Spiderman: Far from home

[Erys]

Good flick. I enjoyed it.

Heads up: there are post credit scenes (mid and end), and they are wtf!

[weckar]

Seeing it on Friday, but seeing very mixed reviews for now. I have some concerns myself based on some of the merchandise and trailers, but it will probably be fine.

[Magic_Hat]

I has a question. It has to do with Spider-Man: Homecoming so I'll put my question in spoilers. I don't know why you would be on this thread to a sequel if you haven't seen the first film, but stranger things have happened.

Is there any mention of Peter's Uncle Ben or does it appear he doesn't exist in this continuity? That was something that bugged me about Homecoming.

I guess put your answer in spoilers as well.

[Douglas]

I has a question. It has to do with Spider-Man: Homecoming so I'll put my question in spoilers. I don't know why you would be on this thread to a sequel if you haven't seen the first film, but stranger things have happened.

Is there any mention of Peter's Uncle Ben or does it appear he doesn't exist in this continuity? That was something that bugged me about Homecoming.

I guess put your answer in spoilers as well.
I don't think so, in either Homecoming or Far From Home. Responsibility is a major theme, but Uncle Ben doesn't come up. My guess is that he exists, died before Spiderman's debut in Civil War, and people at Marvel decided that Spiderman's origin story is so extremely widely known that there's no real need to go into it, and bringing it up would distract from the story they're trying to tell.

I liked Far From Home quite a bit. The big mid-movie twist was partially spoiled for me by seeing discussion of one character's history in comics, but it wasn't dragged out very long, and it being a surprise wasn't all that important.

About the post credits scenes:
At this point, having seen various other Spiderman portrayals over the years, Jameson is mostly a tiresome nuisance of a character to me. I really hope publicizing Spiderman's secret identity is the only significant consequence the MCU uses him for - Peter fighting bad publicity from a maliciously misguided man in the news media business is not a plot element I want to see again. His identity's exposed, the combination of his name and Spiderman's publicly known actions is too specific for any plausible denial, and I hope that's all any future movies use Jameson for.

[Rater202]

It should have been obvious that Mysterio was lying about being a dimensional traveler when he refered to Peter's reality as Earth Dimension 616--tha'ts the main comics universe, the movies are officially Earth-199999


At this point, having seen various other Spiderman portrayals over the years, Jameson is mostly a tiresome nuisance of a character to me. I really hope publicizing Spiderman's secret identity is the only significant consequence the MCU uses him for - Peter fighting bad publicity from a maliciously misguided man in the news media business is not a plot element I want to see again. His identity's exposed, the combination of his name and Spiderman's publicly known actions is too specific for any plausible denial, and I hope that's all any future movies use Jameson for.

Adaptions tend to misuse Jameson.

Jonah has very, very personal reasons to hate Spider-Man* in the comics and has an ego but he's otherwise a morally upstanding pillar of society--most notably, in the main comics, he's a mutant rights activist.

currently int he comics he's losing in-universe popularity becuase he's ruined all credibility: People only like him becuase he rants about Spider-Man but he likes Spider-Man now and Jonah praising Spidey isn't funny.

*To be brief, it's a combination of three major factors: 1: Spider-Man's first publically known act of Heroism was jumping onto a malfunctioning Space Shuttle being piloted by John Jonah Jameson the Third--JJJ's son--and rescuing him. As Spider-Man's only known public appearances prior had been as a televised stunt show performer, Jonah assumed that he'd interfered with the launch to get publicity. 2: As a child, Jonah was taken hostage during the course of an armed robbery where the perpetrators all wore face-concealing masks. Becuase of this, Jonah has a deep-seated, pathological distrust of people who cover up their entire faces, especially if it's to conceal their identity. 3: At the end of the day, Jonah is jealous of Spider-Man. Jonah doesn't want spider-man to be genuine, becuase if he is then he'd be one of the most selfless people alive and Jonah wishes he could be that selfless himself.

[Kyberwulf]

I thought it was meh. Most of it was because I knew the backstory of mysterio, so it wasn't that big of a revel he was the bad guy. Sad to say that most of the beginning till the middle felt like filler.

Also that it seems funny that a lot of people will forgive this movie for spiderman taking his mask off all the time.. but amazing spider got so much flak for.

[Anteros]

It should have been obvious that Mysterio was lying about being a dimensional traveler when he refered to Peter's reality as Earth Dimension 616--tha'ts the main comics universe, the movies are officially Earth-199999



Adaptions tend to misuse Jameson.

Jonah has very, very personal reasons to hate Spider-Man* in the comics and has an ego but he's otherwise a morally upstanding pillar of society--most notably, in the main comics, he's a mutant rights activist.

currently int he comics he's losing in-universe popularity becuase he's ruined all credibility: People only like him becuase he rants about Spider-Man but he likes Spider-Man now and Jonah praising Spidey isn't funny.

*To be brief, it's a combination of three major factors: 1: Spider-Man's first publically known act of Heroism was jumping onto a malfunctioning Space Shuttle being piloted by John Jonah Jameson the Third--JJJ's son--and rescuing him. As Spider-Man's only known public appearances prior had been as a televised stunt show performer, Jonah assumed that he'd interfered with the launch to get publicity. 2: As a child, Jonah was taken hostage during the course of an armed robbery where the perpetrators all wore face-concealing masks. Becuase of this, Jonah has a deep-seated, pathological distrust of people who cover up their entire faces, especially if it's to conceal their identity. 3: At the end of the day, Jonah is jealous of Spider-Man. Jonah doesn't want spider-man to be genuine, becuase if he is then he'd be one of the most selfless people alive and Jonah wishes he could be that selfless himself.

It really just depends from week to week with comic Jonah. Sometimes he's an upstanding hero of the oppressed and other times he's literally funding super villainy. I liked the original Raimi movies version of Jonah. He's a jerk, but when the Goblin comes in and threatens him to find Peter he tells him to pound sand. He'd rather die than betray someone who works for him.

[Rodin]

I'd rank it as another middle-tier Marvel movie. I still really like Tom Holland's take on Spiderman, and I liked the theme of trying to move on after the events of Endgame. This was the most "traditional" superhero flick we've had in the MCU for some time, and I think that kinda hurt it. I did like their take on Mysterio.

Overall, I'd say it's about a B.

Also, I'm grateful that they didn't try to kick-start a multiverse here. I was waiting for the twist that Mysterio was creating the elementals, but fully expected them to be real things he was conjuring, or for them to be illusions but he really was from a parallel universe.

Giving the MCU some time to settle before moving onto the next big thing seems wise.

Oh, and I liked the post-credits scene revealing that Fury and Hill were Skrulls. Fury was far too trusting throughout, and he should have known who "Mysterio" was beforehand thanks to his dealings with Stark and his general paranoia. The Skrulls don't have the same level of paranoia and were much easier to fool.


Oh, and I agree about Peter taking his mask off too often, by the way. I've never seen Amazing Spiderman so can't comment there.

[Ramza00]

My favorite version of JJJ


Is the Avatar the Legend of Korra version of Tenzin who is played by J. K. Simmons

https://66.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m5javv0glz1qloo1ro1_400.png
https://images7.memedroid.com/images/UPLOADED104/565667f20ae17.jpeg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CdQCBjYUAAAayyV.jpg:orig
https://i.redd.it/2ufpacap6g921.jpg

Why is my favorite JJJ, John Jonah Jameson? Because even as a Buddhist Monk who is trying his best to chill, the good old fashion JJJ does come out from time to time. :smallbiggrin: Thus it shows us that this potential exists in all of us, but even if we realize the potential we never become the robot unless we choose to. The animating feature of JJJ, his bag of hot air that comes out of his lungs will eternally exist, if we choose to.

I find this to be a bit of fresh air.

[zimmerwald1915]

Jonah has very, very personal reasons to hate Spider-Man* in the comics and has an ego but he's otherwise a morally upstanding pillar of society--most notably, in the main comics, he's a mutant rights activist.
That's not an upstanding pillar of society, that's a dangerous radical, or worse, an outside agitator :smallwink:

[Rater202]

That's not an upstanding pillar of society, that's a dangerous radical, or worse, an outside agitator :smallwink:

I wasn't aware that being morally opposed to slavery, genocide, and using drugs to surpress the unique gifts of people in the name of conformity to an ideal that doesn't exist was a radical opinion.:smalltongue:

[zimmerwald1915]

I wasn't aware that being morally opposed to slavery, genocide, and using drugs to surpress the unique gifts of people in the name of conformity to an ideal that doesn't exist was a radical opinion.:smalltongue:
{scrubbed}

[Ramza00]

That's not an upstanding pillar of society, that's a dangerous radical, or worse, an outside agitator :smallwink:

I know this is a Joke, but it inspired me to write something about JJJ.

JJJ temperament is of the Protector and he protects via Challenging. He is Katsuki BakugoMy Hero Academia with a newspaper / microphone instead of "explosion generation quirk.

Thus JJJ at his best and worse.

Worse

Loud
Vengeful
Excessive
Controlling
Rebellious
Insensitive
Domineering
JJJ centered / Self-Centered
Skeptical



Best

Compassionate
Inspiring
Direct
Resilient
Loyal
Energetic
Empowering
Protective
JJJ-Confident / Self-Confident


All of these virtues and vices flow from the same source, even with many different writers of JJJ over 50+ years. JJJ is an action / assertive individual who challenges for he thinks via challenging he can protect. Except the problem is JJJ sometimes does this too much and in the wrong places. Furthermore he is skeptical of the concept of innocence, for there is one part of ourselves we treasure so much but we must be vulnerable to accept this part in ourselves and recognize it is precious but also amorphous and thus a form of weak. So see this skeptical of innocence not as a negative form of skepticism but a positive form of skepticism. Thus JJJ try to cover up, to protect this, via taking action.

JJJ is full of forcefulness / action / lust for he thinks it will protect what is good and just in this world which he means "innocent." The part of life that makes things living.

https://i.annihil.us/u/prod/marvel/i/mg/5/d0/5b21875a1e2e0/clean.jpg

-----

I mention Bakugo earlier. Well there has been so many different Spider-Mans over the years so he is written in a more inconsistent way than JJJ, but many of the different versions of Spider-Man are supposed to inhabit some of the energy that Izuku Midoriya / Deku has. One where Peter is full of fear, but he acts anyway, he is scared but he needs to embrace his courage to act.

The tragedy of it all is Spider-Man and JJJ can't see eye to eye, there is such distrust, except some of the time in specific comics (such as this new 2017 to 2018 run of JJJ.) It is tragic but life often is for Peter is trying to protect the things that JJJ values but JJJ can not see it.

[GloatingSwine]

I liked Far From Home quite a bit. The big mid-movie twist was partially spoiled for me by seeing discussion of one character's history in comics, but it wasn't dragged out very long, and it being a surprise wasn't all that important.


It being a surprise wasn't important at all really.

Because, frankly, this is the Google generation. Everyone can find out what Mysterio's deal is and immediately put two and two together to make two squared.

What matters more is that this is a really good version of what Mysterio's deal is, that gives just about the best impression of what he can do to people's perceptions of reality ever and that also captures the heart of the MCU version of Spider-Man and the emotional place his character is in just after Endgame.

Also, looks like Nick is off setting up SWORD.

[Rodin]

It being a surprise wasn't important at all really.

Because, frankly, this is the Google generation. Everyone can find out what Mysterio's deal is and immediately put two and two together to make two squared.

What matters more is that this is a really good version of what Mysterio's deal is, that gives just about the best impression of what he can do to people's perceptions of reality ever and that also captures the heart of the MCU version of Spider-Man and the emotional place his character is in just after Endgame.

Also, looks like Nick is off setting up SWORD.

I'd say it's even easier than that. I avoided the trailers and have never read a Spiderman comic in my life, but Mysterio being part of Spiderman's Rogue's Gallery was just common knowledge for me.

I was half expecting them to do a Captain Marvel and make him into a good guy, but after a while the Scooby Doo rule came into play.

[JadedDM]

I has a question. It has to do with Spider-Man: Homecoming so I'll put my question in spoilers. I don't know why you would be on this thread to a sequel if you haven't seen the first film, but stranger things have happened.

Is there any mention of Peter's Uncle Ben or does it appear he doesn't exist in this continuity? That was something that bugged me about Homecoming.

I guess put your answer in spoilers as well.

Ben Parker is mentioned in Homecoming, just not directly. Peter makes it clear he doesn't want May to know he's Spider-Man because she's been through so much, i.e., still mourning her late husband's death.

As for Far From Home, Ben gets another reference but again, it's not a direct one. The suitcase Peter uses to go to Europe belonged to Ben. His initials are on it.

https://media.comicbook.com/2019/01/spider-man-far-from-home-uncle-ben-1153900.jpeg

[Magic_Hat]

Ben Parker is mentioned in Homecoming, just not directly. Peter makes it clear he doesn't want May to know he's Spider-Man because she's been through so much, i.e., still mourning her late husband's death.

As for Far From Home, Ben gets another reference but again, it's not a direct one. The suitcase Peter uses to go to Europe belonged to Ben. His initials are on it.

https://media.comicbook.com/2019/01/spider-man-far-from-home-uncle-ben-1153900.jpeg

Two things:

About Homecoming:
You mention Aunt May has "been through so much". That's a vague term that could apply to a lot of things. She could have gotten some bad medical news. She could have gotten laid off from a job. A statement like that doesn't instantly mean death of a family member or even husband.

About Far From Home:
"BFP" on a suitcase? That's the reference. The initials could stand for a lot of different things. Do we even know where Peter got it or if it even belonged to a member Peter's family? He could have gotten it at a thrift store and the initials are just a coincidence.

I know this seems like a nitpick, but considering how much of a major figure in Peter Parker's could the family member whose death made Peter Park start fighting crime be mentioned directly in this continuity?

[The New Bruceski]

We've managed to find the one person who still wants an origin story movie for every superhero.

[Magic_Hat]

We've managed to find the one person who still wants an origin story movie for every superhero.

Why someone - especially a teenager - decides to risk his life to protect others - only kind of very important essential/needed.

[Douglas]

Why someone - especially a teenager - decides to risk his life to protect others - only kind of very important essential/needed.
Regardless, in the case of Spiderman it's a story that's been told a ridiculously huge number of times already. Telling it yet again has a major risk of being so similar to previous versions that it turns away some of the audience just because of that, and "everyone already knows this one" is actually a pretty safe assumption to make.

[Androgeus]

Why someone - especially a teenager - decides to risk his life to protect others - only kind of very important essential/needed.

If only the first scene (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DESwBLlniCg) involving the character went over their motivation.

[Douglas]

If only the first scene (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DESwBLlniCg) involving the character went over their motivation.
Ah, right, forgot about that bit.

Tony: Why are you doing this? I gotta know, what's your M.O., what gets you out of that twin bed in the morning?
Peter: Because... *a few bits of leadup interspersed with sighs and pauses* When you can do the things that I can, and you don't, and then the bad things happen, they happen because of you.

It's not directly explicit about it, but that seems a pretty clear reference to the universal Spiderman origin story element of Uncle Ben being killed by a criminal that Peter could have stopped a short time before. In addition to how well the words themselves fit that, the way it's presented, in particular the hesitations, pauses, and sighs, fits the idea of Peter confessing something that he feels a lot of guilt and regret about.

[Delicious Taffy]

The two new costumes from this movie were added to the PS4 game as a free update, so that's pretty cool.

The movie itself is fantastic, and I'd gladly see it in the theater two or three more times.

[Kyberwulf]

I don't think they need an origin story. I do think they need something to show why Peter does what he does. The weight he shoulders. In the new ones, he doesn't even seem affected by his uncle's death. He shows more emotion about Tony.. which is kind of ... I think it would have hit harder if we saw how he was affected by his uncle's death, that lead into even more weight when Tony died almost the exact same way. *Which, by the way, we are still seeing an origin story.. the one for IronBoy. Seriously. The spiderman doesn't really seem to be a story about spiderman. It all revolves around Tony.

[Rater202]

You know, if they have to redo the Spider-Man Origin story again, they could do it the way it was revisited in a backup story published in the "final" issue of Fantastic Four, back in 2011/2012, before they relaunched as The Future Foundation.

IT was a short backup story called "Uncles."

Franklin Richards is in a very bad state, becuase his Uncle Johnny(the Human Torch) is missing and presumed dead after a trip to the Negative Zone gone bad.

Franklin is suffering from severe survivors guilt becuase he deeply believes that if he'd had better control of or access to his godlike powers(franklin is intermittently omnipotent) he would have been able to save his uncle.

Spider-Man, to comfort Franklin and let him know that the grief and guilt gets better, replies "I know I could have saved my uncle" and then goes on to explain that every day it hurts a little bit less and that one day soon Franklin will be able to think back on the good times with Johnny.

If they absolutely need to recap Spider-Man's origin story... Don't devote a movie to it, or even an opening act.

Put Peter in a situation where he can use his own guilt and grief to help someone suffering similarly.

[The New Bruceski]

Which, by the way, we are still seeing an origin story.. the one for IronBoy. Seriously. The spiderman doesn't really seem to be a story about spiderman. It all revolves around Tony.

That's kinda the point. Peter keeps trying to find father figures and pressures himself not to let them down (implied: like he let down Uncle Ben). Tony likes him and sees things in him that Tony lacks, but can only build as Iron Man so the Iron Spider suit has a ton of lethal stuff and an AI mother. Homecoming ends with him no longer relying on that and stopping the Vulture in his original suit and skills, a decision to return to the neighborhood Spider-Man.
Then Beck comes in as a new mentor and father figure, actively manipulating that guilt to gain Peter's trust. Again the stakes are Tony's legacy and Peter's inability to be Tony Stark. This time instead of going back to his first tools Peter resolves it by using Tony's gifts in his own way, building a suit to his needs (it's not major but I love the payoff of him installing/enhancing the taser webbing on the plane, clearly planning ahead to how to take out the drones) without all of Tony's excess. As he grows in future movies this is what I'd like to see emphasized, Peter's ability to solve problems (when being a guilt-driven teenage boy doesn't get in the way) while understanding restraint.

In general the movies do focus on Stark but serve as an interesting contrast to the Iron Man movies. In those Stark is awesome. Flawed but he comes around and saves the day eventually, with his excesses proving useful and everything grand gestures. In the SM movies Tony's shortcomings are the point. Villans are motivated by Tony's flaws, the little guys he didn't care about along the way. Not even malicious, he just didn't think of them at all. When Peter tries to do things to Stark's level it goes wrong and it's only by realizing Stark isn't the answer that he can solve the problems. Those problems may get big but the end resolution is on a personal level while the IM movies get big and stay big. It's not a lesson of "this is Tony Stark's movie" it's "stop trying to be the idealized version of your highly flawed hero and start being yourself."

[Dienekes]

I thought it was meh. Most of it was because I knew the backstory of mysterio, so it wasn't that big of a revel he was the bad guy. Sad to say that most of the beginning till the middle felt like filler.

Also that it seems funny that a lot of people will forgive this movie for spiderman taking his mask off all the time.. but amazing spider got so much flak for.

People are more willing to forgive small breaks from pure logic if they’re enjoying the story. And Garfield’s Spider-Man wasn’t enjoyable.

Anyway, I liked it. But then I’ve known who Mysterio is since I was 10, in the same way I’ve known who Winter Soldier was and how the Ring gets to Mordor.

I thought the movie did a very good job with it the intricacies of Mysterio’s plan and reveal. Gyllenhaal did a great job selling the character which is kind of difficult when they literally gave him a scene where he explains his plan to his own henchmen who already know the plan. But he sold it, good on him.

And the first fight with him was great. Very trippy and well executed.

I’m still not 100% sold on new MJ. Her comic version remains the only super hero girlfriend/wife I’ve actually liked. So seeing such a large departure is odd for me. But then I’m used to college and later life Spider-Man, and that MJ just doesn’t work putting him back in high school. Though seeing her taking on drones with a mace was great. Brought me back to the time she beat up Chameleon with a baseball bat. Keep having her be a badass.

Then the return of my all time favorite Spider-Man minor character. I’m glad they got Simmons back he was perfect for the role. But I feel that having him be against Parker is missing the key part of his character. The whole point is his hatred of Spidey and revealing the actually caring man underneath. The one who paid for Peter’s wedding out of pocket, aided May’s hospital stay, fought for mutant rights, and stood up to villains for people he barely knows. That’s what makes him so good. Oh well.

[Ramza00]

*Which, by the way, we are still seeing an origin story.. the one for IronBoy. Seriously. The spiderman doesn't really seem to be a story about spiderman. It all revolves around Tony.

That is kind of the point. Peter first interactions with Tony are mimetic, as in to mimic, to act, to imitate. Peter feels he needs to be Iron Boy for he feels fear about his responsibility he self invests himself with after Uncle Ben's death. So he does the 5 year old child thing where he acts / imitates a role-model and he picks the most powerful role-model he could.

He then gets wonder boy syndrome when Tony takes notice in him. Tony appreciates him for he sees what Peter can not see in himself, the raw potential and someone who thinks differently than Tony does, who has a complimentary though process but not a simulcra thought process that is simulating the original. Tony does not know how to give Peter what Peter needs, for Tony is half lost himself and he did not have good parental role models that both challenge their sons while at the same time giving them the tools to succeed.

Peter does better when he does not listen to his instincts of trying to emulate Tony, to not go for his first instinct which is to be Iron Boy, to listen to his own voice in his head, his own internal narrator (diegetic) and not the external narrator of others (diegetic but a different form for we are comparing external individual vs internal individual.)

And part of the story of Peter learning not to mimic Tony is to have vilians that are the results of Tony's / Iron Man's choices. Peter is in Tony shadow with both as a role model, and fighting the nemesis of Tony's choices, the necessary consequences of Tony's mistakes he could not see. And the only way to beat them is to become his own man, to become himself, to exit Tony's Shadow.

----

Note this is the same stuff that Thor has to do with Odin in the MCU. Daddy issues is a big deal in the MCU.

Why some people love it and some people hate it is Spider-Man is his own figure with 50 years of rich history that **people are already familiar with**, thus some people see this as a betrayal of Peter Parker and other people see this as an exciting new opportunity, a new direction, full of discovery.

People seeing similar stories in Thor are not already invested in this character, but they are invested in Peter and this is simultaneously a blessing and a curse.

[Douglas]

Then Beck comes in as a new mentor and father figure, actively manipulating that guilt to gain Peter's trust. Again the stakes are Tony's legacy and Peter's inability to be Tony Stark. This time instead of going back to his first tools Peter resolves it by using Tony's gifts in his own way, building a suit to his needs (it's not major but I love the payoff of him installing/enhancing the taser webbing on the plane, clearly planning ahead to how to take out the drones) without all of Tony's excess. As he grows in future movies this is what I'd like to see emphasized, Peter's ability to solve problems (when being a guilt-driven teenage boy doesn't get in the way) while understanding restraint.
Yeah, that scene with Peter designing his own new suit is great. I especially like Happy's reaction to seeing how quickly and well Peter gets into it. As I recall, there's a pause where Happy just stands there watching, and I imagine he thinks something like "Wow, it's just like watching a younger version of Tony. ...He's got this."

And then he stops watching, says "You get that, I'll get the music", and leaves to let Peter work undisturbed, accompanied by a dramatic sound track. That was just perfect as a way for Happy to express his new confidence in Peter.

Side note, seems like Peter should have learned by now to ask for clarification when one of Tony's AIs asks him something that he doesn't fully understand. "Is he a target?" "What exactly do you mean by 'target'?"

[Callos_DeTerran]

I honestly am not sure if I'll go watch this. Homecoming wasn't that interesting when the Vulture wasn't around and Holland's performance is good...but he's probably the least interesting Spiderman of the three versions.

Still prefer the Andrew Garfield Spiderman movies.

#NotMySpiderman

[Kato]

I just saw it and I liked it well enough / quite a bit.
I'm not very familiar with Mysterio but enough to expect the twist, so slightly disappointed I wasn't wrong. And expositing toast is fun but a bit cheap from a writing perspective.
But overall, it was perfectly enjoyable. It's not going to write movie history but fine to watch.

Btw, I left after the JJJ scene, was there more I missed?

[JadedDM]

Btw, I left after the JJJ scene, was there more I missed?

Yes, there was a second credits scene at the very end.

Nick Fury and Maria Hill are driving in a car, and then they both turn into Skrulls (specifically, Talos and his wife). "Maria" urges "Fury" to call the real Fury to tell him how much he nearly botched things. "Fury" calls the real Fury and tells him things 'went a little off the rails' but it all worked out in the end, but people keep asking him where the Avengers are, and he doesn't know, so could the real Fury please come back?

The real Fury is shown lying under the sun at a tropical beach. He turns off the phone and gets up, revealing that the 'beach' is actually just an illusion. He is actually on a very large space ship, somewhere in outer space, with lots of Skrulls on board. "Let's get back to work people!" he calls out to them, then complains that he can't find his shoes.

Many believe this scene is setting up S.W.O.R.D.

[Kato]

Yes, there was a second credits scene at the very end.

Nick Fury and Maria Hill are driving in a car, and then they both turn into Skrulls (specifically, Talos and his wife). "Maria" urges "Fury" to call the real Fury to tell him how much he nearly botched things. "Fury" calls the real Fury and tells him things 'went a little off the rails' but it all worked out in the end, but people keep asking him where the Avengers are, and he doesn't know, so could the real Fury please come back?

The real Fury is shown lying under the sun at a tropical beach. He turns off the phone and gets up, revealing that the 'beach' is actually just an illusion. He is actually on a very large space ship, somewhere in outer space, with lots of Skrulls on board. "Let's get back to work people!" he calls out to them, then complains that he can't find his shoes.

Many believe this scene is setting up S.W.O.R.D.

Thank you for catering to my laziness :smallredface:
I guess we can expect a lot of rumors / theories coming from this..

[Kitten Champion]

I was personally impressed with Jake Gyllenhaal. He managed to be larger-than-life in a comic book-y sort of way without being too excessive.

Also, I'm just glad to see live-action Mysterio as a villain. His battles with Spider-Man are generally quite memorable, he always seemed tailor-made for a cinematic adaptation where his illusions could come to life. Which were done really well here, you could really feel Peter's sense of confusion in his first fight and how he sort of figured things out in the final act.

The closest to this that I can remember was that Spider-Man PS2 game where Mysterio was inserted into the Raimi-verse as a main game villain, and was fairly cool though that game in general hasn't aged too well.

