Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse

The age difference between him and Liv? The age difference between him and MJ doesn't really matter because they meet exactly once and she doesn't know who he is, while he is busy in his own mind trying to apologize to his MJ (who, again, looks the same). In any case, the whole "I'll put on the Parker charm" scene was funny exactly because it didn't work.

As for Peter B. Parker being a loser — well, yes. One of the things about Peter Parker from the main universe, too, is that he's a loser or, well, a loser most of the time. That's why something called the "Parker luck" exists. It's just that this Peter has become more of a loser due to significant bad luck in his life and becoming middle-aged hasn't exactly helped.

It's not that Peter B. Parker is someone that Miles has to "surpass," it's that Miles has to discover his own way of doing things.

By the way, I enjoyed this video from Movie Bob:

Edited by alliterator on Dec 18th 2018 at 4:07:10 AM

In the case of Peter B., luck doesn't seem to have factored in. He did all the stuff to ruin his life himself. He's self-destructive. As he says in his montage, he made irresponsible financial decisions and it doesn't seem like the "I got scammed" kind, but actual legitimate mistakes he made. Then after his Aunt died, he became this total Manchild. He was the one who initiated the divorce and broke his own marriage. As he says, "I broke her heart" and after the divorce, he basically became this total slob who doesn't take good care of his health. There's nothing unlucky about being an irresponsible schmuck.

And in the comics, Depending on the Writer, Peter sees himself as a loser and thinks of himself as more unlucky than he is, and the writers pile on melodrama but even then things never get too bad for him. He's never been single for an extended period since he got bitten by a spider. Never has trouble finding dates, only keeping a relationship and maintaining it. Gets to still live in New York despite being poor. He never gets depressed and lets his weight go and so on and so forth. Things never get too bad for him.

Well in the story sense and arc sense, for the audience to buy Miles as the hero and to earn the right to defeat the Kingpin himself, and not this Alternate Peter. He has to be shown as the better guy, even if the narrative does not openly state it. This is screenwriting 101, and it's there.

Edited by Revolutionary_Jack on Dec 18th 2018 at 4:21:30 AM

HE KILLED AUNT MAY?!

I disagree. He doesn't need to prove he's "better" than Peter, only that he has what it takes to be Spider-Man.

Edited by alliterator on Dec 18th 2018 at 4:21:13 AM

That video with Moviebob is good though it's full of misinformation and misunderstandings of the Gwen Stacy story. He's also a guy overly fond of Raimi's films which aside from the first one are not all that good in terms of Peter's characterization.

His aunt died, of what is implied to be old age. That's not bad luck. For a late-30s man to then decide to screw up his life is inexcusable.

This is why flawed versions of mascots are hard to do because it's hard to really see these mascots as characters who made mistakes and did stupid stuff even when the story shows us and tell us he did. Peter B. is not traditional Peter from comics and Raimi, he's a parody and a jokey take on it. Miles himself doesn't see himself as the real Peter. He's just alternate Peter, but his Peter remains the guy who sacrificed his life for him.

Edited by Revolutionary_Jack on Dec 18th 2018 at 4:25:11 AM

I wouldn't say Peter B hates children. He's just apprehensive about raising ones of his own. It's a very real fear adults can have that doesn't always mean it seems from hatred. Once he goes through the adventure with Miles, he begins to reconsider it and builds up confidence to try and talk with MJ again.

FYI, Moviebob doesn't consider Spider-Man: Homecoming a Spider-Man movie. Make of that what you will.

Edited by kyun on Dec 18th 2018 at 5:43:35 AM

That's appropriate and understandable for a guy in his 20s, but not so for a guy pushing 40. And to be honest, the ending where he and MJ maybe reconcile is kinda unbelievable. He was a terrible husband to a woman who went beyond anyone else to try and put up with him, stuck with him loyally through terrible financial crises he brought on himself, and then finally he puts her through the emotional turmoil of a divorce she didn't want, and now he wants her to take him back.

