Spider-Verse fans when a new action figure non-character appears
MC when any franchise ever stays stuck in the 80s and refuses to change, move forward, or do any better:
Just throwing non-characters on the screen, and creating no stakes multiverse nostalgia bait plots isnt "moving forward"
MC's definition of moving forward: "Just fight a villain"
A+ input man. Really great and in depth analysis
Characters being actual characters with real lore, history, stories, and continuity > non-character action figure stand ins and blank slate archetypes with no consequences, no lore, no continuity, just feeding the nostalgia easter egg seal clap ad naseum
And for the record, I didn't hate the movie. There was a lot I actually did like. I just wish "Spider-Man" wasn't reduced to nothing more than a generic archetype, and Peter wasn't belittled to an insignificant default.
Like Peter, Miles, Ben, Kane, and Miguel are real characters with history, and lore. Everyone else is either a glorified "what-if" that should have been a one-and-done (like Spider-Gwen), or a "GI Joe" variant (fat Spider-Man, Cat Spider-Man, Dinosaur Spider-Man, disabled Spider-Man, Punk Spider-Man, etc, etc).
Punk Spider-Man was literally a crowd favorite and had a pretty significant amount of screen time. What the actual fuck are you talking about. 😐
He was literally created for Spider-Verse comics. He's also Hobie Brown... the original Prowler. He's literally "what if The Prowler was Spider-Man". Literally just created to sell comics for an event. That's my point.
If you prefer archetypes over characters, you do you though. That's the way the Marvel has been for over a decade now, so enjoy.
I don’t give a fuck what he was intended to be or what event he was created for, in the film and he character fits with everything going on, had a unique personality and was hilarious. Spider Gwen is also great in these, funny how you bitch about Miles family thing not getting enough light while Gwen’s family stuff, imo, was the emotional high point of this movie. It was executed perfectly
I don’t give a fuck what he was intended to be or what event he was created for, in the film and he character fits with everything going on, had a unique personality and was hilarious. Spider Gwen is also great in these, funny how you bitch about Miles family thing not getting enough light while Gwen’s family stuff, imo, was the emotional high point of this movie. It was executed perfectly
Please, explain to me the difference between Spider-Man lore, and Spider-Man history, and Spider-Man continuity, and previous Spider-Man stories. You're using them all in the same fucking context )
And no, I'd argue that they have fuck all to do with good story telling. The first Spider-Verse, which you claim as the best Spidey movie ever, maintains very little continuity with the comics.
Some movies you have raved about in the past like Infinity War and Venom completely disregard lore. You love Batman Ninja or whatever that terrible shit is called which has almost nothing to do with any form of Batman lore or history.
So why is it OK sometimes for comic movies to break continuity or deviate from the lore but not other times?
Lore is the in universe background and rules establishing where the story takes place History, like history of the character in terms of publication, but also character history in universe. History could be a part of lore, but not necesarily always the same. Continuity in the sense of cohesive narrative and how it all ties together both within the story and other stories throughout a long history of releases
The first Spider-Verse did a very good job with these things. It put the characters in new situations, but the characters acted like the characters. Outside of Peter and Ben, I actually dont have an issue in that department in the new movie either
My least favorite parts in all of the MCU is how they deviate from the comics. I dont like GOTG 2 very much because of how different they are. I hate MCU Spidey. Infinity War would have been even better if Death was there like in the comics. Venom was good considering the rights issues, but really does suffer immensely from lack of Spider-Man.
Something like Batman Ninja takes established characters and puts them in new situations. Sure its wacky, but the characters actually act like the characters. And they didnt need to invent new ones for the story. And the characters arent treated like archetypes. Even Robin, the closest things to archetype characters, have taken on new identies (Nightwing, Red Hood, Red Robin, etc) to help maintain that they're actually characters.
My least favorite things in comics are time travel, multiverses, and mantle passing. I think those things kill continuity, and genuinely harm characterization by reducing it down to archetype titles. I just dont like them. Which is purely subjective, I get it, but I dont like those tropes. And I think just throwing a thousand nameless Spider-Mans into the story, or inventing some random Spider-Mans with singular traits takes away from the character of "Spider-Man", and especially takes away from Peter as a character. I mean there was literally a line in the new movie when 2099 was talking to Peter like "no, I have enough Peters". Like Peter isnt THE Spider-Man, just a generic nucance taking up space for all these other new Spider-Mans.
Thats just my take on it.
I wouldnt say the new movie is bad. I'm going to watch the third one. I think Miles is awesome. Im just over multiverses in general, and think Spider-Verse is the peak of why they annoy me so much.
And also, with my ranking, I genuinely like Spider-Man 3, and both The Amazing Spider-Man movies. So putting Across The Spider-Verse in their general vicinity isnt a huge slight. I liked it, I didnt love it.
