Spider-man: No Way Home ***Spoiler Thread***

[opeth0500]

On 12/18/2021 at 4:59 AM, Ozzy said:

Here is a Spolier, this movie probably sucks and they should stop making Spider-Man movies!

 

 

Last Spider-Man movie I watched was in 2004, are any of these crap Spider-Man movies even worth watching that have been made in the last 17 years?  I doubt it.  

I was doubtful as well but I went to see this movie to see the old school guys one more time. The movie was good enough to make me want to watch the first two movies in the trilogy. They are all pretty solid.

[Kiltman]

7 hours ago, Ty21 said:

If each Peter Parker is a different person, why would Osborne be the exact same person? 
 

On another note, something I didn’t even consider: what if the spell brought in all the J Jonah Jameson’s lol. 

Multiverse man, who knows. 
 

Dafoe will too old by then probably. But when they do Secret Wars and perhaps do some reality smashing, it’d be a cool Statue of Liberty (Planet of the Apes) moment to have them be in a new fused reality that Oscorp exists and his building took the place of Avengers tower. Everyone hates the Avengers and they do a Dark Reign adaptation.

[BlaqOptic]

9 hours ago, Deadpulse said:

Bro this... this is who Spider-Man is. Since 1962. Sorry you don't like it, but like... thats intrinsically who this character is, he tries to save EVERYONE and ANYONE. 

There's literally no logic in trying to save THESE characters. Regardless of how you try to slice it. They failed to establish a valid reason other than "they died." It would make sense if they established they were redeemable decent guys (other than Norman) beforehand before ecoming villains, but they failed to do that.

Edited December 24, 2021 by BlaqOptic

[Deadpulse]

10 minutes ago, BlaqOptic said:

There's literally no logic in trying to save THESE characters. Regardless of how you try to slice it. They failed to establish a valid reason other than "they died." It would make sense if they established they were redeemable decent guys (other than Norman) beforehand before ecoming villains, but they failed to do that.

how did they fail to do that? You mean, if you haven't seen the other movies? This is a sequel to all of those flicks and if you didn't watch them beforehand thats on you bub. 

[BlaqOptic]

11 minutes ago, Deadpulse said:

how did they fail to do that? You mean, if you haven't seen the other movies? This is a sequel to all of those flicks and if you didn't watch them beforehand thats on you bub. 

I think you're very loosely using the term sequel here. And MCU Peter Parker is not the viewer. They established their redeemable qualities long after determining they would be saved. They didn't speak to Max's redeemable qualities until Amazing Spider-Man spoke about him a the Statue of Liberty. Hell, if we're being honest, Flint started redeemable but then flip-flopped so much that his character's motives and redeemability seemed questionable. You can say that the original villains from the trilogies were given some reeemability by the sequel villains (Otto speaking about Norman, Max speaking about Connors) but the latter were just said to be saved just because... although as I write this I guess Peter could've just assumed just because those 2 (or 3) were redeemable the rest were, but to me that's lazy writing. It should solely be from MCU PP's perspective, not an "I've seen all these films already" perspective.

[Fresh Prince]

28 minutes ago, BlaqOptic said:

I think you're very loosely using the term sequel here. And MCU Peter Parker is not the viewer. They established their redeemable qualities long after determining they would be saved. They didn't speak to Max's redeemable qualities until Amazing Spider-Man spoke about him a the Statue of Liberty. Hell, if we're being honest, Flint started redeemable but then flip-flopped so much that his character's motives and redeemability seemed questionable. You can say that the original villains from the trilogies were given some reeemability by the sequel villains (Otto speaking about Norman, Max speaking about Connors) but the latter were just said to be saved just because... although as I write this I guess Peter could've just assumed just because those 2 (or 3) were redeemable the rest were, but to me that's lazy writing. It should solely be from MCU PP's perspective, not an "I've seen all these films already" perspective.

