Jump to content

Plain Old Tele

Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017)

Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017)  

80 members have voted

  1. 1. Grade it



Recommended Posts

I really dug this. Even though some of the "Spidey is now part of the MCU" stuff does feel a bit shoehorned, I really thought it soared when being it's own thing and that the high school setting made it feel really fresh compared to every other superhero movie we've seen since the turn of the century. Tom Holland is perfect: Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield before him both made for very good Peter Parker's, but Holland nails the innocence of the character and sells his growth from ordinary teenager to superhero. He actually reminded me of (the sadly late) Anton Yelchin at times. I thought all of the teen roles were well cast really, with Jacob Batalon and Zendaya also being standouts (I hope the delightful Angourie Rice gets a bigger part in future movies too). The always great Michael Keaton has one of the better comic book movie villains in recent memory, while Marisa Tomei makes the most of her limited screentime as Aunt May (even if it's still odd to see her as the character). And Robert Downey Jr. shows up just enough to remind us that Spidey has finally become part of his universe thanks to a joint agreement between Sony and Marvel. It ultimately feels rather "small" in scope, even if that's a bonus in this day and age where every superhero movie goes for as much bang for the buck. Either way, this is easily the best Spider-Man movie since Spider-Man 2 13 years ago. B+

 

On a spoilery note, the the following moments near the end had me howling:
 

Spoiler

 

- The last shot with Aunt May finding out Peter is really Spider-Man. :rofl:

- All of those Captain America educational videos. That one at the end of the credits: I died.

 

 

Edited by filmlover
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



I really enjoyed the movie for what it was.  It doesn't do anything to try and disprove what I've said about modern Marvelized tentpoles before, that they're empty spectacle that's enjoyed in the moment and forgotten afterwards, but it's a really entertaining film.

 

It's a little long, and also really cluttered, trying to be a quirky high school drama, a superhero film, and tie-in to the MCU that it never fully gets to thrive at any of those three, but it's not a huge deal because you enjoy it all.

 

I will say, it does play off like an episode in a TV show (which is annoying), but we should expect that from Marvel at this point.

 

I thought Holland was great as Spider-Man, he gets the character more right than the last two.  The supporting cast is fun and lively, you just don't really get much time with them, they feel inconsequential to the movie as a whole.  Zendaya was a fun MJ, I would have liked to see more of her character.

 

Keaton was the best part of the movie, he hammed it up and reminded me of the early Raimi villains.  Definitely one of the better MCU villains.

 

The movie feels bogged down though, it kind of jumps from plot point to plot point to quickly.  It felt like it was trying to be a TV show style plotline, but cramming it into a 2 hour movie.  I also thought the Liz plot line could have been killed, however it did get some of the best scenes of the movie with Holland and Keaton.

 

It's a solid and fun effort.  Much better than TASM movies, although not up to par with the first two Raimi ones.  But still, it's a great time and entertains you.

 

B+

Edited by The Panda
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Dexter of Suburbia said:

I really hate in the beginning with spider man filming the stuff from civil war. So unnecessary. It felt like saying "hey this connected to the MCU audience!!! And go back and watch civil war again. If they were going to keep it maybe have Peter set his phone to film the action scenes and upload them to YouTube so instead of taking pictures he uploads videos of spider man on YouTube.  The first acted did pick up after that but it took me out of the movie. 

Different Counterpoint: I thought those filming scenes did a good job of setting-up one of Peter's main personal conflicts in the movie. Specifically, his wish to get more involved in the important Avengers stuff, rather than the basic 'friendly neighbourhood Spiderman' stuff he was doing before. Showing from a personal perspective how enthusiastic and excited he was during that Civil War mission really did a good job of emphasising that in a way that just messaging Stark/Happy wouldn't really achieve. Plus, as a bonus, it also did a decent job of establishing how Happy considers him an annoyance.

 

 

Anyway, my personal opinion of the movie as a whole is that it was solid. Not amazing, but I liked it enough. It's probably the most consistently good of the SH movies I've seen this year, it didn't have any major flaws that jumped out at me, but it's also probably the most disposable as well (except maybe Lego Batman). It just didn't grab my interest the way WW, GOTG2 or Logan did and none of the high moments shone as strongly (although I think the trailers are partly to blame for spoiling most of Spidey's character arc). Maybe it'll improve on a rewatch, I don't know. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



The action overall was fairly disappointing for a Spider-Man film.  I don't think it took advantage of showing off Spider-Man, with exception to the Monument scene.

 

It also wasted the potential of an aerial battle between him and the Vulture.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites



4 minutes ago, The Panda said:

The action overall was fairly disappointing for a Spider-Man film.  I don't think it took advantage of showing off Spider-Man, with exception to the Monument scene.

