SPIDER-MAN: HOMECOMING starring Tom Holland (7/28/17) 3 3

[revat]

Kevin Feige has to eventually have a big critical bomb of the same order that seemingly every DC movie is these days. If I were betting on which one it will be among the films on slate that we've got much info about, I'd bet this one.

 

That's even assuming Marvel has the type of creative control over this film that we would assume they have over their own films. I haven't heard that they don't, but who knows, maybe there are Sony guys in the production meetings that are playing a major part in the process. Certainly this whole "screw the history, just young this thing up" smells like Sony to me. They tried to do a mini version of this in ASM and ASM2. And we haven't seen major character changes to the other Marvel properties of the order we're seeing here in Spidey.

 

I don't have any info either way, but I think trying to go young is a decent way to separate this movie from the rest of the MCU, another genre within the comic genre. GOG was space comedy, CA2 was spy thriller, Ant-Man was thief, Hulk was boring, CA was era piece, etc. Spiderman can be the 'teen movie'

 

I think the diversity, while some of it might feel forced to some people, could be construed as more of a modernization to reflect modern times, or be as simple as the best actors winning auditions. Or just a director or studio saying "I want this actor/actress" without ever giving a reason. We can read things into it all day long, but in the end most people just care about whether or not it's a good movie, which generally is not dependent on the superficial changes.

 

 

[seanfingh]

Kevin Feige has to eventually have a big critical bomb of the same order that seemingly every DC movie is these days. If I were betting on which one it will be among the films on slate that we've got much info about, I'd bet this one.

 

That's even assuming Marvel has the type of creative control over this film that we would assume they have over their own films. I haven't heard that they don't, but who knows, maybe there are Sony guys in the production meetings that are playing a major part in the process. Certainly this whole "screw the history, just young this thing up" smells like Sony to me. They tried to do a mini version of this in ASM and ASM2. And we haven't seen major character changes to the other Marvel properties of the order we're seeing here in Spidey.

 

I don't have any info either way, but I think trying to go young is a decent way to separate this movie from the rest of the MCU, another genre within the comic genre. GOG was space comedy, CA2 was spy thriller, Ant-Man was thief, Hulk was boring, CA was era piece, etc. Spiderman can be the 'teen movie'

 

I think the diversity, while some of it might feel forced to some people, could be construed as more of a modernization to reflect modern times, or be as simple as the best actors winning auditions. Or just a director or studio saying "I want this actor/actress" without ever giving a reason. We can read things into it all day long, but in the end most people just care about whether or not it's a good movie, which generally is not dependent on the superficial changes.

 

 

The whole argument is nuts. If Shakespeare's works can be cast in Outer Space ("Forbidden Planet/The Tempest"), with all Japanese characters ("Ran/King Lear") or changing the sex of the main character ("Il Bisbetico Domato/Taming of the Shrew") is there really an issue with movies based upon throwaway children's pamphlets?

 

Is there to be no artistic license? Is there to be no way to modernize pre-civil rights era stories for an era over 50 years later? Are shots of Queens with all white people even more fantasy-based than spider-bite-induced superpowers?

 

Should the Spidey movies all have to be shot with 1962 era vehicles, clothes and lingo? Should Petey have wheatcakes with Uncle Ben in the morning?

 

Get over yourselves comic book fans. This is not high literature. And high literature has been mauled by Hollywood (and elsewhere) for years. Comics are not sacrosanct. Quite frankly, they are decades old storyboards.

[Gatsby77]

Kevin Feige has to eventually have a big critical bomb of the same order that seemingly every DC movie is these days. If I were betting on which one it will be among the films on slate that we've got much info about, I'd bet this one.

 

That's even assuming Marvel has the type of creative control over this film that we would assume they have over their own films. I haven't heard that they don't, but who knows, maybe there are Sony guys in the production meetings that are playing a major part in the process. Certainly this whole "screw the history, just young this thing up" smells like Sony to me. They tried to do a mini version of this in ASM and ASM2. And we haven't seen major character changes to the other Marvel properties of the order we're seeing here in Spidey.

