Spider-Man: Far From Home (2019)

Started by Silver Nemesis, Tue, 2 Oct 2018, 19:49

Previous topic - Next topic
Quote from: Edd Grayson on Sat, 22 Jun  2019, 01:30
I agree with you both.

Peter Parker in highschool actually takes up quite a tiny part of the original Amazing Spider-Man comics, and even in those issues, the main focus is still on Peter Parker as Spider-Man and how it affects his ordinary life, not on highschool.

I have an even bigger problem with discarding Uncle Ben and more importantly, the lesson Peter learned from his death, in Homecoming. I know we've seen the origin story before in two films not that long ago, but even so, ignoring Ben completely is not the way to go for me. It seemed that Spider-Man in this incarnation wanted to be a superhero, particularly an Avenger, just because he thought they were so cool and it's fun, and that's it.
I read the Lee/Ditko run on Amazing and I can't help thinking that version of Spider-Man would have been kind of suspicious if he had been invited to join the Avengers. He probably would have rejected it because he thought it might be a trap or something. I certainly can't picture him campaigning for a spot on the team. The Lee/Romita era, yeah, maybe. But early days Spidey, no way.

Quote from: Edd Grayson on Sat, 22 Jun  2019, 01:30
Anyway, under these circumstances, I have little interest in "Far From Home", except maybe for seeing Mysterio, which is sad.

I'm not a MCU follower or supporter so the shared universe aspect of the Holland films automatically turns me off. I much prefer the self contained nature of Raimi and Webb. But that aside, the new direction genuinely rubs me the wrong way. For starters, Far From Home doubles down on outright substituting Uncle Ben with Tony Stark, which is a big no no for me. Colors nailed it on page one of this thread - 'old ground' from prior films is discarded at the expense of the character's soul. For all the talk of Marvel 'fixing' Spider-Man and toppling Spider-Man 2, they have come up very short indeed.

Good post, Edd.

Quote from: Edd Grayson on Sat, 22 Jun  2019, 01:30
I have an even bigger problem with discarding Uncle Ben and more importantly, the lesson Peter learned from his death, in Homecoming. I know we've seen the origin story before in two films not that long ago, but even so, ignoring Ben completely is not the way to go for me. It seemed that Spider-Man in this incarnation wanted to be a superhero, particularly an Avenger, just because he thought they were so cool and it's fun, and that's it

RE: Uncle Ben, I've seen people praise Homecoming as an example in how you don't need to "retread old ground" - as they say - and use it as an example to throw shade at BvS for exploring the Wayne murders scene because "we've seen it too many times". Which I find absolutely laughable. Not only do these dumb detractors ignore how the Wayne murders backstory tie into Batman's character arc they love to mock so much, they completely miss the point about Peter Parker as a character. Apparently, the "great power comes great responsibility" theme doesn't really resonate with these people so much after all.

For me, his desire to becoming an Avenger in the first place completely undoes the conflict in Civil War. Not only does he have no idea what the conflict was even about, which ruins Tony Stark as a character too, it goes to show the entire ordeal over the Sokovia Accords was a complete and utter waste of time. What I thought was going to develop into deeply, troubling ramifications on all heroes going forward into the MCU, ended up feeling like a red herring. And Peter Parker was just dumbed down for laughs, and looked up to Tony Stark as his father figure/benefactor. That in particular reminds me of my complaints over the Bondification of Batman in the Nolan era.
QuoteJonathan Nolan: He [Batman] has this one rule, as the Joker says in The Dark Knight. But he does wind up breaking it. Does he break it in the third film?

Christopher Nolan: He breaks it in...

Jonathan Nolan: ...the first two.

Source: http://books.google.com.au/books?id=uwV8rddtKRgC&pg=PR8&dq=But+he+does+wind+up+breaking+it.&hl=en&sa=X&ei

Lee Bermejo uploaded a picture he drew of Spider-Man, just to throw shade at the MCU version.