From MCU PP he’s a still a young immature boy who didn’t want to dent people to their deaths m. So he wanted to try and save them, makes sense to me.

[Deadpulse]

2 hours ago, BlaqOptic said:

It should solely be from MCU PP's perspective, not an "I've seen all these films already" perspective.

Again

You dont like Spider-Man lol

EVERYONE IS REDEEMABLE 

THATS ALWAYS HIS PERSPECTIVE 

And even if it wasnt, its made very clear to him that they will ALL die if he sends them back. That is enough for just about every iteration of Spider-Man

[seminoles1]

Spiderman trying to save people is an issue now? He's an incorruptible superhero...of course he doesn't just want to sentence people to their deaths.

[BlaqOptic]

2 hours ago, seminoles1 said:

Spiderman trying to save people is an issue now? He's an incorruptible superhero...of course he doesn't just want to sentence people to their deaths.

Again, at the time he doesn’t even know thee of the rogues are redeemable nor that they all died. Nor does he have any verifiable proof that changing them in his reality and sending them back will prevent their deaths. I have no issue with Peter trying to save them; I have an issue with how lazily written it was. There are no stakes at all other than risk for Peter. That’s not good writing.

I understand the depiction of the character, but “hey this was established to the viewer in other movies but not to the antagonist in this movie” and do it because currently living Aunt May told you to is not good writing. Regardless of Peter’s core base, my opinion on the writing for this movie isn’t going to change. We’ll agree to disagree.

Edit: And ad someone in Twitter pointed out, the characters Peter knew died were said to have come into Earth MCU literally right before their deaths. So how would saving them prevent their deaths if they go back to the literal moment right before their death (at least was the case because Amazing Spidey and OG Spidey intervened too.)

Edited December 24, 2021 by BlaqOptic

[Nex_Gen]

17 hours ago, BlaqOptic said:

Finally got a chance to watch this film... It somehow simultaneously felt like a movie that needed to be made while also not in any way, shape, or form needing to be made...

It needed to be made because it served as a reset for MCU Peter Parker to finally give him a true origin story separate from Tony Stark and the Avengers. A motive to be not only Spider-Man but a Man and a Hero. Towards the end he becomes the adult piss poor Peter Parker looking to go to a local college in New York that many of us know only he doesn't have an Aunt May. That said...

This movie was 100% fan service. The meta commentary and easter eggs were so over the top that I loved it but it felt forced. An entire conversation alluding to OG Peter Parker not having to invent his webbing. An entire conversation to Amazing Spider-Man being "Amazing". Giving Amazing Spider-Man a shot at redemption by saving MJ in the way he couldn't save Gwen. The "I'm somewhat of a [blank] myself meme, Aunt May working at F.E.A.S.T., The Best Friend comments, the Spider-Man point meme, Electro's nod to Miles Morales, among many other things...

That said, at the end of the day Peter and May's motives made no sense to me. Dr. Strange tells your entire universe could be effed for people who might as well be "fake" because they come from other universes and you're like "I'm going to save them even though they're freakin' villains who probably cannot be trusted and what happens to them is completely inconsequential to me." There just also felt other times that were kind of deus ex machina on a much smaller scale like the nanotech being able to integrate with Doc Oc's tentacles, etc.

 

That said, as a high school counselor, my favorite part of the whole movie was the college application process part. While receiving letters was 100% inaccurate as it's almost all done line now, the fact that the kids made it their everything but then didn't even know you could appeal and tried literally everything in the world besides calling the admissions office is how kids in the process are nowadays to a tee!

Glad to see someone see it the same way. It wasn't really a good movie. This entire act had no real motive behind it. It basically consisted of "hey, let's just all throw all this crap in there for fanfare with no real construction or coordination behind it and call it a movie!" Strange's character, who up until this point in the entire MCU project, has only followed the ethically high ground, is all of a sudden incompetent and has no sense of judgement to Peter Parker, who he never cared for in previous movies. Marvel completely ruined Strange after this movie. 