 

It also wasted the potential of an aerial battle between him and the Vulture.

I actually appreciated this movie's smaller scope after all of the previous Spider-Man movies (especially The Amazing Spider-Man 2) went for as "big" as possible. It grounded the movie in given the characters more attention.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, filmlover said:

I actually appreciated this movie's smaller scope after all of the previous Spider-Man movies (especially The Amazing Spider-Man 2) went for as "big" as possible. It grounded the movie in given the characters more attention.

 

I was fine with it being grounded, but most of the action was poorly done.  A lot of shaky cam and close up shots where you can't see what's going on, it felt lazy.

 

The Monument setpiece was the only memorable one imo. 

 

The other problem is even though the focus is on the characters, it still lacks depth.  People are saying it's a John Hughes film, but it feels more like a light imitation of that.  The attention to characters feels surface level, especially compared to films like Sixteen Candles and The Breakfast Club.

 

However, I've gotten that with most MCU films.  They pick a "style" and say "This movie is a political thriller!", "This one is a coming of age story", etc. and do a poor imitation of the genre while being sure to still stick to their formula.  They don't really give in to that line of thinking.

 

So in that regards, the focus on the characters is too shallow to make up for the messy action pieces.

 

Dont want to criticize the film too much, though.  It's a good movie, a fun watch, and one of the better MCU films.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Well I went in with hopes and an open mind since for me none of the marketing worked and gave me red flags.

 

Sadly, the move was exactly what I was worried about with the trailers and such.  

 

Too much of "hey this is attached to the Avengers"  movie stuff just like with the SW PT.  I know that is more of a nitpick just like a lot of the CGI with Spidey wasn't good is nitpicking too.

 

But almost none of the humor worked for me, all the kids were not that good except his friend.  Zendaya was bad, or it was her character was bad, but either way, they did nothing to ease my fears of her going forward.  I don't care that she is MJ at all, just want her to be able to act.  And the stupid fake twist that she was MJ was unnecessary and so obvious like Khan in ST.  I didn't think the Liz or Flash was all the great either.  

 

I know it sounds like I am trashing the movie, but it wasn't awful, just I think I am still in the disappointment phase.

 

It was a lot like SM1 in some ways and whoever says this was like a John Hughes movie just must think any movie that has a scene in high school is a Hughes movie :P

 

Keaton was fine with what he was given which wasn't much.

 

I give it at best a B for now.  It may go up or down as I think about it more :P 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Raimi's first two managed to be intimate (especially the first) and still deliver thrilling and inventive set-pieces. I know I'm a Raimi fanboy but his shadow still looms over these movies. This isn't really a Burton -> Nolan scenario as both of those takes were so idiosyncratic that it was easy to watch one without thinking of the other. On the other hand, every time there was an action scene in Homecoming I couldn't help but think of how limp they were when compared to Raimi's kinetic style; every time RDJ popped up I kept thinking of how light the movie was compared to the Uncle Ben scenes in Raimi's movies which carried quite a bit of heft; Giacchino's overly frenetic score fighting for breathing space made me long for how Elfman's music was so in sync with Raimi's (superior) visuals.

 

I don't see why I would want to watch this again when I can see the same characters in an all-round better movie. To go from such a sincere and individual take to these by-the-numbers movies makes me sad.

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Obvious transition movie is obvious. Stark is retiring to marry Pepper after the next Avengers films and Marvel needs a new charismatic genius megastar of the group. Enter Hollands Spider-Man. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was pretty good. It still can't hold a candle to Raimi's perfect Spider-Man 2 but it's better than both amazing spider-mans. Yay?

 

The best thing about it is how it embraces the high school aspect of the story and how upbeat and hilarious the movie is all the way through. The villain and the climax were mostly typical boring marvel stuff, but I liked that he was just a small criminal with some cool technology and nothing more. And Keaton while underused had that one great scene in the car when he is driving them to the prom, which is more than most Marvel villains get.

 

 

edit: also no RDJ-Marisa Tomei reunion is a travesty of epic proportions.

Edited by Joel M
Link to comment
Share on other sites



5 hours ago, The Panda said:

The action overall was fairly disappointing for a Spider-Man film.  I don't think it took advantage of showing off Spider-Man, with exception to the Monument scene.

 

It also wasted the potential of an aerial battle between him and the Vulture.

 

And he pretty much got his ass kicked in every battle.  Just once I would have liked to see him beat the pants off someone.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I decided to watch this pretty soon, unlike most superheroe films. The main reason is that Spidey is my favourite superheroe and the first two Spider-Man movies are easily my favourite cbm films.

I have to say I was disappointed. It wasn't nearly as good as Spidey 1 or 2.

It basically felt like the typical Marvel movie. And since I am far from a fan of that formula I didn't enjoy it.