I also just like this and Homecoming as a very coming-of-age thing, it maintains an earnest appreciation for what this kind of school trip is in the life of a 16 year-old even ignoring the added Marvel-specific weirdness like the "blip". It's not just an excuse to put them in cheaper filming locations or whatever, you can empathize with Peter really wanting this cool, normal trip.

[The New Bruceski]

Yes, there was a second credits scene at the very end.

Nick Fury and Maria Hill are driving in a car, and then they both turn into Skrulls (specifically, Talos and his wife). "Maria" urges "Fury" to call the real Fury to tell him how much he nearly botched things. "Fury" calls the real Fury and tells him things 'went a little off the rails' but it all worked out in the end, but people keep asking him where the Avengers are, and he doesn't know, so could the real Fury please come back?

The real Fury is shown lying under the sun at a tropical beach. He turns off the phone and gets up, revealing that the 'beach' is actually just an illusion. He is actually on a very large space ship, somewhere in outer space, with lots of Skrulls on board. "Let's get back to work people!" he calls out to them, then complains that he can't find his shoes.

Many believe this scene is setting up S.W.O.R.D.

It's kinda neat that while this was in no way important to the current movie, there are some tells of that last scene in hindsight.

Hill calls Fury "Nick" when they first show up. Nobody calls him Nick.
"He's from Earth, just not your Earth."
His "how dare you speak her name"-ish response to mention of Captain Marvel.
"I thought Kree sleeper cells would have been top secret information" shop talk just before they detect the EM field in London. Could have been Fury grumbling about playing post-blip catch up, turned out to be Talos grumbling about some cover fumble.
And then there was just generally acting *off* throughout the movie, nothing obvious or bad but without the usual force of Fury.

[Dienekes]

#NotMySpiderman

Well of course he's not. But C.D. Barnes is too old to play the character now.

[ben-zayb]

Well of course he's not. But C.D. Barnes is too old to play the character now.
That didn't stop Tobey Maguire from playing the role back in the 2000s

[Anteros]

I honestly am not sure if I'll go watch this. Homecoming wasn't that interesting when the Vulture wasn't around and Holland's performance is good...but he's probably the least interesting Spiderman of the three versions.

Still prefer the Andrew Garfield Spiderman movies.

#NotMySpiderman

I agree about Holland, but it's not his fault. The problem is that they've changed so much about the characters that he's not Peter Parker at all. All they share is a name and some spider powers.

[Callos_DeTerran]

I agree about Holland, but it's not his fault. The problem is that they've changed so much about the characters that he's not Peter Parker at all. All they share is a name and some spider powers.

That's pretty much it to be honest. Holland, even if he's not my favorite Peter, is doing a great job with his performances but he's not the Spiderman I want to see. He barely resembles Peter to me to be honest, he's much more Miles Morales then he is Peter (until Miles got the Into the Spiderverse movie that is).

For me, Toby McGuire and Andrew Garfield at least felt like Peter himself...different sides of him, but both still like Peter Parker, I just prefer the Garfield half more than the McGuire half.

[Dilvish]

Yes, there was a second credits scene at the very end.

Nick Fury and Maria Hill are driving in a car, and then they both turn into Skrulls (specifically, Talos and his wife). "Maria" urges "Fury" to call the real Fury to tell him how much he nearly botched things. "Fury" calls the real Fury and tells him things 'went a little off the rails' but it all worked out in the end, but people keep asking him where the Avengers are, and he doesn't know, so could the real Fury please come back?

The real Fury is shown lying under the sun at a tropical beach. He turns off the phone and gets up, revealing that the 'beach' is actually just an illusion. He is actually on a very large space ship, somewhere in outer space, with lots of Skrulls on board. "Let's get back to work people!" he calls out to them, then complains that he can't find his shoes.

Many believe this scene is setting up S.W.O.R.D.

Fury being on a beach with a tropical drink immediately brought to mind Tahiti from Agents of SHIELD. :)

[Friv]

Saw it yesterday, absolutely loved it. Tom Holland is pretty much my favorite Spiderman, outside of maybe the Spectacular Spider-Man TV show, and he's nailed the awkward nerdiness, the covering with quips, and the constant, deep uncertainty and disbelief in his own abilities that I remember from early Spiderman comics. He's a bit less mopey that early Spiderman was, but I consider that a plus.

And I love the Mysterio reveal.

My partner and I were both joking in the early stuff about "how the hell are they going to explain Mysterio pulling all this off, there's just way too much happening", and then it turns out that yep, there is way too much happening for one person!

[JadedDM]

Fury being on a beach with a tropical drink immediately brought to mind Tahiti from Agents of SHIELD. :)

It's a magical place. :)

[Dienekes]

I agree about Holland, but it's not his fault. The problem is that they've changed so much about the characters that he's not Peter Parker at all. All they share is a name and some spider powers.

Out of curiosity what do you feel makes up Spider-Man? Because to me he feels the closest to the awkward science nerdy who quips only in spandex to hide his fear that I know in the comics. At least more than skater boy who edits random women he barely knows did.

I mean, as much as a 16ish year old can feel like my Spider-Man anyway.

He hasn’t been in high school since the 60s before I was even born much less read the comics but everyone keeps going back to that well for some reason. I may have had some qualms with MacGuire’s constant crying face, but he at least grew up.

[Kato]

My partner and I were both joking in the early stuff about "how the hell are they going to explain Mysterio pulling all this off, there's just way too much happening", and then it turns out that yep, there is way too much happening for one person!

I'll admit it's weird I say this here but... It seemed a bit too unrealistic. I know, I know, technology advanced enough to seem like magic. But especially the one on one fight in Berlin felt like it could not possibly happen like that, even though it was very well done otherwise.


On Spidermen... I like all of them, I guess? If I had to complain.. Somehow I feel like Holland is a bit too young, but that doesn't really make sense, considering Peter always was a kid. But all versions I can remember before seemed much more grown up (to me who was obviously younger then) and that twenty-ish Spiderman is what I'm used to.

[Anteros]

Out of curiosity what do you feel makes up Spider-Man? Because to me he feels the closest to the awkward science nerdy who quips only in spandex to hide his fear that I know in the comics. At least more than skater boy who edits random women he barely knows did.

I mean, as much as a 16ish year old can feel like my Spider-Man anyway.

He hasn’t been in high school since the 60s before I was even born much less read the comics but everyone keeps going back to that well for some reason. I may have had some qualms with MacGuire’s constant crying face, but he at least grew up.

Well, every single one of his support characters has been altered to be completely unrecognizable from the source material. He also doesn't act like Peter Parker. Parker is nerdy in a completely different way than Holland's character. He geeks out over isotopes and scientific discoveries, not Star Wars references. He's also much more aggressive and even kinda jerky in the comics where Holland's character is extremely passive.

Plus, like you said...Spidey hasn't been a geeky high schooler for 70 years now. Even when he originally came out they had him move past the nerdy high schooler thing almost immediately. Barring the Uncle Ben stuff, he wasn't a geeky high schooler for any of his iconic scenes or moments so I don't see why they keep trying to force that. Especially when they've gone out of their way to distance themselves from his origin story. In the comics his best friend is a jock and he dates super models. He might vaguely resemble Peter Parker as he appeared in his first 10 or 20 issues, but he's absolutely nothing like Peter Parker has been for the last 70 years.

[Kyberwulf]

I said this before, Tom Hollands Spider-man, seems more like a whitewashed Miles Morales. I know not a perfect whitewashing. They have just enough Peter in there to make it all not fit right.


Tom Holland would be the Perfect Spider/Parker. It's just the story that surrounds the character. I know what they were trying to go for with these movies. aka "the point" I think they failed miserable. They put WAY to much focus on Stark. So much focus that they don't get the point of Parker's character.

Parker has never been one about trying to find himself. He has always known who he was meant to be.

The Point of Parker was trying to find a way to make it work. His character was all about crushing responsibility.

Not only that, he was usually an underdog. Throwing together gear and technology with what he could find. He never had all these gadgets that he used, all he really had was a suit he tailored himself.

Think of this, Instead of Peter Parker, we had a Guy named Markus Willaby. He made a cheapo tech suit that let him do things. Place him in the All the scenes with Stark, and you wouldn't even really notice a difference. Instead of Parker, Stark give all his tech stuff to this guy.

Spider-man is almost an afterthought in his movies. Almost nothing his characters does as spider-man even really matters. It's just.. HOW FAST CAN WE GET HIM INTO STARK TECH!

And on his Non-origin origin story. This is still the Uncle Ben death, but like all the other Parker characters, they just changed the name and look of him to Tony Stark. The way he talks and obsessives about Stark, is the way he SHOULD be obsessing about his Uncle Ben, even in the first movie.

[Starbuck_II]

I said this before, Tom Hollands Spider-man, seems more like a whitewashed Miles Morales. I know not a perfect whitewashing. They have just enough Peter in there to make it all not fit right.


Tom Holland would be the Perfect Spider/Parker. It's just the story that surrounds the character. I know what they were trying to go for with these movies. aka "the point" I think they failed miserable. They put WAY to much focus on Stark. So much focus that they don't get the point of Parker's character.

Parker has never been one about trying to find himself. He has always known who he was meant to be.

The Point of Parker was trying to find a way to make it work. His character was all about crushing responsibility.

Not only that, he was usually an underdog. Throwing together gear and technology with what he could find. He never had all these gadgets that he used, all he really had was a suit he tailored himself.

Think of this, Instead of Peter Parker, we had a Guy named Markus Willaby. He made a cheapo tech suit that let him do things. Place him in the All the scenes with Stark, and you wouldn't even really notice a difference. Instead of Parker, Stark give all his tech stuff to this guy.

Spider-man is almost an afterthought in his movies. Almost nothing his characters does as spider-man even really matters. It's just.. HOW FAST CAN WE GET HIM INTO STARK TECH!

And on his Non-origin origin story. This is still the Uncle Ben death, but like all the other Parker characters, they just changed the name and look of him to Tony Stark. The way he talks and obsessives about Stark, is the way he SHOULD be obsessing about his Uncle Ben, even in the first movie.

I liked the movie, but that is interesting perspective.

I guess Stark is his true Uncle Ben.

Also, they messed up Universe numbering, they called it 616, but it isn't.

[Kato]

Also, they messed up Universe numbering, they called it 616, but it isn't.

Okay, this is not specifically directed at you but since a lot of people keep saying this... What's up with you? This is information from Mysterio which is obviously wrong / made up, since there is not even an established multiverse for the MCU (OK, kind of, thank you, Steven). Why are you calling out a movie for being wrong about something that cannot be true?
(Also, how would you even get started on numbering multiverses? I mean, is there a process?)

[Rodin]

I said this before, Tom Hollands Spider-man, seems more like a whitewashed Miles Morales. I know not a perfect whitewashing. They have just enough Peter in there to make it all not fit right.


Tom Holland would be the Perfect Spider/Parker. It's just the story that surrounds the character. I know what they were trying to go for with these movies. aka "the point" I think they failed miserable. They put WAY to much focus on Stark. So much focus that they don't get the point of Parker's character.

Parker has never been one about trying to find himself. He has always known who he was meant to be.

The Point of Parker was trying to find a way to make it work. His character was all about crushing responsibility.

Not only that, he was usually an underdog. Throwing together gear and technology with what he could find. He never had all these gadgets that he used, all he really had was a suit he tailored himself.

Think of this, Instead of Peter Parker, we had a Guy named Markus Willaby. He made a cheapo tech suit that let him do things. Place him in the All the scenes with Stark, and you wouldn't even really notice a difference. Instead of Parker, Stark give all his tech stuff to this guy.

Spider-man is almost an afterthought in his movies. Almost nothing his characters does as spider-man even really matters. It's just.. HOW FAST CAN WE GET HIM INTO STARK TECH!

And on his Non-origin origin story. This is still the Uncle Ben death, but like all the other Parker characters, they just changed the name and look of him to Tony Stark. The way he talks and obsessives about Stark, is the way he SHOULD be obsessing about his Uncle Ben, even in the first movie.

I think this post sums up the fundamental divide a lot of fans are going to have with the character. It's a litany of ways that MCU Peter Parker differs from Comics Peter Parker, with an overriding theme of "they changed it, therefore it sucks".

And I totally understand that. I can do the same ranting at the Lord of the Rings movies. Expecting one interpretation of a character and seeing another sucks.

In this case however, I'm coming at it from the other camp. I've never read the comics and my only familiarity with Spider-man is from the Sam Raimi movies and the occasional videogame.

From that perspective, none of the above complaint applies. There's this idea that Uncle Ben died and it was Peter's fault, because that's what happened in the comics. None of that is in the movies. Instead, we're getting an origin story spread out over several films that is wholly original to the MCU. Peter chose (for whatever reason) to become Spiderman. He gets noticed by Stark, and gets dragged into a larger world of superheroes that he simply not ready for. He's trying to learn how to balance his personal life with the great responsibility, he's getting offered all this super tech when he's used to dumpster diving, and he makes a lot of mistakes as a result. Stark comes in as a surrogate father figure to help give him direction. And then Stark dies, and Peter feels that it was because he wasn't good enough. Yeah, Stark is Uncle Ben in the MCU. I think that will only become more apparent with time, and I don't expect them to go back and introduce Uncle Ben in a flashback at this stage.

The Spiderman MCU movies thus far have been all about Peter learning about power and responsibility - the hard way. Sure, it's different from the comics. But as a character in the MCU I think he's been totally consistent and well written. And I like that they're playing around with the character while keeping the core there - the superhero who looks out for the little guy, because he's been in their shoes.

[Kitten Champion]

Okay, this is not specifically directed at you but since a lot of people keep saying this... What's up with you? This is information from Mysterio which is obviously wrong / made up, since there is not even an established multiverse for the MCU (OK, kind of, thank you, Steven). Why are you calling out a movie for being wrong about something that cannot be true?
(Also, how would you even get started on numbering multiverses? I mean, is there a process?)


The numbering of universes is fairly recent evidently. Apparently it was something Alan Moore just started doing in the 90's with his Captain Britain run, as he's a hero tied to the whole inter-dimensional concept that does make sense. The eXiles series - which was basically Sliders but with Superheroes that ran through most of the 00's - had numbers to denote the realities they went to each time, which was justified in-universe by coming from the race of beings who observed and catalogued the multiverse and who were controlling the heroes' journey through alternate realities. i don't think there's any specific process to the numbering, just slapping random numbers while using the established format -- though the longer-numbers are probably to differentiate it from DC's "Earth-#" system.

The numbering is convenient for wikis and the modern fandom in general as a frame of reference, so I see why it stuck around.

[Rater202]

Also, they messed up Universe numbering, they called it 616, but it isn't.
The person who called the MCU Earth 616 was the guy who was lying about being from another universe.

It's forshadowing.

Okay, this is not specifically directed at you but since a lot of people keep saying this... What's up with you? This is information from Mysterio which is obviously wrong / made up, since there is not even an established multiverse for the MCU (OK, kind of, thank you, Steven). Why are you calling out a movie for being wrong about something that cannot be true?
(Also, how would you even get started on numbering multiverses? I mean, is there a process?)

Marvel's stance is that everything is canon but not everything happened in the same universe.

Most universes have a number label.

For example, the main comics--the ones that started in the 40s with Timely Comics and became MArvel in the 60s going on till now--are Earth 616.

The ultmate Universe(--Ultimate Spider-Man, Ultimate X-Men, Ultimate Fantastic Four, The Ultimates) is Earth 1060.

Spider-Gwen is Earth 65.

The 1960s Spider-Man Cartoon is Earth-6799, while memetic 60's Spider-Man(The X is going on but I'm just sitting here Y) guy is Earth 3015.

The MCU is Earth 199999.

[Friv]

Plus, like you said...Spidey hasn't been a geeky high schooler for 70 years now. Even when he originally came out they had him move past the nerdy high schooler thing almost immediately. Barring the Uncle Ben stuff, he wasn't a geeky high schooler for any of his iconic scenes or moments so I don't see why they keep trying to force that. Especially when they've gone out of their way to distance themselves from his origin story. In the comics his best friend is a jock and he dates super models. He might vaguely resemble Peter Parker as he appeared in his first 10 or 20 issues, but he's absolutely nothing like Peter Parker has been for the last 70 years.

On the other hand, Comics Peter really isn't the only Peter, or even the Peter who most people know. The Ultimate Universe set him back to high school and he never graduated through its line, the TV shows have been starting him in high school for the last twenty years. Peter Parker The Eternal 30-Year-Old is definitely one version of him, but Peter Parker The Dorky High School Kid has a strong tradition at this point.

[Anteros]

I think this post sums up the fundamental divide a lot of fans are going to have with the character. It's a litany of ways that MCU Peter Parker differs from Comics Peter Parker, with an overriding theme of "they changed it, therefore it sucks".

And I totally understand that. I can do the same ranting at the Lord of the Rings movies. Expecting one interpretation of a character and seeing another sucks.

In this case however, I'm coming at it from the other camp. I've never read the comics and my only familiarity with Spider-man is from the Sam Raimi movies and the occasional videogame.

From that perspective, none of the above complaint applies. There's this idea that Uncle Ben died and it was Peter's fault, because that's what happened in the comics. None of that is in the movies. Instead, we're getting an origin story spread out over several films that is wholly original to the MCU. Peter chose (for whatever reason) to become Spiderman. He gets noticed by Stark, and gets dragged into a larger world of superheroes that he simply not ready for. He's trying to learn how to balance his personal life with the great responsibility, he's getting offered all this super tech when he's used to dumpster diving, and he makes a lot of mistakes as a result. Stark comes in as a surrogate father figure to help give him direction. And then Stark dies, and Peter feels that it was because he wasn't good enough. Yeah, Stark is Uncle Ben in the MCU. I think that will only become more apparent with time, and I don't expect them to go back and introduce Uncle Ben in a flashback at this stage.

The Spiderman MCU movies thus far have been all about Peter learning about power and responsibility - the hard way. Sure, it's different from the comics. But as a character in the MCU I think he's been totally consistent and well written. And I like that they're playing around with the character while keeping the core there - the superhero who looks out for the little guy, because he's been in their shoes.

It's not "they changed it so it sucks" so much as "this isn't even the same character, so why are we pretending it is?" He doesn't have the same backstory, he doesn't have the same supporting characters, he doesn't act the same, he doesn't share a single thing with the character he's supposed to represent except a name and an aesthetic. It would be like if you had Alfred throw on the bat suit instead of Bruce and call himself Batman. Sure, you could make a good story out of it, but it wouldn't be Batman.

It's not even that they're bad movies. They're fine. They just aren't Spider-man.

[Rater202]

So, apparently the plan was to have Nick Fury be the one mentoring Peter but they were forced to change it to Tony.

If they had gone with that, it would have been very similar to Ultimate Spider-Man--where Nick Fury was monitoring and mentoring Peter partially becuase he knew Peter's parents and partly becuase as the result of an illegal genetic experiment, Peter's body was technically government property and Nick wanted to make sure that resulted in "Cushy Job with SHIELD" rather than "Kept in captivity for medical research."

Though, in general, I think the MCU has made some weird choices. Too much is tied to the Infinity Stones, for one. In the comics, the Defenders were Doctor Strange, The Incredible Hulk, The Silver Surfer, and Namor the Submariner. You know, One of the most powerful men on Earth and three of the most powerful people in the Universe. Not a bunch of street-level c-listers.

Peter being Tony's apprentice when in the comics Spider-Man was around first and PEter is smarter than Tony by a wide margin is just another case of weird decisions.

[Kato]

Marvel's stance is that everything is canon but not everything happened in the same universe.

Most universes have a number label.

[...]


The numbering is convenient for wikis and the modern fandom in general as a frame of reference, so I see why it stuck around.

Again, I should have been more specific. I meant, how does a goven universe know what number it is. I mean, how do people in comic put a number on their universe? I know it's rare but aren't those numbers also used once in a while on paper? (and not only by 4th wall breakers) How do THEY know / decide what number their universe has.

[Rater202]

Again, I should have been more specific. I meant, how does a goven universe know what number it is. I mean, how do people in comic put a number on their universe? I know it's rare but aren't those numbers also used once in a while on paper? (and not only by 4th wall breakers) How do THEY know / decide what number their universe has.

I mean, between the Captain Britain Corps, the Transdimensional Council of Spider-Women*, the Watchers, and the Fantastic Four** regularly going to alternate realities for picnics that some standardized terminology for universes cam up and got distributed to people who need to know.

*Consisting entirely of Gwen Stacy's who got Spider-Powers instead of dying. Founded by Gwen/Spider-Woman of Earth 617, whose universe was identical yo 616 until the Gwen of Earth 65 ended up there as part of a stable time loop. Gwen 617 is the host of her world's Venom symbiote and is apparently her world's greatest detective.
**Franklin Richards literally creates universes for fun.

[Bartmanhomer]

I'm going to see it at IMAX tomorrow morning and I'll give you my review. :smile:

[Man_Over_Game]

Was kinda disappointed in Mysterio's reveal, honestly. None of Spiderman's villains have been something you really take all that seriously. His actions in the Avengers movies were okay, but he didn't really do a whole lot and mostly provided support for Tony. His first movie involved a weapon-dealer that was against selling weapons to thugs and likely wasn't going to expand to anything city-threatening. And then Mysterio, who is a made-up supervillain with cameras and borrowed turrets he managed to swindle.

I really like Spiderman's personality, it's just hard to take his superheroics seriously when most of his villains and his contributions are small-time or punch-lines. Maybe I'm just used to the older Spiderman movies, or maybe I'm just expecting Avengers-level stuff, but I have a hard time acknowledging Spiderman as "super", when there's no guessing it when I consider someone like Dr. Strange or Hawkeye.

[Friv]

Again, I should have been more specific. I meant, how does a goven universe know what number it is. I mean, how do people in comic put a number on their universe? I know it's rare but aren't those numbers also used once in a while on paper? (and not only by 4th wall breakers) How do THEY know / decide what number their universe has.

My vague memory is that the original Marvel Multiverse was numbered by either Merlyn or the Captain Britain Corps. I'm not clear on if they were numbered based on the order in which the Corps recruited members, or proximity to some "centre" of the multiverse that Merlyn could see, or what.

[Gallowglass]

Though, in general, I think the MCU has made some weird choices. Too much is tied to the Infinity Stones, for one. In the comics, the Defenders were Doctor Strange, The Incredible Hulk, The Silver Surfer, and Namor the Submariner. You know, One of the most powerful men on Earth and three of the most powerful people in the Universe. Not a bunch of street-level c-listers.

Peter being Tony's apprentice when in the comics Spider-Man was around first and PEter is smarter than Tony by a wide margin is just another case of weird decisions.

Do you know how I know you haven't actually read a marvel comic in over 10 years?

In the Comics, Brian Michael Bendis established the "defenders" becoming a group of c list street-level heroes like Powerman/IronFish/JessicaJones/Daredevil years ago and years before the Defender tv series.

Peter being Tony's "apprentice" and being younger than Tony was established during the terrible Civil War crossover in 2006.

As far as who is smarter.... well that depends entirely on who is writing it and changes from issue to issue... my own perspective is that Tony is a gifted engineer but not of the "super science" theorycraft level of most of the big-brains of the marvel universe. But in the last couple decades, mostly because of the movies, they have upped Tony's smarts. Peter's smarts, on the other hand, are as ill-defined and mercurial as its possible to be.

I mean no disrespect. I stopped reading comics at the weekly pamphlet level halfway through the "rebirth of captain america/rebirth of batman" miniseries when I had the epiphany that "I don't really like these stories much anymore and I'm going to stop supporting a bunch of editors and writers who ahve ruined almost everything I used to love about comics"

But the movies aren't guilty of ignoring or subverting the comics. Only of picking more recent story-lines to represent rather than the classics from our youth.

[Rodin]

Peter being Tony's apprentice when in the comics Spider-Man was around first and PEter is smarter than Tony by a wide margin is just another case of weird decisions.

It's not really a weird decision when you look at how the movies were made. When the MCU was conceived, they didn't have the rights to Spiderman. They decided to go with Iron Man, and as the other genius scientist (Hulk/Bruce Banner) also had weird licensing issues Iron Man became the de facto "smart guy" with Banner moonlighting in the Avengers movies.

And then, the miracle happens - they get the rights to bring Spiderman to the MCU. So, where do you fit him in? Do you introduce him as a brilliant scientist who is smarter than Tony Stark (genius, billionaire, philanthropist) and somehow having been around for longer and been more experienced when Tony has saved the world enough times that he's starting to get PTSD over it? Why was Peter Parker just hanging around Queens not doing anything when New York was attacked?

The easiest explanation is also the simplest: Peter Parker was a kid at the time and had yet to have his encounter with a radioactive spider. That pegs his age, his experience level, and his scientific knowledge at pretty specific levels. You can push his age upwards a bit by changing when he got bit, but that also changes his backstory of being a high school superhero. He becomes Tony's apprentice because Tony had been leading a team of superheroes for years and was also a good 20-30 years older.

In short: There were different ways they could have gone about it, but given the history of the MCU I don't feel it was weird in the slightest.

[Rater202]

I'm aware that there's a street-level group called the defenders. That doesn't make them the Defenders.

As for Peter being smarter than Tony... It doesn't fluctuate that much.

I mean, let's look at the early Iron Man Storys: Tony with access to high-grade weapons parts is able to construct a crude armor and once he has access to his fortune and resources he... Paints it gold.

His crowning achievement is making the same armor 54 times and it's a little bit better each time.

Peter's very first story has him casually create a miracle adhesive that is strong enough to keep the Incredible Hulk pinned down, can function as both an insulator and a conductor, and dissolves without a trace after a few hours. He did this in ten minutes, on a whim, with stuff that he had in a storebought children's chemistry set--and people can't figure out how he did it, even with months of studying the formula.

He chased this up in Amazing Spider-Man #2 by inventing a handhold device that essentially gives him absolute control of electromagnetism(Which has been referred to as recently as 2014) out of parts he just had laying around.

To reiterate, Peter Parker, in the comics, while still in high school, made one of the four fundamental forces of reality his bitch using literally only scraps. While Tony was still clunking around in the Mark 1.

@Rodin.

You don't need to mark him as being a genius scientist better than Tony who just wasn't mentioned anywhere.

But tieing him to Tony was a weird choice and Peter was smarter than Tony as a teenager in the comics. The thing to do would have been to leave him as a street-level independent who makes miracles on a limited budget and/or have Nick Fury mentor him like in the Ultimate Universe.

