@BattleFranky69:
their track record without Marvel's help is…1 for 8? The Raimi/Webb 5, and the two Ghost Rider abominations, and only Spider-Verse wasn't an embarrassment.
At least 4 out of 8. And in the context of Sony Spider-Man films, 4 or 5 out of 7 depending on how you view Venom.
When Sony lets directors and writers make a Spider-Man film without trying to force multiple main antagonists and a shared universe, they tend to turn out pretty good. And it's thanks to Sony and FOX owning Spidey and X-Men that we get experimental subversive superhero films like Spider-Verse, Logan, and Deadpool. Which would never get made under Disney (unless someone wants to come out and say Big Hero 6 is an misunderstood masterpiece lol). I'll gladly risk three bad live-action spin-off movies if it means there's even a chance we'll get something like Spider-Verse again.
My brief, yet still pedantic thoughts on all the Spider-Man films:
! Spider-Man 1 is fairly dated. Decent, but riddled with cheesy dialogue, some of the action is 2000s quality at its worst, and has a poorly written romance. But it's not a definitively bad film by any means. X-Men took the first step (and Blade I guess), but it was Spider-Man 1 that walked so every modern 21st century superhero movie could run. I probably won't ever rewatch it on my own, but anyone here relentlessly bashing it is kidding themselves if they think it's as underwhelming as the worst entries in the MCU or DCEU. Willem Dafoe's Green Goblin chews the scenery so hard his gums bleed, but at least he's a villain memorable enough to requote.
! Over the years we take it for granted as this cheesy first Spider-Man movie where the only good thing was J.K. Simmons' casting, but it's easy to forget it was mainly a drama and the first time we see the tragedy of Uncle Ben's death outside of the comics. Which is still one of the most uniquely iconic and emotional origin stories out there. And unlike most MCU movies, it has a great soundtrack that isn't just white noise in the background and triumphantly playing the main theme once in the climax.
! I will always bat for Spider-Man 2 still being one of the top ten live-action superhero films to date, if not top five (although for me, it's right at the top). Amazing action, spectacular music, astonishing drama (outside of MJ, this trilogy had no idea how to write romance well but that can be said for most superhero films), sensational humor, and a superior supporting cast compared to Homecoming and Far from Home outside of the villains. Compared to Spider-Man 1, there's a lot less cheesiness and whatever cheese is left tends to be more fun than cringe-y. One of the only superhero that more often not knows how to balance drama and humor effectively. The Raindrops Keep Falling on My Head, pizza delivery, and elevator scenes still make me crack up more than any other superhero comedy ever has. It's not my favorite adapted take on Spider-Man (Spectacular, PS4, and Spider-Verse take that honor), but it nailed Peter Parker's underdog lifestyle.
! Spider-Man 3 is a dumpster fire and I definitely wouldn't count it as one of the "good" Sony Spider-Man films. But there's something to be said about how it can still be ironically entertaining to watch for how gloriously bad it is compared to true painfully boring trash like Daredevil, Ghost Rider, and half of MCU's Phase Two movies. The action scenes are pretty damn good, it probably has the best final fight scenario in the trilogy of being staged like a 2v2 hell in a cell wrestling match in a skyscraper construction site, and I'd go as far as saying it has my favorite take on the Symbiote Spider-Man arc.
! >! Because it's less the suit literally corrupting Peter into becoming bad and more Peter letting ego and vanity get to his head after finally becoming a popular superhero, with the Symbiote playing a minor role in his devolution like an actual drug would. I can totally believe a dork like Peter would do that dance because that's his idea of being cool and confident, and the Editor's Cut has that scene take place right after he blows up Harry's face so it was supposed to be a lot more unsettling because there he's celebrating scarring his best friend.
! I respect how daring they were in making Peter naturally become a huge asshat. Of course I would still prefer Peter not putting his hair down and wearing eyeliner to look edgy and his redemption/withdrawal process being longer than just taking off the suit (but that's something no Spider-Man story has ever been willing to do for some reason). The second dance scene is way too cheesy for my liking, the one redeemable aspect about it that's easily forgotten is how Peter was using Gwen as tool to make Mary Jane jealous. Which is downright evil, and makes the sequence easier to swallow because there was a dramatic point to it.