Something like Batman Ninja takes established characters and puts them in new situations. Sure its wacky, but the characters actually act like the characters. And they didnt need to invent new ones for the story. And the characters arent treated like archetypes. Even Robin, the closest things to archetype characters, have taken on new identies (Nightwing, Red Hood, Red Robin, etc) to help maintain that they're actually characters.
Putting established characters in lore breaking, non continuity but new situations sounds pretty close to using an archetype of a character in a new story. That's like the definition of what comic books do. When they made the Harry Potter movies, there was one version of Harry to base it off of. . There was one version of Frodo. There are literally dozens, if hundreds of versions of Peter Parker.
The multiple Spider-Men in Spider-Verse are just a meta commentary on the classic Peter Parker story that we the audience has seen done a hundred times in Spider-Man movies, cartoons, comics, etc. Bit by a spider, uncle Ben dies, etc. You have to remember that for the general movie going audience the first Spider-Verse movie was their first introduction to Miles. They're using the multiverse stuff to differentiate Miles from the Peter Parker story. To ignore all of that because you don't like that they made a fat Spider-Man is just crazy to me.
Yea movie was fucking fire. Honestly might be my favorite out of that specific DCEU now that it’s officially rebooted. But unfortunately, as I said even before release, nothing really held any weight because Ezra Miller is definitely out, and even if he wasn’t, reset button was hit regardless. Jus dead in the water all around. Fire stand-alone movie tho and they did the character justice.
Comments
A+ input man. Really great and in depth analysis
Like Peter, Miles, Ben, Kane, and Miguel are real characters with history, and lore. Everyone else is either a glorified "what-if" that should have been a one-and-done (like Spider-Gwen), or a "GI Joe" variant (fat Spider-Man, Cat Spider-Man, Dinosaur Spider-Man, disabled Spider-Man, Punk Spider-Man, etc, etc).
If you prefer archetypes over characters, you do you though. That's the way the Marvel has been for over a decade now, so enjoy.
They're all things that contribute to good story telling and characterization though
And no, I'd argue that they have fuck all to do with good story telling. The first Spider-Verse, which you claim as the best Spidey movie ever, maintains very little continuity with the comics.
Some movies you have raved about in the past like Infinity War and Venom completely disregard lore. You love Batman Ninja or whatever that terrible shit is called which has almost nothing to do with any form of Batman lore or history.
So why is it OK sometimes for comic movies to break continuity or deviate from the lore but not other times?
History, like history of the character in terms of publication, but also character history in universe. History could be a part of lore, but not necesarily always the same.
Continuity in the sense of cohesive narrative and how it all ties together both within the story and other stories throughout a long history of releases
The first Spider-Verse did a very good job with these things. It put the characters in new situations, but the characters acted like the characters. Outside of Peter and Ben, I actually dont have an issue in that department in the new movie either
My least favorite parts in all of the MCU is how they deviate from the comics. I dont like GOTG 2 very much because of how different they are. I hate MCU Spidey. Infinity War would have been even better if Death was there like in the comics. Venom was good considering the rights issues, but really does suffer immensely from lack of Spider-Man.
Something like Batman Ninja takes established characters and puts them in new situations. Sure its wacky, but the characters actually act like the characters. And they didnt need to invent new ones for the story. And the characters arent treated like archetypes. Even Robin, the closest things to archetype characters, have taken on new identies (Nightwing, Red Hood, Red Robin, etc) to help maintain that they're actually characters.
My least favorite things in comics are time travel, multiverses, and mantle passing. I think those things kill continuity, and genuinely harm characterization by reducing it down to archetype titles. I just dont like them. Which is purely subjective, I get it, but I dont like those tropes. And I think just throwing a thousand nameless Spider-Mans into the story, or inventing some random Spider-Mans with singular traits takes away from the character of "Spider-Man", and especially takes away from Peter as a character. I mean there was literally a line in the new movie when 2099 was talking to Peter like "no, I have enough Peters". Like Peter isnt THE Spider-Man, just a generic nucance taking up space for all these other new Spider-Mans.
Thats just my take on it.
I wouldnt say the new movie is bad. I'm going to watch the third one. I think Miles is awesome. Im just over multiverses in general, and think Spider-Verse is the peak of why they annoy me so much.
The multiple Spider-Men in Spider-Verse are just a meta commentary on the classic Peter Parker story that we the audience has seen done a hundred times in Spider-Man movies, cartoons, comics, etc. Bit by a spider, uncle Ben dies, etc. You have to remember that for the general movie going audience the first Spider-Verse movie was their first introduction to Miles. They're using the multiverse stuff to differentiate Miles from the Peter Parker story. To ignore all of that because you don't like that they made a fat Spider-Man is just crazy to me.