Quote from: Lee Bermejo
SPIDER-MAN. Real spider-men don't let their movie versions get a costume from Iron Man. They make it themselves at their Aunt's place in queens.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BzQKEHzCh_Z/?hl=en

Of course, I've seen some fans argue Peter making his cheap homemade suit means he hasn't completely loss touch of his own independence. But I think they're missing Bermejo's point here.
QuoteJonathan Nolan: He [Batman] has this one rule, as the Joker says in The Dark Knight. But he does wind up breaking it. Does he break it in the third film?

Christopher Nolan: He breaks it in...

Jonathan Nolan: ...the first two.

Source: http://books.google.com.au/books?id=uwV8rddtKRgC&pg=PR8&dq=But+he+does+wind+up+breaking+it.&hl=en&sa=X&ei

Quote from: The Laughing Fish on Sat, 29 Jun  2019, 23:33
Lee Bermejo uploaded a picture he drew of Spider-Man, just to throw shade at the MCU version.

Quote from: Lee Bermejo
SPIDER-MAN. Real spider-men don't let their movie versions get a costume from Iron Man. They make it themselves at their Aunt's place in queens.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BzQKEHzCh_Z/?hl=en

Of course, I've seen some fans argue Peter making his cheap homemade suit means he hasn't completely loss touch of his own independence. But I think they're missing Bermejo's point here.

Holy crap! Did Lee Bermejo buck the MCU's take on Spider-Man?!? Say it ain't so.  ;D

Don't know much about Lee, but indeed, TLF, the man definitely has a point!
"Imagination is a quality given a man to compensate him for what he is not, and a sense of humour was provided to console him for what he is."

Sat, 6 Jul 2019, 18:43 #25 Last Edit: Sat, 6 Jul 2019, 18:48 by Silver Nemesis
Here are my thoughts on Far From Home. As usual, SPOILERS in white.

To summarise my opinion on Homecoming, I liked Holland's performance, the villains, and the fact the movie was carving its own identity without retreading the earlier films. I didn't like the hi-tech suit, the teenage supporting characters, or the way Aunt May's guidance and Uncle Ben's death were downplayed/rendered obsolete by the inclusion of Happy Hogan and Tony Stark. I also thought Homecoming was lacking in style and that the score was bland and forgettable. But overall, it was all right.

I feel almost exactly the same way about Far From Home. The high school comedy aspect fell flat for me, perhaps even more so than it did in Homecoming. I saw FFH in a packed theatre (an experience which was unfortunately ruined by a group of 12-year-old yobs sat next to me who wouldn't shut up or stop play fighting for the entire film), and there was little to no laughter from the audience. Almost every joke failed to land and not one of them elicited the sort of response I heard when I went to see John Wick 3 earlier this year (which is a much better movie than FFH). If you're going to place such a strong emphasis on humour, it has to be good. And both Homecoming and FFH simply aren't as funny as they need to be. But that's obviously an extremely subjective thing, and others will feel differently on the matter. There was only one gag that made me smile in FFH, and that was Peter's "I love Led Zeppelin" line. Other than that, the jokes left me cold.

I'm still not enamoured with the supporting characters. Ned's ok, and M.J. was less unlikeable this time around. But Aunt May continues to be redundant, and they still haven't referenced Uncle Ben. In the comics, Ben's death is the defining event in Peter's life that calibrates his moral compass and teaches him to be responsible, but we're now five movies in to the MCU Spider-Man's career and it still hasn't even been mentioned. The music and visuals are acceptable, but not particularly memorable. Same goes for the action. The film also has the same problem all the other MCU trilogies do, insofar as you have to have seen the Avengers movies that take place in between the solo films in order to fully understand what's going on. I'm still not a fan of the hi-tech costumes either, and Pete goes through four of them this time around (five if you count the original suit he wears during one of Mysterio's illusions).

So those are the negatives out of the way. Moving on to the positives.

Gyllenhaal's good as Mysterio. His performance here reminded me a little of his excellent turn in Nightcrawler (2014). I don't think he was quite as good as Keaton's Vulture, and certainly not as good as Raimi's take on Green Goblin or Doc Ock, but he's still a strong villain. They did a good job adapting his classic MO from the comics for the modern age while still making him a credible threat. I liked seeing Spider-Man outside of New York for a change and the film gets decent mileage out of its varied locations. We also finally get to see him swinging amongst the tall buildings of Manhattan towards the end of the film, which I've always thought of as his natural habitat. The set pieces are what you'd expect from a Spider-Man film, though they do rise above mediocrity during the sequences involving Mysterio's holographic illusions. One of these in particular, which occurs about halfway through the film, was really excellent and provides a great template for how I'd like Scarecrow's fear toxin effects to be handled in future Batman films.