He thinks Sam Raimi's version, a Celibate Hero monk who allows horrible people like Harry Osborn (as played by Franco) to walk all over him is somehow an accurate version of Peter Parker, when what it is is mainlining Donner's Superman and his characterization behind a Spidey mask. Peter Parker was originally a Deconstruction of both Superman and Batman, and my main problem with the trilogy, specifically in the good films (1 and 2) is that the ending of 1 where Peter rejects Mary Jane at the end after she returns his affections is just plainly out of character for Peter. That whole It's Not You, It's My Enemies thing has never been Peter's thing. Peter only complains about how Spider-Man is ruining his life after he gets into relationships, after he tries and makes it works, he's always optimistic that somehow he will make it work and never stops trying. It creates this false melodrama that is basically annoying. Like why does Harry hate Peter...his butler is a loser incompetent. I know some will say that melodrama like that is there in comics and its true but it's never like this. Whereas Homecoming while not perfect and not without problems is fresh, and it's a lot truer to the character than before. And we have a Peter who is a nice guy without being saint (don't get me started on the Spider-Jesus moment at the end of the train scene in 2) and you know it's a movie that is funny and a little cheery and people forget this but Spider-Man comics aren't supposed to be all doom and gloom, whereas in Raimi's films it's always this kind of gloominess and so on, except for odds bit of some campy gags here and there.

Spider-Verse in its characterizations of both Blond Peter and Older Peter while not true to any single version of Spider-Man in total, by juxtaposition offers a range of characterizations the guy had in the comics.

No, he does consider it a Spider-Man movie — he doesn't consider Civil War or Infinity War Spider-Man movies, just "movies with Spider-Man in them." Homecoming is a Spider-Man movie, but I don't think he liked it much — I believe he stated that the only good Spider-Man movie was the first Raimi film (up until Into the Spider-Verse that is).

Edited by alliterator on Dec 18th 2018 at 5:59:14 AM

Let's just say that his nostalgia googles regarding the Spider-Man trilogy are firmly attached. I mean, this is a guy who seriously tried to argue that Mary Jane is a good character in those movies.

Edited by Swanpride on Dec 18th 2018 at 6:03:00 AM

He said 1 and 2. And he thinks 2 is better like most people. I tend to dissent, because the main reason 2 is liked is because it decides to have Peter Parker lose powers and go without a mask for a huge chunk of the film, and it allows it to be about this average college kid...in other words it's a superhero movie made for people who don't like superhero movies. And once the train climax is done, the movie has several different endings, whereas 1 is standalone and more compact, and fundamentally Willem Dafoe's Goblin is the better villain, kills more people, has more fun, and is entertaining and frightening as opposed to incompetent scientist who killed his wife and is now a meat-puppet for his own arms.

And I don't know, Civil War gives a version of Spider-Man who is more or less the coolest superhero battler of any version, and while I have problems with Spider-Man supporting Iron Man through and through, it's fine.

Well, he's not the only one. This article for instance is also pointing out stuff there that's good about her character in the movie. I mean Dunst's MJ is quite different from the one in the comics, but she has more in common with her counterpart than Maguire's Peter does with his. I mean that upside down kiss with Spider-Man is very much in spirit of their romance in the comics.

I mean there are problems with the script and problems with how Raimi saw these characters, which worked well in 1. But the actors totally make it work.

Edited by Revolutionary_Jack on Dec 18th 2018 at 6:13:26 AM

Look, I am the first who defends Dunst. She does the best with what she is given. But what she is given is just terrible material. No matter how you swing it. She is the epitome of a sexy lamp.

Well that's hardly the only or the main problem of those movies or why that entire trilogy is unsatisfying and not just because 3 is bad which, contrary to revisionists, like Mr. Chipman, is both a really bad film and is primarily Raimi's fault for its weak execution.

Yes, there are more things which are wrong with those movies than Mary Jane, but this is the one point where I think that you need to be totally in your nostalgia bubble to now acknowledge that there is a problem. It's like saying that Black Panther has great CGI or that the third act of Wonder Woman is a brilliant conclusion. You might like those movies overall and have good reasons for it, but if you just ignore objective flaws (and yes, I think that there is objectivity in film criticism), you better have a really, really good argument why this element is great after all. If you don't, well, better listen to someone else.