 

I don't have any info either way, but I think trying to go young is a decent way to separate this movie from the rest of the MCU, another genre within the comic genre. GOG was space comedy, CA2 was spy thriller, Ant-Man was thief, Hulk was boring, CA was era piece, etc. Spiderman can be the 'teen movie'

 

I think the diversity, while some of it might feel forced to some people, could be construed as more of a modernization to reflect modern times, or be as simple as the best actors winning auditions. Or just a director or studio saying "I want this actor/actress" without ever giving a reason. We can read things into it all day long, but in the end most people just care about whether or not it's a good movie, which generally is not dependent on the superficial changes.

 

 

The whole argument is nuts. If Shakespeare's works can be cast in Outer Space ("Forbidden Planet/The Tempest"), with all Japanese characters ("Ran/King Lear") or changing the sex of the main character ("Il Bisbetico Domato/Taming of the Shrew") is there really an issue with movies based upon throwaway children's pamphlets?

 

Is there to be no artistic license? Is there to be no way to modernize pre-civil rights era stories for an era over 50 years later? Are shots of Queens with all white people even more fantasy-based than spider-bite-induced superpowers?

 

Should the Spidey movies all have to be shot with 1962 era vehicles, clothes and lingo? Should Petey have wheatcakes with Uncle Ben in the morning?

 

Get over yourselves comic book fans. This is not high literature. And high literature has been mauled by Hollywood (and elsewhere) for years. Comics are not sacrosanct. Quite frankly, they are decades old storyboards.

 

 

And I'm just waiting for folks to return with virtual pitchforks to argue that Kurt Russell would have been _such_ a better Nick Fury than the b.s.-needless-kowtowing-to-PC-interests Samuel L. Jackson.

 

[The First Avenger]

I'm digging the changes made so far. Yes, it is definitely a more modern take with some of the characters like Flash Thompson. I'm really looking forward to the first trailer.

[Prince Namor]

The more this annoys the racists and homophobes the more I like it.

 

or

 

the people who complain about others being too easily offended sure are easily offended.

[Prince Namor]

Kevin Feige has to eventually have a big critical bomb of the same order that seemingly every DC movie is these days. If I were betting on which one it will be among the films on slate that we've got much info about, I'd bet this one.

 

That's even assuming Marvel has the type of creative control over this film that we would assume they have over their own films. I haven't heard that they don't, but who knows, maybe there are Sony guys in the production meetings that are playing a major part in the process. Certainly this whole "screw the history, just young this thing up" smells like Sony to me. They tried to do a mini version of this in ASM and ASM2. And we haven't seen major character changes to the other Marvel properties of the order we're seeing here in Spidey.

 

I don't have any info either way, but I think trying to go young is a decent way to separate this movie from the rest of the MCU, another genre within the comic genre. GOG was space comedy, CA2 was spy thriller, Ant-Man was thief, Hulk was boring, CA was era piece, etc. Spiderman can be the 'teen movie'

 

I think the diversity, while some of it might feel forced to some people, could be construed as more of a modernization to reflect modern times, or be as simple as the best actors winning auditions. Or just a director or studio saying "I want this actor/actress" without ever giving a reason. We can read things into it all day long, but in the end most people just care about whether or not it's a good movie, which generally is not dependent on the superficial changes.

 

 

The whole argument is nuts. If Shakespeare's works can be cast in Outer Space ("Forbidden Planet/The Tempest"), with all Japanese characters ("Ran/King Lear") or changing the sex of the main character ("Il Bisbetico Domato/Taming of the Shrew") is there really an issue with movies based upon throwaway children's pamphlets?

 

Is there to be no artistic license? Is there to be no way to modernize pre-civil rights era stories for an era over 50 years later? Are shots of Queens with all white people even more fantasy-based than spider-bite-induced superpowers?

 

Should the Spidey movies all have to be shot with 1962 era vehicles, clothes and lingo? Should Petey have wheatcakes with Uncle Ben in the morning?

 

Get over yourselves comic book fans. This is not high literature. And high literature has been mauled by Hollywood (and elsewhere) for years. Comics are not sacrosanct. Quite frankly, they are decades old storyboards.

 

+100

 

And I wonder if wheatcakes are even all that tasty in the first place.

