Discussion in 'Community' started by Spiderfan, May 20, 2008.
yeah that was the big issues on his mind at the end of Civil War.
Yeah. On the ferry, the suit helped him see Toomes before he got his costume. However, I believe Pete only thought he was one of the dealers.
I'm not sure if he realized Toomes was the Vulture, when he showed up to take Liz.
He saw Toomes become the Vulture by the cars on the lower level of the ferry.
While there isn't quite an stated response to the Avengers actions after Civil War and how the team is doing, Tony's somewhat overbearing attitude about control (which goes from The Avengers to Iron Man 3 to Age of Ultron to Civil War) are still around, pretty much with him being able to constantly monitor Peter, putting the spidey suit in "training wheels mode", and him stripping Peter of his suit after the Ferry debacle. He does want Spider-Man in the Avengers but doesn't think he's ready until by the end, he thinks he is, but Pete sticks to being the "friendly neighborhood Spider-Man".
As for the rest of the Avengers, there's a big "moving day" from Stark Tower and Happy is loading up items belonging to Thor and Cap (Cap dropped the shield in Civil War and it was mentioned in the inventory by Happy)
IIRC, Happy mentioned a new prototype of Cap's shield, so it probably wasn't the one he dropped in CW.
The Amazing Spider-Man 3 and Sinister Six details surface
I didn't think this was new news since it was talked about years ago, like in this video regarding Norman's frozen head:
Saw the movie again 2 weeks ago, still pretty awesome. It's global total is at 739 million and it needs less than 20 million to pass "The Amazing Spider-Man" globally. Also of note is that 750 million benchmark, Marvel gets to keep some money. There's a Wall Street Journal article that is probably the most in-depth about how the deal went down and I did notice this bit:
No money changed hands under the deal. The only tweak to the prior arrangement was that in exchange for its producing services, Marvel gets to reduce the $35 million it would owe on “Homecoming” if the movie grosses more than $750 million, said people with knowledge of the arrangement.
Just got back from the movie and I liked it on the whole, though it's certainly not a great Marvel movie or anywhere near the best Spider-Man movie. Holland is great, though really everyone is. The Washington Monument sequence was the best; it was genuinely vertiginous and my heart was in my throat the whole time.
But I have a question I'd like some input on. I'm not at all sure how I feel about the Keaton character. I liked the way the movie set Toomes up and how he is, for a large part of the movie, portrayed as kind of working-class. It, without overdoing it, makes him a little man crushed by the system and the idea that he's doing what he's doing because he has to take care of his family make him empathetic. But then when we do finally see his home life, he lives in an incredibly large, luxurious home and drives a fancy sports car. After that, he makes a speech that kind of makes everything explicit about how he's standing up against the big man, the wealthy people like Tony. I'm honestly not sure if this is horrible writing or great writing. On the one hand, it feels like the movie has no idea how working-class people live; on the other hand, maybe this is character work and the hypocrisy is part of the character and the working-class anger thing is just BS. After all, after he makes that speech, he does eventually reveal that he only did it to stall Peter. But that seems like really complex character work for this movie, frankly, which isn't particularly deep on any of the character arcs. If it is intentional character work, it would make Toomes by far the most complicated character in the film. So, thoughts? Is Toomes' whole working class thing just an act on the part of the character? Or does this movie really not get the way people in desperate financial straights actually live?
I think Toomes just simply climbed from working class to upper middle class very fast, due to the money he earned from his illegal business, and he knows how fragile his gains are. And while he could definitely afford a nice upper-class house in NYC suburbs, that's not nearly the same level of income as Bill Gates or Tony Stark.
that's what made him a little more complicate of a character. you could understand how he felt, but at the same time he took it to an extreme and rationalized crime.
He's a working class guy who's gotten rich through crime, but that doesn't change the way he feels. He still identifies himself as a working-class guy who's had to fight to make it. His character is informed by the fiftysomething years he spent working-class, moreso than the five years or so he's spent getting reasonably well-to-do off the black market. He's not scrabbling to get by anymore but he still feels that way -- he might have a nicer car and a nicer house, but he's still got car payments and house payments and he still feels kept down by the fact that he has to operate on the black market because he's not allowed to profit off his work legally. The character really, really worked for me.