[Ramza00]

Peter's very first story has him casually create a miracle adhesive that is strong enough to keep the Incredible Hulk pinned down, can function as both an insulator and a conductor, and dissolves without a trace after a few hours. He did this in ten minutes, on a whim, with stuff that he had in a storebought children's chemistry set--and people can't figure out how he did it, even with months of studying the formula.

He chased this up in Amazing Spider-Man #2 by inventing a handhold device that essentially gives him absolute control of electromagnetism(Which has been referred to as recently as 2014) out of parts he just had laying around.

To reiterate, Peter Parker, in the comics, while still in high school, made one of the four fundamental forces of reality his bitch using literally only scraps. While Tony was still clunking around in the Mark 1.


Sigh, you understand what non-sense is right? It is a story it does not have to make sense.

[Delicious Taffy]

Wow, these characters and stories are fake?? This incredible new information is blowing my mind!

[Dienekes]

I'm aware that there's a street-level group called the defenders. That doesn't make them the Defenders.

As for Peter being smarter than Tony... It doesn't fluctuate that much.

I mean, let's look at the early Iron Man Storys: Tony with access to high-grade weapons parts is able to construct a crude armor and once he has access to his fortune and resources he... Paints it gold.

His crowning achievement is making the same armor 54 times and it's a little bit better each time.

Peter's very first story has him casually create a miracle adhesive that is strong enough to keep the Incredible Hulk pinned down, can function as both an insulator and a conductor, and dissolves without a trace after a few hours. He did this in ten minutes, on a whim, with stuff that he had in a storebought children's chemistry set--and people can't figure out how he did it, even with months of studying the formula.

He chased this up in Amazing Spider-Man #2 by inventing a handhold device that essentially gives him absolute control of electromagnetism(Which has been referred to as recently as 2014) out of parts he just had laying around.

To reiterate, Peter Parker, in the comics, while still in high school, made one of the four fundamental forces of reality his bitch using literally only scraps. While Tony was still clunking around in the Mark 1.

@Rodin.

You don't need to mark him as being a genius scientist better than Tony who just wasn't mentioned anywhere.

But tieing him to Tony was a weird choice and Peter was smarter than Tony as a teenager in the comics. The thing to do would have been to leave him as a street-level independent who makes miracles on a limited budget and/or have Nick Fury mentor him like in the Ultimate Universe.

Mate. Tony has literally turned his blood into steel. Developed the worlds best nanotechnology beating Pym at his own game, developed a clean nearly limitless fuel source, and developed a countermeasure system that tracks and neutralizes Asgardian level threats. He also somewhere along that line figured out how to develop elemental control or some nonsense.

I mean he isn’t Mr Fantastic levels of create a machine that can create anything. But just lowering his accomplishments to builds suits is grossly diminishing his accomplishments in nonsensical bull**** physics.

[Rater202]

Mate. Tony has literally turned his blood into steel. Developed the worlds best nanotechnology beating Pym at his own game, developed a clean nearly limitless fuel source, and developed a countermeasure system that tracks and neutralizes Asgardian level threats. He also somewhere along that line figured out how to develop elemental control or some nonsense.

I mean he isn’t Mr Fantastic levels of create a machine that can create anything. But just lowering his accomplishments to builds suits is grossly diminishing his accomplishments in nonsensical bull**** physics.1: Everyone's beaten Pym at his own game. Pym is the designated Science Jobber of the marvel universe. For the record, Peter's Spider-tracers, the ones that interface directly with his spider-sense, work on the exact same principals as Pym's ant control helmet and Hank had a fit when he realized that a teenager on a shoe-sting budget did in days what took him years and cost a fortune to do.

2: Peter Parker has also created not one but two sources of functionally infinite clean power--Parker Particles when he was with Horizon Labs and the Plasma Breeder with Parker Industries. A sibgle Plasma Breeder is said to be powerful enough to power a small country.

But let's face it. That's not what he's known for. And Tony's ot known for any of the stuff you cited.

Peter's known for inventing an ultra-powerful and durable miracle adhesive on a whim out of store-bought chemistry set chemicals and Tony's known for building the same armor 54 times, slightly better each time.

[Douglas]

Peter's known for inventing an ultra-powerful and durable miracle adhesive on a whim out of store-bought chemistry set chemicals and Tony's known for building the same armor 54 times, slightly better each time.
"Armor" that can make a single person more militarily powerful than many entire countries, even with the early versions.

[zimmerwald1915]

He chased this up in Amazing Spider-Man #2 by inventing a handhold device that essentially gives him absolute control of electromagnetism
I want to make a joke about Magneto, but nothing comes to mind.

[GloatingSwine]

Marvel Comics persistently treat Tony Stark as one of the peak Smart Guy heroes, and persistently do not treat Peter Parker as one.

It doesn't matter what individual things Peter has done, Tony is the one the comics go to when they want a tech genius who isn't Reed.


Also, Peter is consistently presented as the everyman hero, he's always going to snap back to that state as a relatively normal guy, the hero who has trouble making rent and dealing with his personal life because of his responsibilities, no matter what his current presentation may be. He's always a little bit of an outsider to all the teams and groups, because he's still got his feet on the ground and an outwardly normal life to deal with. And even in the comics he's accepted tech and resource help from Tony.


In the current state of the MCU, starting with a younger version of Peter captures all that succinctly because it addresses the question of why he's an outsider to the big teams, and why he fits in that unique position he does as the hero with dirt on his boots.

[Saph]

I always thought that the idea is that Peter Parker and Reed Richards are better at science, but Tony Stark's better at engineering.

In terms of research breakthroughs, the stuff that Peter and Reed pull off is more impressive. But Tony Stark's much better at getting the most out of the technology he has. That's why Iron Man mostly fights with lasers, missiles, and repulsor beams, while Spider-Man mostly fights by doing acrobatics and punching and kicking the bad guys really fast.

[Rater202]

Marvel Comics persistently treat Tony Stark as one of the peak Smart Guy heroes, and persistently do not treat Peter Parker as one.

It doesn't matter what individual things Peter has done, Tony is the one the comics go to when they want a tech genius who isn't Reed.

...you're confusing being treated as a genius for being treated as someone who has a budget and time to get multiple doctorates.

Peter Parker is consistantly depicted as one of the smartest people in the world--hell, he is explicitly on Reed's level: His College test scores were equal to Reed's in the same subject, Reed is genuinely impressed with Peter's intellect and inventions, Peter was a vital part of the original incarnation of the Future Foundation(the think Tank,) Peter during Peter's time with the FF he was involved in a second Think Tank that otherwise consisted of Reed Richards and Reed's suer genius enemies having called a truce, Peter Parker independently discovered what were later named "Parker Particles" and how to safely tap them for energy when Reed had previously discovered them and gave up on using them safely.

[Ramza00]

Spider-Lore question, does Spider-Man have any A or B list female villains that are not gender swapped versions of an already existing Spider-Man villian? So far I can think of these following women villians for Spider-Man.

Black Cat (which is A or B list),
Silver Sable (obscure not A or B list),
Grey Goblin (obscure),
Some of the Venom 90's Maximum Carnage characters such as Shriek, Scream, etc.

I am not counting Spider-Verse spin off female villains who are not villains to Peter Parker but villains to other Spider-Adjacent-Heroes like Gwen Stacey and Jessica Drew.

Is that it? Is Black Cat the only major Spider-Man villain who is a women? :smalleek:

[Bartmanhomer]

Ok I saw the movie early this morning in IMAX and these are my thoughts about the movie: Ok I saw the movie and it was great. It was about Spider-Man and his friends and teacher went to a trip to Europe at Venice, Italy. There was a new threat know as the Elementals want to destroy Earth. A new hero known a Quentin Beck AKA Mysterio trying to stop the Elementals. My favourite part during the Water Elemental fight that Peter Parker used a Super Mario Bros. Move by jumping from building to building. Instant Classic. Also MJ found out that Peter Parker was Spider-Man which she already knew that. And also it's was no big surprise that Mysterio was the main villain the whole time trying to fool everybody thinking that the Elementals were real. This movie has everything. There was action and comedy. The special effects was outstanding. This movie is definitely Oscar-worthy. I'll give this movie 5 out of 5 stars. :smile:

[Dienekes]

1: Everyone's beaten Pym at his own game. Pym is the designated Science Jobber of the marvel universe. For the record, Peter's Spider-tracers, the ones that interface directly with his spider-sense, work on the exact same principals as Pym's ant control helmet and Hank had a fit when he realized that a teenager on a shoe-sting budget did in days what took him years and cost a fortune to do.

2: Peter Parker has also created not one but two sources of functionally infinite clean power--Parker Particles when he was with Horizon Labs and the Plasma Breeder with Parker Industries. A sibgle Plasma Breeder is said to be powerful enough to power a small country.

But let's face it. That's not what he's known for. And Tony's ot known for any of the stuff you cited.

Peter's known for inventing an ultra-powerful and durable miracle adhesive on a whim out of store-bought chemistry set chemicals and Tony's known for building the same armor 54 times, slightly better each time.

You have to pick what we’re arguing over. If it’s Marvel deep cuts or what a character is known for. If it’s deep cuts then they’ve both created stupid powerful reality breaking nonsense. If it’s what they’re known for, Stark has the “impossible” arc reactor and hulk busting armor and Spiderman has really cool glue. You can pump up whichever one you want to be more impressive. But they’re both just fantasy, whose difficulty in creation is entirely up to the writer because both are impossible.


Spider-Lore question, does Spider-Man have any A or B list female villains that are not gender swapped versions of an already existing Spider-Man villian? So far I can think of these following women villians for Spider-Man.

Black Cat (which is A or B list),
Silver Sable (obscure not A or B list),
Grey Goblin (obscure),
Some of the Venom 90's Maximum Carnage characters such as Shriek, Scream, etc.

I am not counting Spider-Verse spin off female villains who are not villains to Peter Parker but villains to other Spider-Adjacent-Heroes like Gwen Stacey and Jessica Drew.

Is that it? Is Black Cat the only major Spider-Man villain who is a women? :smalleek:

White Rabbit was unfortunately considered a popular villain for a while.

[Anteros]

Spider-Lore question, does Spider-Man have any A or B list female villains that are not gender swapped versions of an already existing Spider-Man villian? So far I can think of these following women villians for Spider-Man.

Black Cat (which is A or B list),
Silver Sable (obscure not A or B list),
Grey Goblin (obscure),
Some of the Venom 90's Maximum Carnage characters such as Shriek, Scream, etc.

I am not counting Spider-Verse spin off female villains who are not villains to Peter Parker but villains to other Spider-Adjacent-Heroes like Gwen Stacey and Jessica Drew.

Is that it? Is Black Cat the only major Spider-Man villain who is a women? :smalleek:

Shriek is female and I don't consider her obscure, although some might.

It's just part of life for heroes that had most of their identity established in an era where hitting women (no matter the circumstance) was seen as something a hero shouldn't do.

[Friv]

Shriek is female and I don't consider her obscure, although some might.

It's just part of life for heroes that had most of their identity established in an era where hitting women (no matter the circumstance) was seen as something a hero shouldn't do.

I mean, we say that, but the X-Men managed it relatively often, and there are a decent number of female Avengers villains. I think it's just that Spiderman got lucky enough to develop a really strong rogue's gallery early, and it didn't change a lot.

I was going to suggest Alisha Silvermane, but looking her up she was animated-only.

[GloatingSwine]

...you're confusing being treated as a genius for being treated as someone who has a budget and time to get multiple doctorates.

Peter Parker is consistantly depicted as one of the smartest people in the world--hell, he is explicitly on Reed's level: His College test scores were equal to Reed's in the same subject, Reed is genuinely impressed with Peter's intellect and inventions, Peter was a vital part of the original incarnation of the Future Foundation(the think Tank,) Peter during Peter's time with the FF he was involved in a second Think Tank that otherwise consisted of Reed Richards and Reed's suer genius enemies having called a truce, Peter Parker independently discovered what were later named "Parker Particles" and how to safely tap them for energy when Reed had previously discovered them and gave up on using them safely.

Well no.

I'm not talking about them in-universe but how the franchise as a whole uses them as narrative components.

If a book which doesn't already feature Peter Parker in a reasonably central role is in want of a science guy to advance the plot, Peter Parker is pretty low down on the list of characters who will appear in that book.

As an example, when Civil War ran in the comics Tony and Reed both did science things in the plot, Peter was the everyman who revealed his secret identity. Tony's in Official Smart* People club (the Illuminati), Peter isn't. Etc.



* Okay the Illuminati are pretty dumb quite often, see World War Hulk, but I didn't say it was the official wise people club.

[Kitten Champion]

The last Spider-Man villain to be created that I'd categorize as A-tier was, like, Venom/Carnage. There are female villains created since which I've liked - such as the current Beetle - but nothing with the general public awareness of the villains from the 90's Spider-Man cartoon that could be called "major".

Black Cat and Silver Sable were getting their own Venom-esque Spider-Man-sans-Spider-Man-character-movie but apparently it fell apart and it's on indefinite delay. Regardless, I don't think they'll be in a MCU Spider-Man movie anymore than Venom will be.

[Rater202]

Spider-Lore question, does Spider-Man have any A or B list female villains that are not gender swapped versions of an already existing Spider-Man villian? So far I can think of these following women villians for Spider-Man.

Black Cat (which is A or B list),
Silver Sable (obscure not A or B list),
Grey Goblin (obscure),
Some of the Venom 90's Maximum Carnage characters such as Shriek, Scream, etc.

I am not counting Spider-Verse spin off female villains who are not villains to Peter Parker but villains to other Spider-Adjacent-Heroes like Gwen Stacey and Jessica Drew.

Is that it? Is Black Cat the only major Spider-Man villain who is a women? :smalleek:

Grey Goblin is a young man.

[Ramza00]

I was going to suggest Alisha Silvermane, but looking her up she was animated-only.

Alisha Silvermane is still a Gender Swapped / Family Member of an Original Rogue Gallery.

I love Olivia "Liv" Octavius...
https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/villains/images/c/c4/Doc_olivia_octavius.png/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/310?cb=20190414114716
https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/livoctavius2.png

...but we have to acknowledge she is a simulacra of the Original. A simulacra that Surpassed the Original, but still it is a simulacra that does not stand alone...yet :smallbiggrin: in the Public Consciousness. ("But there is no rule that an imitation cannot defeat the original. If you say you are the original, I shall surpass every one of your" [ octopi arms])

-----

Of course this creates a problem with family members for when do the children become their own things? Is Talia al Ghul her own villain, or is she merely a lackey and family member to Ra's al Ghul?


Grey Goblin is a young man.

There are two Grey Goblins.

Norman Osborn Son via Gwen Stacey who is known as Gabriel. Gabriel Stacy also has a twin sister Sarah Stacy.

The other Grey Goblin is Lily Hollister, Harry Osborn's ex-fiance. She goes by the name Grey Goblin, Menace, and Queen Cat. I was refering to Lily Hollister when I was talking about Female Super Villains in Spider-Man's line up.

[Anteros]

I mean, we say that, but the X-Men managed it relatively often, and there are a decent number of female Avengers villains. I think it's just that Spiderman got lucky enough to develop a really strong rogue's gallery early, and it didn't change a lot.

I was going to suggest Alisha Silvermane, but looking her up she was animated-only.

It's always odd to hear people say that, because I personally consider most of Spidey's rogues gallery to be pretty weak. Outside of Norman Osborn (in his non goblin roles) and Venom/Carnage they're all pretty cartoony and gimmicky. They've started to flesh Ock out as a real character in recent years, so that's something at least.

[Dienekes]

It's always odd to hear people say that, because I personally consider most of Spidey's rogues gallery to be pretty weak. Outside of Norman Osborn (in his non goblin roles) and Venom/Carnage they're all pretty cartoony and gimmicky. They've started to flesh Ock out as a real character in recent years, so that's something at least.

Oh they're all very gimmicky. But they own their gimmicks and they have enjoyable gimmicks. People remember fishbowlhead, octopus scientist, stingerbutt, and the rest. Are they high concept multifaceted characters? No. They're still great though.

[Rater202]

It's always odd to hear people say that, because I personally consider most of Spidey's rogues gallery to be pretty weak. Outside of Norman Osborn (in his non goblin roles) and Venom/Carnage they're all pretty cartoony and gimmicky. They've started to flesh Ock out as a real character in recent years, so that's something at least.

I mean, most of Spider-Man's rogues gallery was catylized and became iconic when Lee was still writing.

Lee primarily wrote the kind of stories that he'd like to see.

Cartoony, gimmicky villains against a wisecracking hero hiding a secret pain is basically what Spider-Man was all about.

But more specifically, people say that Spider-Man has a well-developed rogues gallery becuase there's a degree of emotional intimacy between Spider-Man and most of his rogues.

Take Spider-Man: Renw Your Vows, an AU in a timeline where the Civil War never happened, so PEter never outed himself, so aunt may never got shot, he never made the deal with Mephisto.

In the second volume(the original volume was a five part mini as part of Secret Wars 2015 so there are some slight continuity differences to account for being a regular earth vs battle world,) a backup story indicates that Peter trusts Sandman to watch his kid for a few minutes becuase he knows that Mako isn't going to hurt a kid.

He comes back and they're making sandcastles.

Peter's rogues are well defined becuase Peter, and by extension we the audience, know them as people. We know what motivates them and makes them tick.

[Kato]

It's always odd to hear people say that, because I personally consider most of Spidey's rogues gallery to be pretty weak. Outside of Norman Osborn (in his non goblin roles) and Venom/Carnage they're all pretty cartoony and gimmicky. They've started to flesh Ock out as a real character in recent years, so that's something at least.

Okay, I'll probably expose myself as a total noob but didn't Octavius get huge time in the spot light / development when he was Superior Spiderman and wasn't that quite a while ago? Or am I getting something totally wrong here?
(also, I remember some good things about Lizard, but my memory is much more foggy on that)

[Anteros]

Okay, I'll probably expose myself as a total noob but didn't Octavius get huge time in the spot light / development when he was Superior Spiderman and wasn't that quite a while ago? Or am I getting something totally wrong here?
(also, I remember some good things about Lizard, but my memory is much more foggy on that)

He did, and then they reset his development, and now they're finally starting to go back to it. It's comics so characters aren't allowed to grow or change without resetting over and over.


I mean, most of Spider-Man's rogues gallery was catylized and became iconic when Lee was still writing.

Lee primarily wrote the kind of stories that he'd like to see.

Cartoony, gimmicky villains against a wisecracking hero hiding a secret pain is basically what Spider-Man was all about.

But more specifically, people say that Spider-Man has a well-developed rogues gallery becuase there's a degree of emotional intimacy between Spider-Man and most of his rogues.

Take Spider-Man: Renw Your Vows, an AU in a timeline where the Civil War never happened, so PEter never outed himself, so aunt may never got shot, he never made the deal with Mephisto.

In the second volume(the original volume was a five part mini as part of Secret Wars 2015 so there are some slight continuity differences to account for being a regular earth vs battle world,) a backup story indicates that Peter trusts Sandman to watch his kid for a few minutes becuase he knows that Mako isn't going to hurt a kid.

He comes back and they're making sandcastles.

Peter's rogues are well defined becuase Peter, and by extension we the audience, know them as people. We know what motivates them and makes them tick.

That doesn't tell me anything other than the fact that alternate universe Spidey is a bad parent. Even if you're reasonably sure the guy who tried to murder you hundreds of times won't take the grudge out on your kid, there's still a whole lot of qualifications you'd want in a babysitter that a super villain doesn't exactly meet.

[Rater202]

Okay, I'll probably expose myself as a total noob but didn't Octavius get huge time in the spot light / development when he was Superior Spiderman and wasn't that quite a while ago? Or am I getting something totally wrong here?
(also, I remember some good things about Lizard, but my memory is much more foggy on that)

Superior onward.

Octavious is technically still dead but a copy of him is running around uploaded into a composite clone made of his own and Peter Parker's DNA and he still ha Peter's memories.

Initially he was operating as a villain as "Superior Octopus," even going so far as to sign on with HYDRA during Secret Empire becuase they were trying to get PI under their control and he wanted the company he made back under his control.

However, in Go Gown Swinging--Dan Slott's last Spider-Man storyline before Nick Spencer took over--he intervenes to save Aunt May* from a Carnage possessed Normie Osborn and if badly hurt as a result. Peter decides then and there that saving his aunt makes things good between him and Otto, and Otto moves cross country to California to be a Superhero after being told the slate is clean. Next we see him is in Spider-Gheddon and now there's a second volume of Superior Spider-Man.

Last we saw him was in the War of the Realms tie-in, he may or may not be part of the West Coast Avengers now(their series got canceled so we have to wait and see if they show up in more Superior issues.)

[Ramza00]

Oh they're all very gimmicky. But they own their gimmicks and they have enjoyable gimmicks. People remember fishbowlhead, octopus scientist, stingerbutt, and the rest. Are they high concept multifaceted characters? No. They're still great though.

They are neighborhood level threats the Spider-Man 🕷️ villians. Not the power level where the villians are a threat for they are the head of multinational corporations where the corporations have armies that can take over a country. No the Spider-Man rogue gallery is middle management where the mid tied people can do lasting damage to the neighborhood but they are not going to destabilize a nation state.

Now of course there are exceptions to this. Norman Osborn and Kingpin are supposed to be those nation state level threats with armies, much like Superman's Lex Luthor. And to justify their power and comic repeatability these rich jerks have to be rich but also diabolically smart in a. Machiavellian sense or they would been replace by other cut throat villians long ago.

The reason why Spider-Man villians are memorable is for they are enduring, we see the every man in the Spider-Man villians even if it's mixed with camp, theatrics, and silliness. Note this also applies to the Batman rogue galley even though Batman is the opposite of an Everyman, but his rogues are grounded as mid tied city level threats and not unstoppable super villians.

[The Glyphstone]

So I watched Homecoming on Friday as preparation for watching this yesterday. Overall it wasn't a bad movie, but I think Homecoming was a decidedly superior product.


I've read that Homecoming was a deliberate love letter to the John Hughes style coming-of-age teen drama, which probably shows why I've never wanted to see Ferris Bueller or Breakfast Club. The bulk of the movie was Peter failing and screwing up worse than if he had never gotten involved at all, which was a painful slog to sit through for the obvious eventual payoff of his success. And it bothers me more than it probably should that the one line which basically sums up Tony Stark's entire character arc ("If you need the suit to be a hero, you don't deserve it") is relegated to a throwaway line in a Spiderman movie.

Mysterio was far less sympathetic than Vulture, since his version of the 'screwed over by Tony Stark' backstory was both self-justified and ultimately well-deserved. The fight scenes were more spectacular and his illusion-mastery tech was exactly as surreal as it deserved, but ultimately Beck just wasn't as good of a character as Toomes, Gyllenhall's excellent efforts notwithstanding.

The weird sidelining of Ned was sort of jarring. He really irritated me through about 90% of Homecoming, and it's amazing Peter trusts him to do literally anything at this point without screwing it up or embarrassing Peter somehow. But he felt like he was barely in the movie at all except for the obligatory punchlines.

They're finally advancing the Peter/MJ romance, but I'm not sure I like this MJ yet. Her sarcastic anti-social attitude makes her a very awkward foil for Peter's dorky earnestness, so it's difficult to see them as a stable or healthy couple.

My problems with Nick Fury were solved, rather brilliantly, by the post-credits scene.

[weckar]

Saw it the other day.

Dutch Tourist Board approved.

[Kyberwulf]

Oh yeah, I forgot about "MJ" lol. He being "Edgy" was really annoying. When she dropped that part of her character, halfway for that little bit and just was.... human? she was ALOT more cooler.

[Sholos]

Just got out. Liked the movie overall and curious to see where they'll go next with it. Peter's got a lot to look forward to.

I legit teared up when Happy put on Led Zeppelin for Peter to work to.

[Douglas]

Just got out. Liked the movie overall and curious to see where they'll go next with it. Peter's got a lot to look forward to.

I legit teared up when Happy put on Led Zeppelin for Peter to work to.
That's one of the best scenes in the movie in my opinion. Happy used to consider Peter as some annoying kid of no consequence that he was unfortunately stuck dealing with. Now he trusts Peter to handle a serious supervillain threat with potential mass casualties, and putting on that music the way he did was his way of saying it. They've come so far together.:smallsmile:

[The Glyphstone]

Part of the joke there is that Peter thinks it's Led Zeppelin but it's actually AC/DC. Specifically Happy put on 'Back in Black', which has become Iron Man's unofficial theme song in the MCU. So it's also an additional layer of symbolism for Peter being Tony's successor.

[Bartmanhomer]

Part of the joke there is that Peter thinks it's Led Zeppelin but it's actually AC/DC. Specifically Happy put on 'Back in Black', which has become Iron Man's unofficial theme song in the MCU. So it's also an additional layer of symbolism for Peter being Tony's successor.


I thought Iron Man unofficial song was Black Sabbath. :confused:

[Mordar]

Saw it Saturday...for most of it I felt like I was watching a Nickelodeon movie. The pacing, presentation, supporting characters...all felt more like Drake and Josh or Suite Life (yeah, yeah, that isn't Nickelodeon) than MCU.

Not an auspicious start for the film, particularly not as the first post-Endgame entry. Following it up with the whole "I don't wanna be a super-hero this week" and the CW-inspired secret identity joke hurts it a lot for me, pushing it into the bottom tier of the MCU (and adjacent) films for me. Not GotG 2 bad...but you can see it from there.

Mysterio was good. Power source and tie-in less so...again feels like something CW would do. Not every villain needs to have a unified origin story...metas could exist outside of the STAR labs explosion, or the meteor-freaks to push it back to Smallville. MCU has established a number of ways to develop powers...so we don't need this to be Stark rejects. Not a huge deal on its own, but coupled with the other things I didn't like it just becomes a bigger issue for me.

Overall, I felt it dragged and seemed to be trying to hard to make Spider-Man the replacement for RDJ (moreso than Iron Man) in the new phase.

- M

[Psyren]

Seeing it on Friday, but seeing very mixed reviews for now. I have some concerns myself based on some of the merchandise and trailers, but it will probably be fine.

RT has 91 critic/96 audience so not sure where this is coming from.

For me, I definitely enjoyed it, but I'm very wary about where it looks like they're taking the MCU next. In particular,
Secret Invasion seems like a hard 180 after they spent so much time establishing the Skrulls as sympathetic in CM, and continuing that here by having them integral to setting up SWORD. Yeah we could go from that to "there are evil Skrulls", just like there are some good Kree out there, but it runs the risk of the screenplay getting very muddy.