[Hulksdaddy1]

Kevin Feige has to eventually have a big critical bomb of the same order that seemingly every DC movie is these days. If I were betting on which one it will be among the films on slate that we've got much info about, I'd bet this one.

 

That's even assuming Marvel has the type of creative control over this film that we would assume they have over their own films. I haven't heard that they don't, but who knows, maybe there are Sony guys in the production meetings that are playing a major part in the process. Certainly this whole "screw the history, just young this thing up" smells like Sony to me. They tried to do a mini version of this in ASM and ASM2. And we haven't seen major character changes to the other Marvel properties of the order we're seeing here in Spidey.

 

I don't have any info either way, but I think trying to go young is a decent way to separate this movie from the rest of the MCU, another genre within the comic genre. GOG was space comedy, CA2 was spy thriller, Ant-Man was thief, Hulk was boring, CA was era piece, etc. Spiderman can be the 'teen movie'

 

I think the diversity, while some of it might feel forced to some people, could be construed as more of a modernization to reflect modern times, or be as simple as the best actors winning auditions. Or just a director or studio saying "I want this actor/actress" without ever giving a reason. We can read things into it all day long, but in the end most people just care about whether or not it's a good movie, which generally is not dependent on the superficial changes.

 

 

The whole argument is nuts. If Shakespeare's works can be cast in Outer Space ("Forbidden Planet/The Tempest"), with all Japanese characters ("Ran/King Lear") or changing the sex of the main character ("Il Bisbetico Domato/Taming of the Shrew") is there really an issue with movies based upon throwaway children's pamphlets?

 

Is there to be no artistic license? Is there to be no way to modernize pre-civil rights era stories for an era over 50 years later? Are shots of Queens with all white people even more fantasy-based than spider-bite-induced superpowers?

 

Should the Spidey movies all have to be shot with 1962 era vehicles, clothes and lingo? Should Petey have wheatcakes with Uncle Ben in the morning?

 

Get over yourselves comic book fans. This is not high literature. And high literature has been mauled by Hollywood (and elsewhere) for years. Comics are not sacrosanct. Quite frankly, they are decades old storyboards.

 

So, this is your opinion on how others shouldn't have an opinion?

 

[Hulksdaddy1]

The more this annoys the racists and homophobes the more I like it.

 

or

 

the people who complain about others being too easily offended sure are easily offended.

 

 

[Prince Namor]

Kevin Feige has to eventually have a big critical bomb of the same order that seemingly every DC movie is these days. If I were betting on which one it will be among the films on slate that we've got much info about, I'd bet this one.

 

That's even assuming Marvel has the type of creative control over this film that we would assume they have over their own films. I haven't heard that they don't, but who knows, maybe there are Sony guys in the production meetings that are playing a major part in the process. Certainly this whole "screw the history, just young this thing up" smells like Sony to me. They tried to do a mini version of this in ASM and ASM2. And we haven't seen major character changes to the other Marvel properties of the order we're seeing here in Spidey.

 

I don't have any info either way, but I think trying to go young is a decent way to separate this movie from the rest of the MCU, another genre within the comic genre. GOG was space comedy, CA2 was spy thriller, Ant-Man was thief, Hulk was boring, CA was era piece, etc. Spiderman can be the 'teen movie'

 

I think the diversity, while some of it might feel forced to some people, could be construed as more of a modernization to reflect modern times, or be as simple as the best actors winning auditions. Or just a director or studio saying "I want this actor/actress" without ever giving a reason. We can read things into it all day long, but in the end most people just care about whether or not it's a good movie, which generally is not dependent on the superficial changes.

 

 

The whole argument is nuts. If Shakespeare's works can be cast in Outer Space ("Forbidden Planet/The Tempest"), with all Japanese characters ("Ran/King Lear") or changing the sex of the main character ("Il Bisbetico Domato/Taming of the Shrew") is there really an issue with movies based upon throwaway children's pamphlets?

 

Is there to be no artistic license? Is there to be no way to modernize pre-civil rights era stories for an era over 50 years later? Are shots of Queens with all white people even more fantasy-based than spider-bite-induced superpowers?

 

Should the Spidey movies all have to be shot with 1962 era vehicles, clothes and lingo? Should Petey have wheatcakes with Uncle Ben in the morning?

