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

[kimik]

1 hour ago, piper said:

Have you seen it yet?  It's worth a watch.

I will wait until it comes out for free on Netflix or elsewhere. No use paying for a movie that I suspect I will not like. I was not a fan of Holland as Spidey in Avengers 3: Civil War.

[piper]

1 hour ago, kimik said:

I will wait until it comes out for free on Netflix or elsewhere. No use paying for a movie that I suspect I will not like. I was not a fan of Holland as Spidey in Avengers 3: Civil War.

I should say that about Justice League. I know it's going to suck. 

[kimik]

40 minutes ago, piper said:

I should say that about Justice League. I know it's going to suck. 

LOL.

I did not say I think Homecoming sucks, just that I do not care for Holland as Spidey. I will wait to watch it for free as a result. FWIW - I held off on Batman Begins since I was not sure re: Bale as the lead. I was wrong in that case, but I saw enough of Holland as Spidet in Avengers 3: Civil War to make up my mind for this go round.

Sony has a tough act to follow since the first two movies (especially the second one) were so good. Everything that has followed has kind of been a let down.

 

[Gatsby77]

3 hours ago, kimik said:

LOL.

I did not say I think Homecoming sucks, just that I do not care for Holland as Spidey. I will wait to watch it for free as a result. FWIW - I held off on Batman Begins since I was not sure re: Bale as the lead. I was wrong in that case, but I saw enough of Holland as Spidet in Avengers 3: Civil War to make up my mind for this go round.

Sony has a tough act to follow since the first two movies (especially the second one) were so good. Everything that has followed has kind of been a let down.

 

I've said it before, but I felt the same way after Civil War.

And I was wrong.

Homecoming is easily the 2nd best Spidey film (after Spider-Man 2).

It deserves to be doing better at the domestic box office than it is, but after the mediocrity of the prior three films, I don't blame the public at large for yawning and taking a pass on this one.

Edited July 16, 2017 by Gatsby77

[paperheart]

1 hour ago, Gatsby77 said:

I've said it before, but I felt the same way after Civil War.

And I was wrong.

Homecoming is easily the 2nd best Spidey film (after Spider-Man 2).

It deserves to be doing better at the domestic box office than it is, but after the mediocrity of the prior three films, I don't blame the public at large for yawning and taking a pass on this one.

$100MM more than the last one domestically, that's a mighty big yawn

[jsilverjanet]

I love that the blame for this movies under performance is due to the Garfield movies

thank god Marvel and Tony Stark were involved as it surely would have done even worse without them 

[zosocane]

15 hours ago, kimik said:

Interesting. So even the MCU involvement did not really turn things around for the Spidey franchise? I think Spider-Man has become the Marvel equivalent to Superman. A property that is still valuable but not as big as it used to be.

 

Spider-Man and Superman are huge properties.  But like MOS (and BvS), maybe it's just that Homecoming is not that great of a film.  I saw Homecoming once and there was nothing special about it that's going to get me to see it again.  If this film breaks $700 million, I will be surprised.

[exitmusicblue]

Would wait until China release, where Iron Man is by far the most popular superhero (and it ain't close).  I foresee a massive jump.

[Bosco685]

45 minutes ago, exitmusicblue said:

Would wait until China release, where Iron Man is by far the most popular superhero (and it ain't close).  I foresee a massive jump.

The concern brought up by a few recent articles is now that the Chinese Cinema Committee has delayed the release of Spider-Man to make way for local productions to gain ground, there is the possibility of black market impact because they will get the movie in advance for untracked resale prior to an official release. We shall see how much of an impact that has.

[paperheart]

6 hours ago, zosocane said:

Spider-Man and Superman are huge properties.  But like MOS (and BvS), maybe it's just that Homecoming is not that great of a film.  I saw Homecoming once and there was nothing special about it that's going to get me to see it again.  If this film breaks $700 million, I will be surprised.

If China gives it a decent release date, it will blow by $800MM

[Dick Pontoon]

After seeing it yesterday with my son, I clicked on this thread and was surprised to see how many folks didn’t care for it. We both thought it was great! I was really glad to see a super-hero movie that was fun and exciting for a change without an overload of brooding, tormented hero angst. It at least goes to-to-toe with Raimi’s Spider-Man II and surpasses I and III; I might even like it better. The opening credits homage to the '66 series theme was a nice touch, and the final Captain America PSA pretty funny to me, as my son was being anything but patient at that point.

Edited July 17, 2017 by Dick Pontoon

[ComicConnoisseur]

Just came back from this and I love it. It had action,romance and was fun.

A very modern movie. I look foward to the second one.

I really like Michael Keaton as the Vulture in this. 

[ComicConnoisseur]

On 7/16/2017 at 0:27 PM, kimik said:

Interesting. So even the MCU involvement did not really turn things around for the Spidey franchise? I think Spider-Man has become the Marvel equivalent to Superman. A property that is still valuable but not as big as it used to be.

Based on the comments here, it seems like the jury is out on the movie as well. i wonder if catering to a younger market with the casting choices was a mistake as the film is not resonating with the older crowds like the first two movies did?

The older crowd was 13 to 15 years younger when those first movies came out,hence that older crowd back then was actually a young crowd.