The plot has a couple of very predictable twists which I saw coming from a mile away, and the fact Peter doesn't spot these threats reflects poorly on his intelligence. But overall, the story isn't bad and manages to avoid repeating things from the earlier films. While the high school road trip angle dominates the first half of the film, the plot takes a more dramatic turn in the second half. I'm hoping this portends a more dramatic final entry in the trilogy. The mid-credit scene would certainly seem to indicate this, where (SPOILERS) Spider-Man's secret identity is revealed on television by J. Jonah Jameson. (END SPOILERS). This scene is interesting in terms of how it positions the characters for the final film in the trilogy, but more so because it marks the first time an actor from a pre-MCU Marvel film has reprised their role in an MCU production. If you're not planning on seeing the film and you want to know who that person is, (SPOILERS) J. K. Simmons is back as Jameson. (END SPOILERS) This is pretty cool and makes me wonder if there's hope for Wesley Snipes to make a return as Blade.

To conclude, the film is all right. Admittedly my viewing experience was ruined by the kids sat next to me, so maybe I'll enjoy it more when I see it again on DVD. I'd rate this one as more or less on a par with Homecoming. If you loved Homecoming, you'll like Far From Home. If you didn't like Homecoming, I'd recommend seeing Todd Douglas Miller's Apollo 11 instead. Now that's a great film, and one well worth seeing in IMAX.

I found this online, sums up the MCU Spider-Man very well.

QuoteJonathan Nolan: He [Batman] has this one rule, as the Joker says in The Dark Knight. But he does wind up breaking it. Does he break it in the third film?

Christopher Nolan: He breaks it in...

Jonathan Nolan: ...the first two.

Source: http://books.google.com.au/books?id=uwV8rddtKRgC&pg=PR8&dq=But+he+does+wind+up+breaking+it.&hl=en&sa=X&ei

Quote from: The Laughing Fish on Sat, 22 Jun  2019, 08:05RE: Uncle Ben, I've seen people praise Homecoming as an example in how you don't need to "retread old ground" - as they say - and use it as an example to throw shade at BvS for exploring the Wayne murders scene because "we've seen it too many times". Which I find absolutely laughable. Not only do these dumb detractors ignore how the Wayne murders backstory tie into Batman's character arc they love to mock so much, they completely miss the point about Peter Parker as a character. Apparently, the "great power comes great responsibility" theme doesn't really resonate with these people so much after all.

For me, his desire to becoming an Avenger in the first place completely undoes the conflict in Civil War. Not only does he have no idea what the conflict was even about, which ruins Tony Stark as a character too, it goes to show the entire ordeal over the Sokovia Accords was a complete and utter waste of time. What I thought was going to develop into deeply, troubling ramifications on all heroes going forward into the MCU, ended up feeling like a red herring. And Peter Parker was just dumbed down for laughs, and looked up to Tony Stark as his father figure/benefactor. That in particular reminds me of my complaints over the Bondification of Batman in the Nolan era.
What's dumb about that? They can know that and not like it. And the movie can show the Wayne murders, but not do it in slow mo with every detail being emphasized. I think using it for a plot point and not showing it like that can both be done. I wouldn't say the theme is absent from the character as is in MCU's.

It wasn't a waste of time. This conflict is the building point of the movie that builds to the end and is one of reasons the Avengers weren't together in IW with the fight against Thanos. I wouldn't say it ruins Tony's character. That I think had been done in AOU/A1 more than CW. And I don't think it dumbs Peter down that much. Though he's far from the main character and I think is barely a cameo, so to me, it's not a huge issue. Irregardless of the situation, Peter's more or less going after someone under the essential deputization by Tony whose working for the government.



What a pity.
"Imagination is a quality given a man to compensate him for what he is not, and a sense of humour was provided to console him for what he is."