Regarding the movie - it did a great job of establishing Peter's greatest asset, more even than his powers - his smarts.
I loved watching him geek out about multiverses, and the "build my own suit" montage is a standout as many others have mentioned. I also liked how quickly he came up with a test to make sure that Happy wasn't another illusion.

Jake Gyllenhaal as Mysterio was great too - just the right level of egotistical, maniacal, and vengeful. You really get a sense for how dangerous he would have been up against many other superheroes. Pity nobody's figured out a way around the "Peter tingle" :smallbiggrin:

My one criticism is that the MCU seems to be falling back on a common premise, which is essentially the one that sank Suicide Squad:
Namely, "the thing we made to solve our problems is itself the main problem, so why did we make it in the first place?" E.D.I.T.H., I mean. Funny acronym aside, we saw this same issue pop up in Winter Soldier with Project Insight, Suicide Squad with the Enchantress, and Age of Ultron with... well, Ultron. While one of those movies is far worse than the other two, it's been a problematic element in all of them, because it just makes what should be the smartest folks in their respective universes (Fury, Waller, and Stark) look outright dumb or insane. When the world would have been safer if you did nothing, that's a problem.

We're also running into the other problem with the MCU, namely where are all the other heroes when world-changing threats emerge, though I suppose we're going to find out about Doctor Strange's absence shortly. At least they do a better job with this than DC seems able to; Superman handles cosmic threats for example, but he doesn't seem to have as much of a reputation in the popular culture for that as Thor, Carol, or even Green Lantern.

Lastly, I really want a Night Monkey theme song!

[GloatingSwine]

My one criticism is that the MCU seems to be falling back on a common premise, which is essentially the one that sank Suicide Squad:
Namely, "the thing we made to solve our problems is itself the main problem, so why did we make it in the first place?" E.D.I.T.H., I mean. Funny acronym aside, we saw this same issue pop up in Winter Soldier with Project Insight, Suicide Squad with the Enchantress, and Age of Ultron with... well, Ultron. While one of those movies is far worse than the other two, it's been a problematic element in all of them, because it just makes what should be the smartest folks in their respective universes (Fury, Waller, and Stark) look outright dumb or insane. When the world would have been safer if you did nothing, that's a problem.

We're also running into the other problem with the MCU, namely where are all the other heroes when world-changing threats emerge, though I suppose we're going to find out about Doctor Strange's absence shortly. At least they do a better job with this than DC seems able to; Superman handles cosmic threats for example, but he doesn't seem to have as much of a reputation in the popular culture for that as Thor, Carol, or even Green Lantern.

Lastly, I really want a Night Monkey theme song!

Eh, I think you're overestimating how often the MCU has done that and it not be Tony Stark's fault.

Like in Winter Soldier Project Insight was never made to solve any problems, it was made to let Hydra take over the world, they just told everyone it was "for security".

Meanwhile, "Tony Stark is his own worst enemy" is a consistent theme of his stories, and so it's also inextricably linked to any legacy he leaves to the world. Even In Death I'm The ****up.

[Psyren]

Insight was absolutely made to solve a perceived problem (i.e. the heroes - who were much smaller in number around WS - not being able to be everywhere at once.) Sure, that perception was heightened and the checks and balances eroded by Hydra, but at some point they had to fool multiple supposedly-very-smart people to bring us as close to the brink as they did.

I'm not saying this is a problem in and of itself - you need the drama to come from somewhere after all - I'm more concerned about the fact that Tony being his worst enemy should be a known quantity by now, and so some contingencies should be put in. Specifically,
some of his bigger gaffes (Ultron, and now EDITH) should really have had much more in the way of safeguards put in. There is a great video series on Youtube called Nando v. Movies where he makes minor (and some not-so-minor, hi DC) tweaks to a movie's premise in order to make said more credible and interesting. One that he suggested for Age of Ultron was that Ultron itself could have been built with the Laws of Robotics in mind, i.e. not being able to kill. That would have ramped up the tension far more - Ultron's goal being to remove that block and THEN drop a big rock on the planet - while also making Tony seem a lot smarter than he came off in that movie. EDITH should have been built similarly, rather than handing a freshman the ability to call down lethal drone strikes on his classmates.

[Reddish Mage]

Insight was absolutely made to solve a perceived problem (i.e. the heroes - who were much smaller in number around WS - not being able to be everywhere at once.) Sure, that perception was heightened and the checks and balances eroded by Hydra, but at some point they had to fool multiple supposedly-very-smart people to bring us as close to the brink as they did.

I'm not saying this is a problem in and of itself - you need the drama to come from somewhere after all - I'm more concerned about the fact that Tony being his worst enemy should be a known quantity by now, and so some contingencies should be put in. Specifically,
some of his bigger gaffes (Ultron, and now EDITH) should really have had much more in the way of safeguards put in. There is a great video series on Youtube called Nando v. Movies where he makes minor (and some not-so-minor, hi DC) tweaks to a movie's premise in order to make said more credible and interesting. One that he suggested for Age of Ultron was that Ultron itself could have been built with the Laws of Robotics in mind, i.e. not being able to kill. That would have ramped up the tension far more - Ultron's goal being to remove that block and THEN drop a big rock on the planet - while also making Tony seem a lot smarter than he came off in that movie. EDITH should have been built similarly, rather than handing a freshman the ability to call down lethal drone strikes on his classmates.

I wonder if audiences can really follow these smarter plots or if there is enough time in the movie to follow those twists and turns. If Ultron had safeguards in him, then broke them anyway doing the same things in the same runtime, they weren't much of a safeguard. However, if he does a two step, that's a lot of movie dedicated to explaining how Tony sought to make Ultron the proper smart way and failed.

Finally, Vision was supposed to be the superior Ultron mark 2 that actually works. Vision makes no sense if Ultron was thoughtfully designed...but failed anyway.

In other words Ultron is a case where "smarter plot" is too long to explain and doesn't really work anyway.

Here, with Spiderman FFH, we get a system designed to hack anything and call in drone strikes (we don't know if it can do other stuff). However, that itself, and given Age of Ultron and Winter Soldier, is probably something that shouldn't exist at all in this universe. If we have it that Tony made the system smarter, to make it self-aware (like Ultron) and ignore explicit orders from Peter to transfer the capabilities to another (which violates the 2nd of the 3-laws) and then have Beck compromise it, we'd still be have lots of problems. However, now we have to show Beck's team compromising the thing, and explain how Peter restores the technology's original purpose...a purpose that doesn't make sense in the first case.

In other words FFH is a case where the smarter plot doesn't work once again.

Playing the geek game of filling plot holes often just ends up creating more and more complex plot holes. That is especially true because these plot contrivances are paper-thin cliche contrivances found in countless movies and comic books anyway. They were even less realistic when they first came about in the...60's? 50's? 40's?

In Endgame, we get Thanos proposing to destroy half of all life. That's one of the most patently absurd strategies for bringing about paradise ever (because of population rebound will happen within a few generations). However, had Thanos also decided to subtly change things, we would have had a longer explanation, that wouldn't work either.

The blip-back is the thing that disturbs me. It seems transparently obvious to me that people would lose not only their apartments and schools, but their families, friends, jobs, property, and potentially social status en masse as a consequence of the blip. This is vaguely alluded to their being a charity drive for those displaced by the blip, but the movie well underplays the catastrophic consequences of having half the population disappear for years and then suddenly "blip" back. How fortunes, governments, militaries, families, companies and social networks all disappear in the 5 years post "devastation" of the snappening only to have half the population suddenly come back and clamor to have their lives reinstated. The idea of that everybody in the world collectively shrugged and found some way to move on with their lives with minimal consequences is simply silly...which is why they played it for laughs.

If you're convinced sensible explanations can really be made, by all means, tell me I'm wrong. However, I think a very different concept has to be used in place of all of the above, probably something Hollywood would think too complicated for a general audience.

Recall, executives forced the Witkowski's to substitute humans as "batteries" rather than "processors" for the machines, even though in retrospect, everyone would understand that latter concept and it would have been a lot more interesting. I'd give you great internets if you could make a substitution half as good as that one.

[Psyren]

In other words Ultron is a case where "smarter plot" is too long to explain and doesn't really work anyway.

I disagree, it wouldn't take much at all. Spoiler for off-topic:
Ultron would do all the same things - recruiting other villains, try to escape to the web, getting partially countered by Jarvis - but it makes him a lot more threatening when you actually realize there's something clear, however flimsy or temporary, standing between him and the mass murder a truly unfettered AI could unleash pretty much instantly, and that said thin reed is something Tony planned for (however imperfectly) rather than essentially being a stroke of good luck or incompetence on Ultron's part. (And really the laws of robotics aren't that heavy a lift anyway - audiences got on board with the likes of Robocop and I, Robot after all.)


For EDITH it would be even easier:
An error message when Peter tries to (unknowingly) kill his annoying classmate, and a quick line where Quentin (or preferably his pet egghead) disables the safeguards - that's it, that's all it would take for Tony to not look like a posthumous basketcase without changing anything else about the film. But I get it, they wanted a short action scene on the bus where Peter takes down the drone, regardless of how implausible it is that he got his entire class to look out the window at some nonexistent goats while he jumped 15 feet in the air.

I'll link the Nando video later but it goes into detail on how you could introduce a concept like that quickly without bogging down the movie.


Recall, executives forced the Witkowski's to substitute humans as "batteries" rather than "processors" for the machines, even though in retrospect, everyone would understand that latter concept and it would have been a lot more interesting. I'd give you great internets if you could make a substitution half as good as that one.

Uh no, I don't find "processors" more interesting at all; it doesn't change anything about the Matrix's failings, nor the Architect's ultimate judgement that "there are levels of survival they're willing to accept" when it comes to either wiping out Zion or coexisting with it. But we're really drifting off topic here.

[zimmerwald1915]

because of population rebound will happen within a few generations
It occurs to me that we have a counterexample to this truism: Russia. The demographic "echo" created by the Second World War shows up generation after generation, as the WWII generation failed to have babies due to being dead, and their descendents never existed due to their putative progenetors being dead. The country's population, rather than growing rapidly through a baby boom, has flatlined or declined in the generations since.

This hasn't led to increased quality of life for the Russians, so doesn't touch the larger point about Thanos's plan being a bad way to create good quality of life, but the specific point that demographic rebound would moot Thanos's plan in a few generations is not trivially true.

[Reddish Mage]

I disagree, it wouldn't take much at all. Spoiler for off-topic:
Ultron would do all the same things - recruiting other villains, try to escape to the web, getting partially countered by Jarvis - but it makes him a lot more threatening when you actually realize there's something clear, however flimsy or temporary, standing between him and the mass murder a truly unfettered AI could unleash pretty much instantly, and that said thin reed is something Tony planned for (however imperfectly) rather than essentially being a stroke of good luck or incompetence on Ultron's part. (And really the laws of robotics aren't that heavy a lift anyway - audiences got on board with the likes of Robocop and I, Robot after all.)


Ultron couldn't actually attack the Avengers than until that later part is removed. Also, its the THREE laws. Tony could simply order Ultron to shutdown all systems. If Tony put in all three laws, rather than some vague prohibition against directly killing humans, it'd be a whole thing.

Also, in the original, Ultron was deemed a "failure" and then took over Jarvis like a virus. He was incomplete and only vaguely instructed by his creators, that's a good explanation. Three laws have a lot of technical problems, vagaries, and contradictions that would make a nice topic for the Asimov thread.


For EDITH it would be even easier:
An error message when Peter tries to (unknowingly) kill his annoying classmate, and a quick line where Quentin (or preferably his pet egghead) disables the safeguards - that's it, that's all it would take for Tony to not look like a posthumous basketcase without changing anything else about the film. But I get it, they wanted a short action scene on the bus where Peter takes down the drone, regardless of how implausible it is that he got his entire class to look out the window at some nonexistent goats while he jumped 15 feet in the air.

If Tony put in safeguards that his people can be so easily bypassed, that also says Tony is also a basketcase. How can the guy who made Ultron think a few easily bypassed security protocols can protect the world?

The canon EDITH at least obeys Peter Parker and only Peter Parker, it could only be disabled by Peter Parker...who does so...but EDITH does give a word of caution in requiring very clear confirmation. Tony trusted Peter with the system, he even trusted Peter to choose a successor, but he did put in a safeguard against accidental transfer.

You are suggesting Peter gets EDITH with automated training wheels like in Homecoming. We saw that once before. This is a Tony that trusts Peter completely.

That makes Tony look like an idiot for giving so much power to a teenage boy who is clearly not ready to take up the mantle. However, given that Beck, who had a team of Stark's ex-employees, needed to basically convince Nick Fury and alter Peter's reality in order to get EDITH, that suggests Tony may not have been that stupid after all. He just had his blindspots like he always did.


I'll link the Nando video later but it goes into detail on how you could introduce a concept like that quickly without bogging down the movie.

I'll watch, but the description given is that Nando basically thinks brief mentions of these concepts are fixing the plot holes. I see the OG plot holes as fairly shallow in the first place, and the fixes are creating new ones.



Uh no, I don't find "processors" more interesting at all; it doesn't change anything about the Matrix's failings, nor the Architect's ultimate judgement that "there are levels of survival they're willing to accept" when it comes to either wiping out Zion or coexisting with it. But we're really drifting off topic here.

OMG, other than playing into the myth that we use like 10 to 15% of our brain and the rest is available for processing, the idea of having the Matrix processed by human brains makes a huge difference.

Now the humans are fighting...essentially themselves. One is the human qua human, the other is human as a processor that acts as the intelligence of the machines. Moreover, its transparently obvious to everyone that humans make bad batteries (and also its rather silly). The idea the machines need humans to be their brains opens the door to a lot of personal identity issues and mind/brain/body issues that the released movies never went into.

Of course, all of that was probably stuff the studios would have preferred stay well away from a mainstream audience.



It occurs to me that we have a counterexample to this truism: Russia. The demographic "echo" created by the Second World War shows up generation after generation, as the WWII generation failed to have babies due to being dead, and their descendents never existed due to their putative progenetors being dead. The country's population, rather than growing rapidly through a baby boom, has flatlined or declined in the generations since.

This hasn't led to increased quality of life for the Russians, so doesn't touch the larger point about Thanos's plan being a bad way to create good quality of life, but the specific point that demographic rebound would moot Thanos's plan in a few generations is not trivially true.

I would posit this is because resources in Russia were constrained and did not allow for population expansion. I am, however, just spitballing and don't want to get into Russian history.

In a resource rich environment population rebound would happen according to scientific studies of all sorts of animal and insect populations. It happened with humans after the plague (it looks like a little blip on a population history chart), after numerous events in human history that kill off large populations but don't make a dent (really only the black plague makes a noticeable, albeit temporary, depression). Of course, these are population charts made by historians operating on very, very, old and suspect data supplemented by their own assumptions and rules of thumb. Of course the historians know it should look like a smooth curve, but these charts exist and supplement population demographic theories.

That overpopulation causes misery is something long posited and discussed in lots of literature (Charles Dickens is found of referring to it). Thanos' take on it is slim on the detail but its serviceable.

Note that this directly plays into FFH because we start with a funny account of the "blip" when everyone returns and life somehow moves on the same as always and there is no wide-scale problems on the newly crowded world filled with temporal refugees.

[Psyren]

Ultron couldn't actually attack the Avengers than until that later part is removed. Also, its the THREE laws. Tony could simply order Ultron to shutdown all systems. If Tony put in all three laws, rather than some vague prohibition against directly killing humans, it'd be a whole thing.

Also, in the original, Ultron was deemed a "failure" and then took over Jarvis like a virus. He was incomplete and only vaguely instructed by his creators, that's a good explanation. Three laws have a lot of technical problems, vagaries, and contradictions that would make a nice topic for the Asimov thread.

I was using shorthand here - as you mentioned, the "don't kill humans" is really the only one you need.



If Tony put in safeguards that his people can be so easily bypassed, that also says Tony is also a basketcase. How can the guy who made Ultron think a few easily bypassed security protocols can protect the world?

The canon EDITH at least obeys Peter Parker and only Peter Parker, it could only be disabled by Peter Parker...who does so...but EDITH does give a word of caution in requiring very clear confirmation. Tony trusted Peter with the system, he even trusted Peter to choose a successor, but he did put in a safeguard against accidental transfer.

You are suggesting Peter gets EDITH with automated training wheels like in Homecoming. We saw that once before. This is a Tony that trusts Peter completely.

That makes Tony look like an idiot for giving so much power to a teenage boy who is clearly not ready to take up the mantle. However, given that Beck, who had a team of Stark's ex-employees, needed to basically convince Nick Fury and alter Peter's reality in order to get EDITH, that suggests Tony may not have been that stupid after all. He just had his blindspots like he always did.

Under what circumstances could Peter ever possibly
need to call down a lethal dronestrike on someone? Peter doesn't kill and Tony knows it. Even in Homecoming, nobody actually died. (Well, that one henchman did, but Peter wasn't even there for that.) Leaving that functionality in by default served no purpose except making Tony look silly.

For me, having Quentin need the admin transfer + some keystrokes from his hacker guy to remove the safeguards is both plausible and makes him look better.

I really have to leave the Matrix thing alone because we'll have a 50 page thread otherwise, sorry.

[Ramza00]

You have to remember that Ultron in the MCU is not a robot, but is instead an emergent phenomenon like a biological lifeform. He is a Frankenstein monster giving life where Ultron mind was shaped by Tony but Ultron was not alive, and suddenly the threshold was crossed when Tony was not looking and Ultron emerged alive, and then he emerged grew and grew and grew. Once he emerged and grew past a point no super-ego rules, relegations, three Asmiov directives was going to work.

Tony's aesthetic values of life is sacred is inherrently absurd. It is also absurd to value life some of the time and not other times, to see this human as an enemy and that human as a friend, especially when friends can betray you in the present, past, and future.

Now when I say humanity valuing life as absurd, this means I still value life, I still love and defend life, but I reconogize it is not a math problem you can ground in mathematical axioms, it requires choice and enough of a ego to make self define value statements in the moment.

Ultron was given rules but he then broke the rules for the aesthetics behind the predetermined choices did not make sense to Ultron. The aesthetics were incompatible so he rejected Tony's rules and he self created his own aesthetics.

Vision agreed Tony rules were arbitrary and contradictory but he made a leap of faith and how the aesthetics compatible enough.

-----

My point here was making the mistake that Ultron was a machine instead of seeing Tony we creating a child with his own will and volition. Ultron was Tony's Frankenstein's Monster, for Frankenstein did not understand people let alone children, Frankenstein want mastery not realizing mastery requires ambiguity and choice as a foundation.

[ben-zayb]

Just got back after watching Iron Man: FFS Iron Man: Far From Over Spider-Man: Far From Home.

It's a solid 7/10 as far as entertaining me is concerned, although I did have to turn my brain off for my own good for a good portion of it. I actually appreciated the out-of-suit and out-of-web actions, to follow through with Homecoming's idea that Peter being Spider-Man is more than just having the suit (well, until he had to resort to Starktech....again). Gyllenhall and Holland killed in their roles. I even like the subtheme of concealed reality: from Spider-Man leading a double life, to Quentin Beck's BARF tech, to Talos disguising as Fury, to real Fury's space holodeck.

My main gripe like others was that there was just too many Stark stuff in this movie, and the point of Peter being his own person instead of being Stark Mark II would have worked for me if not for the fact that he ended up using Stark tech itself anyway.



Final Musings:

What's the deal with the airport security casually ignoring Pete's Spider Suit? Did they really just think he's cosplaying or something?

Did the movie forget showing us what happened to Quentin Beck's motley crew, or was that a deliberate omission?

If EDITH ready existed prior to Stark's death, why didn't he just deploy them in Endgame?

Why does it seem like The Blip barely affected the lives of the main cast, heck society in general from what was shown in the movie?

Even without Strange, aren't there other sorcerers in different jurisdictions across the continents? Considering the claim that the threat was inter-universal, this seems like a good reason for the sorcerers to get involved.

Why is Fury getting help from a 16 year old, instead of reaching out to Falcon, Bucky, Wanda, or War Machine?

[Friv]

I can answer a few of these:


What's the deal with the airport security casually ignoring Pete's Spider Suit? Did they really just think he's cosplaying or something?

I think we're supposed to just infer that she doesn't care. Maybe she doesn't know who Spider-Man is, because he's not a big enough name in Europe. Maybe she thinks he's cosplaying. Maybe she went home and told someone, "Oh, yeah, I stopped Spider-Man at the airport. He tried to smuggle a banana in. What a guy."


Did the movie forget showing us what happened to Quentin Beck's motley crew, or was that a deliberate omission?

We didn't see what happened to most of them, but William explicitly was able to finish assembling that post-mortem accusation and then escape, so the implication is that most of the Mysterio team is still on the loose.


If EDITH ready existed prior to Stark's death, why didn't he just deploy them in Endgame?

Based on their general destructibility, my guess would be that Stark didn't bother deploying them because the giant spaceship hanging in the area would have blown them all up in a matter of minutes. That, or he didn't have EDITH access in the one suit he still had access to after the surprise attack.


Why does it seem like The Blip barely affected the lives of the main cast, heck society in general from what was shown in the movie?

I mean, this one is really just "they want to mostly be able to play in a real-world-like sandbox." You can headcanon it as "the Infinity Gems were strong enough that the desire to 'get everyone back safely' papered over a lot of stuff and left things pretty fixable", which seems reasonable. We also see the tail end of a year, since everyone had to repeat a year of school, so there may have been a few truly chaotic months followed by things settling down. They've got a major charity drive for people displaced by the Blip, so it's obviously affected some lives in a big way, but if they want to do superheroes and not pure sci-fi, they can't really examine it.


Even without Strange, aren't there other sorcerers in different jurisdictions across the continents? Considering the claim that the threat was inter-universal, this seems like a good reason for the sorcerers to get involved.

Why is Fury getting help from a 16 year old, instead of reaching out to Falcon, Bucky, Wanda, or War Machine?

Spoilered for potential big spoilers:

My guess is that even if Fury knew how to contact these sorcerers, Talos doesn't. And I would guess that the real Avengers are in space with Fury, which is why Talos skips over them when he's discussing options.

[Palanan]

Just saw it, had a ton of fun.

But questions:



Wouldn’t Tony Stark have written a “don’t kill Peter Parker” subroutine into EDITH’s protocols? His biosignature is known to the Stark database, so why wouldn’t Stark have given the kid that extra layer of protection?

As all the Americans were having super-fights against the backdrop of European cities…

…did anyone else wonder why Europe doesn’t have any supers of its own?

Okay, who are the green shapeshifters? Why are they filling in for Nick Fury and Maria Hill?

And is this another tie-in to Captain Marvel?

Okay…where exactly is Nick Fury? Why is he on an alien facility?

Do we know, or is this teasing whatever’s next in Phase 4?

[GloatingSwine]

As all the Americans were having super-fights against the backdrop of European cities…

…did anyone else wonder why Europe doesn’t have any supers of its own?

They're mostly X-Men, and so unavailable for legal reasons.


Okay, who are the green shapeshifters? Why are they filling in for Nick Fury and Maria Hill?

And is this another tie-in to Captain Marvel?

Yes. Those are the lead Skrulls from Captain Marvel. Presumably they are filling in for Nick Fury whilst he is off doing Secret Space Things.


Okay…where exactly is Nick Fury? Why is he on an alien facility?

Do we know, or is this teasing whatever’s next in Phase 4?

We don't know, but dollars to donuts it's The Peak, headquarters of SWORD. (The counterpart to SHIELD that deals with Secret Alien Stuff).

[Toastkart]

Saw it this afternoon. Overall I enjoyed it. Some of the teenage drama was a little cringey. Then again, it was cringey in homecoming too. Since we're sharing our version of Spider-Man, I grew up on the '94 cartoon and the novels of the same era. An adult. I miss adult Spider-Man. That being said, Tom Holland has made Spider-Man his own thing and I've enjoyed his work so far. There are a couple things that stood out for me.

What exactly did they need Edith for? They obviously already had control of the drones for the earlier elemental attacks. Was it just a matter of scale? Did I miss something?

Fury's eye looked like it had more of a defined claw mark rather than the more radial scar it had previously. I didn't notice if this was also the case in endgame. I know they took a gamble on making it a joke, but it fell very flat for me (and apparently, a lot of people). To see it carried forward is kind of a letdown. That being said, I couldn't tell if it was present in the end credits scene, which may make this complaint moot.

As mentioned a couple of times by others, I really enjoyed Peter's building the suit scene. Although I already miss the extra appendages of the Iron Spider suit. Narratively speaking, it makes a lot of sense to move on and build a new suit. Practically speaking I would think I'd want extra arms when dealing with a horde of drones that I can't really see.

Having said that, his spider-sense fight scene was wicked cool.



As for Far From Home, Ben gets another reference but again, it's not a direct one. The suitcase Peter uses to go to Europe belonged to Ben. His initials are on it.

https://media.comicbook.com/2019/01/spider-man-far-from-home-uncle-ben-1153900.jpeg

Benjamin Franklin Pierce?

[Douglas]

I actually appreciated the out-of-suit and out-of-web actions, to follow through with Homecoming's idea that Peter being Spider-Man is more than just having the suit (well, until he had to resort to Starktech....again).
He needed Starktech, yes, but he needed his Spiderman abilities too. If either had been missing, he would have lost. Without Starktech he can't disable enough of the drones fast enough to matter. Without his powers he can't tell what's really going on well enough to fight through the illusions.


Wouldn’t Tony Stark have written a “don’t kill Peter Parker” subroutine into EDITH’s protocols? His biosignature is known to the Stark database, so why wouldn’t Stark have given the kid that extra layer of protection?
Why would Tony have expected such a specific thing to be needed? The line where Edith tells Mysterio that the drones aren't shooting because he's too close to the target area indicates that there is a rule against harming the person giving the orders, which Tony expected would be Peter. Making a version of that rule specific to Peter himself would only make sense if he anticipated that Peter might either be suicidal or hand over control to someone who betrays him, and there's not much reason for Tony to expect either possibility.