Not that I necessarily dislike moviebob overall...a lot of his work is at least interesting and provides some perspectives worth to explore. He made me appreciate Ghostbusters more. But when it comes to Spider-Man, he is just not objective. He has hung his heard on one specific version of Spider-Man.

I actually do think Wonder Woman's conclusion is the right way for it to conclude given its set-up. Parts were not well executed and poor choices were made (Ares killing off the rest of the Pantheon which was set-up from the start is one of those choices-made-thinking-this-was-the-only-one-but-not-good-for-stories-going-forward things) but the emotional heartbeat Chris Pine, aka Blond Peter in Into the Spider-Verse, performing a heroic sacrifice works. Sure a lot of people think that it should be I dunno Watchmen and say something real against World War I but I don't think that's what it is trying to do. It's about emotion and so on. I agree that parts of Black Panther's CGI wasn't well done but then it's par for the course, and it doesn't bother me nor (based on the s—t-ton of money it earned) does it for most people. CGI only becomes a problem if the rest of the movie was bad (the Ryan Reynolds Green Lantern being a major example).

I'd like to hear what your problems are with that character but I think you should bring this to the General Page for Spider-Man rather than Necro-Thread Sam Raimi's trilogy page or continue here. I think Dunst's MJ was fine in Spider-Man 1 with a lot of strong moments there, but the sequels didn't serve her well, like there was absolutely no real story reason for Dr. Octopus to kidnap Mary Jane in 2 and it didn't even make sense for him to do so, and even less so in 3. And like I said the story decision at the last scene in 1 was an absolutely terrible choice going forward for both the characters, and is likewise out of character for Peter. The Sam Raimi movies are similar to, and obviously inspired Nolan's The Dark Knight Trilogy but where Nolan improves is that he sustains and builds the characters from movie to movie. So there isn't a lot of repetition and so on. And The Dark Knight Rises gives a conclusion to that version of the characters, and fundamentally that's what Raimi should have done with Spider-Man 3 but that movie and the absolutely ludicrous plans for Spider-Man 4 showed that he had no intentions or idea on doing so.So 3 ends up making 2 unsatisfying since a good part of the final stuff is sequel-building.

That's why Spider-Man is the best film overall, followed by Into the Spider-Verse, and in third place Spider-Man Homecoming with 2 coming in at fourth.

Look up the definition of a "sexy lamp".

Thankfully, we have moved past this from the Webb movies onwards. I might not always like all the decisions made for the female characters, but at least they feel like persons, not like props.

To bring this back to Into the Spider-Verse: I actually liked the settled way it showed the important role the females played in the live of Peter Parker, the kind of support they provided for him and how badass they are in their own right. Especially Aunt May. I never ever want to go back to frail close to a heart attack aunt May!!!!

Back on topic...

I don't know what Sony's stance on Venom / Spider-Man co-appearances is in the wake of Venom (2018), but if they get him for a sequel I'd love to see him with Andi "Mania" Benton as sort of a dark counterpart to Miles and Peter's relationship. Maybe even have a Heel–Face Turn referencing how she and Venom were Anti Heroes when they were partnered, who knows.

Edited by Dirtyblue929 on Dec 19th 2018 at 7:33:59 AM

Ya know there is a Venomverse.

"I am Alpharius. This is a lie."

Yeah but I'm not super-psyched for any Venom sequels, honestly. That "Tom Hardy's Wicker Man" quote really summed up my feelings on the movie.

It doesn't have to be a sequel to Venom.

"I am Alpharius. This is a lie."

You mean they are these flawless undemanding beings who should be the protagonist, but the movie chickens out and shills until they stick-to-canon and drop them off a bridge (or clock tower) anyway. No thanks. Emma Stone's Gwen Stacy is a fine screen presence and obviously the actress is quite likable but the character she plays is the other extreme from Dunst's MJ. The latter had too much drama and baggage, whereas Emma Stone's Gwen has none, and to the extent that the comics!Gwen had some agency and independence, the movie removes that, such as the fact that she hated Spider-Man but liked Peter Parker and blamed Spider-Man for her father's death. Removing those elements, even if those were hurdles she overcomes with Character Development, make her this total saint and leaves her with no humanity. What the Marc Webb movies have an advantage is that the director is much better and more comfortable showing a romantic couple interacting and being in a relationship whereas Raimi had no chops for that...