I had a hard time being attached to May's death. She had no reason or motive to all of a sudden be so involved when they spent the first two prequels making her a meme instead of developing her as this high moral character as they should have. That is of course until the last 30 minutes before her death by using Osborne as a ploy to justify her legacy as that.

They tried to force comedy every minute, which got overbearing. I didn't even notice my theater room laughing at most of them, just to put how bad it was.

The storyline could make you care less. There was no reason for Peter to be the way he was. Same for Strange. Same for any of the villains. Same for any of the other Spidermans. They didn't care to provide enough substance to justify them all being there at all. Other then, of course.  Where's the growth and maturity of Peter? We're three movies in, and it's the same theme over and over; Peter being a complete idiot who lacks the judgement of a 10 year old. The spells were stupid, and completely made out of left field. At least try to make it make sense. Someone explain to me why Strange sending them back would possibly kill them, but they end up doing it at the end anyways? Was it where Strange said he could do it, but it would take the sacrifice of everyone completely forgetting who Peter Parker is? Lol is the best reaction I could give to that. I get it. I'm nitpicking a comic book movie. But they could at least put in the same effort they did with the earlier Iron Man movies so the plot holes aren't gaping. 

This entire Spiderman project has been a disappointment to me. Just my opinion. And that kind of sucks because I genuinely like Tom Holland.

 

I feel like most of the positive reviews of this movie come down to the same recurring sentiment:

3 Spidermans in one screen. A+!

 

But its definitely undermined by piss poor writing and execution.

 

Edited December 24, 2021 by Nex_Gen

[opeth0500]

8 hours ago, BlaqOptic said:

There's literally no logic in trying to save THESE characters. Regardless of how you try to slice it. They failed to establish a valid reason other than "they died." It would make sense if they established they were redeemable decent guys (other than Norman) beforehand before ecoming villains, but they failed to do that.

The movie opened up with spider getting a lot of backlash for mysterio’s death and them blaming him. Maybe he didn’t want to have another death on his conscience. 

[Fresh Prince]

Parker hears the Villains mention that most of them are dead in their universe, that is how he knows if he sends them back they will die.

[kingseanjohn]

If the villains were sent right before their deaths, does that mean the other Peters were sent right before their death?

I know they weren't "sent". But I'm not sure what else to call it when you have Ned randomly opening a portal.

Edited December 25, 2021 by kingseanjohn

[Broncofan]

On 12/20/2021 at 9:09 AM, THE DUKE said:

 

Interesting to me that my kids, who don't have that emotional connection to the earlier spiderman movies, still like Homecoming over this, but they all universally said it was better than Far From Home.  It's the best of the three to me, but I DO have that nostalgic view of the Tobey/Garfield movies.

A-

 

My teen & preteen daughters saw the Maguire & Garfield movies before they saw Homecoming.   They absolutely LOVED this movie.    But interestingly enough - they both prefer the Garfield Spidey out of the 3 - because it's the one they grew up and attached to, whereas for me, Maguire was the version where Spidey movies became the standard of hero movies (I try to suppress SM3 there, although No Way Home retcons it to "not as embarrassingly bad as when it first came out".    I think this demonstrates the power of emotional connection that you referred to.  

[THE DUKE]

5 hours ago, Broncofan said:

My teen & preteen daughters saw the Maguire & Garfield movies before they saw Homecoming.   They absolutely LOVED this movie.    But interestingly enough - they both prefer the Garfield Spidey out of the 3 - because it's the one they grew up and attached to, whereas for me, Maguire was the version where Spidey movies became the standard of hero movies (I try to suppress SM3 there, although No Way Home retcons it to "not as embarrassingly bad as when it first came out".    I think this demonstrates the power of emotional connection that you referred to.  

They have seen all the Tobey/Garfield ones, but saw them at home and didn't have the same excitement for them.