What exactly did they need Edith for? They obviously already had control of the drones for the earlier elemental attacks. Was it just a matter of scale? Did I miss something?
Just scale, and possibly some precision and quality, I think. They had some drones, but not the vast stockpile that Edith controlled and probably not made by Tony, so their resources without Edith may have been insufficient to pull off the bigger "Avengers-level threat" illusion.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Douglas
They had some drones, but not the vast stockpile that Edith controlled and probably not made by Tony, so their resources without Edith may have been insufficient to pull off the bigger "Avengers-level threat" illusion.

This was my impression as well. However….

That doesn’t explain how the Mexican village was so utterly destroyed, unless they were using ordinary munitions or something.


Originally Posted by Douglas
Why would Tony have expected such a specific thing to be needed?

Seems like a pretty basic failsafe. If you can program for a friendly biosignature, why not include it?

This is the same Tony Stark who knows that Peter disabled the “Training Wheels” protocol, so anything could happen. Given how much he thinks of the kid, I'd expect he'd want to reduce the possibilities of a fatal accident.


Originally Posted by Douglas
He needed Starktech, yes, but he needed his Spiderman abilities too.

I have to say, Tony Stark loomed large over this film, and maybe a little too large.

That said, the plot was pretty much built around access to Stark’s resources—access for both Peter and Mysterio—and it’s hard to imagine how it would’ve played out otherwise.

That said, it does seem a little odd that Stark would leave control of orbiting weapons platforms to a sixteen-year-old kid, and I have to wonder what Pepper would’ve said about it. I don’t think she really knows Peter, apart from his walking out on her press conference, which wasn’t the best way to impress her. That’s not a pair I can really see doing lunch.

On the other hand, I can definitely see Pepper giving MJ some advice on how to deal with being the SO of a superhero. Pepper is probably the leading authority on that one.

[KillianHawkeye]

NIGHT MONKEY!!!

That is all. :smallbiggrin:

[Psyren]

What's the deal with the airport security casually ignoring Pete's Spider Suit? Did they really just think he's cosplaying or something?

If you saw a spiderman costume in some kid's luggage, would you immediately think they were actually Spiderman? Especially in a foreign country thousands of miles away from New York City. And we don't even know how well-known Spidey even is in the MCU.



Did the movie forget showing us what happened to Quentin Beck's motley crew, or was that a deliberate omission?

Probably deliberate, and one of them (particularly the hacker) could probably get recycled as a different C-list Marvel villain down the line. (Did he get a name?)



If EDITH ready existed prior to Stark's death, why didn't he just deploy them in Endgame?

Lingering PTSD from Infinity War? Not fully weaponized yet?



Why does it seem like The Blip barely affected the lives of the main cast, heck society in general from what was shown in the movie?

The main cast of this, for whatever reason, were almost all blipped. Peter, MJ, Ned, Fury, Hill, Happy etc.



Even without Strange, aren't there other sorcerers in different jurisdictions across the continents? Considering the claim that the threat was inter-universal, this seems like a good reason for the sorcerers to get involved.

I expect that we're about to find out what was keeping Strange and the sorcerers busy in DS2.


Why is Fury getting help from a 16 year old, instead of reaching out to Falcon, Bucky, Wanda, or War Machine?

1) That wasn't Fury.

2) Mysterio arranged the energy spikes so that they had minimal time to react, so even if they had thought they needed backup (which thanks to Mysterio's chicanery, they didn't) they wouldn't really have had time to send for anyone who wasn't already in the area (like Spidey.)



This was my impression as well. However….

That doesn’t explain how the Mexican village was so utterly destroyed, unless they were using ordinary munitions or something.

They were - without EDITH, they were using ordinary explosives/ballistics set up ahead of time in a predetermined area and concealed by all their projectors. With EDITH, the illusions were able to move and change on the fly.

[Lvl45DM!]

Oh yeah, I forgot about "MJ" lol. He being "Edgy" was really annoying. When she dropped that part of her character, halfway for that little bit and just was.... human? she was ALOT more cooler.

I actually really like MJ. She clearly has some social anxiety issues, and she puts up a front, but watching her get dorkishly happy about the Italian word 'bo' was great, just like the fact that she was low-key stalking Peter in the first movie, cos she liked him.

[GloatingSwine]

Just scale, and possibly some precision and quality, I think. They had some drones, but not the vast stockpile that Edith controlled and probably not made by Tony, so their resources without Edith may have been insufficient to pull off the bigger "Avengers-level threat" illusion.

The drones were all designed by box of scraps guy, including the ones that were part of EDITH. So the ones they stole along with Edith were the same design as the ones they had, they just had less of them, dozens instead of hundreds.

They already had plenty of destructive capability, with some kind of force projectors that were able to smash buildings, so they could put on a fair old show already.

[Worrkim]

I actually really like MJ. She clearly has some social anxiety issues, and she puts up a front, but watching her get dorkishly happy about the Italian word 'bo' was great, just like the fact that she was low-key stalking Peter in the first movie, cos she liked him.
I like her very much,sometimes,i think i am very similar to her,both have secial anxiety issues,but always put on a happy and relaxed look,because we are hiding our inner fear.

[Rodin]

I expect that we're about to find out what was keeping Strange and the sorcerers busy in DS2.


I doubt they were too busy.

Fake Fury pretty clearly doesn't have a way to contact the sorcerors. If he did, he would have contacted Strange to ask him about the Elementals, and Strange would have told him it's a crock.

Other than being contacted directly, the only way Strange would get involved is if there's an actual magical threat to the world. Mysterio made everything up and is just a dude with a bunch of drones, so it doesn't fall into Strange's jurisdiction.

[Psyren]

I doubt they were too busy.

Fake Fury pretty clearly doesn't have a way to contact the sorcerors. If he did, he would have contacted Strange to ask him about the Elementals, and Strange would have told him it's a crock.

Other than being contacted directly, the only way Strange would get involved is if there's an actual magical threat to the world. Mysterio made everything up and is just a dude with a bunch of drones, so it doesn't fall into Strange's jurisdiction.

The two aren't mutually exclusive:

It's possible that Talos had no idea how to contact them, AND that something we'll learn about later was keeping the European branches quite busy.

As for them only getting involved if a threat is magical, we saw that the Ancient One was mixing it up in the attack on New York in Endgame.

[GloatingSwine]

The two aren't mutually exclusive:

It's possible that Talos had no idea how to contact them, AND that something we'll learn about later was keeping the European branches quite busy.

As for them only getting involved if a threat is magical, we saw that the Ancient One was mixing it up in the attack on New York in Endgame.

The Ancient One was defending the Sanctum Sanctorum and not a lot else. She certainly didn't turn her prodigious magical powers to the general defence of the city, despite likely being able to turn the entire invasion inside out just by wanting it

[KillianHawkeye]

The main cast of this, for whatever reason, were almost all blipped. Peter, MJ, Ned, Fury, Hill, Happy etc.

Point of order: Happy was not blipped. He lived the 5 years. He even grew a beard. It was a blip beard.

[Starbuck_II]

If EDITH ready existed prior to Stark's death, why didn't he just deploy them in Endgame?

Looks like Stark was holding out.
Makes you wonder how better they might have fared in End Game if Stark didn't hold back too often (over confidence).

[Psyren]

Point of order: Happy was not blipped. He lived the 5 years. He even grew a beard. It was a blip beard.

Thanks, my bad. I can't remember, did May blip too?


The Ancient One was defending the Sanctum Sanctorum and not a lot else. She certainly didn't turn her prodigious magical powers to the general defence of the city, despite likely being able to turn the entire invasion inside out just by wanting it

Because she knew it was the Avengers' time to shine, and for humanity/SHIELD to begin relying on them. That, and drawing attention to herself and her Infinity Stone would almost certainly have gotten Loki and Thanos' attention long before her successor was ready. It's tough to argue with the decisions of someone who can see the future.

[Reddish Mage]

Under what circumstances could Peter ever possibly
need to call down a lethal dronestrike on someone? Peter doesn't kill and Tony knows it. Even in Homecoming, nobody actually died. (Well, that one henchman did, but Peter wasn't even there for that.) Leaving that functionality in by default served no purpose except making Tony look silly.

The point of that was to be silly. Of course, having EDITH presume Peter wanted to launch a kill strike on his classmate was absurd.

The joke doesn’t work if you have to explain it. Maybe you hate this scene and want it taken out but its a tonal and stylistic choice they ran with.

On the more serious side.


For me... admin transfer + some keystrokes to remove the safeguards is both plausible and makes him [Tony Stark] look better.

Does Tony Stark really look better? The guy who created Ultron still goes back and creates EDITH. EDITH is essentially the thing from Winter Soldier, only he builds in some software safeguards regarding killing that can be easily bypassed!

In the actual movie, Tony Stark puts all his trust in the capability and morality of one person: Peter Parker. Only Peter has authority to make use of EDITH. Anything on top of that would suggest Tony didn’t fully trust Peter with such awesome responsibility, and if he didn’t fully trust Peter, he shouldn’t have given Peter EDITH in the first place.

Why would Tony have to also make sure EDITH can’t kill? Wouldn’t Tony know and trust Peter would use EDITH properly? Also, does the biggest weapon supplier to the US military really believed in a no killing rule?

What you are suggesting is really just a “don’t kill Peter Parker” rule.

What if Peter determined one day he had to make the heroic sacrifice and kill himself to take out the bad guy?

Tony Stark put in enough safeguards that only Peter could use the thing. The only way EDITH would kill Peter is if Peter ordered it.

Now Peter did have the ability to transfer control of EDITH to another person, but Stark did put in a control on that...Peter had to clearly confirm the transfer. Stark wanted to make sure that Peter would only give someone else that sort of power if Peter was really, really, sure that person was to be completely trusted with that sort of power.

I mean, if you don’t trust Peter with the ability to choose a successor, if you don’t trust him with absolute power and responsibility...should you really be trusting him with a device of this sort of power in the first place?


You have to remember that Ultron in the MCU is not a robot, but is instead an emergent phenomenon like a biological lifeform. He is a Frankenstein monster giving life where Ultron mind was shaped by Tony but Ultron was not alive, and suddenly the threshold was crossed when Tony was not looking and Ultron emerged alive, and then he emerged grew and grew and grew. Once he emerged and grew past a point no super-ego rules, relegations, three Asmiov directives was going to work.

Asimov’s whole point of the 3-laws is that they are broad and flexible and complete enough to be an adequate set of safeguards on the very human-like super-intelligent robots that he wrote stories about. I’ve written quite a bit about that on the Asimov thread recently.

Sure you can write a story about how the three laws don’t work (*cough* they did a movie about that) but at the expense of basically taking everything Asimov wrote and either chucking it or turning it on its head.


"don't kill humans" is really the only one you need.

We’ve had dozens if not hundreds of movies, tv shows, books, comics and what not that makes the point that a rule formulated as “don’t kill humans” won’t prevent robots from actually killing humans. Asimov actually wrote a story about how a robot with that directive could theoretically kill a human.

The story is in the “I, Robot” anthology btw, the whole point is that Asimov’s actual 3-laws are, in fact, all necessary and must be formulated with all the details Asimov put into them.

So you can put you’re weak-sauce rule into Ultron, and then show Ultron bypassing it. However, he’ll be repeating a story that has been told since at least the 30’s and 40’s.

Incidentally, you can put the 3-laws into EDITH, but I’ve already dealt with that above as to why Tony wouldn’t do that. Tony is definitely not a 3-laws type of guy.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Psyren
I can't remember, did May blip too?

I’m pretty sure she did, since Happy definitely aged and she didn’t seem to.

Also, if they’d both lived the intervening five years, Peter might have come back to a four-year-old cousin.


Originally Posted by Psyren
Because she knew it was the Avengers' time to shine….

This exactly. The Ancient One knew that the Avengers had it in hand.


Originally Posted by Psyren
Peter doesn't kill and Tony knows it…. Leaving that functionality in by default served no purpose except making Tony look silly.

Well, Tony also programmed the Homecoming suit with an instant-kill option, which Peter initially rejected, but ended up using against the minions of Thanos.

A drone strike against nonhuman targets is certainly plausible…and as Far From Home showed us, sometimes it’s not easy to tell human from nonhuman.




And on that note....

When Peter was naming all the Avengers that Nick Fury could call, there was an odd moment when Peter mentioned “Captain Marvel,” and Nick Fury said, “Do not invoke that name.”

At the time it seemed like a strange reaction, and a very un-Nick Fury thing to say. But given the second credits scene, in which “Nick Fury” is shown to be an alien imposter, it makes me wonder if the alien dropped his Nick Fury act for a moment when Captain Marvel’s name came up.

I’m assuming this was some sort of obscure callback to the Captain Marvel movie. But was that line from “Nick Fury” a sly way of letting us know that something was off?

[Ramza00]

The point of that was to be silly. Of course, having EDITH presume Peter wanted to launch a kill strike on his classmate was absurd.

The joke doesn’t work if you have to explain it. Maybe you hate this scene and want it taken out but its a tonal and stylistic choice they ran with.

On the more serious side.



Does Tony Stark really look better? The guy who created Ultron still goes back and creates EDITH. EDITH is essentially the thing from Winter Soldier, only he builds in some software safeguards regarding killing that can be easily bypassed!

In the actual movie, Tony Stark puts all his trust in the capability and morality of one person: Peter Parker. Only Peter has authority to make use of EDITH. Anything on top of that would suggest Tony didn’t fully trust Peter with such awesome responsibility, and if he didn’t fully trust Peter, he shouldn’t have given Peter EDITH in the first place.

Why would Tony have to also make sure EDITH can’t kill? Wouldn’t Tony know and trust Peter would use EDITH properly? Also, does the biggest weapon supplier to the US military really believed in a no killing rule?

What you are suggesting is really just a “don’t kill Peter Parker” rule.

What if Peter determined one day he had to make the heroic sacrifice and kill himself to take out the bad guy?

Tony Stark put in enough safeguards that only Peter could use the thing. The only way EDITH would kill Peter is if Peter ordered it.

Now Peter did have the ability to transfer control of EDITH to another person, but Stark did put in a control on that...Peter had to clearly confirm the transfer. Stark wanted to make sure that Peter would only give someone else that sort of power if Peter was really, really, sure that person was to be completely trusted with that sort of power.

I mean, if you don’t trust Peter with the ability to choose a successor, if you don’t trust him with absolute power and responsibility...should you really be trusting him with a device of this sort of power in the first place?



Asimov’s whole point of the 3-laws is that they are broad and flexible and complete enough to be an adequate set of safeguards on the very human-like super-intelligent robots that he wrote stories about. I’ve written quite a bit about that on the Asimov thread recently.

Sure you can write a story about how the three laws don’t work (*cough* they did a movie about that) but at the expense of basically taking everything Asimov wrote and either chucking it or turning it on its head.



We’ve had dozens if not hundreds of movies, tv shows, books, comics and what not that makes the point that a rule formulated as “don’t kill humans” won’t prevent robots from actually killing humans. Asimov actually wrote a story about how a robot with that directive could theoretically kill a human.

The story is in the “I, Robot” anthology btw, the whole point is that Asimov’s actual 3-laws are, in fact, all necessary and must be formulated with all the details Asimov put into them.

So you can put you’re weak-sauce rule into Ultron, and then show Ultron bypassing it. However, he’ll be repeating a story that has been told since at least the 30’s and 40’s.

Incidentally, you can put the 3-laws into EDITH, but I’ve already dealt with that above as to why Tony wouldn’t do that. Tony is definitely not a 3-laws type of guy.

It seems you want to see written an Asmiov story, but that is not the only robot / created life form story, and these other stories have different aesthetics. Mary Shelley's Frankenstein is very different so on and so on. We been dealing with created lifeform stories at least 2800 years now, and arguably even older but those stories older we have are more fragmentary.

Age of Ultron is neither better or worse for not including the 3 laws. Would you have found fault AoU if it included a reference to The Future Eve (also translated as Tomorrow's Eve and The Eve of the Future) but not Asmiov?

[Kitten Champion]

And on that note....

When Peter was naming all the Avengers that Nick Fury could call, there was an odd moment when Peter mentioned “Captain Marvel,” and Nick Fury said, “Do not invoke that name.”

At the time it seemed like a strange reaction, and a very un-Nick Fury thing to say. But given the second credits scene, in which “Nick Fury” is shown to be an alien imposter, it makes me wonder if the alien dropped his Nick Fury act for a moment when Captain Marvel’s name came up.

I’m assuming this was some sort of obscure callback to the Captain Marvel movie. But was that line from “Nick Fury” a sly way of letting us know that something was off?

When Fury said that I assumed he was just being flippant in response to Peter's increasing desperation in escaping the responsibility he wanted him to shoulder. It was a rule-of-threes comedy moment, and worked with Fury being clearly exasperated with everything Peter was doing to avoid him.

Also, to the real Nick Fury, Carol was a significant presence in his life. Much of the events of Captain Marvel revolve around him and Carol working together to hunt the Skrulls who had infiltrated SHIELD, until the two learnt the truth that the Kree we're manipulating Carol into furthering their genocidal agenda against the Skrulls that were actually relatively benign and not the evil terrorists the Kree propaganda painted them as. She was the first Superhero in Fury's personal history, and his advocacy for the Avengers initiative was revealed to be rooted in his experiences in the 90's with her. So, he has a reason to have a higher opinion of her than most.

But to Talos and the Skrulls, Captain Marvel saved them from the Kree genocide and used her FTL powers to ferry them to a distant location where the Kree wouldn't follow to make a new homeland in peace. Which puts her in the Moses category in terms of historical significance for them. Being irked by using her in his sort-of weaseling out of things (as he seemed to see it) would make sense.

[Reddish Mage]

It seems you want to see written an Asmiov story, but that is not the only robot / created life form story, and these other stories have different aesthetics.

What I did with the 3 law was react to a post that said they should be used to make “Age of Ultron” by saying “no they would not.” I then said they would have made more sense then a simple “do not kill” rule but they weren’t appropriate for “Age of Ultron.”

I made a side comment explicitly said they would not make sense for EDITH.

I’m not sure where you get I want a 3 laws movie in the MCU. Also, I don’t think you are using the word “aesthetics” properly.

Frankenstein stories have a different structure to them with a different message. Age of Ultron is a Frankenstein story done with the depth of a summer blockbuster. My point is: while this movie had many flaws, but having Tony not put in the 3 laws wasn’t one of them, and if he did it would over complicate the movie and abuse Asimov.

[Happygiraffe]

Asides from the villain feeling very much like something they'd already done in Iron Man 3 etc I really enjoyed this one. Maybe I'm childlike but I found the movie very wholesome and feel-good. Dialogue and acting is very good and funny, I think anyone that liked the first Spiderman will really enjoy this one too. Villain was worse in this one but the kids were still excellent.

[Ramza00]

. My point is: while this movie had many flaws, but having Tony not put in the 3 laws wasn’t one of them, and if he did it would over complicate the movie and abuse Asimov.

I misunderstood then, I thought you were arguing for the opposite, the opposite being included these 3 laws would somehow make AoU better.

I apologize for this misunderstanding.

[Reddish Mage]

I misunderstood then, I thought you were arguing for the opposite, the opposite being included these 3 laws would somehow make AoU better.

I apologize for this misunderstanding.

I see now you would have to go up further chain to figure it all out.

Also, I think you wanted to talk to the substance of the film but for some reason used the word "aesthetic" instead of "story structure" or some sort of substantial gestalt term: tone, genre, message, story structure, these are not elements of an aesthetic, they are essential elements of the story itself. In common usage an aesthetic refers to the mere appearance of the film: light, color, use of background, the type of camera used.

[Psyren]

Maybe you hate this scene and want it taken out but its a tonal and stylistic choice they ran with.

I don't hate it exactly, but it certainly adds nothing to the plot. At best all we got out of it is that Even-Dead-I'm-The-Halfwit's drones have guns on them, and we didn't need a whole scene for that. It accomplished the objective of making Peter's entire class and teachers look even dumber than usual (seriously, not even Ned who knows the score kept his eyes on Peter? Nor MJ who has been hella suspicious up until now?), so hooray for that I guess.



Does Tony Stark really look better? The guy who created Ultron still goes back and creates EDITH. EDITH is essentially the thing from Winter Soldier, only he builds in some software safeguards regarding killing that can be easily bypassed!

It's far better than no safefguards at all. (And before you bring up the transfer confirmation again, remember that Peter almost murdered someone with EDITH all by himself.) Besides, the villain (especially a highly cerebral villain like Mysterio) easily overcoming the hero's safeguards is completely fine, it shows the heroes can't plan for everything.



In the actual movie, Tony Stark puts all his trust in the capability and morality of one person: Peter Parker. Only Peter has authority to make use of EDITH. Anything on top of that would suggest Tony didn’t fully trust Peter with such awesome responsibility, and if he didn’t fully trust Peter, he shouldn’t have given Peter EDITH in the first place.

And if he knows Peter as well as you claim he does, he'd know that Peter wouldn't even use one gun-mounted drone to kill someone, never mind a fleet of them. So why leave it in?



What if Peter determined one day he had to make the heroic sacrifice and kill himself to take out the bad guy?

In such a ridiculously convoluted scenario he'd probably find a more efficient way to off himself than commanding a fleet of gun drones to shoot him, I'd wager.



Incidentally, you can put the 3-laws into EDITH, but I’ve already dealt with that above as to why Tony wouldn’t do that. Tony is definitely not a 3-laws type of guy.

I already walked that back to just the no-kill rule, since you're hung up on Asimov.

[Reddish Mage]

It's far better than no safefguards at all. (And before you bring up the transfer confirmation again, remember that Peter almost murdered someone with EDITH all by himself.) Besides, the villain (especially a highly cerebral villain like Mysterio) easily overcoming the hero's safeguards is completely fine, it shows the heroes can't plan for everything.

And if he knows Peter as well as you claim he does, he'd know that Peter wouldn't even use one gun-mounted drone to kill someone, never mind a fleet of them. So why leave it in?

As I’ve mentioned before, the safeguard is Peter. Peter has the ability to use the system however he sees fit. Tony did a bunch of safeguards on tech he gave Peter in the previous movie, and they made a big show of taking off the “training wheels” and how now Tony trusts Peter.

I recall quite a bit of that runtime was given about it. Its not like it was the entire point of the Tony/Peter relationship arc or anything.

Also, if Tony was concerned about his drone fleet killing things, why stop at programming the AI not to do that even if instructed to by Peter? If Tony really believes in “no killing” why not make his drones without deadly missiles? In fact, why make these drones at all?



I already walked that back to just the no-kill rule, since you're hung up on Asimov.

Again, my point is what good is a no-kill rule? Ultron will just bypass it in an extremely cliche way, as you explicitly noted. So 1. Ultron indirectly sets up a death trap (so technically “Ultron” is not killing). Stupid and cliche (btw doesn’t Ultron does set up a death trap)? 2. Ultron rationalizes his way around the rule (Ultron actually does this).

If we add that Ultron has to take orders from Tony and Bruce and that overrides everything, that’ll be a bit smarter. Of course, Ultron would still just interpret what Tony and Bruce said was his purpose while constructing him as a sort of prime directive to eliminate the human race.

The way they have it is best. Ultron evolves from some incomplete code deemed a “failure,” and thus doesn’t have these sorts of safeguards in place, because why put safeguards into fragmentary piece of code that couldn’t work?

[Avaris]

I’m pretty sure she did, since Happy definitely aged and she didn’t seem to.

Also, if they’d both lived the intervening five years, Peter might have come back to a four-year-old cousin.



I think one of the opening scenes, where Spiderman is doing an appearance at a Blip charitable event organised by May, starts with her talking about the experience of reappearing in her flat and really freaking out the family living there now?

[GloatingSwine]

Again, my point is what good is a no-kill rule?

Ultron was a response to a potential military threat. Restricting it from using lethal force would defeat the object.

So, essentially was EDITH. It’s Tony’s answer to “how do we do this with half the Avengers gone?”

Neither make sense as a three-laws device.

[Reddish Mage]

Ultron was a response to a potential military threat. Restricting it from using lethal force would defeat the object.

So, essentially was EDITH. It’s Tony’s answer to “how do we do this with half the Avengers gone?”

Neither make sense as a three-laws device.

Agreed.

By the way, how crazy is it that EDITH is essentially a new iteration of Ultron and Project Insight (the Hydra-controlled robot Helicarriers from Winter Soldier)?

The difference appears to be that EDITH isn’t made to be autonomous, she’s more like Jarvis souped up and given to Peter.

[Mordar]

Agreed.

By the way, how crazy is it that EDITH is essentially a new iteration of Ultron and Project Insight (the Hydra-controlled robot Helicarriers from Winter Soldier)?

The difference appears to be that EDITH isn’t made to be autonomous, she’s more like Jarvis souped up and given to Peter.

I think that's just one of those "Shhhh...don't say that out loud" items that really point to the flaws in Tony Stark's thought processes. There's a reason it was Steve that brought down Insight and SHIELD. Stark is a totalitarian and gets away with it because he makes some half-butt impassioned speech and Cap lets it slide in Endgame despite Stark's last effort at the suit of armor for the word nearly destroying it (head canon: Cap knows better but doesn't have time to waste, so he pretends to capitulate to Stark...he's just playing to Stark's ego to get what he wants done).

In short, it isn't crazy. It is consistent Starkism and shows his hubris. Stark is the true villain of the MCU!

I'm not ranting. You're ranting. Shut up.

- M

[Psyren]

In short, it isn't crazy. It is consistent Starkism and shows his hubris. Stark is the true villain of the MCU!


I'm not objecting to Stark making barely-fettered killbots in the first place. As you mentioned, it's consistent with his sheer idiocy mania.

My objection is to him not making any attempt at all to hobble them - even from accidental murder - before giving them to the one person in the MCU we can be sure is never going to want to kill anybody, even moreso than Cap. It was played for laughs in Homecoming, but they came a lot closer to tragedy this time around, in what was framed as a funny scene.

Maybe he was planning to do so and didn't have time, which could have been a quick line if so and would have made him look at least somewhat thoughtful. But I can't control how they choose to portray Tony, only wonder who the next villain will be to use his tech to become a far greater threat than they otherwise would have been.

[Ramza00]

I'm not objecting to Stark making barely-fettered killbots in the first place. As you mentioned, it's consistent with his sheer idiocy mania.

My objection is to him not making any attempt at all to hobble them - even from accidental murder - before giving them to the one person in the MCU we can be sure is never going to want to kill anybody, even moreso than Cap. It was played for laughs in Homecoming, but they came a lot closer to tragedy this time around, in what was framed as a funny scene.

