Spider-Man: Far From Home

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

Plot convenience is for when a plot is in motion already.

Plot starting can be anything, even random chance. That's how a lot of plots start.

The directors & people who wrote and made the movie already said that EG is direct continuation of IW as a one long arc. That means the plot is already moving before the rat came up.

Now, you're free to disagree but the people who made the movie actually agree with me that EG is not a new start.

[Tenzen12]

Exactly, story didn't call for Lang to be released, story exist because it happened.

As for articles only one explicitly share your definition of plot convenience and that esays and even that one says it's ok to use it that way.

Coincidence and convenience ruin plot. Anytime random, extemporaneous events are embedded in a story for the purpose of turning plot they are, by definition, deus ex machina. I think writers are allowed one deus ex machina per story, and typically it’s at the very beginning, where the ‘story’ starts. Fiction is just that: it’s the illustration of anomaly, the disruption of a preexisting pattern, the specific coinciding with the general. But the beginning is the only time you get to use it. Anytime you begin spiking your narrative with anomalies to keep the story moving it reveals the hand of the author working behind the story. The reader sees you putting the literary rabbits in the hat before the trick is performed, and your narrative loses credibility.

I said exactly that to you before. Multiple times.

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

Read my post above where I emphasize that EG is not a new start as said by the makers themselves.

It you disagree with that then go ahead and do it. After that, we can agree to disagree and stop this cyclical debate with you.

[Tenzen12]

It may be direct sequel, but it's still has narrative structure of self-contained story and thus it work by same rules. ALL remaining plotlines except the Snap itself were closed with few first minutes of Endgame and no new starts until actual plot kick in. Instead of intepreting creators words by point you want make, you should look on movies itself and figure what they meant instead.

Infinity War and Endgame doesn't have same kind of relation as Lord of The Ring, Two Towers and Return of the King. Instead it continuation in similiar manner to early Harry Potter (but much better because HP is terribly bad) books, where second book onward while being "direct continuation" are still fully self-contained.

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

Originally Posted by Tenzen12

Instead of intepreting creators words by point you want make, you should look on movies itself and figure what they meant instead.

Or you may need to learn to understand that two opposing arguments can have valid backups & supporting points of their own and your take is not the only one that is right.

This is, what, the fourth time I offered you to agree to disagree and drop it? And throughout all this debate, you refuse to let it go and continue trying to shove down your view on me.

You see EG as a new beginning, thus you don't consider the rat-savior as convenience. Fine, I guess. But those like me who view IW & EG as one long story arc (including the directors) will view the rat-savior as convenience and also has valid supporting points to back it up.

And yes, technically-speaking The Two Towers also has its own beginning, middle & end but that doesn't change the fact that it's only the second act of a larger story arc of TLOTR trilogy.

[Endscape]

Originally Posted by Obelisk ze Tormentor

Yeah, but Tony making Iron-Man suit in a cave with a box of scraps is one of the important plot points about who Tony Stark is, a true genius who will not cave in (no pun intended) even at terrorists' gun point. The rat serve no purpose more than a big fat convenience to move the plot as fast as they can with minimal thought given to it.

So things being unbelivable is Ok as long as it's thematically important then?

Scott is Hank's mentee and Hope's on-&-off love interest. I think that's good enough to make him work together with Ghost & Goliath to save them. I think it's totally worth giving the two relevant characters more screen-time. Also, "Laurence Fishburne + Hannah JK >>>>> random rat" any time of the day .

If Scott was the main character of the movie. I'd agree, but he isn't. Despite the importance of the Quantum Realm to the movie, I don't think it merits adding two characters to the thing.

Tony inventing the time machine has two narrative points:

1. To provide the movie with actual quantum time-travel.
2. To have Tony make a choice to help his Avengers friends do dangerous mission again or not, because he's a parent now and still couldn't get over his crushing defeat from Thanos.

If Goliath can provide #1, Tony would just need to do #2.

And if Tony can do both, why add another character to take up narrative resorces?

And this will also help nerfing Tony's intellect a bit which, frankly, have been blown to outrageous proportion in Endgame. Not only did Tony designed a time-machine on the fly (which works the first time around during the holographic test run) but he is also capable of making his own version of Infinity Gauntlet in just, what, a few weeks after he joined Avengers again? It's just too much. Yeah, nerfing Tony would actually help improving his character from being absurdly too much of a genius for his own good.

