Well, they were already moaning about that way before the movie came out, so I don’t think anything was going to stop them.
Having Tony Stark right there at the beginning of Spider-Man’s career, giving him what is recognizable as the Spider-Man costume seems to suggest he’s kind of replaced Uncle Ben as the significant source of early inspiration. The whole point of the character used to be guilt, not wanting to do the right thing, even if Peter’s saying that as a cover for something else. There’s nothing wrong with Avengers Spider-Man going in a different direction. It makes a lot of sense, really, considering Marvel has always tried to be an interconnected playground (nearly everyone lives in NYC), but hardly any of them seemed aware of each other until they ran into each other already costumed up.
Not to get into the headline, but I saw a review that was positive but said the diversity was hollow because it wasn’t Miles.
Which, as you know, I have major beef with Miles because his latino side is completely underutilized/ignored found funny.
I don’t think so - in Civil War, Stark shows Peter the YouTube video that shows him already doing hero work in his homemade costume, and it’s suggested he’s been doing so for a little while. I don’t think it’s a stretch to assume that the circumstances that led him to become a hero are very similar to the classic origin. Otherwise we can assume that Peter would still be the carefree TV-star (or maybe in the modern day, internet sensation) Spider-Man that seeks to exploit his powers selfishly and for financial benefit.
And Aunt May has definitely experienced a loss in the new films.
It’s also not Kevin Feige’s ethos, he likes to stick close to the comics wherever possible.
I agree with Dave, the whole uncle Ben stuff happened before, they just didn’t want to cover it in this film.
Woah, woah, woah, woah, woah, hold on… there are people who don’t like Wrath of Khan?
Marvel are giving people the credit for knowing that Uncle Ben died and that event pushed Peter to fight crime rather than goof off and be a jerk with his abilities. Just like we’ve all seen multiple times before.
But the whole point of Homecoming is that Peter is desperate for approval. I don’t think that happens if he and May are still mourning the recent death of Uncle Ben. If anything it would push him away from an obvious father figure like Tony. And as you say, he’s already actively pursuing a superhero career before Tony shows up in Civil War. I can appreciate that nobody thinks recapping the full origin is necessary all over again, and that it can merely be implied, but the Spider-Man we see is noticeably, radically different from any we’ve seen before. If these movies wanted to sidestep the origin for fans who’ve already seen it twice already, they wouldn’t be pursuing new audiences with the younger Peter so fervently. It’s an approach that makes far more sense if they introduced an adult Spider-Man who’s been active for years, not months, like the casual Hulk reboot in Avengers.
…But that’s neither here nor there. Like the dude surprised that anyone couldn’t love Wrath of Khan, let’s just agree that there are different ways to view this, and I’m just trying to make that clear.
I’m not sure I understand this. What new audiences are they pursuing? Do you mean kids or international audiences?
I think we can tend to overstate the new audience thing. My kids are 8 and 6 and have seen the Raimi ones on the TV. Teenagers, if they are the target of the high school setting, almost definitely would have seen the Webb ones.
The last film came out only 3 years ago. It’s like expecting a completely new audience between episodes of any film series.
Not everyone grows up in a house with geek dads, though. They managed to make a movie that appealed to existing fans, but they were clearly looking for new ones, too, younger ones who weren’t in the demographic for the Garfield ones.
Like, if they totally rebooted Batman in a few years, would you really expect kids to have Batman v Superman as a reference point?
I wouldn’t underestimate kids to think they would forget that Batman’s parents died is the thing
You don’t think that someone who loses a father figure might be drawn towards a substitute father figure (whether consciously or unconsciously)?
I think claiming that this is a “radically” different Spider-Man is really overstating it. It’s very easy to assume that the classic origin story happened and this is what came next for the character in the MCU.
(It’s really very similar to the story that JMS told with Iron Man in his Amazing run, before, Civil War came in and shook everything up.)
I don’t put them on for them as some form of education This stuff is on constant repeat on the family movie channels. There are also Spider-Man cartoons every day on Disney XD.
People watch old stuff all the time, more people than watch at the cinemas. My kids wanted to see Finding Dory even though the original came out 5 years before the eldest was born.
I don’t see how that matters. I knew Spider-Man’s origin story by the time I was six and I didn’t have a bunch of previous fims, a geek dad or the internet.
If you were talking about new International audience I could understand the argument.
I think sometimes people forget the sheer amount of ways in which kids become accustomed to these characters; there has been a similar conversation about Transformers in Box Office Mojo. These franchises go far beyond film in terms of reaching new child audiences, my nephews and niece know ten times as much as I did about Marvel and DC characters than I did at their age.
Edit: Okay, ten times is an exaggeration, but I was geek to the bone. They are just normal everyday kids.
If the number of people who watch the big Christmas Day movie on BBC1 all went and paid to see it in the cinema it would be the highest grossing film ever overnight.