Maybe he was planning to do so and didn't have time, which could have been a quick line if so and would have made him look at least somewhat thoughtful. But I can't control how they choose to portray Tony, only wonder who the next villain will be to use his tech to become a far greater threat than they otherwise would have been.

Remember Starks projects are itterative. He takes A then layers B and C on it. This in turn can lead to tunnel vision where he does not think globally of how things can go wrong.

For example be starts EDITH as his new fancy suit / auxillary supplemental drones. Him being a cocky brat he does not think he needs accidential safeguards. Then he realizes he may die and transforms an existing project into a new and improved project. Durinng which Stark never challenges his assumptions and choices and thus make the project both more secure and more elegant.

Stark is always a walkimg mess, one thatvleaves death and destruction in his wake. A joking rhetorical question, in Infinity War+Avengers 1 when Thanos is courting death, could he be refering to Tony? 😅

[Reddish Mage]

I'm not objecting to Stark making barely-fettered killbots in the first place. As you mentioned, it's consistent with his sheer idiocy mania.

My objection is to him not making any attempt at all to hobble them - even from accidental murder - before giving them to the one person in the MCU we can be sure is never going to want to kill anybody, even moreso than Cap.

You accept that Stark is the guy who thinks killbots is the answer to everything. You accept that he gives them to the guy who is too principled to use them to kill trusting that Peter would know what to do with them...and now you are saying that the thing that doesn't make sense about this whole scenario is that Stark didn't hobble the stuff before handing them to his chosen successor?

[Reddish Mage]

Aside:

Mysterio and his crew is only the latest in a series of MCU villains (https://comicbook.com/marvel/2019/07/12/hilarious-iron-man-meme-reveals-the-true-villain-of-the-marvel-u/) that Tony Stark created by being an ass.

https://i-cdn.embed.ly/1/display?key=fd92ebbc52fc43fb98f69e50e7893c13&url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fvtpbui7o2r931.jpg

[Psyren]

Stark is the true villain of the MCU!

Didn't highlight this enough - but while I wouldn't call him a villain necessarily, he certainly causes enough problems to be one.


A joking rhetorical question, in Infinity War+Avengers 1 when Thanos is courting death, could he be refering to Tony? 😅

It would certainly explain penetrating him so readily :smallamused::smallbiggrin:


You accept that Stark is the guy who thinks killbots is the answer to everything. You accept that he gives them to the guy who is too principled to use them to kill trusting that Peter would know what to do with them...and now you are saying that the thing that doesn't make sense about this whole scenario is that Stark didn't hobble the stuff before handing them to his chosen successor?

It makes sense in the vein that they want to portray Tony as a shortsighted egomaniac. That's fine, he's their character. But I can still be disappointed that even post-snap he didn't seem to have learned, well, anything. Which, yes, is a bit incongruous when you consider the endings of WS, Ultron, and IM3 were supposed to indicate some kind of growth/learning his lesson on that front. But hey, guess not.

[The Glyphstone]

Wait. Does the comment by the gym coach about Captain America possibly being a war criminal mean he never got his name cleared from Civil War?

[Douglas]

Wait. Does the comment by the gym coach about Captain America possibly being a war criminal mean he never got his name cleared from Civil War?
Wasn't that only in Homecoming? I don't remember a repeat of it in Far From Home. Homecoming was set immediately after Civil War, so Cap hadn't had time or opportunity to clear his name.

[The Glyphstone]

Wasn't that only in Homecoming? I don't remember a repeat of it in Far From Home. Homecoming was set immediately after Civil War, so Cap hadn't had time or opportunity to clear his name.

Actually it might have been. I watched them back to back, so my memory might be faulty.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Reddish Mage
Aside:

To be fair, Vulture only killed one guy that we know of, and that was by accident.

He also protected Peter's identity while in prison, although he might have been planning something diabolical himself. But still, not mass murder.


Originally Posted by Douglas
Wasn't that only in Homecoming?

Yeah, I don't think Cap was ever named as a war criminal in Far From Home. Probably it was assumed he gave his life in reversing the snap (a little ironic, since he actually got his life back) and all supposed crimes were forgiven or exonerated.

[Androgeus]

Yeah, I don't think Cap was ever named as a war criminal in Far From Home. Probably it was assumed he gave his life in reversing the snap (a little ironic, since he actually got his life back) and all supposed crimes were forgiven or exonerated.

More likely he was exonerated during the blip, seeing as he was living in New York.

[Draconi Redfir]

saw the movie last night. some thoughts:


i was kind of sad when they revealed Mysterio to be the main villain. it was kind of expected when the fire elemental was defeated and there was still a good hour or so of movie to go, plus whis whole shtick was that he lies and has illusions and such. But it would have been a fun twist on the character if they subverted out expectations and had him be legit. maybe he could fall towards villainy in a different movie idk.

one part i loved though was during the drone attack on London, there's a blink-and-you'll-miss-it scene where two royal guards are shooting down Drones, and one Drone actually goes down because of it, the other is heavily damaged. It was nice to see this wasn't a case of "CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS ARE USELESS! ONLY THE HEROES CAN DO SOMETHING"-itis like you see in most hero movies. They were HELPING! they actually assisted in defending London! We need to see more of that, just small mundane background characters taking out handfulls of baddies with shotguns and baseball bats or something.

also that end-credits scene. WOW.

[Reddish Mage]

saw the movie last night. some thoughts:


i was kind of sad when they revealed Mysterio to be the main villain. it was kind of expected when the fire elemental was defeated and there was still a good hour or so of movie to go, plus whis whole shtick was that he lies and has illusions and such. But it would have been a fun twist on the character if they subverted out expectations and had him be legit. maybe he could fall towards villainy in a different movie idk.

one part i loved though was during the drone attack on London, there's a blink-and-you'll-miss-it scene where two royal guards are shooting down Drones, and one Drone actually goes down because of it, the other is heavily damaged. It was nice to see this wasn't a case of "CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS ARE USELESS! ONLY THE HEROES CAN DO SOMETHING"-itis like you see in most hero movies. They were HELPING! they actually assisted in defending London! We need to see more of that, just small mundane background characters taking out handfulls of baddies with shotguns and baseball bats or something.

also that end-credits scene. WOW.

Mysterio’s villain reveal was, in fact, disappointingly obvious and expected. I don’t see how it could have been any other way though. The real villain would have to be a big deal, and Mysterio doesn’t add much to the movie as simply a replacement heroic father figure for Peter.

That said both Mysterio and EDITH’s turning out to be a tool for the villains were both so obvious I can say hands down I would have preferred a different villain entirely.

[Bartmanhomer]

saw the movie last night. some thoughts:


i was kind of sad when they revealed Mysterio to be the main villain. it was kind of expected when the fire elemental was defeated and there was still a good hour or so of movie to go, plus whis whole shtick was that he lies and has illusions and such. But it would have been a fun twist on the character if they subverted out expectations and had him be legit. maybe he could fall towards villainy in a different movie idk.

one part i loved though was during the drone attack on London, there's a blink-and-you'll-miss-it scene where two royal guards are shooting down Drones, and one Drone actually goes down because of it, the other is heavily damaged. It was nice to see this wasn't a case of "CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS ARE USELESS! ONLY THE HEROES CAN DO SOMETHING"-itis like you see in most hero movies. They were HELPING! they actually assisted in defending London! We need to see more of that, just small mundane background characters taking out handfulls of baddies with shotguns and baseball bats or something.

also that end-credits scene. WOW.
Mysterio have always been the main villain especially his comic book debut. I wasn't even surprised about it one bit.

[Draconi Redfir]

Mysterio have always been the main villain especially his comic book debut. I wasn't even surprised about it one bit.

yes, exactly. So imagine how cool it would have been to have one depiction of him as a legit hero. anyone who knew who he was saw the twist coming a mile away. so it would have been a larger twist to NOT have it, and keep him as a hero throughout the whole movie.

maybe he could even keep the whole illusion thing, maybe the elementals and all his fights really WERE fake. it wasn't that he was trying to take down Fury or Shield or whatever though, he just wanted to be a hero, but all he had was some high-tech tricks. so he made up his own baddies and his own origin to try and fabricate his own thirty minutes of fame.

then in the last act, some other threat pops up, some other D-list spiderman villain, or even just some actual crooks with real guns. then it's reveled that Mysterio is a fraud. people get upset, spiderman fights the baddies, gets in trouble, Mysterio figures out how to use his illusions to help out or something idk, an in the end still wants to be a hero. maybe an end-credits scene could show him meeting up with Dr. Strange to learn some actual real magic or something.

i mean with everything else that's different in the MCU, i could see it happening. and it'd be fun to see some of the usual villains on team good for a change.

[Bartmanhomer]

yes, exactly. So imagine how cool it would have been to have one depiction of him as a legit hero. anyone who knew who he was saw the twist coming a mile away. so it would have been a larger twist to NOT have it, and keep him as a hero throughout the whole movie.

maybe he could even keep the whole illusion thing, maybe the elementals and all his fights really WERE fake. it wasn't that he was trying to take down Fury or Shield or whatever though, he just wanted to be a hero, but all he had was some high-tech tricks. so he made up his own baddies and his own origin to try and fabricate his own thirty minutes of fame.

then in the last act, some other threat pops up, some other D-list spiderman villain, or even just some actual crooks with real guns. then it's revealed that Mysterio is a fraud. people get upset, spiderman beats the baddies, Mysterio figures out how to use his illusions to fight back or something idk, an in the end still wants to be a hero. maybe an end-credits scene could show him meeting up with Dr Strange to learn some actual real magic or something.

I mean with everything else that's different in the MCU, I could see it happening. and it'd be fun to see some of the usual villains on team good for a change.

Yes and Mysterio is also a very good liar. I actually like the part in the end where he reveals the world that Spider-Man kills him and he reveals Spider-Man true identity. That was a mind-blowing move in Mysterio part. :smile:

[Reddish Mage]

yes, exactly. So imagine how cool it would have been to have one depiction of him as a legit hero. anyone who knew who he was saw the twist coming a mile away. so it would have been a larger twist to NOT have it, and keep him as a hero throughout the whole movie.

maybe he could even keep the whole illusion thing, maybe the elementals and all his fights really WERE fake. it wasn't that he was trying to take down Fury or Shield or whatever though, he just wanted to be a hero, but all he had was some high-tech tricks. so he made up his own baddies and his own origin to try and fabricate his own thirty minutes of fame.

then in the last act, some other threat pops up, some other D-list spiderman villain, or even just some actual crooks with real guns. then it's reveled that Mysterio is a fraud. people get upset, spiderman fights the baddies, gets in trouble, Mysterio figures out how to use his illusions to help out or something idk, an in the end still wants to be a hero. maybe an end-credits scene could show him meeting up with Dr. Strange to learn some actual real magic or something.

i mean with everything else that's different in the MCU, i could see it happening. and it'd be fun to see some of the usual villains on team good for a change.

I get that Jake Gyllanhaal's portrayal seems very earnest and makes you want this guy to be good, but if he did turn out good it'd stop the entire movie in its tracks.

The way it actually went down in the movie, giving Mysterio the glasses would leave us with having to make up the 2nd half with nothing laid in the ground work.

However, if we change that story to one where Mysterio is a well-intentioned illusionist who commits his fraud out of a misplaced heroic zeal doesn't work on many, many levels. First of all, I don't find fraud and causing terror, danger to life and large scale property damage as actions terribly worthy of a redemption, though I suppose your mileage may very. Second, those are not actions that the real heroes are going to just forgive. While it may be consistent for Peter Parker to just let things slide, for Nick Fury its just too far out of character.

One scenario is that Mysterio get revealed, gets tossed out, and then comes back for a surprise actual heroic action in the grand finale against some new threat. The problem here is, once again, this new threat wasn't present in the first half of the movie, so we lost a lot of motivation for the main plot.

You are also putting too much of the limelight on Mysterio by making him the co-protagonist of the entire movie. That's a lot for just a rando that comes out of nowhere. Add to this that he goes and learns real magic in big surprise post-credit reveal. What you did was effectively takes the spotlight off Spidey to throw some cool stuff around at a newcomer with no deep connection to Spiderman or the rest of what's going on. Mysterio starts to seem like Gary Stu.

[Bartmanhomer]

I get that Jake Gyllanhaal's portrayal seems very earnest and makes you want this guy to be good, but if he did turn out good it'd stop the entire movie in its tracks.

The way it actually went down in the movie, giving Mysterio the glasses would leave us with having to make up the 2nd half with nothing laid in the ground work.

However, if we change that story to one where Mysterio is a well-intentioned illusionist who commits his fraud out of a misplaced heroic zeal doesn't work on many, many levels. First of all, I don't find fraud and causing terror, danger to life and large scale property damage as actions terribly worthy of a redemption, though I suppose your mileage may very. Second, those are not actions that the real heroes are going to just forgive. While it may be consistent for Peter Parker to just let things slide, for Nick Fury its just too far out of character.

One scenario is that Mysterio get revealed, gets tossed out, and then comes back for a surprise actual heroic action in the grand finale against some new threat. The problem here is, once again, this new threat wasn't present in the first half of the movie, so we lost a lot of motivation for the main plot.

You are also putting too much of the limelight on Mysterio by making him the co-protagonist of the entire movie. That's a lot for just a rando that comes out of nowhere. Add to this that he goes and learns real magic in big surprise post-credit reveal. What you did was effectively takes the spotlight off Spidey to throw some cool stuff around at a newcomer with no deep connection to Spiderman or the rest of what's going on. Mysterio starts to seem like Gary Stu.

Who's Gary Stu? :confused:

[Draconi Redfir]

Who's Gary Stu? :confused:

basically the male version of a Mary Sue, just a perfect character with no flaws or the like.


I get that Jake Gyllanhaal's portrayal seems very earnest and makes you want this guy to be good, but if he did turn out good it'd stop the entire movie in its tracks.

The way it actually went down in the movie, giving Mysterio the glasses would leave us with having to make up the 2nd half with nothing laid in the ground work.

However, if we change that story to one where Mysterio is a well-intentioned illusionist who commits his fraud out of a misplaced heroic zeal doesn't work on many, many levels. First of all, I don't find fraud and causing terror, danger to life and large scale property damage as actions terribly worthy of a redemption, though I suppose your mileage may very. Second, those are not actions that the real heroes are going to just forgive. While it may be consistent for Peter Parker to just let things slide, for Nick Fury its just too far out of character.

One scenario is that Mysterio get revealed, gets tossed out, and then comes back for a surprise actual heroic action in the grand finale against some new threat. The problem here is, once again, this new threat wasn't present in the first half of the movie, so we lost a lot of motivation for the main plot.

You are also putting too much of the limelight on Mysterio by making him the co-protagonist of the entire movie. That's a lot for just a rando that comes out of nowhere. Add to this that he goes and learns real magic in big surprise post-credit reveal. What you did was effectively takes the spotlight off Spidey to throw some cool stuff around at a newcomer with no deep connection to Spiderman or the rest of what's going on. Mysterio starts to seem like Gary Stu.


all good points. my only defense would be that in my hypothetical film, a large chunk of it would have been vastly different to what we got. i had no idea going in that those glasses were going to exist, so it'd be easy enough to just not include them in this hypothetical rework. you could likely also work the film so there is some background threat slowly growing as the film progresses, maybe something that strongly resembles whatever Mysterio is doing, so we think it's relevant to him when it's not. maybe some bits could be re-worked to show that somehow, all property damage was faked as well, or there were contingencies to make sure nobody was actually getting hurt. Or maybe just forgo the illusion thing and have him fight real elementals with real powers, idk.

i kinda disagree with you on the end scene there, as we got a post-credit scene for the real nick fury who wasn't in the film at all, and the Skrull, who we had no idea were in the film. but i suppose, perhaps that scene could be added to the end of a different film where he plays a more minor role. or perhaps we just see him learning about Dr. Strange or the temples with no actual confirmation that he'd learn anything.

keep in mind, Spiderman himself was a rando that came out of nowhere in the marvel MCU. in Civil war, he just shows up out of nowhere during the airport battle (maybe one scene of tony meeting him before all that? not sure if that was a flashback or not. either way, something similar could have been done) and plays not a small roll in the resulting fight.

not saying my specific thoughts would have made a good film, just think they'd be entertaining possibilities for a fresh new take on an existing character.

[Bartmanhomer]

The post credit scene was great. The question on my mind is why was Nick Fury on Planet Skrull in the first place? :confused:

[JadedDM]

The post credit scene was great. The question on my mind is why was Nick Fury on Planet Skrull in the first place? :confused:

He was on a space ship, not a planet, but nobody really knows. But some are speculating he is setting up S.W.O.R.D., the space counterpart of S.H.I.E.L.D..

[Bartmanhomer]

He was on a space ship, not a planet, but nobody really knows. But some are speculating he is setting up S.W.O.R.D., the space counterpart of S.H.I.E.L.D..

Well that really explain it until we have to wait for Spider-Man 3 or the Avengers 5 coming out.

[Draconi Redfir]

definitely looked like they were in the process of building a fleet of space ships to me.

[Reddish Mage]

all good points. my only defense would be that in my hypothetical film, a large chunk of it would have been vastly different to what we got. i had no idea going in that those glasses were going to exist, so it'd be easy enough to just not include them in this hypothetical rework. you could likely also work the film so there is some background threat slowly growing as the film progresses, maybe something that strongly resembles whatever Mysterio is doing, so we think it's relevant to him when it's not. maybe some bits could be re-worked to show that somehow, all property damage was faked as well, or there were contingencies to make sure nobody was actually getting hurt. Or maybe just forgo the illusion thing and have him fight real elementals with real powers, idk.

i kinda disagree with you on the end scene there, as we got a post-credit scene for the real nick fury who wasn't in the film at all, and the Skrull, who we had no idea were in the film. but i suppose, perhaps that scene could be added to the end of a different film where he plays a more minor role. or perhaps we just see him learning about Dr. Strange or the temples with no actual confirmation that he'd learn anything.

keep in mind, Spiderman himself was a rando that came out of nowhere in the marvel MCU. in Civil war, he just shows up out of nowhere during the airport battle (maybe one scene of tony meeting him before all that? not sure if that was a flashback or not. either way, something similar could have been done) and plays not a small roll in the resulting fight.

not saying my specific thoughts would have made a good film, just think they'd be entertaining possibilities for a fresh new take on an existing character.

Now you are suggesting a different, better?, movie from the ground up.

Think about how this would play out as a proposal for Marvel studios. We should do a movie about Spiderman teaming up with one of his less-well known villains to tackle [insert plot here]. Only we will completely rework the villain so he's a hero! He'll be part of the new MCU heroes!

His illusion powers from the comics are actually real magic powers!

I don't think I have to spend a lot of time why this particular idea wouldn't fly, and shouldn't. You can get away with taking a superhero everyone knows like Spiderman, and just toss him into the mix. That's different from taking a minor villain, completely reimagining him so that he's a hero with real magic powers, and just make him the major co-protagonist of a Spiderman movie [plot pending].

The earlier idea of Mysterio going from illusionist villain to hero has more merit since at least Mysterio is still recognizable from the comics. The problems with this I already mentioned. I don't see how making the elementals do "illusionary damage" fixes any of these.

However, you are saying you would like to rewrite the entire movie to make Mysterio come out as a hero and write everything around it to make it work. That is exactly the sort of foundation for a fan-fic work. Mysterio is going to come out looking like a Gary Stu or Draco in leather pants.


definitely looked like they were in the process of building a fleet of space ships to me.

If that's what they are doing, the question is why? If this is in the absence of any particular threat, history suggests the most likely threat the Avengers will face next will be using those spaceships.


Yes and Mysterio is also a very good liar. I actually like the part in the end where he reveals the world that Spider-Man kills him and he reveals Spider-Man true identity. That was a mind-blowing move in Mysterio part. :smile:

Agreed. This was a great WTF moment that completely throws everyone off balance right at the end.

[Bartmanhomer]

Now you are suggesting a different, better?, movie from the ground up.

Think about how this would play out as a proposal for Marvel studios. We should do a movie about Spiderman teaming up with one of his less-well known villains to tackle [insert plot here]. Only we will completely rework the villain so he's a hero! He'll be part of the new MCU heroes!

His illusion powers from the comics are actually real magic powers!

I don't think I have to spend a lot of time why this particular idea wouldn't fly, and shouldn't. You can get away with taking a superhero everyone knows like Spiderman, and just toss him into the mix. That's different from taking a minor villain, completely reimagining him so that he's a hero with real magic powers, and just make him the major co-protagonist of a Spiderman movie [plot pending].

The earlier idea of Mysterio going from illusionist villain to hero has more merit since at least Mysterio is still recognizable from the comics. The problems with this I already mentioned. I don't see how making the elementals do "illusionary damage" fixes any of these.

However, you are saying you would like to rewrite the entire movie to make Mysterio come out as a hero and write everything around it to make it work. That is exactly the sort of foundation for a fan-fic work. Mysterio is going to come out looking like a Gary Stu or Draco in leather pants.



If that's what they are doing, the question is why? If this is in the absence of any particular threat, history suggests the most likely threat the Avengers will face next will be using those spaceships.



Agreed. This was a great WTF moment that completely throws everyone off balance right at the end.
Yes. Nobody including myself wasn't expecting this. It looks like that Mysterio have a back up plan. A very surprising one at that. :biggrin:

[Anteros]

So does anyone in the MCU actually have a secret identity now? Spider-Man was the only one I can think of who had one to start with. It seems like less of a big deal to have his identity out when every other Avenger does as well.

[DeTess]

So does anyone in the MCU actually have a secret identity now? Spider-Man was the only one I can think of who had one to start with. It seems like less of a big deal to have his identity out when every other Avenger does as well.

I think the outing of his identity is less of a big deal than the accusation that came with it. If Nick Fury had been on earth he could have squashed the rumour in about 10 seconds, but as it is I suspect it's going to haunt peter for a while.

I also don't think Mysterio would have done this out of spite. He seemed to actually like peter, just not enough to not remove him when he became an obstacle. But if he had a larger plan running or was, for example, still alive then the reveal and accusation makes sense.

[Reddish Mage]

Nobody in the MCU had a secret identity, except Peter Parker. Now nobody has a secret identity.

Poor Peter, it doesn't matter what universe he is in, or whether superheroes are looked up to or feared...Spiderman is always a "menace" thanks to J. J. Jameson.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPNcaVU0aiU

[Mordar]

So does anyone in the MCU actually have a secret identity now? Spider-Man was the only one I can think of who had one to start with. It seems like less of a big deal to have his identity out when every other Avenger does as well.

This is the biggest problem I have with the MCU (and CW hero shows).

There's a reason Spider-Man always kept his identity hidden, right up until that horrible Civil War story. It is explained, in excruciatingly painful fashion, to PP that if his identity becomes known everyone he knows or cares about is at great risk. They will become instant hostages/targets/leverage for every villain from the mookiest mook to Goblin, Ock, Kingpin...all of them.
It would be nice if the actors would accept that their pretty faces will sometimes be covered by a mask when they sign on so the producers and directors would stop having to let everyone on the planet know the identity of every super in the universe. Stark was the exception, not the rule.

- M

[Grey_Wolf_c]

yes, exactly. So imagine how cool it would have been to have one depiction of him as a legit hero. anyone who knew who he was saw the twist coming a mile away.

My SO knew nothing about Mysterio, and yet literally after his first on-screen fight, they turned to me and said "Syndrome gambit (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Incredibles), right?". Thing is, the film is called "Spider-Man: {insert subtitle here}", not "Mysterio: {idem}". It would not be cool for the main character to be someone other than the person in the title, it'd be bait and switch. And most movie goers tend to dislike that kind of thing, when it happens (and it happens surprisingly often).

Credit where credit's due, though, it did happen in Mad Max: Furiosa is the main character Road" and we loved it anyway, so it's not impossible. But it's hard to pull off.

Grey Wolf

[Delicious Taffy]

Nobody shows up to a Spider-Man movie hoping to see Spidey get sidelined in favor of some random jackass.

Also, did anyone else notice that Mysterio was blatantly copying Doctor Strange's "magic pose" a lot of the time? It wasn't even subtle, he might as well have been hopping up and down, waving his arms, screaming "I'm a phony! Hey, look at me, I'm a big phony!". And people somehow took anything he said at face value.

[Bartmanhomer]

Nobody shows up to a Spider-Man movie hoping to see Spidey get sidelined in favor of some random jackass.

Also, did anyone else notice that Mysterio was blatantly copying Doctor Strange's "magic pose" a lot of the time? It wasn't even subtle, he might as well have been hopping up and down, waving his arms, screaming "I'm a phony! Hey, look at me, I'm a big phony!". And people somehow took anything he said at face value.

Yes but however Mysterio never met Doctor Strange. :tongue:

[Grey_Wolf_c]

did anyone else notice that Mysterio was blatantly copying Doctor Strange's "magic pose" a lot of the time?

I didn't, but if so, I like it as a detail: Strange's probably the least-known "avenger", so using him as model for their own would make things easier, without setting too many 'he's just copying some other hero' alarm bells in the general public, and allowing them to say to SHIELD "I'm harnessing the same powers you already accept Dr. Strange learnt to use".

Grey Wolf

[Kyberwulf]

Does it bother anyone else, that they put a major plot point inside the ending credits roll?

The more I think about it, the more I don't think it should have been done like that. They should have put that revel in the movie itself. I mean something as big as reveling spider-mans identity to the world.

[Mordar]

Does it bother anyone else, that they put a major plot point inside the ending credits roll?

The more I think about it, the more I don't think it should have been done like that. They should have put that revel in the movie itself. I mean something as big as reveling spider-mans identity to the world.

But it isn't a major plot point for Far From Home, it is a major plot point for Spider-Man: Next Witty Title.

Given that the MCU mid- and post-credit thing is a known quantity, I think it counts as still being part of the movie anyway.

- M

[Bartmanhomer]

Does it bother anyone else, that they put a major plot point inside the ending credits roll?

The more I think about it, the more I don't think it should have been done like that. They should have put that revel in the movie itself. I mean something as big as reveling spider-mans identity to the world.
No it didn't bother me at all. It was perfect timing as intended. :smile:

[Reddish Mage]

It continues the tradition started with Iron Man of putting really significant scenes in the middle of and after the credits. After End Game didn’t have an after credit scene at all you might have thought that was going away.

Also are we going to spoil any of this? The last few posts basically spoil the entire movie.