I said it before and I will say it again Spider-Man is for a younger audience. We his biggest admirers are getting too old to relate to him. It not that the Spider-Man movies are out of tune,but we the audience are aging. Hard for 40 to 60 year old men to relate to a teen super hero.  I think hard core Spider-Man fans keep expecting a Heath Ledger/Christian Bale dark experience. It will never happen because Spider-Man is a different character than Batman.

Fans expecting a dark n gritty Spider-Man movie are just setting themselves up for future disappointments.

We old time hard core Spider-Man fans have to step aside and let the younger generations enjoy him like we did.

Time for us to watch Thor. 

 

[kimik]

1 minute ago, ComicConnoisseur said:

The older crowd was 13 to 15 years younger when those first movies came out,hence that older crowd back then was actually a young crowd.

I said it before and I will say it again Spider-Man is for a younger audience. We his biggest admirers are getting too old to relate to him. It not that the Spider-Man movies are out of tune,but we the audience are aging. Hard for 40 to 60 year old men to relate to a teen super hero.  I think hard core Spider-Man fans keep expecting a Heath Ledger/Christian Bale dark experience. It will never happen because Spider-Man is a different character than Batman.

Fans expecting a dark n gritty Spider-Man movie are just setting themselves up for future disappointments.

We old time hard core Spider-Man fans have to step aside and let the younger generations enjoy him like we did.

Time for us to watch Thor. 

 

I went to the first Sony Spider-Man movie with a bunch of 40 - 50 yo old-time collectors that loved the film. It is a character that resonates well with all age groups as long as it is a solid movie. Based on the mixed comments about this one, there is something that is not connecting across the broader audience like the original SM 1 and 2 did.

[ComicConnoisseur]

13 minutes ago, kimik said:

I went to the first Sony Spider-Man movie with a bunch of 40 - 50 yo old-time collectors that loved the film. It is a character that resonates well with all age groups as long as it is a solid movie. Based on the mixed comments about this one, there is something that is not connecting across the broader audience like the original SM 1 and 2 did.

It has the highest rating ever for a Spider-Man movie on rotten tomatoes. I don't get  what you mean that it isn't connecting across the broader audience like the original SM 1 and 2 did?

Do you mean it is not connecting with older men like the first two did?

That is the trouble in that those 40-50 year olds you saw the first Sony Spider-Man with are now 55 to 65 years old!  I would say it would be hard for a 65 year old man to relate to a teen Spider-Man.So I have no problem with Marvel marketing it to a younger audience.

Let the younger generation have Spider-Man. 

We hard-core Spider-Man fans got Thor now. lol.

 

Edited July 17, 2017 by ComicConnoisseur

[kimik]

Just now, ComicConnoisseur said:

It has the highest rating ever for a Spider-Man movie on rotten tomatoes. I don't get  what you mean that it isn't connecting across the broader audience like the original SM 1 and 2 did?

Do you mean it is not connecting with older men like the first two did?

That is the trouble in that those 40-50 year olds you saw the first Sony Spider-Man with are now 55 to 65 years old!  I would say it would be hard for a 65 year old man to relate to a teen Spider-Man.So I have know problem with Marvel marketing it to a younger audience.

Let the younger generation have Spider-Man. 

We got Thor. lol.

 

The point I was trying to make is that the fanboys I went with back then were older (40-50) and the SM 1 and SM 2 movies connected just as well with them as it did with the younger crowd (I was only 27 at the time). Based on the comments I see here and elsewhere, this movie is not doing the same. FWIW, my kids did not like the Holland-Spidey in Civil War. They are both under 14 and that is the market that should want to see Spidey (they want to see Thor: Ragnarok though  ). Since neither one wants to we will be hitting Dunkirk or Valerian this weekend instead.

[Bosco685]

11 minutes ago, ComicConnoisseur said:

It has the highest rating ever for a Spider-Man movie on rotten tomatoes.

Not that I am taking sides. I enjoyed Homecoming. But it is the second highest RT score, behind Spider-Man 2 (now 92% vs. SP2's 94%).

Edited July 17, 2017 by Bosco685

[Bosco685]

It looks like a few critics dropped the Homecoming score down.

It will be interesting over time to see where the Audience Score lands. Trying to compare 76K to 1.15M is quite a sample difference.

[Bosco685]

Final weekend numbers.

[ComicConnoisseur]

2 hours ago, kimik said:

The point I was trying to make is that the fanboys I went with back then were older (40-50) and the SM 1 and SM 2 movies connected just as well with them as it did with the younger crowd (I was only 27 at the time). Based on the comments I see here and elsewhere, this movie is not doing the same. FWIW, my kids did not like the Holland-Spidey in Civil War. They are both under 14 and that is the market that should want to see Spidey (they want to see Thor: Ragnarok though  ). Since neither one wants to we will be hitting Dunkirk or Valerian this weekend instead.

I am willing to take a guess they might like Deadpool better? If I was that age again I would go with Deadpool because he is more rebellious.

Spider-Man to them is like Superman was to us in that he is their father's hero.

Deadpool is the cool cat now among the young people.

Spider-Man will probably never regain the popularity of the Tobey Maguire movies again.

Just like Superman will never be as popular as he was in the Christopher Reeve era.

I could see the same thing happening to the Avengers,as once Captain America,Thor and Iron Man leave the film series they will never hit the top peak again.

 

Edited July 17, 2017 by ComicConnoisseur