It was a C+ for me which is basically my average for any Marvel movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



5 hours ago, The Panda said:

 

I was fine with it being grounded, but most of the action was poorly done.  A lot of shaky cam and close up shots where you can't see what's going on, it felt lazy.

 

The Monument setpiece was the only memorable one imo. 

 

The other problem is even though the focus is on the characters, it still lacks depth.  People are saying it's a John Hughes film, but it feels more like a light imitation of that.  The attention to characters feels surface level, especially compared to films like Sixteen Candles and The Breakfast Club.

 

However, I've gotten that with most MCU films.  They pick a "style" and say "This movie is a political thriller!", "This one is a coming of age story", etc. and do a poor imitation of the genre while being sure to still stick to their formula.  They don't really give in to that line of thinking.

 

So in that regards, the focus on the characters is too shallow to make up for the messy action pieces.

 

Dont want to criticize the film too much, though.  It's a good movie, a fun watch, and one of the better MCU films.

 

 

Remember readong some reviews that said Civil War was like Kramer vs Kramer 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



9 minutes ago, John Marston said:

 

 

Remember readong some reviews that said Civil War was like Kramer vs Kramer 

 

Yeah, comparing these films to classics of their genre is an insult to the movies you're comparing them to.

 

This was a fun superhero movie with some coming of age elements, but it wasn't a John Hughes film at all.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites





21 hours ago, cheesypoofs said:

In the beginning when they're dealing with the aftermath of the first avengers movie, right after that scene it said 8 years later. So does avengers take place in 2009 or does this take place in 2020?

 

I can answer this.

 

MCU kicks off in 2008 with Iron Man. Iron Man 2 takes place six months after as per a title card after Vanko watches Stark's press conference announcing he's Iron Man, with Incredible Hulk taking place concurrently as per news footage and Thor taking place right after as per credits tease. Cap probably wakes up a few months before Avengers 1 in 2009, even though the movie was shot in 2011 and released in 2012.

 

Hope that helps. ;)

Edited by Jay Beezy
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites





Yah, it's pretty good. The second act was kind of losing me when it can't decide if it wants to be a Hughes-like movie or MCU movie, but it redeems itself in the third act. A rewatch will probably improve my rating. B | 8/10

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Since most everybody's covered everything else, I'll just focus on the few things that really stood out to me:

 

For me the first issue is that by the end of the movie, Spiderman comes off as a weaker superhero than what I felt he was in Civil War. His character arc was one of some maturation, but because of all the help he got from the Stark costume, at the end I felt the costume was more powerful than Spiderman himself. It really drove home the point that if Spiderman ever has to come to the aid of the Avengers in a desert, he better charter a plane otherwise they'll be dead by the time he gets there.

 

The second issue is that only a few characters in the film actually get fleshed out at all: The Vulture, Spidey and his buddy (I can't even remember his name). And Keaton's talent really overshadows everybody else, even against RDJ's cameos.

 

A huge problem for me was that the plot entirely hinged on Happy repeatedly hanging up the phone a little too early....?  It feels like lazy writing.

 

One spot that I though really could have turned this movie into something special was the ferry sequence. When that laser thing was going nuts, I thought sure people had gotten killed (I mean, come on, every person on that boat should have bought lotto tickets at that point just for surviving that!). And if not then, when the boat was split in half. The fact that the ferry definitely should have sunk in a couple of seconds BUT DIDN'T broke my suspension-of-disbelief meter. What was wasted was that if Peter had actually caused the deaths of those innocents, the entire lesson of the movie would have been made right there, and in a much more impactful way. But Iron Man saves the day, welds the boat together and we are reminded that this is a Avenger's Marvel Movie attempting to be a John Hughes movie.

 

The last thing I will harp on is something that's bugged me in a lot of Marvel films but a recent youtube video was actually able to put a label on it, and that is bathos: whenever things get serious, somebody has to crack a joke or some out of place humor gets injected into it, and it just drains away the emotional impact of the scene. The best example is when Happy brings Peter into the men's room to have a heart-to-heart talk with him, and I really want to hear what he has to say....but then we get that awkward, cringey piece where we have to wait for the kid in the bathroom to pop out of the stall and slowly wash his hands and slide out of the bathroom. I was completely taken out of the moment and thought to myself "God-dammit Marvel!" It's supposed to be humorous, but really comes off as a cheap laugh. This happened here and there and especially with some of RDJ's scenes, and there is a cost to this kind of humor; and that cost is that as a viewer, I am less invested in the movie, and in particular I care a little less about the characters.

 

I did like the movie as a popcorn CBM and I liked Holland's performance but especially Keaton's, and I give it a B. 

Edited by grimfandango
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.