Quiver Posted March 29, 2017 Report Share Posted March 29, 2017 Marvel dropped the new trailer for Spider-Man: Homecoming. Personally, the trailer alone is setting up Peter to be the next-gen Tony Stark, which I love. There's Tony's line about how he wants Peter "to be better", obviously, but also... The line about the suit? "If you're nothing without the suit, you shouldn't have it". That sentiment seems to echo Tony's throughline for his movies, the way that, at the end of Iron Man 3, he decided that, suit or no, "I am Iron Man." It's interesting to see how the character has changed and evolved his philosophy over the years, even more so when we are seeing him interacting with a kid who idolises and looks up to him. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkness Ascendant Posted March 29, 2017 Report Share Posted March 29, 2017 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delightful Posted March 29, 2017 Report Share Posted March 29, 2017 I like that it's not another identical Spider-Man backstory, it's a how do I fit in this universe story. Homecoming as in the dance? because there was a poster. And im wondering if we'll get another avenger cameo. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Modal Seoul Posted March 29, 2017 Report Share Posted March 29, 2017 Tony's a jerk, and he doesn't deserve his suits, because he is nothing without his suit. Vulture!!!!!! SHOCKER!!!!!!!!!!!! @Delightful Captain America. (Yes that does count as a cameo.) I really like this. Uncle Ben has been shot enough already. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delightful Posted March 29, 2017 Report Share Posted March 29, 2017 35 minutes ago, Captains Domon said: Tony's a jerk, and he doesn't deserve his suits, because he is nothing without his suit. Vulture!!!!!! SHOCKER!!!!!!!!!!!! @Delightful Captain America. (Yes that does count as a cameo.) I really like this. Uncle Ben has been shot enough already. Ok fair. "I stole his shield!" This smaller picture stuff does make me really want them to cameo agents of shield, inhumans, something about the smaller plot lines established in universe. Unlikely but I can hope. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erandeni Posted March 29, 2017 Report Share Posted March 29, 2017 My thoughts of the trailer: Too much Tony, I can't stand him anymore, btw he shouldn't say those thing about being nothing without the suit. I really like this spiderman's behaviour. His low cost suit seems very similar to the Scarlet Spider´s suit (Ben Reilly) but with inverted colours. Is just me or the trailer pretty much shows like all the movie? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiver Posted March 29, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 29, 2017 33 minutes ago, Idealistic Mistborn said: Too much Tony, I can't stand him anymore, btw he shouldn't say those thing about being nothing without the suit. His low cost suit seems very similar to the Scarlet Spider´s suit (Ben Reilly) but with inverted colours. As a Scarlet Spider fan, I'm surprised I didn't notice the hoodie similarity, but now that you point it out... Anyway, I interpreted that line differently from you. I think what Tony is trying to say is that Peter doesn't need a suit to be a hero. My guess/assumption is that he thinks that having that tech is giving Peter ideas and he's aiming "too much, too fast"; webbing up the boat is certainly a step above anything we've seen this Peter attempt before. So, taking the suit away, he's stirpping Peter back to basics, and hoping that will make him focus on being a "friendly neighbourhood Spider-Man", rather than a wannabe Avenger. It'll backfire horribly, since the trailer shows that, high tech suit or no Peter is still gonna challenge the Vulture (and not having the suits tech is a handicap)... but Tony, even well-intentioned, well-meaning mentor Tony, still screws up sometimes. Side not: has Peter signed to Sokovia Accords? That seems like it would be a big deal. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erandeni Posted March 29, 2017 Report Share Posted March 29, 2017 17 minutes ago, Quiver said: Anyway, I interpreted that line differently from you. I think what Tony is trying to say is that Peter doesn't need a suit to be a hero. My guess/assumption is that he thinks that having that tech is giving Peter ideas and he's aiming "too much, too fast"; webbing up the boat is certainly a step above anything we've seen this Peter attempt before. So, taking the suit away, he's stirpping Peter back to basics, and hoping that will make him focus on being a "friendly neighbourhood Spider-Man", rather than a wannabe Avenger. Your interpretation make Tony seemes less like a jerk, Hope you are right 18 minutes ago, Quiver said: Side not: has Peter signed to Sokovia Accords? That seems like it would be a big deal. They made a big deal with the Accords, I would be disappointed if, at least, they don't said something about that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiver Posted March 29, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 29, 2017 4 minutes ago, Idealistic Mistborn said: They made a big deal with the Accords, I would be disappointed if, at least, they don't said something about that. Honestly, the reason I ask is because Spider-Man is in a pretty unique position amongst the Marvel characters in that he actually has a secret identity. Okay, Daredevil does too... but Daredevil didn't side with Iron Man, and no one has come knocking on his door yet. So, right now, Peter is the only unknown person who is in the public spotlight; the government knows who Steve Rogers is, they know who Tony Stark is, they know Natasha Romanoff, Bruce Banner, Thor Odinson... Do they know who Spider-Man is? Has Tony used his (presumably considerable) amount of influence with the Accords to convince them not to pursue Spider-Man? Does the government even know that Tony Stark is liasing with Spider-Man? Presumably he was still at the airport when officals arrived to arrest Hawkeye and the others in Civil War, and Tony would have had to have said something along the lines of "No, it's cool, he's with me," but... Yeah. Did Spider-Man sign his name as Spider-Man? If he considered exempt from the Accords as a result of his age? This stuff is genuinely bothering me, because Peter unmasking himself was a huge part of the original Civil War comic, but that's obviously something that couldn't be translated over to this version yet, so... what's the deal? (Also, I wonder whether or not Marvel's plan IS to use Spider-Man as the new face of the MCU and have him replace Tony. The Tony-as-Mentor plot would certainly lean in that direction, and Peter has, traditionally, always been I]the[/I] face of Marvel, even when his film rights were owned by other studios. As much as I'd love to see Marvel ge ttheir hands on and fix the train wreck that is the Fantastic Four movie franchise... Spider-Man was the crown jewel they needed back. The only guys whose rights they could need almost-as-much as Peters would be the X-Men.) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jondesu Posted March 30, 2017 Report Share Posted March 30, 2017 5 hours ago, Idealistic Mistborn said: Too much Tony, I can't stand him anymore, btw he shouldn't say those thing about being nothing without the suit. Actually, Tony's in the best position of anyone to say something like that. He's been there, he's worn the suit but been a chull. He knows better than most what it's like to have power but not know how to control yourself. And as he says in the trailer, he wants Peter to be better than him. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkness Ascendant Posted March 30, 2017 Report Share Posted March 30, 2017 @Captains Domon Bro, did you watch Iron Man 3? Basically, Tony learnt that without his suit, he was nothing, then went on to prove that wrong. Learning that the suit isn't what made him the hero, it was who he was that was the hero. Understand before critique boiii. 17 hours ago, Delightful said: I like that it's not another identical Spider-Man backstory, it's a how do I fit in this universe story. Homecoming as in the dance? because there was a poster. And im wondering if we'll get another avenger cameo. Uurfh, I really hate how they pulled so much from Miles Morales spiderman. Really crushes the hopes of an african american spiderman. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erandeni Posted March 30, 2017 Report Share Posted March 30, 2017 10 hours ago, Quiver said: Do they know who Spider-Man is? Has Tony used his (presumably considerable) amount of influence with the Accords to convince them not to pursue Spider-Man? I hope not, would be pretty weird, i mean, you don't fight your mate because the Accords and then begin to make exceptions, although if the goverment knows that a teenager is going around, putting himself in danger would be weird too, maybe Tony convinced them that Peter is kind of working to him or something like that. 10 hours ago, Quiver said: I wonder whether or not Marvel's plan IS to use Spider-Man as the new face of the MCU and have him replace Tony. The Tony-as-Mentor plot would certainly lean in that direction, and Peter has, traditionally, always been I]the[/I] face of Marvel, even when his film rights were owned by other studios. I hadn't thought about that, but if that's the plan the it would improve the mentor-Tony thing, I didn't like it at first, but if that's the plan then it may be pretty great. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Modal Seoul Posted March 30, 2017 Report Share Posted March 30, 2017 (edited) @Darkness Ascendant I did see Iron Man 3, but I didn't take it seriously enough because I was too busy being angry about the fact that they removed the FLIPPIN METAL SHRAPNEL FROM HIS CHEST WHEN IT IS PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO DO SO!!?? WHY WASN'T THE HULK THERE?! BEN KINGSLEY WAS PERFECT FOR THE MANDARIN AND MARVEL MADE HIM A 65 YEAR OLD DRUGGIE WITH ISSUES!!! INSTEAD, WE SAW TONY DUKE IT OUT WITH A STUPID IDIOT WHO DOESN'T KNOW THE MEANING OF "ATTACK PLAN". THEN ALGERNON-OR WHATEVER HIS FREAKING NAME IS GOT HIS BUTT WHUPPED BY FREAKING PEPPER!!! PEPPER!!!! PEPPER!!! SERIOUSLY, IF IRON MAN 3 WANTED TO BE GOOD, THEN THEY WOULD'VE STUCK TO THE ORIGINAL COMIC STORYLINE!!! ALSO, NO AC/DC!? SHANE BLACK, YOU TOOK AWAY THE ONE THING THAT MADE THE IRON MAN MOVIES UNIQUE, WHICH IS WHY THIS ONE FEELS OUT OF PLACE WHEN YOU WATCH IT IN A TRILOGY MARATHON!!! (As an aside, Ben Kingsley was a little bit funny. But only a little.) That is the end of my rant. Continue talking about Spider-Man: Homecoming. Darkness, my boi, I do understand in my way. I do. Edited March 30, 2017 by Captains Domon 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkness Ascendant Posted March 30, 2017 Report Share Posted March 30, 2017 haha @Captains Domon I never said it was a good movie, what I was trying to say was that Tony learnt the lesson "the hard way" and is in turn, "educating" Peter, 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiver Posted March 30, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2017 ...And in the space of a day, I go from hyped for this film, to dreading it's existence. >sigh< Legal drama in-coming: So, obviously, the main difference and draw of this Spider-Man is that he exits within the MCU. While the rights are still -technically- owned by Sony, they are sharing the character with Marvel and allowing a movie to be made. That's great! Marvel has a pretty good track record, and Sony... Well, their record with Spidey has been more mixed. So this is the best of both worlds! Heck, we're even getting some spin-off films: they are already planning a Venom film, and a spin-off film revolving around Silver Sable and/or Black Cat! ... except that apparently the Venom movie won't have any connections to the MCU. Which, uh... that seems weird. How do you do a Spider-Man spin-off film and not connect it to the rest of the universe? And the Silver Sable/Black Cat film may be in the same umbrella. And Marvel isn't involved in making either of those films, they are just Sony. And apparently the contract Sony has with Marvel may only allow Spidey to appearing in Homecoming, Infinity War and the 2019 Homecoming sequel and oh my god Sony might end up sabatoging and destroying MCU Spider-Man. Again. I really, really hope I'm wrong. That Marvel and Sony do decide to keep producing proper, MCU!Spider-Man films and don't pull an Amazing fiasco by rushing all the sequels and spin-offs out the door again, but... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParadoxicalZen Posted March 30, 2017 Report Share Posted March 30, 2017 IIRC @Argent, the venom movie was a leftover idea from TAS2 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orlion Blight Posted March 31, 2017 Report Share Posted March 31, 2017 My reaction to all the trailers for this movie: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argent Posted March 31, 2017 Report Share Posted March 31, 2017 15 hours ago, AnanasSpren said: IIRC @Argent, the venom movie was a leftover idea from TAS2 ??? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParadoxicalZen Posted March 31, 2017 Report Share Posted March 31, 2017 Before the Sony/marvel-disney agreement with Spiderman appearing in Civil War, The Amazing Spiderman 2 was supposed to be followed up by said Venom movie, as in it has been in the idea works ever since TAS2. That is, if I'm remembering correctly so I don't think it was planned to be in the MCU from the start. Spiderman may prove otherwise 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiver Posted April 1, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2017 23 minutes ago, AnanasSpren said: Before the Sony/marvel-disney agreement with Spiderman appearing in Civil War, The Amazing Spiderman 2 was supposed to be followed up by said Venom movie, as in it has been in the idea works ever since TAS2. That is, if I'm remembering correctly so I don't think it was planned to be in the MCU from the start. Spiderman may prove otherwise I think you might have been aiming that comment at me rather than Argent Anyhow, yeah, they had a Venom film planned before AS2 (ASM2? What's the capitals for that series?), along with the Sinister Six one. Thing is, though, those were spin-offs of the Spider-Man continuity they were trying to build; the fact that that got scrapped, realistically, means those plans should have been scrapped as well. Now, supposing this isn't rumor, and they ARE actually forwarding with production? There're three options: - Venom is a part of the Amazing Spider-Man film continuity, which is... unlikely. That film continuity kind of bombed, so I doubt there are fans eagerly seeking to see more of that. - Venom is a part of the MCU Spider-Man film continuity which would make sense, seeing as how Venom (and Silver Sable, and Black Cat, and the Sinister Six) are spin-off characters and informed by Peter. Except apparently this isn't going to connect to the MCU at all, so that leaves - Venom is unconnected to anything else... so they are going to build a cinematic universe around Venom? This sort of raises a lot of questions about whether or not Spider-Man will be sticking (heh) in the MCU past 2019. Will Venom/Black Cta/etc reference Spider-Man, but not THAT Spider-Man? Will this be an all new universe? What is going on? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParadoxicalZen Posted April 1, 2017 Report Share Posted April 1, 2017 Woops , yeah, sorry A! Brainfart...yeah I doubt they would but as a standalone, I think it could work and more then see how it performs before making connections would be better, especially if they govthe Agent Venom or Planet Symbiote routes 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Modal Seoul Posted April 1, 2017 Report Share Posted April 1, 2017 I am very eager to see what Sony will do. I think they just get a clue and sell all Spider-Man rights to Marvel, which they should have done when they made the deal in the first place. Also, if anyone was offended by my rant, I apologize. There are some things I did enjoy about the movie, and my other post was just venting my negative feelings. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkness Ascendant Posted April 8, 2017 Report Share Posted April 8, 2017 (edited) oh yeah. @Captains Domon Perhaps this will help you see it Edited April 14, 2017 by Darkness Ascendant 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jondesu Posted April 8, 2017 Report Share Posted April 8, 2017 7 hours ago, Darkness Ascendant said: Wow, that's an amazing montage. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delightful Posted April 13, 2017 Report Share Posted April 13, 2017 On 30/03/2017 at 2:38 PM, Captains Domon said: @Darkness Ascendant I did see Iron Man 3, but I didn't take it seriously enough because I was too busy being angry about the fact that they removed the FLIPPIN METAL SHRAPNEL FROM HIS CHEST WHEN IT IS PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO DO SO!!?? WHY WASN'T THE HULK THERE?! BEN KINGSLEY WAS PERFECT FOR THE MANDARIN AND MARVEL MADE HIM A 65 YEAR OLD DRUGGIE WITH ISSUES!!! INSTEAD, WE SAW TONY DUKE IT OUT WITH A STUPID IDIOT WHO DOESN'T KNOW THE MEANING OF "ATTACK PLAN". THEN ALGERNON-OR WHATEVER HIS FREAKING NAME IS GOT HIS BUTT WHUPPED BY FREAKING PEPPER!!! PEPPER!!!! PEPPER!!! SERIOUSLY, IF IRON MAN 3 WANTED TO BE GOOD, THEN THEY WOULD'VE STUCK TO THE ORIGINAL COMIC STORYLINE!!! ALSO, NO AC/DC!? SHANE BLACK, YOU TOOK AWAY THE ONE THING THAT MADE THE IRON MAN MOVIES UNIQUE, WHICH IS WHY THIS ONE FEELS OUT OF PLACE WHEN YOU WATCH IT IN A TRILOGY MARATHON!!! (As an aside, Ben Kingsley was a little bit funny. But only a little.) That is the end of my rant. Continue talking about Spider-Man: Homecoming. Darkness, my boi, I do understand in my way. I do. So uh, the rant isn't the problem exactly. But all caps and not much grammar is pretty aggressive and aesthetically kinda hard to look at. If you were to keep the all caps, I would suggest you spoiler so not everyone has to look at the whole thing. Not hard and fast rules at all, just some suggestions. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.