It's Tony's last outing, I don't think it's a problem showing off how smart he is.

As for the Gauntlet, I don't think that required exceptional intelligence, just something strong enough to handle the power.

Which is why it's called Plot-Convenience in the first place. Now, are you going to tell me that the rat-saviour is not a plot-convenience? I'd sure like to hear it.

I never said the rat wasn't plot convinience, just that I don't think plot convinience is something bad.

If superspies and assassins can find people who are living off the grid and in the middle of nowhere, finding a van in which physical appearance they already can tell should be easy. The fact that they stored it inside a government-run warehouse will make it even easier. Also, they can always track down Luis or his surviving friends who actually know about the van. Did we get any confirmation that Luis and his entire crew got dusted?

That's valid only if the warehouse was keeping proper rcords, which I doubt highly, considering all the chaos from the Snap.

I'd argue that Steve was already able to move on in his life as a fugitive-freedom-fighter. He can chill in Wakanda if he so choose. Hell, he was even confident enough to offer Tony help when needed (with that flip phone). It's just his failure against Thanos brought up his insecurities all over again.

It's not just failing that was the problem. Steve risked half of existence on his moral code and lost. That moral code has always been his core guiding principle. Steve lost that in this movie, which is something totally different than we've seen before from him.

His guilt and learning from mistake is what we need from Thor and we already got the former in IW. You don't need to stretch that guilt out to five years just so that he can learn humility and be a better ma I mean, god. Thor can learn that in, what, three days when he was banished to New Mexico in his first solo movie when he was an ungrateful & cocky god at the beginning?

What we didn't get before was a Thor that had lost everything, even who he was because of his own failure. It's pretty much the same as Steve and Tony's arc, which is what makes it interesting.

And considering how quick & easy Nat persuaded Clint away from his Ronin persona, it looks even more skippable to me. It's not like their relationship and bond from Avengers 1 changes or anything.

I found it an interesting reversal myself. But to each their own.

I mean, mature MJ could always wait until Peter reached the age of consent before going all out with them being official lovers. Before that happened, you can have Peter just crushing on mature MJ . It's not rocket science. If anything, it will also teach kids about the age of consent boundaries.

And there would be complaints that they were fetishizing statutory rape, like what happened with 13 Reasons Why and teen suicide. Not worth the hassle for Marvel and Disney.

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

Originally Posted by Endscape

So things being unbelivable is Ok as long as it's thematically important then?

Isn't that the point of following a superhero story? We excuse some of the ridiculousness as long as it is meaningful, important for the theme of the story and well-executed. Tony building a superior armor from scraps (it's not really scraps though, he was provided with the latest weapons of Stark Industries as ingredients in that cave by the terrorists) is ridiculous but that ridiculousness establishes who Tony is and what he is capable of. On the other hand, the rat doesn't establish anything aside from being a big fat convenience to move the plot forward.

Originally Posted by Endscape

If Scott was the main character of the movie. I'd agree, but he isn't. Despite the importance of the Quantum Realm to the movie, I don't think it merits adding two characters to the thing.

After the time skip, by adding Ghost & Goliath, logically we can substract Rocket & Hawkeye. Tony can build the new gauntlet, Goliath can build the QTM & the Q-suits while Ghost can do all the fighting & running that Hawkeye did in the movie. For the mission to Vormir, they can assign both Ghost & Goliath (because they love each other, like Nat & Clint) then Goliath can make the sacrifice for the Soul Stone. Tony & Hulk can then take over when it comes to all the quantum techs and Black Widow doesn't have to die. See? It's neat.

Originally Posted by Endscape

And if Tony can do both, why add another character to take up narrative resorces?

Already explained above.

Originally Posted by Endscape

It's Tony's last outing, I don't think it's a problem showing off how smart he is.

As for the Gauntlet, I don't think that required exceptional intelligence, just something strong enough to handle the power.

Tony was already established as probably the smartest man on Earth when it comes to science (coz Reed isn't here). They really don't need to crank it up to eleven. Why not share that intelligence to other characters while keeping Tony's intellect stay where he is instead of jacking it up with steroids? Quantum tech is the specialties of Hank, Goliath & Janet. Why not give them some credits (at least the available one)?