I think that idea, that the only kind of women in superhero movies are badass and sassy co-workers and so on is just as dangerous and limiting as the over damselization and fridging of women and making them sickly and so on. It also leads to what was called in Gone Girl the "cool girl" phenomenon.

Into the Spider-Verse serves Miles' story so obviously for Miles' sake, Aunt May has to be the Alfred and so on. But it wouldn't do for Peter's story. Like when Peter B. meets Aunt May, the reunion is undercut when May notes how poorly he's aged, how he's not taken good care of himself and wears sweatpants, the tension being that Peter B is aware that he's disappointed his Aunt and failed her, and that she can't replace in any way his dead Aunt. The fact that Aunt May is lame, sickly and boring is part of who she was. She's the embodiment of Peter's guilt, the fact that this guy ultimately repaid his adopted mother who loved her like her own son by accidentally widowing her and making her a struggling single mother. That kind of baggage and guilt is interesting and dramatic, and it underpines that great scene in Spider-Man 2 where Peter tells Aunt May that he's responsible for Uncle Ben's death which she has to process carefully and think over before forgiving him.

Edited by Revolutionary_Jack on Dec 19th 2018 at 7:52:35 AM

Like I said, I don't necessarily like all decisions made for them. But none of them is a sexy lamp, which was progress in my eyes. Especially since the sexy lamp was the default in Superhero movies beforehand.

And my issue with the frail Aunt May is not that I necessarily want her to be badass, but with the fact that she is outdated. Next to no woman of this age actually dresses or acts that way any longer.

Edited by Swanpride on Dec 19th 2018 at 8:33:07 AM

I have news for you. Spider-Man is fundamentally outdated. There's no way anyone can be poor, chronically unemployed and struggling and still operate and claim to be in New York anymore as Peter B. does. In real life, people like Peter Parker would have been driven out of the city ages ago. Likewise, crime in New York city has dropped from the time of The Big Rotten Apple era, and Marvel unlike DC which uses fictional cities and so never has this problem, has a hard time trying to justify why Peter being Spider-Man is so important because in real-life crime isn't that bad. In the old days, New York was really downtrodden and crime-ridden so that made sense. It no longer does. Likewise Peter being a nerd and so on. Nerdiness is no longer this big outcaste identity it once was, so in Spider-Man: Homecoming, Peter is basically just some ordinary teenager without any real edges, even a little over-privileged. And heck in Homecoming, they borrowed from Miles Morales to tell MCU Peter's story, the whole bit of him going to Magnet school and so on. Aunt May and Uncle Ben were outdated from the get-go. Lee-Ditko Spider-Man, the original run was written by men in their 40s (Lee) and mid-to-late 30s (Ditko) respectively and based on the memories both of them had of their childhood in the Depression. Uncle Ben was a world war II veteran in the comics. Neither of them logically being so much older than Peter's parents made sense. But it conveyed a Generation Gap theme.

As I said, I invited you to a designated place where you can actually debate and explain this to me rather than make out you are having the last word. I cited an actual article written by a feminist website in support of my claim, all you are doing is making some vague reference to a term I need to look at the urban dictionary to figure out.

Then give me a link to the place where you want to debate the question.

Already did so above, but here: Spider-Man General Discussion Page

oops...sorry....

I know near to nothing about Peni's comic/universe. All I know is that she comes from a futuristic world which may or may not be set IN the future (likely is), did not start out having an anime style, and her mech technology was started by her late father, which is why she's so devastated when it is destroyed in the climax: destroy the mech = destroy the last thing her father stood for and which he left behind for her. It does make me wanna find out more of it.

There are SLIM, and RARE, ways a person with $55K income is able to live in New York City for a long time, but he'd still need to have a ton of finances saved up on top of that. Also, crime has gone down, and it is extremely safe to live in with the NYPD being some of the most capable domestic defense forces in the country, but the number of homeless people is rising, and it's even worse in the outer boroughs.