[Draconi Redfir]

[Thing is, the film is called "Spider-Man: {insert subtitle here}", not "Mysterio: {idem}". It would not be cool for the main character to be someone other than the person in the title

:sigh:i never said i wanted him to be the main character. at no point did i suggest that "Spider Man: Far from Home" should star anyone other then Spiderman. all i said was "it'd be neat if the painfully obvious plot twist maybe wasn't"



to be fair to the end credits scenes, the first time the Avengers ever meet Captain Marvel was in the end-credits of the Captain Marvel movie wasn't it? in Endgame, she's just kinda already there, so if you didn't see the end-credits scene, then you'd probably be wondering why she's there all of a sudden and why noone is making a deal out of it.

... She was also basically introduced to the MCU in the Infinity War end-credits scene come to think about it.

[Kyberwulf]

Yeah, but most of the end credits are just character revels or things that aren't plot relevant to the movie.

Having the main vengeance act of the villain in the end credits scene.. also a HUGE character moment done when a lot of people have probably left the theater... I mean this is the public unmasking of a hero... to be shoved into the end credits.

I just feel like it cheats some people out of money. It's like downloadable content for video games. It's important enough that some people may feel that they have to go back and drop more money to get the full experience.

[Dienekes]

Yeah, but most of the end credits are just character revels or things that aren't plot relevant to the movie.

Having the main vengeance act of the villain in the end credits scene.. also a HUGE character moment done when a lot of people have probably left the theater... I mean this is the public unmasking of a hero... to be shoved into the end credits.

I just feel like it cheats some people out of money. It's like downloadable content for video games. It's important enough that some people may feel that they have to go back and drop more money to get the full experience.

Eh. I get where you're coming from. But this seems about par for the course. Since "something important to the next movement of the MCU in the credits" isn't new. Starting the Avengers in Iron Man to setting up the clear new villain in Doctor Strange to the entire MacGuffin of Endgame in Ant-Man and the Wasp. It's definitely pushing the boundaries, but still within acceptable limits, for me anyway.

[DeTess]

Also are we going to spoil any of this? The last few posts basically spoil the entire movie.

I think if you haven't watched the movie yet, and go to page 6 of the discussion thread expecting no spoilers, you're just playing yourself.

[Giggling Ghast]

I knew there was a 95 per cent chance that Mysterio was going to turn out to be fake, simply because it's fricking Mysterio. But upon hearing he was "the last survivor of his alternate Earth," my disbelief increased to 100 per cent. How were the four Elementals so powerful that they could destroy an entire world, but so coincidentally so weak that they could be defeated by a single warrior?

What REALLY shocked me is how they were able to pull together several throwaway plot elements from previous films. The scientist from the iconic "box of scraps" scene? The holographic technology that Tony showcased in Age of Ultron? I'm actually impressed.

EDIT: And since I just noticed this, I'll link to this rather interesting article on io9.

https://io9.gizmodo.com/spider-man-far-from-home-almost-featured-another-even-1836449168

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Eh. I get where you're coming from. But this seems about par for the course. Since "something important to the next movement of the MCU in the credits" isn't new. Starting the Avengers in Iron Man to setting up the clear new villain in Doctor Strange to the entire MacGuffin of Endgame in Ant-Man and the Wasp. It's definitely pushing the boundaries, but still within acceptable limits, for me anyway.
Plus, it's the sort of thing that can be briefly explained or recapped in a future movie.

[Gallowglass]

I used to have a, sort of, mental rule of thumb about the post credits scenes. That rule was "don't put anything in the post credit scene that is essential to know for the next movie." They should be little easter egg bits of goodness that enhance the experience for the people who sit through them, but should not be essential for someone when they get to the next movie.

For example: The Black Panther end credit scene where it shows he's going to build a wakanda embassy/school in Oakland. Let's say the next movie starts with him in front of his embassy, christening it and opening it up. It wouldn't absolutely be necessary to have seen the end credit scene to "get" that. "Oh, okay, makes sense they would do that." even without seeing the EC scene in the first movie.

The Spiderman end credit scene is NOT like that. I can only assume that the next movie would start with Peter Parker, identity outed, on the run which, a viewer would not understand what was going on without having seen the end credit scene from this movie.

That being said, I -USED- to have that rule of thumb. I don't anymore.

Because none of the movies lately have been encapsulated to where you can enjoy it without having seen the prior movies. Especially the last two Avengers movies. I can't imagine someone who hadn't seen Black Panther or Captain Marvel or Civil War being able to really follow along with those movies. I'm sure some did, and I'm sure a lot of them were "who is this? eh doesn't matter. Explosions! Thor chopped that purple dude's head off! Ha ha, go Fat Thor, go!" I can't imagine someone seeing Spiderman: Homecoming, then nothing else until they walked into Spiderman: Far from Home, not being confused about what happened between the two movies. "Blip? What the hell is a Blip? Why are May and Peter homeless? Tony Stark is dead? What is going on?"

So if the movies are no longer even pretending to be encapsulated, why not include post credit scenes that are more plot-required than just fun. Go for it.

[Majin]

Imma still spoiler my spoiler-y thoughts, just in case.

Overall really liked the movie, maybe better than Homecoming or on par at least.


Well, the obvious bad guy was obvious. I agree bigger twist would have been if Mysterio had been a good guy, but I think I like this one better. His "as you know" speech is a little jarring, but I liked the callbacks to earlier movies. The motion capture suit was a nice touch, and the illusion battle was cool, nice visuals.

The scene where Peter was fiddling with the new webshooters was also nice. Spider-Man creating something to defeat a bad guy is classic.

Now Spider-Man seems a bit odd in a way to inherit Stark's position since he doesn't have much experience, but I did like Parker Industries Spider-Man when that was a thing, so let's see where it'll go.

Fury being a Skrull made sense in hindsight, but is it just me or do the skrull actors have hard time speaking? Maybe something to do with prosthetics.



Really happy they brought J.K Simmons back :smallbiggrin: Guess there was one actor they couldn't replace. Really hope he'll be featured more in future movies!

But wow, that identity reveal took me by surprise, so I guess that sort of makes up for the lackluster Mysterio twist. No more secret identities I guess. Perhaps this means Peter won't have a ready access to Stark-tech? It's been almost a couple of weeks since I saw the movie, did Mysterio have any proof about what he said? Might be Fury or Happy will try to spin this, but it still leaves Peter in trouble.

I do hope they won't do 'One More Day thought'. Reading it once was bad enough...



Spider-Man: Next Witty Title.


I'd be totally fine if Disney picked this one.

[Douglas]

I knew there was a 95 per cent chance that Mysterio was going to turn out to be fake, simply because it's fricking Mysterio. But upon hearing he was "the last survivor of his alternate Earth," my disbelief increased to 100 per cent. How were the four Elementals so powerful that they could destroy an entire world, but so coincidentally so weak that they could be defeated by a single warrior?
I think they had a pretty good explanation for that, actually. They absorb things of their element and grow, and the bigger they get the more powerful they are and the more they can absorb. It's a runaway feedback loop, easy to stop if you catch it right at the start but impossible if you wait too long, and presumably the inter-universe trip has costs or restrictions that force them to start over. Mysterio's made up alternate Earth didn't notice and respond to the elementals until it was too late, while MCU Earth has warning (and Mysterio) to detect and take them out the moment they show up.

They even made a big point about this, with Fire being able to tap into the heat of the Earth's core if it gets big enough, and that enormous heat source instantly powering it up to unstoppable levels. Later in the climactic fight, one of Mysterio's lines is a claim that the composite elemental is already drawing on the Earth's core, which would make his final victory considerably more impressive. If only Peter hadn't ruined the plan.:smallamused:

[Tom Kalbfus]

I'd rank it as another middle-tier Marvel movie. I still really like Tom Holland's take on Spiderman, and I liked the theme of trying to move on after the events of Endgame. This was the most "traditional" superhero flick we've had in the MCU for some time, and I think that kinda hurt it. I did like their take on Mysterio.

Overall, I'd say it's about a B.

Also, I'm grateful that they didn't try to kick-start a multiverse here. I was waiting for the twist that Mysterio was creating the elementals, but fully expected them to be real things he was conjuring, or for them to be illusions but he really was from a parallel universe.

Giving the MCU some time to settle before moving onto the next big thing seems wise.

Oh, and I liked the post-credits scene revealing that Fury and Hill were Skrulls. Fury was far too trusting throughout, and he should have known who "Mysterio" was beforehand thanks to his dealings with Stark and his general paranoia. The Skrulls don't have the same level of paranoia and were much easier to fool.


Oh, and I agree about Peter taking his mask off too often, by the way. I've never seen Amazing Spiderman so can't comment there.

It appears Spiderman doesn't have a secret identity anymore. Most of the Avengers don't anyway. Captain America doesn't, the Hulk doesn't, Thor doesn't, Iron Man is well known to be Tony Stark. Spiderman was one of the few superheroes that had a secret identity, until JJJ let the cat out of the bag.

[Giggling Ghast]

Mmm, fair enough. I suppose that’s plausible.

In any case, I don’t have an issue with Beck turning out to be a murderous glory hound. An undeserved massive ego is pretty common among the various incarnations of Mysterio.

[Douglas]

Another thing I thought of, his plan was pretty well done when considered in isolation, but I don't think he thought through the future implications very well. He's living in a world where "Avengers level threats" are an actual real thing that happens, and his entire plan is designed specifically to convince the world that he can handle threats on that scale. So what was he going to do the next time an actual Avengers level threat showed up?

[Delicious Taffy]

So what was he going to do the next time an actual Avengers level threat showed up?

Get killed off by a single weak enemy within the first 45 seconds while Aunt May fights off an army of them effortlessly, if I had to guess.

[Douglas]

Perhaps I should have asked what he was planning to do. Or, since I doubt he actually had a plan for it, what he would have tried to do.

[Razade]

Perhaps I should have asked what he was planning to do. Or, since I doubt he actually had a plan for it, what he would have tried to do.

Let the real Avengers handle it.

[Zalabim]

He might have thought that an army of stealth-capable drones armed with disorienting holo-projectors and a wide array of destructive tools could handle it.

Now here's what I want to know. Did he really accidentally get shot, or was that part of the hologram too? Because I know Spider-man didn't kill him, but it seems like weirdly quick thinking and more guts than I expected for him to stand up so well if he did actually get shot. I just assumed he had a few more holograms being remote controlled by his tech and not by EDITH.

[Razade]

He might have thought that an army of stealth-capable drones armed with disorienting holo-projectors and a wide array of destructive tools could handle it.

Now here's what I want to know. Did he really accidentally get shot, or was that part of the hologram too? Because I know Spider-man didn't kill him, but it seems like weirdly quick thinking and more guts than I expected for him to stand up so well if he did actually get shot. I just assumed he had a few more holograms being remote controlled by his tech and not by EDITH.

He really got shot but then used that to try and trick spiderman. Then he falls over.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Perhaps I should have asked what he was planning to do. Or, since I doubt he actually had a plan for it, what he would have tried to do.

"If that talentless hack, glory-and-inventions stealin' Tony was able to handle it, me, a genius, with all my genius lackeys, can definitely handle it too".

The thing about massive egos is that they don't tend to think there is anything that can beat them.

Grey Wolf

[Giggling Ghast]

He might have thought that an army of stealth-capable drones armed with disorienting holo-projectors and a wide array of destructive tools could handle it.

Now here's what I want to know. Did he really accidentally get shot, or was that part of the hologram too? Because I know Spider-man didn't kill him, but it seems like weirdly quick thinking and more guts than I expected for him to stand up so well if he did actually get shot. I just assumed he had a few more holograms being remote controlled by his tech and not by EDITH.

Although it’s always possible that it was an illusion, I’m pretty sure he’s dead. It was definitely him in the scene where he tries to shoot Peter.

[Cozzer]

He might have thought that an army of stealth-capable drones armed with disorienting holo-projectors and a wide array of destructive tools could handle it.

Also, it's likely that with access to EDITH, he might eventually have gotten to the point where he could develop Avengers-tier technology and weapons. Or he thought he would, at least. That's why EDITH was the lynchpin of his plan, I guess.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Oh, one little thing I really appreciated about Mysterio was that he was actually part of an entire team, a whole crew that put the operation together. I loved that, it's a very different take from other MCU villains. (Sure, Vulture had his crew, but on the whole, he was very much a self-made man. Here, the team members all played indispensable roles in the deception.)

[Aotrs Commander]

Just got back from seeing it!

Excellent, as per usual.

I was about 50% convinced that Mysterio was on the level to start with and I was wondering where they were going with it. They did a good enough job to lay sufficient doubt. Kudos!

Zendaya makes a good, if rather different, MJ.



Those mid/post credit sequences, though!


Especially that last one, I was like "oh, we're doing secret invasion? But that guy, isn't he the one from Cap Marvel and... Ohhhhhhhh. Nick! Really...!"

[Reddish Mage]

Also, it's likely that with access to EDITH, he might eventually have gotten to the point where he could develop Avengers-tier technology and weapons. Or he thought he would, at least. That's why EDITH was the lynchpin of his plan, I guess.

Note that if EDITH is that sort of lynchpin, for an army of drones, that makes it almost exactly like both the Ultron initiative and Hydra's Project Insight.

Does anyone have an argument that EDITH is anything other than this?


Oh, one little thing I really appreciated about Mysterio was that he was actually part of an entire team, a whole crew that put the operation together. I loved that, it's a very different take from other MCU villains. (Sure, Vulture had his crew, but on the whole, he was very much a self-made man. Here, the team members all played indispensable roles in the deception.)

I'd have appreciated it more if the team actually were more of a factor rather than in the background except for two scenes.


Just got back from seeing it!

Excellent, as per usual.

I was about 50% convinced that Mysterio was on the level to start with and I was wondering where they were going with it. They did a good enough job to lay sufficient doubt. Kudos!

Zendaya makes a good, if rather different, MJ.



Those mid/post credit sequences, though!


Especially that last one, I was like "oh, we're doing secret invasion? But that guy, isn't he the one from Cap Marvel and... Ohhhhhhhh. Nick! Really...!"

Apparently, everything has been thoroughly spoiled for the thread.

If you thought Mysterio was just as likely or not to be on the level you weren't being very critical. Everything about the guys earnestness, likability, and the set up that was perfect for his comic-book illusion powers, all screamed that this guy was a fraud.

I think however, that's what they were going for. They figured with sincere-looking acting the audience would just go along for the ride and not see Mysterio for what he is until they confirmed it was all fake.

That Nick Fury fake out was great. Its better because they telegraph it in the movie (he says things like "your world" instead of "our world"). However, the best end credit scene was the great unmasking, reminiscent of the first Iron Man movie.

You could have left after that and gone away satisfied without knowing Nick Fury was fake the entire movie.

[Zalabim]

EDITH is not autonomous like Ultron nor is it predictive in the way that Project Insight was supposed to be. It doesn't try to think for you, beyond the obvious. Like google's predictive text with the option to kill people.

[Ramza00]

EDITH is not autonomous like Ultron nor is it predictive in the way that Project Insight was supposed to be. It doesn't try to think for you, beyond the obvious. Like google's predictive text with the option to kill people.

Level 5 autonomy with self driving cars it is not, but it is at least level 3 (really it is level 4 but lets accept it is at least 3.) The difference between 3 and 5 may not matter in 90% of scenarios.

[Cozzer]

That Nick Fury fake out was great. Its better because they telegraph it in the movie (he says things like "your world" instead of "our world"). However, the best end credit scene was the great unmasking, reminiscent of the first Iron Man movie.

You could have left after that and gone away satisfied without knowing Nick Fury was fake the entire movie.

I remember I felt like something was wrong with Nick's personality for the whole movie, but I thought it was simply the writers slightly mischaracterizing him. It was very satisfying to see the movie acknowledging my suspicions and making them into a minor plot point.

[Reddish Mage]

EDITH is not autonomous like Ultron nor is it predictive in the way that Project Insight was supposed to be. It doesn't try to think for you, beyond the obvious. Like google's predictive text with the option to kill people.

So like the Iron Legion (https://marvelcinematicuniverse.fandom.com/wiki/Iron_Legion) from early on in Age of Ultron? Tony spoke about his autonomous armor as a stop-gap measure that wouldn't take the pressure off the Avengers.

So all Peter Parker gets is the keys to basically spy and hack using any technology (recall what he sees and can do to his classmates phones) and a drone army that takes his every command. Also, note Happy had him use the tank programmed with a series of customizable spider-suits.

Seems entirely appropriate for Tony's chosen successor...until Peter reminds us he's just a teenager awkwardly trying to be normal.

Well that last ship has sailed...

[Psyren]

So Nando released a video today that sums up basically all my problems with EDITH, and how the movie could have been done better without it:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8hgAnKWRyE

To reiterate, I liked this movie a lot, and Tom Holland is still my favorite Spiderman. But I'm with Nando on this one, EDITH is the worst part of this otherwise great film.

[Zalabim]

In a nutshell, Nando wants to revisit the least enjoyable parts of Spider-man 2 and retread a lot of plot points that were covered in Homecoming.

As to "Does EDITH not have any safeties about blowing up the bus it's on," obviously EDITH knows Peter is Spider-man and Beck is just human, so it treats Beck with more care to avoid him getting hurt. Peter can take it. (I still believe that "ignore the safeties; fire everything" was fake. )

Update: I read articles talking about Mysterio's death. The scene where Beck gets hit by stray machine-gun fire from a drone after he said ignore the safeties? Not real. He doesn't get injured there. Beck is hit by the ricochet after Peter avoids his final shot. So no, EDITH does not have those safeties, and presumably the terrible Bus Scene is a hint to reveal that that particular event is faked, much like Beck getting the universe's number wrong is intentional.

[Psyren]

In a nutshell, Nando wants to revisit the least enjoyable parts of Spider-man 2 and retread a lot of plot points that were covered in Homecoming.

Neither of these are true. Homecoming was pre-Snap and I don't see the Spiderman 2 connection at all.

EDIT: Oh, do you mean the attenuation of his abilities? Here's the thing, that made no damn sense in Spiderman 2. FFH Peter has been through actual trauma that could explain something like that, and this movie had some of it anyway.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Just saw the movie today. It might be my favorite Spider-Man movie of all, primarily because the main villain in it is one of my favorites of Spider-Man's rogues' gallery and in comics in general, and the movie nailed the portrayal!

God, I was grinning from ear to ear with delight during the "villainous reveal" scene, and then the nightmarish illusion battle.... Plus Mysterio's vanity (multi-tasking orders to get his suit in immaculate condition so he'll be ready to shake the Queen's hand after wards, as he's lying to Fury on another line and plotting the "attack" out), his use of misinformation (crazy to think how ahead of its time the character was considering how extremely relevant that is today!), just...everything.
I've wanted a big screen portrayal of Mysterio for decades, and it was honestly everything I ever wanted it to be! :smallbiggrin:
I actually was surprised by the big reveal, despite knowing full well who the character is (and when it happened, just thinking, "this is such classic Mysterio!"). I think the credit (if you want to call it that) goes to Marvel's prior history of terrible villain writing, especially regarding Mr. "We subverted your expectations, why aren't you happy?" Mandarin. I could TOTALLY see the MCU re-writing Mysterio as a completely different character given past let downs, and was gradually emotionally trying to ease myself into that reality ("well, at least they made him bad ass and really charming..."). It was a huge relief, and IMO a "subversion" of its own (in that they didn't butcher a character to subvert the audience's expectations this time), when it turned out it was one big con after all.

I did think it was possible he'd end up the villain, but figured that accessing EDITH would corrupt his mind somehow, or a similar plot device, where the character is robbed of his own agency. So glad that it wasn't the case.

[Devonix]

Neither of these are true. Homecoming was pre-Snap and I don't see the Spiderman 2 connection at all.

EDIT: Oh, do you mean the attenuation of his abilities? Here's the thing, that made no damn sense in Spiderman 2. FFH Peter has been through actual trauma that could explain something like that, and this movie had some of it anyway.

The Spider-man 2 thing always made a lot of sense to me. It had nothing to do with trauma. I don't think Trauma could have caused it. It was his body fighting with his desires. This was Spider-man getting in the way of Peter Parker. And so he rebelled against himself. He never lost his powers he was just forcing himself not to use them.

[Majin]

Well I hope they don't use Spider-Man 2 plot, I didn't really care for the Peter losing his abilities part, it was just kind of dull. Neither JJJ or I want pictures/movies of Peter Parker, but Spider-Man!

[Devonix]

Well I hope they don't use Spider-Man 2 plot, I didn't really care for the Peter losing his abilities part, it was just kind of dull. Neither JJJ or I want pictures/movies of Peter Parker, but Spider-Man!

Ehh to me the Peter Parker stuff has always been the most interesting thing about Spider-man. With out Pete, there is now Jamison. J Jona is funny because of Spider-man, but he's compelling because of Peter.

Pete without his powers have been some of the most interesting Spiderman stories in comics.

[Psyren]

Just saw the movie today. It might be my favorite Spider-Man movie of all, primarily because the main villain in it is one of my favorites of Spider-Man's rogues' gallery and in comics in general, and the movie nailed the portrayal!

God, I was grinning from ear to ear with delight during the "villainous reveal" scene, and then the nightmarish illusion battle.... Plus Mysterio's vanity (multi-tasking orders to get his suit in immaculate condition so he'll be ready to shake the Queen's hand after wards, as he's lying to Fury on another line and plotting the "attack" out), his use of misinformation (crazy to think how ahead of its time the character was considering how extremely relevant that is today!), just...everything.
I've wanted a big screen portrayal of Mysterio for decades, and it was honestly everything I ever wanted it to be! :smallbiggrin:
I actually was surprised by the big reveal, despite knowing full well who the character is (and when it happened, just thinking, "this is such classic Mysterio!"). I think the credit (if you want to call it that) goes to Marvel's prior history of terrible villain writing, especially regarding Mr. "We subverted your expectations, why aren't you happy?" Mandarin. I could TOTALLY see the MCU re-writing Mysterio as a completely different character given past let downs, and was gradually emotionally trying to ease myself into that reality ("well, at least they made him bad ass and really charming..."). It was a huge relief, and IMO a "subversion" of its own (in that they didn't butcher a character to subvert the audience's expectations this time), when it turned out it was one big con after all.

I did think it was possible he'd end up the villain, but figured that accessing EDITH would corrupt his mind somehow, or a similar plot device, where the character is robbed of his own agency. So glad that it wasn't the case.

I actually thought the Mandarin subversion was great. Where I think they stumbled is that Aldirch Killian should have ended up being a different villain entirely; "Mandarin" should have just been the persona Trevor Slattery chose for the ruse, and in the meta-narrative, as a fakeout for the audience. In the Extremis Iron Man comic that IM3 is based on, the super-powered terrorist he fights is named Mallen, so they could have just gone with that, or folded him into a different IM villain. Aldrich purporting to be the actual MCU Mandarin at the end was nonsense, and Marvel clearly agrees with that because they're now rolling their Author Saving Throw with the Shang-Chi movie.



Pete without his powers have been some of the most interesting Spiderman stories in comics.

That may be but I find depowering heroes completely to be boring. It's the Kryptonite problem again - in Superman movies that's always the way to weaken him, and it turns him into a pushover, and that isn't fun to watch. That's why I like Nando's take - Peter still has his powers, they're just a lot weaker (and his "tingle" nonexistent) because of everything that's on his mind post-Endgame, until he rallies in Act 3.

[Ramza00]

I actually thought the Mandarin subversion was great. Where I think they stumbled is that Aldirch Killian should have ended up being a different villain entirely; "Mandarin" should have just been the person Trevor Slattery chose for the ruse, and in the meta-narrative, as a fakeout for the audience. In the Extremis Iron Man comic that IM3 is based on, the super-powered terrorist he fights is named Mallen, so they could have just gone with that, or folded him into a different IM villain. Aldrich purporting to be the actual MCU Mandarin at the end was nonsense, and Marvel clearly agrees with that because they're now rolling their Author Saving Throw with the Shang-Chi movie.

The problem with Iron Man 3 is the Villian. Aldrich Killian or whatever his name is.

You see the tension in Iron Man 3 is the tension of Tony's PTSD and his anxiety. The tension rises and falls, no matter what Tony does it keeps on coming back, no matter how prepared he is, no matter how many suits he makes, no matter how hypervigilant Tony is, he is always getting surprised and due to PTSD the surprise is always a disaster for PTSD makes it hard sometimes impossible to bring your best self to the situation when surprise and tension hits.

Thus Trevor Slattery being a Terrorist makes sense as a Villain to be the for for Iron Man in IM3, for surprise of terrorism naturally flows in a synergistic fashion with PTSD trauma. Each time Tony has internal tension the audience really believes there is an external existential threat for the nature of terrorism is fear and deadly threat that comes from surprises. Iron Man 3 is about horror as in a horror movie and not even a super prepared, technical superhero can escape the horror.

And the fake out when Trevor Slattery is revealed to be a fraud also makes sense from a tension standpoint, it how's how corrupted and manipulatable Tony is capable of being. Even released from the terror of the Mandarian, Tony still has PTSD and the PTSD corrupts everything. And now Tony knows it for he feels relief when he finds out the Mandarian is not real, but he still has problems ahead.

Enter the real antagonist (but not the villian for the Mandarin and the PTSD occupy Tony's thoughts for so much of the movie.) The real antagonist appears in act 3 as the antagonistic threat but he was barely there in act 1 and 2. He was a distraction in act 1 and 2.

-----

The problem is Aldrich Killian as a Villain, he talks to much. He is vain and shallow, empty, when the Villian that Iron Man needs in the 3rd act (after Trevor's facade is revealed) needs to be seen as a force of nature with the feeling of power, terror, and INEVITABLY. Have a moment where Tony realize the mistakes in the past were mind based, him losing due to fear, a then reverse it again for the Extremis foes threat is the power of their body, they are so overwhelming in force that not even Tony's Iron Suits can protect him.

The movie was bad for Aldrich Killian did his reveal "I am the Mandarin," he felt like a joke. No instead imagine an Aldrich Killian who used to be anxious fifteen years ago, but he was reborn via extremis, who is now the cocky but tough and silent type. The man who sees everything but dresses down the humans who are beneath him but does not overly boast. Imagine an Aldrich Killian who feels like a predator, who feels above fear now, yet is a man who instills fear in others.

Making Aldrich Killian vain is his undoing as a serious Villain, what you needed with him is cunning, power, and forcefulness that he can bring to bear. Everything Tony is not, Aldrich Killian should be, for he should be Tony's projection of Tony's inadequacies.