! Oh, and as rushed and lame as the Venom design in this movie is, the Eddie Brock in this movie is better than in Venom. He's a pathetic, slimy, cunning, self-pitying loser who uses his earned misfortune as an excuse to be evil, and he's effective at it as an antagonistic foil to Peter's underdog character who still strives to be a compassionate hero. That's all Eddie Brock ever is and needs to be. While Venom's Eddie… I don't even know how to describe what Tom Hardy's take was besides being a selfish idiot at best and a fidgeting, stuttering, awkward middle schooler in an adult's body at worst.
! The first Amazing Spider-Man is actually a better origin story than Spider-Man 1 and is an overall engaging film when you get past the first clunky fifteen minutes of once Peter gets his powers. It's also the first Spider-Man movie where the main villain has an actual plan in spite of how goofy it is. And for once in the superhero movie genre, the romantic chemistry between Peter and Gwen is actually decently written and endearing? Peter's got a good arc in this movie about starting off as an introverted teen to a jerk with superpowers to a selfish revenge-obsessed vigilante to realizing he should be a responsible superhero. And I think this movie did the best job with Peter's supporting cast, especially Flash Thompson.
! >!
! Everyone knows Spider-Verse is the best Spider-Man film. Although I would go as far as saying it's the best superhero film ever. And as for The Amazing Spider-Man 2…
@Green_vs_Red:
I liked Amazing Spider-Man 2 though yeah it wasn't necessary to have Harry become the Green Goblin and fight Peter at the end of the movie …....or kill off Gwen, which lead to that weird transition in the last few minutes.
I can't express how grateful I am to see someone else on here defend Amazing Spider-Man 2 despite it's many flaws. Seriously, it's a relief.
! Like Md-Martin said, Sony should have listened to all of Feige's advice because he had both spot on critiques and praises (he also actually liked Electro, which I don't see anyone ever talk about). Yes, its ending is rushed to oblivion and it's a mess of a film when viewed as a whole two and half hour experience and deserves a lot of its criticism. Although I think some of the complaints tend to be overblown nitpicks that most people wouldn't fuss about in more popular superhero films.
! But there are individual parts within Amazing Spider-Man 2 that I really liked and wish were allowed to be fleshed out more by dividing the story across two movies and completely cutting out the mystery about Peter's parents. The web swinging, crime fighting, and bits of Spider-Man helping out New Yorkers and kids in the intro to the film are really charming. And I liked Electro a lot, aside from the couple cheesy bits pre-transformation where they make him look cartoonishly crazy (but it's not like Spider-Man 1's Green Goblin was any better).
! Even the final fight with Gobby and Gwen's death, as ugly as its Green Goblin design is and how shoehorned they are in climax of the film right after beating Electro, that final fight still has really compelling tension, music, and action choreography. Especially the action choreography. If there's one thing I could absolutely care less for in the MCU Spider-Man films, it's how mediocre the action choreography and web-swinging are portrayed and made almost entirely in CGI compared to all the other Spider-Man films. In a better film focused exclusively on Harry's descent into madness, it could have been the best finale out of all the Spider-Man films.
Criticize the Amazing films as much as you want, but at least the Spider-Man in those two films is actually funny like he's supposed to be.
Then there's the MCU Spider-Man films where… I don't like anything besides the villains, including Peter Parker himself, until the third act. MCU Peter messes up everything so badly all the time until just barely scraping by with success in the final battle of both films that I only want him to quit being a hero instead of becoming a better one. Spider-Verse does a flawed beginner Spider-Man character living up to a mentor's expectations arc dozens of times better, and it only needed one film with a runtime less than two hours too.
Tom Holland's Spider-Man in the proximity of the entire MCU is like the comedic relief main character in a shonen action series, but the story pretends he develops into a competent superhero without doing the legwork to show him learn and improve, unlike Usopp in One Piece and Kanchome/Folgore in Zatch Bell.
