics accurate" one, I am beyond thrilled that we are (finally!) getting something different. And there's nothing stopping them from bringing in Osborn, Doc Ock and JJJ in future installments, especially with the SMU now a thing.

And, if not, I already have Uncle Ben, Norman Osborn, Mary Jane Watson, JJJ, Doc Ock and the rest sitting on my movie shelf and they're not going anywhere.

Onward...

 

[Ethros]

Saw it last night. I was just reading through the Anticipation thread, I hadn't read about that 8 years thing before I saw it so it's all fresh for me.
But yeah, that's weirdly what stood out for me. As Deadpool would say "these timelines are so confusing."

So it's set a few months after Civil War... and the Chitauri invasion was 8 years ago?...... Eight years?!
There's eight years in between the end of Avengers 1 and Civil War??

No. You can try retcon whatever you want, but no, I don't buy that.


(They can ignore Agents of Shield all they want too and I'm sure they will, but even only focussing on the movies I don't buy it)


There's also the whole thing of they're moving from Avengers Tower to a new facility in upstate New York... oh yeah that new facility that's been there since the end of Age of Ultron? Huh?
And who even are the Avengers at this point? Iron Man and Vision? And War Machine maybe if Rhodey's all better now.

I'll be a nerd and pick at the pointless parts maybe, but it was just weird.

 

[Tosk]

No. You can try retcon whatever you want, but no, I don't buy that.

Honest question...why not? If Spidey is set now, (and I don't know that it is, but I'm assuming, even though that would require yanking Civil War backwards a little, seeing as SM:H is set two months after Civil War) then that seems about right. ...Although I could easily be missing something here of course.

Iron Man - 2008
Iron Man 2 - six months later, concurrent with Thor.
The Avengers, set a year after Thor. aka 2009-ish. Spider-Man Homecoming...2017

Anyway, it's all a sliding timeline anyway probably. Just sit back and e̶n̶j̶o̶y̶ ignore it.

There's also the whole thing of they're moving from Avengers Tower to a new facility in upstate New York... oh yeah that new facility that's been there since the end of Age of Ultron? Huh?

They didn't move everything to the new facility in Age of Ultron, it was their new primary location but it wasn't said that Stark just "abandoned" Avengers Tower for it. Steve says to Tony at the end of Civil War, "I was glad to hear you moved back into the compound..."

 

[DarthPipes]

I just got back from it and I really enjoyed it. A very fun movie with a terrific cast. Keaton was great as the Vulture. It looks like 2017 is the year Marvel finally got their villains right.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

I rank it alongside Guardians of the Galaxy, easily. It was so much fun, the acting incredible (Keaton can do no wrong, it seems!) and holy easter eggs, too!

So much fun, we couldn't stop talking about it in the parking lot afterwards that I was much later than anticipated coming home from th theatre.

And the Cap cameos were hilarious.

 

[Turtletrekker]

I give it an A-.

It was very enjoyable and a good first solo adventure for Spider-Man in the MCU. Michael Keaton was great as the Vulture. As far as Spider-Man movies in general go, I still think I prefer the first two Sam Raimi movies, but this movie was a lot of fun.

 

[Turtletrekker]

And, yeah, now that I've seen the movie and the whole "eight years" thing in context, it is a little bit weird and doesn't really work at all. All of the issues stem from Captain America: Civil War. Vision said that it's been eight years since Stark first announced himself as Iron Man, but earlier in the movie General Ross states that the Avengers have been around for four years. Now, if Homecoming takes place just a few months after Civil War, how can it be eight years since the Battle of New York...?

It's not a deal-breaker by any means, but it does stand out as being odd. I noticed that the timeliners at the MCU wiki are pretty much just ignoring it, which is probably the best way to handle it.

 

[KennyB]

I liked Toby, Andrew was OK, but Tom Holland is Peter Parker. I wasn't excited when he was announced but I LOVE this kid. I loved the fact that they show he is a 15 year old kid and trying to balance real world and super-hero lives. Keaton was super as well. I really liked it a LOT more than I expected to. I found myself grinning often and some of the references were well done.

 

[Ethros]

It's not a deal-breaker by any means, but it does stand out as being odd. I noticed that the timeliners at the MCU wiki are pretty much just ignoring it, which is probably the best way to handle it.

Yeah same here, suppose we'll see if it's mentioned or dealt with again in any upcoming films, probably Infinity War. But till then I'll happily just pretend it's an error.
And I always figured the 8 years since Stark announced himself in CW simply comes from that movie coming out in 2016 and Iron Man in 2008, so it was 8 years for the audience too. Whether that fits I can't remember, is it stated how much time has gone by in between IM1 & IM2, and IM2 & Avengers 1?

Honest question...why not? If Spidey is set now, (and I don't know that it is, but I'm assuming, even though that would require yanking Civil War backwards a little, seeing as SM:H is set two months after Civil War) then that seems about right. ...Although I could easily be missing something here of course.

For me the 8 years thing is just I can't buy that amount of time has passed between movies. 8 years is a long time ago, 8 years ago it was July 2009, thinking in popular movie terms that's like just between X-Men Origins: Wolverine and Inglorious Basterds came out. It seems a looong time ago I saw those at theatres.
Iron Man 3 is set at Christmas so it's probably the Christmas after the Avengers. How much time is there between Winter Soldier and Civil War? I can't see being like 6 years they've been looking for Bucky, or that there was that long between Winter Soldier and Age of Ultron, like when Cap & Falcon speak at the party.
"So, found Bucky yet?"
"Nah not yet. It's only been 5 years."

It's just a bit odd. And like I said I know they don't care about Agents of Shield, but The Dark World & Civil War are season 1, Age of Ultron season 2, and Civil War season 3. I don't see those seasons of AoS actually taking place over the course of like 2-3 years each.



Anyway as for Homecoming I did enjoy it, that just occupies my thoughts
Like the Ferris Bueller gag! I also like it was suffciently different from the other Spidey movies, whereas the 2012 movie wasn't really that different from the 2002 movie was it.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Well, its not hard to be the best spider-man movie since Spider-Man 2

Not, its not, since 3 was...3, and the Garfield films--with his "I--I'm such a misfit" act---was anything but a genuine Spider-Man. And thankfully, the romantic interest this film (Zendaya) is not grating at all, but a normal personality (Like Kirsten Dunst in the Raimi spider-Man movies). The opposite of Emma Stone in the Garfield movies.