 

Get over yourselves comic book fans. This is not high literature. And high literature has been mauled by Hollywood (and elsewhere) for years. Comics are not sacrosanct. Quite frankly, they are decades old storyboards.

 

So, this is your opinion on how others shouldn't have an opinion?

 

 

Do you not have the capability to comprehend what you read?

NOWHERE, did he say, you COULD NOT HAVE that opinion.

What he DID say is that (in HIS opinion) those who have that opinion ('argument') are nuts.

He then gives his reasons why, he believes his opinion has merit, solidifying why the other opinion is 'nuts'.

But I guess, since really you can't attack any of the actual information he has stated, it comes down to what is essentially a 'nuh unh!' come back on your part.

Good one.

[Prince Namor]

The more this annoys the racists and homophobes the more I like it.

 

or

 

the people who complain about others being too easily offended sure are easily offended.

 

 

 

I'm neither worried about others being easily offended, nor easily offended myself, so your little 12th grade comeback is really just sort of 'so 2013'...maybe use the 'surprised baby' one next, or ask one of the younger guys to make up something original for you.

[Hulksdaddy1]

Kevin Feige has to eventually have a big critical bomb of the same order that seemingly every DC movie is these days. If I were betting on which one it will be among the films on slate that we've got much info about, I'd bet this one.

 

That's even assuming Marvel has the type of creative control over this film that we would assume they have over their own films. I haven't heard that they don't, but who knows, maybe there are Sony guys in the production meetings that are playing a major part in the process. Certainly this whole "screw the history, just young this thing up" smells like Sony to me. They tried to do a mini version of this in ASM and ASM2. And we haven't seen major character changes to the other Marvel properties of the order we're seeing here in Spidey.

 

I don't have any info either way, but I think trying to go young is a decent way to separate this movie from the rest of the MCU, another genre within the comic genre. GOG was space comedy, CA2 was spy thriller, Ant-Man was thief, Hulk was boring, CA was era piece, etc. Spiderman can be the 'teen movie'

 

I think the diversity, while some of it might feel forced to some people, could be construed as more of a modernization to reflect modern times, or be as simple as the best actors winning auditions. Or just a director or studio saying "I want this actor/actress" without ever giving a reason. We can read things into it all day long, but in the end most people just care about whether or not it's a good movie, which generally is not dependent on the superficial changes.

 

 

The whole argument is nuts. If Shakespeare's works can be cast in Outer Space ("Forbidden Planet/The Tempest"), with all Japanese characters ("Ran/King Lear") or changing the sex of the main character ("Il Bisbetico Domato/Taming of the Shrew") is there really an issue with movies based upon throwaway children's pamphlets?

 

Is there to be no artistic license? Is there to be no way to modernize pre-civil rights era stories for an era over 50 years later? Are shots of Queens with all white people even more fantasy-based than spider-bite-induced superpowers?

 

Should the Spidey movies all have to be shot with 1962 era vehicles, clothes and lingo? Should Petey have wheatcakes with Uncle Ben in the morning?

 

Get over yourselves comic book fans. This is not high literature. And high literature has been mauled by Hollywood (and elsewhere) for years. Comics are not sacrosanct. Quite frankly, they are decades old storyboards.

 

So, this is your opinion on how others shouldn't have an opinion?

 

 

Do you not have the capability to comprehend what you read?

NOWHERE, did he say, you COULD NOT HAVE that opinion.

What he DID say is that (in HIS opinion) those who have that opinion ('argument') are nuts.

He then gives his reasons why, he believes his opinion has merit, solidifying why the other opinion is 'nuts'.

But I guess, since really you can't attack any of the actual information he has stated, it comes down to what is essentially a 'nuh unh!' come back on your part.

Good one.

 

His opinion is that others opinions are nuts, and they should not have that opinion. Regardless of his reasons for 'his' opinion, his opinion is others should not have their opinions.

 

Get it now?

[Hulksdaddy1]

The more this annoys the racists and homophobes the more I like it.

 

or

 

the people who complain about others being too easily offended sure are easily offended.