@BattleFranky69:
I still felt Spider-Man 2 was too cliche and they spent way too much time focusing on 'Spider-Man is broke AF'.
But mundane conflicts like money problems are essential to making Spider-Man, well, Spider-Man. They're a notable part of what makes him unique among the Marvel universe, and superhero comics as a whole. And would easily enhanced the MCU's variety when juxtaposed with how every other superhero is basically a celebrity, billionaire, monarch, or commissioned agent of justice with near infinite resources to fall back on. Out of all the things to criticize about Spider-Man movies, that's what you're homing in on?
It's always funny to me to see people praise seeing Spider-Man in a shared universe when a big part of early Spider-Man crossovers in the comics (going back as far as Spider-Man meeting the Fantastic Four in Amazing Spider-Man #1) is him trying to join superhero teams because he thinks it'll help him improve his public reception and earn a living wage to support himself and Aunt May through superhero work. Those are relatable motivations that set him apart from other superheroes to this day. And make excellent comedic material for moments like this:
!
! It's not the first time he joined the Avengers here but it still says everything you need to know about the character. And Peter joining the Avengers in Infinity War was just as anticlimactic.
While I understand the desire to create a different take on the character and potential in focusing on a superhero living up to the A-listers, I find stuff like money problems much more compelling and relatable than Peter trying to earn a billionaire's approval or struggling with inheriting interstellar drone strike AI glasses. A better pick for that type of superhero-fan-in-training niche would have been Ms. Marvel.
And what exactly was cliche about Spider-Man 2? The only thing I can point out off the top of my head is hiding his secret identity from a love interest. And maybe Harry misunderstanding how his father died because Peter wants to maintain his secret identity, because contrived drama.
But everything else aside from them? Spider-Man 2 would still be a very unconventional film under today's superhero genre standards. Dealing with money issues, being criticized by news outlets, trying not to fail college because of poor attendance, talking with ordinary New Yorkers, saving people from fires, struggling with depression to the point it negative affects your superpowers, giving up your superhero identity to focus on maintaining civilian life, and ultimately redeeming the supervillain of the month are all still unique superhero story elements that I haven't seen done in any modern superhero film this past decade. Iron Man 3 came close with Tony's PTSD and blowing up his suits at the end of the film, but the consequences of those things weren't explored enough to feel impactful before inevitably donning the suit again.
Superheroes having secret identities are all but extinct nowadays, and while there are a bunch of tired out tropes I'm glad we don't see from that anymore, there are some characters that benefit more from having one than without one.
Spider-Man 2 definitely isn't a perfect movie. But very few superhero films are even truly great, although Spider-Verse comes super freaking close. I feel like a lot of the criticism towards Spider-Man 2 nowadays comes from people vaguely remembering watching it as a kid and comparing it to recent movies fresh on the mind under the assumption they've only gotten better, and watching cheesy out of context clips of Tobey crying or screaming online. If you watched it recently and you dislike it, I can respect that, but provide criticism that is consistent and backed up.
I used to think Spider-Man 2 was outdated for a few a decade or so too until I watched all the Spider-Man films back-to-back a year ago to prepare for watching Far from Home. And I was blown away by how much more heartfelt, sincere, and funny it is compared to the MCU. The humor especially, there's actually a lot of great slapstick and visual comedy gold in Spider-Man 2 that still stands the test of time compared to the Avengers namedropping Spongebob characters and the Beatles.
I think Spidey's connection to the MCU is the most important aspect because of all the tie-ins whatnot so it behooves Sony to let Marvel be the thing whispering in their ear and doing course-correction. I'm still against them having started Peter Parker out in high school instead of college because he's literally the only hero with a secret identity to protect and a freakin' curfew which is not a compelling distraction from his duties. There are so many other things he could be dealing with that provide filler for his time outside of costume but we get the same one we got twice before and it hasn't fixed the underlying issue.