Originally Posted by Endscape

I never said the rat wasn't plot convinience, just that I don't think plot convinience is something bad.

Well, I already posted articles explaining why plot convenience is bad in previous page. Most of my reasoning about why it's bad is there for everyone to read. Agree or disagree, it's up to you.

Originally Posted by Endscape

That's valid only if the warehouse was keeping proper rcords, which I doubt highly, considering all the chaos from the Snap.

Secret agents, superspy & assassins have more ways to track things. And like I said, Luis & co are good leads since they owned the van and Ghost & Goliath know a lot about the Pym family at the end of A&tW. If my country's regular police can track down a stolen car (with unreliable plate numbers) using the oldschool method of going through investigations and asking people who has connection to the car, I'm pretty sure super-spy/super-assassins like Ghost can do better. She was supposed to be SHIELD's elite agent. Elite agents are not too dependent on automated technology. See Jason Bourne.

Originally Posted by Endscape

It's not just failing that was the problem. Steve risked half of existence on his moral code and lost. That moral code has always been his core guiding principle. Steve lost that in this movie, which is something totally different than we've seen before from him.

I don't disagree with that. I just don't think he needs five years to think and do what's necessary with the opportunity that he had at each moment.

Originally Posted by Endscape

What we didn't get before was a Thor that had lost everything, even who he was because of his own failure. It's pretty much the same as Steve and Tony's arc, which is what makes it interesting.

Thor already lost everything after the opening act of IW. He already broke down in front of Rocket. I don't think he really needs five more years after beheading Thanos to brood and being drunk all the time before doing something to undo the snap. I personally think FaThor is just a filler. Him breaking down in front of his past AU mother can easily happened a week after IW.

Originally Posted by Endscape

I found it an interesting reversal myself. But to each their own.

Yes, to each their own. I don't think it's all that interesting.

Originally Posted by Endscape

And there would be complaints that they were fetishizing statutory rape, like what happened with 13 Reasons Why and teen suicide. Not worth the hassle for Marvel and Disney.

Hence why I called out general US audience who can be too PC sometimes. I mean, come on people! Be more open-minded when it comes to romance & age-gap!

[Endscape]

Originally Posted by Obelisk ze Tormentor

Isn't that the point of following a superhero story? We excuse some of the ridiculousness as long as it is meaningful, important for the theme of the story and well-executed. Tony building a superior armor from scraps (it's not really scraps though, he was provided with the latest weapons of Stark Industries as ingredients in that cave by the terrorists) is ridiculous but that ridiculousness establishes who Tony is and what he is capable of. On the other hand, the rat doesn't establish anything aside from being a big fat convenience to move the plot forward.

You can easily say the same thing for the sake of smoothly moving the story along.

After the time skip, by adding Ghost & Goliath, logically we can substract Rocket & Hawkeye. Tony can build the new gauntlet, Goliath can build the QTM & the Q-suits while Ghost can do all the fighting & running that Hawkeye did in the movie. For the mission to Vormir, they can assign both Ghost & Goliath (because they love each other, like Nat & Clint) then Goliath can make the sacrifice for the Soul Stone. Tony & Hulk can then take over when it comes to all the quantum techs and Black Widow doesn't have to die. See? It's neat.

Except now Hawkeye, an originial Avenger, loses his chance to finish his story. And they can't really leave out a popular character like Rocket either. All characters are not equal, you can't subract a Rocket for a Goliath.

Tony was already established as probably the smartest man on Earth when it comes to science (coz Reed isn't here). They really don't need to crank it up to eleven. Why not share that intelligence to other characters while keeping Tony's intellect stay where he is instead of jacking it up with steroids? Quantum tech is the specialties of Hank, Goliath & Janet. Why not give them some credits (at least the available one)?

Except Hank and Janet needed to die for the timeskip and eventual Unsnappening to happen and there's no real reason to put Goliath in when Tony can do what he did.

Well, I already posted articles explaining why plot convenience is bad in previous page. Most of my reasoning about why it's bad is there for everyone to read. Agree or disagree, it's up to you.

I read some of them. IMO, plot convinience is bad when dealing with character arcs, but to move the plot along, there's a necessary evil.