 

 

 

I'm neither worried about others being easily offended, nor easily offended myself, so your little 12th grade comeback is really just sort of 'so 2013'...maybe use the 'surprised baby' one next, or ask one of the younger guys to make up something original for you.

 

Seems you're a little offended I called you on your wildly_fanciful_statement, and now you're trying to come back at me with your sophomoric drivel.

 

Swing and a miss again, Skippy.

[MetalPSI]

Skippy.

 

This really is a 80's gradeschool classroom.

 

I'll see you guys out at the bike racks after school

[techvoodoo]

I don't like the casting choice for Flash. Let the pile on begin. I can take you all.

 

 

I don't know about anyone else but I bet you can't wait to see that guy play Agent Venom, right?

[prez]

I don't like the casting choice for Flash. Let the pile on begin. I can take you all.

 

This is the only Marvel movie that I'm not looking forward to. I honestly have a bad feeling about this.

[Prince Namor]

Kevin Feige has to eventually have a big critical bomb of the same order that seemingly every DC movie is these days. If I were betting on which one it will be among the films on slate that we've got much info about, I'd bet this one.

 

That's even assuming Marvel has the type of creative control over this film that we would assume they have over their own films. I haven't heard that they don't, but who knows, maybe there are Sony guys in the production meetings that are playing a major part in the process. Certainly this whole "screw the history, just young this thing up" smells like Sony to me. They tried to do a mini version of this in ASM and ASM2. And we haven't seen major character changes to the other Marvel properties of the order we're seeing here in Spidey.

 

I don't have any info either way, but I think trying to go young is a decent way to separate this movie from the rest of the MCU, another genre within the comic genre. GOG was space comedy, CA2 was spy thriller, Ant-Man was thief, Hulk was boring, CA was era piece, etc. Spiderman can be the 'teen movie'

 

I think the diversity, while some of it might feel forced to some people, could be construed as more of a modernization to reflect modern times, or be as simple as the best actors winning auditions. Or just a director or studio saying "I want this actor/actress" without ever giving a reason. We can read things into it all day long, but in the end most people just care about whether or not it's a good movie, which generally is not dependent on the superficial changes.

 

 

The whole argument is nuts. If Shakespeare's works can be cast in Outer Space ("Forbidden Planet/The Tempest"), with all Japanese characters ("Ran/King Lear") or changing the sex of the main character ("Il Bisbetico Domato/Taming of the Shrew") is there really an issue with movies based upon throwaway children's pamphlets?

 

Is there to be no artistic license? Is there to be no way to modernize pre-civil rights era stories for an era over 50 years later? Are shots of Queens with all white people even more fantasy-based than spider-bite-induced superpowers?

 

Should the Spidey movies all have to be shot with 1962 era vehicles, clothes and lingo? Should Petey have wheatcakes with Uncle Ben in the morning?

 

Get over yourselves comic book fans. This is not high literature. And high literature has been mauled by Hollywood (and elsewhere) for years. Comics are not sacrosanct. Quite frankly, they are decades old storyboards.

 

So, this is your opinion on how others shouldn't have an opinion?

 

 

Do you not have the capability to comprehend what you read?

NOWHERE, did he say, you COULD NOT HAVE that opinion.

What he DID say is that (in HIS opinion) those who have that opinion ('argument') are nuts.

He then gives his reasons why, he believes his opinion has merit, solidifying why the other opinion is 'nuts'.

But I guess, since really you can't attack any of the actual information he has stated, it comes down to what is essentially a 'nuh unh!' come back on your part.

Good one.

 

His opinion is that others opinions are nuts, and they should not have that opinion. Regardless of his reasons for 'his' opinion, his opinion is others should not have their opinions.

 

Get it now?

 

No. That's not what he said. Get it now?

[Prince Namor]

The more this annoys the racists and homophobes the more I like it.

 

or

 

the people who complain about others being too easily offended sure are easily offended.

 

 

 

I'm neither worried about others being easily offended, nor easily offended myself, so your little 12th grade comeback is really just sort of 'so 2013'...maybe use the 'surprised baby' one next, or ask one of the younger guys to make up something original for you.

 

Seems you're a little offended I called you on your wildly_fanciful_statement, and now you're trying to come back at me with your sophomoric drivel.