That's what makes him different and interesting though. Why do we want more of the same superheroes with no social constraints besides being super? I would have enjoyed MCU movies like, say, Ant-Man and the Wasp a lot more if it focused on Scott's parental struggles and being an ex-convict instead of watered down humor most of the time.
Now, I would prefer not keeping Peter in high school for an entire movie trilogy (both the Raimi and Webb films got high school over with in the first or second film). But even if he got to college sooner he'll have to deal with issues like attending classes, dealing with college professors potentially being supervillains, working on his college thesis, and deciding on his future profession (which I would prefer being a teacher since that's a relatable working class underdog job, but Spider-Man stories lean heavily into him being an inventor nowadays).
Otherwise there's no point to making him a student besides setting window dressing.
Not that Spider-Man doesn't work as an adult living on his own with a job, that's literally Spider-Man 2. But you miss out on a lot of internal conflict, character growth, and supporting cast potential by completely skipping the high school years. Hence why Spectacular Spider-Man and Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse are such beloved takes on Spider-Man despite taking place entirely in high school as per the usual Spider-Man adaptation. Theoretically you could possibly have Harry Osborn, MJ, Gwen Stacy, and Flash Thompson be college classmates instead, but they would need to be somewhat reinvented since their tropes and roles are very rooted in high school specifically.
I don't mean to be a jerk, but I struggle to understand how you criticize both having Peter as an adult with money problems and a high school student with domestic problems. That's like saying Spider-Man should be all about the power with zero responsibility. That sequence in Homecoming where Peter learns Toomes is Vulture and Toomes learns Peter is Spider-Man is arguably the best part of the movie, but you can't have twists seeped in suspense like that if you don't focus on the high school problems and skip it entirely. Hence why scenes like these get to be so impactful thanks to the high school drama buildup:
Spider-Man having a curfew isn't just a distraction from the super cool hero work, it's an insight into his relationship with Aunt May and the drama of living with your caretaker after being indirectly responsible for them becoming a widow. Which plants the seeds for big moments like these:
!
!
Those scenes wouldn't be possible or impactful if we didn't focus on Peter's school and home life with Aunt May. Peter needs to be in high school for at least a little while because that's where he gets his supporting cast. They gave Peter relationships. Drama. Lessons. Stakes. They help flesh out New York to feel like a character of its own that deserves to be protected by Spider-Man. They define his stories as much as the powers, costume, and villains do.
Without them… he's just Iron Man. If I wanted to watch Iron Man, I'd watch Iron Man. Only 1 and 3 though.
As much as I like to rag on MCU Spider-Man films, taking place in high school for the third time isn't one of my fundamental issues with them. There are a bunch of ways to play out his high school life that hasn't been often done before, a la Spectacular Spider-Man (which is the most faithful Lee/Ditko-inspired adaptation). Instead, my grievances are how the MCU movies barely characterize any of Peter's supporting cast aside from maybe MJ outside of forgettable gags that either make them a joke or a jerk with little-to-no depth. And how the comedy is emphasized more than the drama in both Homecoming and Far from Home until the third acts where they finally feel like Spider-Man stories instead of teenage Iron Man (not to be confused with the actual teenage Iron Man story, Iron Man: Armored Adventures, which is a pretty underrated cartoon).
Spider-Man, across every adaptation except maybe the MCU, is a drama first, a comedy second, and a tragedy from time to time but not relentlessly gritty. And if a writer wants to focus on the comedy, at least have it be relatable/character-driven instead of accidentally ordering a drone strike on your tour bus because your romantic rival walked in on you changing clothes with a female secret agent and misunderstood the situation enough to take a picture so as to show it to said love intere-Seriously, what in God's name even was that freaking scene?
How did we get a point where people think Spider-Man crossing over with other heroes is more essential to his stories than being an everyman protagonist? Aside from rebooting a movie franchise twice, I mean.
Let me know when it's time to roast a superhero movie franchise that's actually cliche, overrated, dated, and worth picking apart. Like all the live-action Batman movies outside of Heath Ledger's Joker performance.