fantastic_four

Agents of SHIELD shows that enhanced individuals who wish to use their powers the way Spider-man does get supervised training once they sign the Sekovia Accords. Just letting Peter do his own thing doesn't really flow with what the Accords are trying to accomplish. In fact, the document was born as the direct result of Cap and his team doing what they felt was right...which is exactly what Spider-man does. Wasn't Stark supervising him throughout the film? That seemed to be the entire point of him being in the film, and most of the point of the suit he gave him.

Wow! It didn't have that impact on me. But that doesn't detract from your feelings about the movie. Just depending on the individual and what they expect I guess. But I do agree Spider-Man: Homecoming was a good movie, and between Tom Holland and Michael Keaton they had nailed some top actors. It doesn't crack my top five superhero films, but it might hover around five just considering Marvel films. The best superhero films are, in order, Dark Knight, Spider-Man 2, Batman Begins, Logan, and X-Men: First Class. Homecoming probably fits somewhere from 6 to 10, although given more time to think about it I could see it passing First Class, not sure yet. It's not passing into that top four though.

He explicitly told him he didn't think he was ready.

Almost as if he were an immature 15-year old.

Stark was clearly intending to suck him into the Avengers throughout the film, and that explains it. The Washington Monument incident could be what tipped the scale for the reason you outlined more than what he did against the Vulture. The real question is why he allowed him to decline the Avengers invite without giving him a Sekovia Accords speech.

Another Feige confirmation is that Aunt May does in fact learn Peter's secret identity in that last scene.

Yea, I don't get those protests in the thread either. Uncle Ben's death is his core, and we already know that. They said they're not going to re-tell the origin because they've already done it twice, yet people seem to need a third rendering of it, a re-telling of it because it's a new iteration. Tony Stark wasn't Peter's motivation in this film, he was just a motivation layered on top of his core motivation.

Zendaya's character isn't Mary Jane. Feige explicitly said they may still introduce Mary Jane into the movies, and if they do, it won't be Zendaya. She's just another potential love interest. I figured Happy's job essentially was to make sure Peter didn't do anything to rise to a level where the Sekovia accords would apply to him. Yes, theoretically, Stark could be asked to bring Peter to justice, and if he were I assume he'd go to Peter and say "stop fighting crime, or join the Avengers, or we're coming after you." But as long as Peter is going after individual criminals and not Thanos, what he's doing doesn't rise to an international scale, so the people who enforce the Sekovia accords probably don't even know he exists.

This film also did to me what "Amazing Spider-Man" (the first Garfield film) was able to do--it made me want to get into parkour when I got home. They've got a lot better at capturing Spidey's insane agility as the films have gone on.

Homecoming's most memorable scene started with peter showing up to pick Liz up for homecoming, and climaxed with Toomes driving Peter and Liz to the homecoming dance and having their "dad talk." Stunningly compelling tension throughout that sequence.

Also, still have to give the nod to Spider-Man 2 as better. This one was TONS more fun, but there weren't any scenes with the inspiration of the Aunt May "I believe there's a hero in all of us" scene, the focusing power of the moment with Ock telling Peter he'll "strip the flesh from her bones" scene, or the tenderness of the "he's just a kid" subway scene. The ferry scene reminded me of the subway scene, but the subway scene from 2 was better.

What most impressed me was similar to what impressed me about Spider-Man 2--they took a villain whose concept seems rather dumb and somehow tweaked it to seem cool as hell. I thought their job with the Vulture was even harder than with a guy wearing radiation-handling arms, but they really pulled it off. And tying it to the scavenged Chitauri weaponry gave them a plausible explanation for regular humans having the insane technology that went into Vulture, Shocker, and probably Scorpion.

So it was teenage drama with Logue's daughter. Did they release any details other than she was with a friend?

He was the second major person to wear the Venom symbiote after Eddie Brock. Ah, missed that. How long did that pairing last?

What does the Scorpion (Max Gargan) have to do with Venom? Loved the film.

The previous series are also on Netflix, so not much of a draw unless CBS yanks them from all the other streaming services--which I would expect them to do. But I hope they don't.

Now I'll have visions of Connelly dancing through my head leading up to watching this film.

I did enjoy what Leto did, but nowhere near as much as Ledger's Joker. Most of that wasn't his performance, it was the writing. He just wasn't anywhere near as interesting. I also had no reason to see why he liked Harley so much that he'd risk himself for her over and over...you just had to accept it as a given.

Finally saw it this past weekend. Ugh, lots of cringe-worthy corny moments.

If by "these folks" you mean Amy Pascal, I doubt it'll happen. She's the one creating all the doubt in the relationship by publicly floating all these ideas about how you never know how long the Marvel/Sony relationship will last, who knows when and where Spidey will pop up, etc.

If we found out it was Tom Holland in that Iron Man mask, it'd be cool. Knowing it was Jon Favreau's son, then yea, it just looks like revisionist history on a totally trivial story point that wasn't worth the effort.

Oh yea, that makes sense.

If you go to a Transformers movie, it's to see giant robots fighting. That's what Transformers is about. While I loved the first one best, the fighting scenes from some of the sequels are awesome. When I re-watch Revenge of the Fallen, all I want to see is Optimus Prime going 1-on-5 in that forest, and later Optimus Prime with upgrades from Jetfire kicking the butts of Megatron, the Fallen, and Starscream simultaneously. Every film has had some memorable fight sequence I found cool, but I've only seen the first three. Still need to see both Marky Mark films.

I don't have the slightest clue how they'd make movies about giant robots from the planet Cybertron where the enemies are called Decepticons. The core story is so geared towards the sophomoric tastes of children that making it at all realistic for adults seems a stretch. I still view TMNT as being for kids, and I was buying the comic long before any of the kids' cartoons came out. Stan Lee's creations are different because he explicitly wrote them for both adults and kids. "Pacific Rim" pulled off a more believable movie about giant robots, but only by entirely changing the story from the ground up.

I didn't get into Transformers as a kid; I was into G.I. Joe figures during the Transformers era. I generally enjoy the films and think the CGI effects for the robots is absolutely awesome. The CGI action is the entire reason I enjoy it. That scene in the first movie where they first come to Earth and reveal themselves to Shia LaBeouf's character gave me chills because it was so impressive. Which surprised me entirely, because I wasn't looking forward to seeing the film and had no prior attachment to it, I just happened across it while flipping channels and got hooked.