 

Swing and a miss again, Skippy.

 

I've swung and hit twice, 'chief'.

 

You've responded both times, with name calling.

 

You're way too easy.

 

Swing miss and fall down with the bat. Nice try, 'Slugger'.

[Hulksdaddy1]

Kevin Feige has to eventually have a big critical bomb of the same order that seemingly every DC movie is these days. If I were betting on which one it will be among the films on slate that we've got much info about, I'd bet this one.

 

That's even assuming Marvel has the type of creative control over this film that we would assume they have over their own films. I haven't heard that they don't, but who knows, maybe there are Sony guys in the production meetings that are playing a major part in the process. Certainly this whole "screw the history, just young this thing up" smells like Sony to me. They tried to do a mini version of this in ASM and ASM2. And we haven't seen major character changes to the other Marvel properties of the order we're seeing here in Spidey.

 

I don't have any info either way, but I think trying to go young is a decent way to separate this movie from the rest of the MCU, another genre within the comic genre. GOG was space comedy, CA2 was spy thriller, Ant-Man was thief, Hulk was boring, CA was era piece, etc. Spiderman can be the 'teen movie'

 

I think the diversity, while some of it might feel forced to some people, could be construed as more of a modernization to reflect modern times, or be as simple as the best actors winning auditions. Or just a director or studio saying "I want this actor/actress" without ever giving a reason. We can read things into it all day long, but in the end most people just care about whether or not it's a good movie, which generally is not dependent on the superficial changes.

 

 

The whole argument is nuts. If Shakespeare's works can be cast in Outer Space ("Forbidden Planet/The Tempest"), with all Japanese characters ("Ran/King Lear") or changing the sex of the main character ("Il Bisbetico Domato/Taming of the Shrew") is there really an issue with movies based upon throwaway children's pamphlets?

 

Is there to be no artistic license? Is there to be no way to modernize pre-civil rights era stories for an era over 50 years later? Are shots of Queens with all white people even more fantasy-based than spider-bite-induced superpowers?

 

Should the Spidey movies all have to be shot with 1962 era vehicles, clothes and lingo? Should Petey have wheatcakes with Uncle Ben in the morning?

 

Get over yourselves comic book fans. This is not high literature. And high literature has been mauled by Hollywood (and elsewhere) for years. Comics are not sacrosanct. Quite frankly, they are decades old storyboards.

 

So, this is your opinion on how others shouldn't have an opinion?

 

 

Do you not have the capability to comprehend what you read?

NOWHERE, did he say, you COULD NOT HAVE that opinion.

What he DID say is that (in HIS opinion) those who have that opinion ('argument') are nuts.

He then gives his reasons why, he believes his opinion has merit, solidifying why the other opinion is 'nuts'.

But I guess, since really you can't attack any of the actual information he has stated, it comes down to what is essentially a 'nuh unh!' come back on your part.

Good one.

 

His opinion is that others opinions are nuts, and they should not have that opinion. Regardless of his reasons for 'his' opinion, his opinion is others should not have their opinions.

 

Get it now?

 

No. That's not what he said. Get it now?

 

Try again. His opinion is that others should not have that opinion, they should "get over themselves."

 

Perhaps Google translate might work for ya?

[Hulksdaddy1]

The more this annoys the racists and homophobes the more I like it.

 

or

 

the people who complain about others being too easily offended sure are easily offended.

 

 

 

I'm neither worried about others being easily offended, nor easily offended myself, so your little 12th grade comeback is really just sort of 'so 2013'...maybe use the 'surprised baby' one next, or ask one of the younger guys to make up something original for you.

 

Seems you're a little offended I called you on your wildly_fanciful_statement, and now you're trying to come back at me with your sophomoric drivel.

 

Swing and a miss again, Skippy.

 

I've swung and hit twice, 'chief'.

 

You've responded both times, with name calling.

 

You're way too easy.

 

Swing miss and fall down with the bat. Nice try, 'Slugger'.

 

 

Man, I really got to you, huh Junior?

 

[Hulksdaddy1]

Skippy.

 

This really is a 80's gradeschool classroom.

 

I'll see you guys out at the bike racks after school

 

Watch yourself, Sparky.