Yeah I see it as he's still "working class" at heart and even though he has a freakin' flying Vulture suit, he's probably still burning through cash to live a life of extravagance and to keep his family happy. He's a bad guy, he's gonna burn through capital and probably wouldn't sock it away. which is why he's so desperate for the One Big Score.
I like everything Keaton does in the movie, actually, I noticed this bit when he's talking to Peter and Liz on the car ride and Peter says something Toomes goes "Huh" but it actually sounds more like a bird squeak. Or a vulture squeak. It's pretty great, early on in the scene. May be my favourite thing he does all flick.
In the comics, is Spiderman usually depicted as using artificial web shooters, or just shooting them out of his wrists?
Only the Sam Raimi movies, and a brief change in the comics to accommodate those movies (which was soon gotten rid of), have organic webshooters.
Okay, so I'm getting the vibe that the complexity and hypocrisy is actually written into the character, which is what I was hoping but I just wasn't quite sure. A second watch would probably help me on really getting the character more. But I buy what you guys are saying and I'm on board. I like the character a lot then.
I'm debating giving this movie 5 stars and adding it to the Sig List. I can't find any criticisms with it at all, and I genuinely enjoyed it from start to finish. The only thing I can harp about is the bland soundtrack, but that didn't detract from the experience whatsoever. It has a superior third act to Wonder Woman's unintentional (smashing!) hilarity.
From the start, it was the mechanical web shooters with the webbing being an adhesive that Peter developed on his own.
As noted, Peter did have organic webbing which debuted in 2004's, "The Other: Evolve Or Die!", where Peter undergoes a transformation where he becomes more spider like, but still looks human.
This was undone in 2007's "One More Day". The change to organic webbing was due to parity with the film, but in the films it was due to Raimi thinking that, "In the comics, Peter Parker designed and made Spider-Man's synthetic spider web and the mechanical wrist guns that fire it. In the movie he shoots the web from his own body. Director Sam Raimi answered the protests of comic book fans saying that it was more credible to have Peter shoot web this way than for a high school boy to be able to produce a wonder adhesive in his spare time that 3M could not make."
This according to IMDB.
Originally the organic webshooters popped up in James Cameron's "scriptment" for Spider-Man, probably carried through various drafts to Raimi's movie. (and apparently were in a draft even before his!)
Erm... uh huh.
Organic web makes sense. That the bite would "Genetically" impart him a specific chemical formula in his head and the high-integrity, replicable production process to make it is completely stupid. This was an improvement on the original franchise.
Yeah, the organic web shooters make more sense to me as well. I'm pretty surprised to be finding out that it wasn't part of the character's original backstory.
What are you talking about?
Yeah I remember reading one time that it's physically impossibly for Peter to produce as much natural webbing as he does in the Raimi movies unless he eats exponentially more food than a regular human. Could have been blatant internet wrongness, but it makes somewhat sense to me.
Didn't have anything to do with the spider bite...
Then that's even more stupid. He has an incomplete high school education and just invented this using off the shelf amateur equipment? Why is this even a story? He could have sold the substance, been a millionaire (if not billionaire) and never worried about finances or his family or future again. This implies a level of genius not even seen in humans. It makes the character more fundamentally unrelatable than that naked member of the Blue Man Group from that idiotic Zack Snyder film. Game of Thrones is a masterpiece of plotting compared to this utter drivel. Voting for Donald Trump made more sense.
I don't ever want to hear a complaint about Raimi's lack of realism again. Literally every part, including the emo dance sequence, was more realistic than this. All of it. Thank you for this reminder of the worst things about comic books. Ye gods.
Is someone going to defend this?
The ASM films went into it deeper with the angle that Peter was modifying or repurposing an existing substance and his high school had a particular science focus (thus internships at Oscorp, etc).
In the comics and MCU, he's just really good at science (or, at least, chemistry) and has above average intelligence in that regard.