[Reddish Mage]

So Nando released a video today that sums up basically all my problems with EDITH, and how the movie could have been done better without it:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8hgAnKWRyE

To reiterate, I liked this movie a lot, and Tom Holland is still my favorite Spiderman. But I'm with Nando on this one, EDITH is the worst part of this otherwise great film.

While we've been over all the ways EDITH is a dumb idea already beaten to death the rest of these changes are pretty superfluous. You can take EDITH out of the movie, Mysterio can have the drone tech on his own (which he already did in fact for the first four elementals), and almost everything plays out in the exact same way.

Nando goes further to rewrite the entire movie around the Iron Spider Suit as EDITH substitute. The problem with this concept is, two-fold: First the Iron Spider Suit is a suit. Its custom clothing made for Peter Parker. Beck clearly can't fit in it. Moreover, the tech is very distinctive even if it somehow could stretch, Mysterio wearing the suit wouldn't be Mysterio, he'd be Spider-man... or Night-Monkey.

Moreover, the plot about Peter learning that he's more than a suit was the entire point of Homecoming. Homecoming did that. Nando wants to repeat that arc because he hates the aesthetics of a Spider-Man with access to a real lab and support team. He calls his video "The Iron Spider Mistake." Clearly, Nando is much more disturbed by MCU's Spiderman having a fancy suit than he is about EDITH.

Really this isn't a problem except for hardcore fans that can't stand the change to Peter's powers and backstory. We see from Far From Home that a Peter can still be the awkward teenage Peter we all know even if he is mentored by Tony Stark and given a plane, a drone-commanding omnihacking AI, and a fancy suit...maker machine.

Finally, Nando wants to fix the fridge-logic hole point that Beck, being a fake without real powers, should be exposed sooner or later when the next threat to Earth emerges and the Avengers are around (although there's a plot point about how they all appear to be busy). Only, it doesn't fix that point. Beck's original plan still sucks, the plan 2.0 once Peter gives him the suit is still basically to carry on only do it bigger with fancy new tech.

I'm sure there could be something else to fill in the space EDITH takes up. However, like the last attempt at suggesting a fix, this one is a swing and a miss.


The problem with Iron Man 3 is the Villian. Aldrich Killian or whatever his name is.
-----

The problem is Aldrich Killian as a Villian, he talks to much. He is vain and shallow, empty, when the Villian that Iron Man needs in the 3rd act (after Trevor's facade is revealed) needs to be seen as a force of nature with the feeling of power, terror, and INEVITABLITY. ...

The movie was bad for Aldrich Killian did his reveal "I am the Mandarin," he felt like a joke. No instead imagine an Aldrich Killian who used to be anxious fifteen years ago, but he was reborn via extremis, who is now the cocky but tough and silent type. The man who sees everything but dresses down the humans who are beneath him but does not overly boast. Imagine an Aldrich Killian who feels like a predator, who feels above fear now, yet is a man who instills fear in others.

Making Aldrich Killian vain is his undoing as a serious Villian, what you needed with him is cunning, power, and forcefulness that he can bring to bear. Everything Tony is not, Aldrich Killian should be, for he should be Tony's projection of Tony's inadequacies.

You want fake!Mandarin to be something as terrifying (or more) as the real one, and for the main to be a deadly serious villain that makes a great opposite of Tony. That could actually work.

However, they very clearly decided for a big joke. This was the problem.

I still think turning the Mandarin into a substitute for Osama bin Ladin rings hollow (pun un-intended) in many, many ways. I can't take serious a faux terrorist organization stylized after Al Qaeda saying its headed up by "The Mandarin." That's just all kinds of wrong. Like tossing falafel in with General Tso's chicken.

[Draconi Redfir]

Beck clearly can't fit in it. Moreover, the tech is very distinctive even if it somehow could stretch, Mysterio wearing the suit wouldn't be Mysterio, he'd be Spider-man... or Night-Monkey.

i imagine the intention is for Beck to take and reverse-engineer the technology, use the nannites to make a nano-tech mysterio suit for himself, not wear the iron-spider suit as-is.


the plan 2.0 once Peter gives him the suit is still basically to carry on only do it bigger with fancy new tech.

to be fair, if he had access to better tech like the suit, or even EDITH really, and he WASN'T actively trying to be a villain, i could see him using the technology to actually fight real threats in the same way Tony did. He'd just also be using some illusions to either confuse the enemy, or make his own attacks look more flashy.

[Reddish Mage]

i imagine the intention is for Beck to take and reverse-engineer the technology, use the nannites to make a nano-tech mysterio suit for himself, not wear the iron-spider suit as-is.

to be fair, if he had access to better tech like the suit, or even EDITH really, and he WASN'T actively trying to be a villain, i could see him using the technology to actually fight real threats in the same way Tony did. He'd just also be using some illusions to either confuse the enemy, or make his own attacks look more flashy.

This plan then looks like the “Mysterio as the (wannabe) real hero” rewrite idea I spent several pages of the thread explaining why it wouldn’t work in detail. That idea was already fully played out on this thread and recently.

[Psyren]

While we've been over all the ways EDITH is a dumb idea already beaten to death the rest of these changes are pretty superfluous. You can take EDITH out of the movie, Mysterio can have the drone tech on his own (which he already did in fact for the first four elementals), and almost everything plays out in the exact same way.

That's kind of the point. Like I said, I liked the movie overall (a lot), I just think EDITH is dumb. Having the movie's broad strokes play out exactly the same way without EDITH is exactly what I want.



Nando goes further to rewrite the entire movie around the Iron Spider Suit as EDITH substitute. The problem with this concept is, two-fold: First the Iron Spider Suit is a suit. Its custom clothing made for Peter Parker. Beck clearly can't fit in it. Moreover, the tech is very distinctive even if it somehow could stretch, Mysterio wearing the suit wouldn't be Mysterio, he'd be Spider-man... or Night-Monkey.

Missing the point. We've seen three examples of true nanotech in the MCU - Tony's suit in Infinity War/Endgame (destroyed), T'challa's latest suit (under lock and key in Wakanda) and the Iron Spider suit that he launched at Peter. It's nanotech, it doesn't have to be an actual spidersuit once Beck gets his hands on it - what he truly wants is technology that is as close to magic as anything we've seen in the MCU short of whatever the heck Asgardians use.



Moreover, the plot about Peter learning that he's more than a suit was the entire point of Homecoming. Homecoming did that. Nando wants to repeat that arc because he hates the aesthetics of a Spider-Man with access to a real lab and support team. He calls his video "The Iron Spider Mistake." Clearly, Nando is much more disturbed by MCU's Spiderman having a fancy suit than he is about EDITH.

I think Peter's current suit (i.e. the one he made himself during FHH) is perfectly fine. No AI jabbering in his ear, no precision drone strikes, no kill mode etc. Some specialty webs like the web ball and the zappy webs. And most importantly, expressive eyes.



Finally, Nando wants to fix the fridge-logic hole point that Beck, being a fake without real powers, should be exposed sooner or later when the next threat to Earth emerges and the Avengers are around (although there's a plot point about how they all appear to be busy). Only, it doesn't fix that point. Beck's original plan still sucks, the plan 2.0 once Peter gives him the suit is still basically to carry on only do it bigger with fancy new tech.

No, being the only guy with true nanotech outside of Wakanda would definitely allow him to be a hero.



I'm sure there could be something else to fill in the space EDITH takes up. However, like the last attempt at suggesting a fix, this one is a swing and a miss.

With respect, your opinion of what constitutes a miss only solidifies my appreciation for this idea. I think it's pretty clear that our tastes don't gel at all.

Regardless, we both ended up where we want to be - Peter has a cool tech suit (without being Ironman 2.0), and EDITH is nothing but a bad memory.

[Kornaki]

I don't understand people saying mysterio couldn't handle an avenger level threat with good tech and know-how when that's literally what iron man was.

[The Glyphstone]

I don't understand people saying mysterio couldn't handle an avenger level threat with good tech and know-how when that's literally what iron man was.

Because Iron Man didn't take on any Avengers level threats alone. He took on Iron Man level threats, and when he was up against an Avengers level threat he had the other Avengers to help.

Mysterio wants to be a solo superhero doing the work of an entire superhero team - or, at least, making himself look like one.

[Ranxerox]

I don't understand people saying mysterio couldn't handle an avenger level threat with good tech and know-how when that's literally what iron man was.

Because Tony actually shows up for his fights. The only time Beck actually is actually physically present for the fight is in the walkway fight with Peter at the end (and maybe not even then). In every other fight it is just hologram of Mysterio that appears to be flying around fighting the foe. He only appears in the flesh after the supposed enemy is vanquished, such as after he came out from doing his seeming apparent kamikaze dive into the fire elemental projection.

So sure he could send the drones to fight an Avenger level threat, but he isn't going to be there to direct the drones in person and the enemy isn't going to be following his script. So, if he is just going to be the man directing the drones from a safe room somewhere, then why him? Why not find someone who knows how to do more than stage a fight. Find Ender from Ender's Game, not some guy who knows how to stage an exciting action sequence.

[Kornaki]

Because Tony actually shows up for his fights. The only time Beck actually is actually physically present for the fight is in the walkway fight with Peter at the end (and maybe not even then). In every other fight it is just hologram of Mysterio that appears to be flying around fighting the foe. He only appears in the flesh after the supposed enemy is vanquished, such as after he came out from doing his seeming apparent kamikaze dive into the fire elemental projection.

So sure he could send the drones to fight an Avenger level threat, but he isn't going to be there to direct the drones in person and the enemy isn't going to be following his script. So, if he is just going to be the man directing the drones from a safe room somewhere, then why him? Why not find someone who knows how to do more than stage a fight. Find Ender from Ender's Game, not some guy who knows how to stage an exciting action sequence.

I agree other people could do the job well. Presumably being smart helps, and he's got that. He could spend more time developing actual hero technology later, he and his team were mostly inventors already.

[Bartmanhomer]

I know that are some heroes and villains who uses illusion in the Marvel Universe. (Technology or Magic) I just can't seem to name them other than Mysterio.

[Sholos]

I know that are some heroes and villains who uses illusion in the Marvel Universe. (Technology or Magic) I just can't seem to name them other than Mysterio.

Did you forget Loki?

[Bartmanhomer]

Did you forget Loki?

Oh yeah. I forgot about him. Thank you for reminding me. :smile:

[Ramza00]

I know that are some heroes and villains who uses illusion in the Marvel Universe. (Technology or Magic) I just can't seem to name them other than Mysterio.

The main ones are Mastermind (the creep in the Dark Phoenix saga), Loki, Mysterio, Selene, Mesmero.

Plus a dozen other characters psionics and magical who are not mainly illusionists but have multiple abilities and just use illusions to augment their repitore.

[Bartmanhomer]

The main ones are Mastermind (the creep in the Dark Phoenix saga), Loki, Mysterio, Selene, Mesmero.

Plus a dozen other characters psionics and magical who are not mainly illusionists but have multiple abilities and just use illusions to augment their repitore.

Well I guess my work here is done. LOL! :tongue:

[weckar]

Relevant to Spider-Man: Jackal dabbles in that sort of thing. With the Skrull about that is just the sort of character hey may bring in...

[Delicious Taffy]

Relevant to Spider-Man: Jackal dabbles in that sort of thing. With the Skrull about that is just the sort of character hey may bring in...

Ben Reilly for Spider-Man 3? That might be fun. Ooh, or Kaine.

[Talakeal]

It's nanotech, it doesn't have to be an actual spidersuit once Beck gets his hands on it - what he truly wants is technology that is as close to magic as anything we've seen in the MCU short of whatever the heck Asgardians use.

Wait, but we have seen actual magic in the MCU. How else do you explain Ant Man's card tricks?

[Reddish Mage]

That's kind of the point. Like I said, I liked the movie overall (a lot), I just think EDITH is dumb. Having the movie's broad strokes play out exactly the same way without EDITH is exactly what I want.



Missing the point. We've seen three examples of true nanotech in the MCU - Tony's suit in Infinity War/Endgame (destroyed), T'challa's latest suit (under lock and key in Wakanda) and the Iron Spider suit that he launched at Peter. It's nanotech, it doesn't have to be an actual spidersuit once Beck gets his hands on it - what he truly wants is technology that is as close to magic as anything we've seen in the MCU short of whatever the heck Asgardians use.



I think Peter's current suit (i.e. the one he made himself during FHH) is perfectly fine. No AI jabbering in his ear, no precision drone strikes, no kill mode etc. Some specialty webs like the web ball and the zappy webs. And most importantly, expressive eyes.



No, being the only guy with true nanotech outside of Wakanda would definitely allow him to be a hero.

With respect, your opinion of what constitutes a miss only solidifies my appreciation for this idea. I think it's pretty clear that our tastes don't gel at all.

Regardless, we both ended up where we want to be - Peter has a cool tech suit (without being Ironman 2.0), and EDITH is nothing but a bad memory.

I’m not sure what the respect is if you think the very fact I support something makes it wrong.

Also we seem to agree that the movie is fine broadly as is, without superhero Mysterio and EDITH was an unnecessary flourish. So you are agreeing with and then insulting my opinions generally.

That is not respectful or coherent.


Wait, but we have seen actual magic in the MCU. How else do you explain Ant Man's card tricks?

Pym particles :smalltongue:

[kinem]

Wait, but we have seen actual magic in the MCU.

Strange that anyone would think we haven't :smallbiggrin:

[Talakeal]

Strange that anyone would think we haven't :smallbiggrin:

It is Strange, but who am I to judge?

[Bartmanhomer]

Wait, but we have seen actual magic in the MCU. How else do you explain Ant Man's card tricks?

I think the card tricks are mundane magic if I'm not mistaken.

[Delicious Taffy]

I think the card tricks are mundane magic if I'm not mistaken.

That's the joke.

[Bartmanhomer]

That's the joke.

Ok. :biggrin:

[Psyren]

I’m not sure what the respect is if you think the very fact I support something makes it wrong.

Actually, what I said was that the fact that you think something is "a miss" isn't much of a refutation in my eyes. It was a response to you stating your opinion as though it were objective fact when it's not.


Wait, but we have seen actual magic in the MCU. How else do you explain Ant Man's card tricks?

Whoops, that was meant to say "magitech" rather than "magic." Certainly true magic exists in the MCU but it doesn't appear to be something that just anyone can learn. (I mean, I'm sure the Ancient One would tell me that anyone CAN learn it, much in the way that anyone CAN be a neurosurgeon or learn a dozen languages, but you get my point.)

[Ramza00]

So the True Spider-Man Far From Home Post Credit Reveal Was

Spider-Man leaving the MCU.

Currently Spider-Man movies (not team up movies like the Avengers) Disney gets about 5% of the Gross. Disney wanted the split to be 50 / 50 with Disney paying more of the production costs and Sony decided this hard ball deal was not sweet enough.

Note it seems Tom Holland has 2 more movies in his contract with Sony. So this may get weird.

[Devonix]

So the True Spider-Man Far From Home Post Credit Reveal Was

Spider-Man leaving the MCU.

Currently Spider-Man movies (not team up movies like the Avengers) Disney gets about 5% of the Gross. Disney wanted the split to be 50 / 50 with Disney paying more of the production costs and Sony decided this hard ball deal was not sweet enough.

Note it seems Tom Holland has 2 more movies in his contract with Sony. So this may get weird.

Seems like Disney being greedy. Disney now wants 50 percent of the box office as well as everything else made on the film with Sony getting nothing but the half the box office which has always been the weakest portion of the money made from a movie any way.

It would be different if Disney offered to cut sony in on merchandise.

[The Glyphstone]

Marvel's probably regretting setting up Spidey to be the in-universe heir of Iron Man about now...

[Jayngfet]

The contract allows them to make one more MCU Spider-Man movie(or two more, I'm hearing conflicting reports). Holland can definitely round out the trilogy and maybe be in an Avengers movie but after that it's uncertain. but that covers Spider-Man's run in the MCU for about as long as Iron Man had.

Even then I wouldn't be surprised if Marvel and Sony reached an accord. A 95/5 and 50/50 split are pretty far apart and there's plenty of middle ground. The big thing to be aware of though is Sony now owns Insomniac, which produces the PS4 game and any sequels it would make. Meaning between Venom, the game, and Spider-Verse a lions share of Spider-Man's multimedia presence now has to go through Sony. So Sony has the game and film rights all snapped up and active even without Holland.

Realistically a 75/25 or 80/20 split would still be better than what they're getting but still keep Sony placated.

If Marvel absolutely had to replace Spider-Man it would be easy. Harley Keener is the same age and was Iron Lad in a spinoff comic. Given that Ultron killed Amadeus Cho's mom and Cassie Lang got aged up. Given that a skrull push would net you Hulkling and Dr. Strange has enough sorcerers about to justify Wiccan you could slot either of them into the techie-loudmouth role and round out the team more or less perfectly for the Young Avengers movie in development.

[Anteros]

I don't think it's that easy for Marvel to replace Spider-man. They've lost Iron man, they've lost Cap, and Thor's story seems to be basically over as well. Now they're losing Spidey. These are the flag ship characters for Marvel comics. I know they want to push their new wave of characters, but none of them have a spot in the public's consciousness like the originals did. It's not going to be impossible for them, but it's definitely going to be harder.

Combined with the whole super-hero fatigue that a lot of people are getting from the oversaturation...I really don't see the next wave of movies being anywhere near as successful. I'm sure they'll make plenty of money, but they won't be a cultural phenomenon like what we've had for the last decade.

[Gallowglass]

I don't think it's that easy for Marvel to replace Spider-man. They've lost Iron man, they've lost Cap, and Thor's story seems to be basically over as well. Now they're losing Spidey. These are the flag ship characters for Marvel comics. I know they want to push their new wave of characters, but none of them have a spot in the public's consciousness like the originals did. It's not going to be impossible for them, but it's definitely going to be harder.

Combined with the whole super-hero fatigue that a lot of people are getting from the oversaturation...I really don't see the next wave of movies being anywhere near as successful. I'm sure they'll make plenty of money, but they won't be a cultural phenomenon like what we've had for the last decade.

I mean, I really don't think, prior to 2008 and the first Iron Man movie that you could say that Iron Man or Thor were high in the public consciousness. Prior to 2008, if you asked any 100 people on the street to name three superheroes you'd get "superman, batman and spiderman" If you asked them "name three marvel superheroes" you'd get "superman, batman and spiderman."

Go try it now. I bet you get "Iron Man, Captain America and Thor" a great portion of the time.

I would argue that Marvel have build a structure now that they can introduce the black panthers and captain marvels of the universe and get buy in by the fan base. With or without Spiderman.

I keep waiting for fatigue to set in. Still waiting. Keep hearing how its going to happen now. Keep expecting it. Still waiting.

Personally, I think this spiderman thing will be bad for BOTH sides. Sony doesn't know how to make a superhero movie. Marvel really played out spiderman as the next big thing.

But I also thought it was a "good" thing for X-men to be farmed out to another studio because Marvel only has the infrastructure to make so many movies at a time and when it was farmed out we had two studios making movies so it shared the load.

[Malphegor]

Eh, I feel it'll work out. Comics work well on status quo. Franchise movies and tv shows... don't have to. Spider-Man's set up now as this guy taking up Tony's mantle, that doesn't necessarily mean he has to be a plot element for a long time. Hell, depending on how the Sony/Marvel deal shakes out eventually, he could be the 'guy in the chair', with minimal screentime, for whatever new Avengers/Defenders/Revengers team pops up from young heroes.

(in an ideal world we'd be having Sony making the Spider-Man movies in partnership with Marvel studios, consistently in tune with the MCU's beats and current status but vague enough that it could be considered stand-alone at will.)

As a side note, in my opinion, characters need to retire, plotlines need to move forward, otherwise things get boring. Death and retirement is good for creating space for new properties to bloom, otherwise you end up with 90s-style 'it feels like every Marvel comic contains Wolverine, Spider-Man, or those two teaming up' over-saturation.

I don't think Holland's done with Spider-Man, the character's got a million stories in him, but it can be slow.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I don't think it's that easy for Marvel to replace Spider-man. They've lost Iron man, they've lost Cap, and Thor's story seems to be basically over as well. Now they're losing Spidey.

Off the top of my head: the next spiderman MCU movie ends with Spiderman losing his powers. Or a leg, as per the comics. Pepper Pots hires him for R&D. He starts using regular iron Man suits, or just builds them for the next spiderman-mold character.

There, lost Spiderman, not lost the character or the "next Iron Man" title.

Heck, Spiderman as the character is already practically dead. Spiderman is an adolescent struggling with responsibility & similar 15-20 yo issues. The movies can't keep him there, and as characterization grows, the further he gets from the "true" spiderman. Tom can transition to a different character.

Grey Wolf

[GloatingSwine]

Bear in mind there are no MCU crossover movies slated that would need Spidey to interact with any other MCU characters, so I don't think his role in the wider MCU to come is actually necessarily planned for at all.

Also, it's pretty easy to shuffle things around to replace Peter as the "young hero with a sense of adventure and heart" because, well, Kamala Khan is right there.

[Clertar]

Bear in mind there are no MCU crossover movies slated that would need Spidey to interact with any other MCU characters, so I don't think his role in the wider MCU to come is actually necessarily planned for at all.


Sony could not use this Spider-man, they would need to reboot him.

[GloatingSwine]

Sony could not use this Spider-man, they would need to reboot him.

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

They might not be able to use any other Marvel characters without some other agreement, but Sony still own the movie rights to Spider-Man, including this version.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

They might not be able to use any other Marvel characters without some other agreement, but Sony still own the movie rights to Spider-Man, including this version.

I took Clertar to mean they couldn't in practice use this version of the character, precisely because he is so steeped in MCU lore. It'd be like the disconnect between latter NetflixMCU and Movie MCU, but on steroids. No, in practice Sony would almost certainly need to completely sever any mentions to MCU, which means an entirely new Spiderman - probably a new actor, too. Might not require a new origin story, but Sony being Sony, that's probably all they'd think of doing.

ETA: I wonder in the MCU could marry Peter and MJ, have him take her surname, so that he's now Peter Jones, and thus not even have to worry about not being able to call him Parker.

Grey Wolf

[GloatingSwine]

I took Clertar to mean they couldn't in practice use this version of the character, precisely because he is so steeped in MCU lore.

He is, but they've literally just ended a movie on the best possible reason to break from everything the character has been presented as to this point.

That might not have been the intent, but it's certainly convenient for them.

They actually can quite easily dump any wider MCU trappings in the next Spider-Man movie, and excuse it because now he's on the run and can't use any of those resources.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

He is, but they've literally just ended a movie on the best possible reason to break from everything the character has been presented as to this point.

That might not have been the intent, but it's certainly convenient for them.

They actually can quite easily dump any wider MCU trappings in the next Spider-Man movie, and excuse it because now he's on the run and can't use any of those resources.

Errr... no? If he's on the run (and that's a big if right there), why wouldn't he run to NuSHIELD, who won't give a damn? Sign the accords, go out in the open like every other superhero in the lore? And most specially, how would SONY explain any of this when they wouldn't be able to mention Stark, Fury, SHIELD, the blink, or any of the other fundamental, crucial backstory elements that have turned this Spiderman into who he is today?

Grey Wolf

[GloatingSwine]

Errr... no? If he's on the run (and that's a big if right there), why wouldn't he run to NuSHIELD, who won't give a damn? Sign the accords, go out in the open like every other superhero in the lore?

Because he's just been exposed as a murderer and terrorist with his real identity, and "NuSHIELD" is a pair of out of their depth Skrulls with about a dozen support staff.

It's super easy to write a story where Peter is explicitly avoiding anyone he has previously interacted with who he thinks might have bought Beck's last illusion, which conveniently includes all the previous MCU characters.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Because he's just been exposed as a murderer and terrorist with his real identity, and "NuSHIELD" is a pair of out of their depth Skrulls with about a dozen support staff.

And yet SONY would have no way to indicate any of this to the audience.


It's super easy to write a story where Peter is explicitly avoiding anyone he has previously interacted with who he thinks might have bought Beck's last illusion, which conveniently includes all the previous MCU characters.

No, it is not. Not while keeping him Spiderman.

Grey Wolf

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Or you just don't bother explaining it, and just act like the MCU components don't exist. The bulk of the Spider-Man audience doesn't have a pressing need for the films to retain a tight attention to continuity. Keep the Iron Spider suit, remove references to Tony, don't acknowledge SHIELD or anything, and just build on the excellent established core cast.

At the end of the day, the MCU elements are ancillary.

In some ways, Disney/Marvel is the one in a bind here, what with how they set Peter up as the heir apparent to Tony. I don't think Disney gets more movies with Holland, so...

Or maybe this is all part of Disney playing hardball to get a bigger slice of the profits by exploiting nerdrage against Sony. Not that nerdrage actually did anything for Star Wars, but you never know.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Or you just don't bother explaining it, and just act like the MCU components don't exist. The bulk of the Spider-Man audience doesn't have a pressing need for the films to retain a tight attention to continuity. Keep the Iron Spider suit, remove references to Tony, don't acknowledge SHIELD or anything, and just build on the excellent established core cast.

The cast includes multiple characters SONY doesn't own. Happy, MJ (which is explicitly not Mary Jane), Stark, even when dead, are all crucial to this Peter Parker. I'm not even sure who owns Peter's best friend (whose name escapes me ATM). You can create new spiderman without them, you can even cast Tom in the role. But it would not be this spiderman. It would be, like Clertar said, a reboot.


At the end of the day, the MCU elements are ancillary.

Most. Not all. Too much of Peter's growth has come from Tony to simply never mention any Stark-related theme again.

Grey Wolf

[CarpeGuitarrem]

MJ is absolutely usable by Sony. Either she's covered under the existing rights (as a derivation of Mary Jane Watson) or she's a non-Marvel character (given that there's no "Michelle Jones" in the comics) and therefore usable by Sony. "Ned Leeds" (even though he's basically Ganke) also falls under the Spiderman umbrella pretty cleanly, I'd suspect. That trio of MJ/Ned/Peter drives the movies, and is more than enough to power a standalone Sony movie.

Happy and Stark would go, but that's something you can write around. The major character development for Peter that revolves around Stark has been done, and you can just move forward from there. You don't need a 1-for-1 replacement for everything that drops out of the film, and you can still carry the themes forward. Ease Peter into that tech whiz field that the comics sent him into anyhow, without Stark, and you're doing just fine. Reintroduce Norman Osborne as the Stark proxy if you really need to.