Secret agents, superspy & assassins have more ways to track things. And like I said, Luis & co are good leads since they owned the van and Ghost & Goliath know a lot about the Pym family at the end of A&tW. If my country's regular police can track down a stolen car (with unreliable plate numbers) using the oldschool method of going through investigations and asking people who has connection to the car, I'm pretty sure super-spy/super-assassins like Ghost can do better. She was supposed to be SHIELD's elite agent. Elite agents are not too dependent on automated technology. See Jason Bourne.

OK, I was not aware the van was Luis'. It is possible then.

I don't disagree with that. I just don't think he needs five years to think and do what's necessary with the opportunity that he had at each moment.

Time has a way of bringing everything into context. For as long as we've known Steve, he's been jumping from one conflict to another. Even his time on the run was likely another mission in a way. The timeskip was probably the first oppurtunity Steve had to slow down, look at life and really see what he wanted from it.

Thor already lost everything after the opening act of IW. He already broke down in front of Rocket. I don't think he really needs five more years after beheading Thanos to brood and being drunk all the time before doing something to undo the snap. I personally think FaThor is just a filler. Him breaking down in front of his past AU mother can easily happened a week after IW.

Thor needed to be at absolute rock bottom to really reconcile the fact that he's no longer the Prince of anything,to get over the fact that he had built his whole identity around his title.

Hence why I called out general US audience who can be too PC sometimes. I mean, come on people! Be more open-minded when it comes to romance & age-gap!

On one hand, I agree about the weird Puritanism of Americans, on the other hand, the world can do without another reason for impressionable kids to let idiot horny adults take advantage of them. Nothing to do with being "PC". I'll err on the side of the latter.

[Magin]

I was trying to remember why the rat didn't seem terribly far-fetched. One, I was under the impression that the rat merely turned the device on, not manage to punch in the correct code to bring Scott back- is there any clarification on this in any interviews?

Second, I see your rat-convenience and raise you a Freakazoid. If you think a rat hitting the right keys is bad (by the way, keep in mind that 5 YEARS is a long time. There's that old saying about monkeys and writing all of Shakespeare), try a cat chasing a butterfly on a keyboard and entering the exact sequence to activate a super-computer chip.

Now, Spiderman itself... the bad part is that there's too many comparisons to Tony Stark, and we have the Iron Spider. Ignoring the fact that we have Peter as a high schooler in the first place (an idea I never got used to), Spiderman is far too heavily overshadowed in the MCU. But, at least MCU does one thing right: it looks to have amazing action sequences.

[Kanon]

Originally Posted by Magin

Now, Spiderman itself... the bad part is that there's too many comparisons to Tony Stark, and we have the Iron Spider. Ignoring the fact that we have Peter as a high schooler in the first place (an idea I never got used to), Spiderman is far too heavily overshadowed in the MCU. But, at least MCU does one thing right: it looks to have amazing action sequences.

I think this movie will in fact be about him stepping out of Iron Man's shadow. We see him wearing his regular costume in some scenes (and the Noir costume in others), I'm guessing the Iron Spider scenes are from the beginning of the movie.

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

Originally Posted by Endscape

You can easily say the same thing for the sake of smoothly moving the story along.

No. I really can’t easily say the same thing to the rat-ex-machina. Not when it happened in the middle of the long Infinity-arc starting from IW, and it doesn’t establish anything except for the superheroes being blessed with a ridiculous amount of astronomical luck to the point where even destiny & cosmos assist them . That's bad in my book.

Originally Posted by Endscape

Except now Hawkeye, an originial Avenger, loses his chance to finish his story. And they can't really leave out a popular character like Rocket either. All characters are not equal, you can't subract a Rocket for a Goliath.

Eh, the audience seem to be okay when Hawkeye did not present in IW. They just made a bunch of memes about his absence and that’s pretty much it. Clint's only arc in EG is just this: lost family -> went EMO & gone rogue -> accept mission -> lost Nat -> gets family back -> EMO no more. In my scenario where Nat doesn’t die, Hawkeye doesn’t need to be there until the final battle where he can do a cameo. The writer can just make him and his family be among the lucky ones who didn't get dusted so he doesn’t need to go the EMO route. As for Rocket, his real contribution is forcefully extracting Aether from Jane. You can literally give that job to anyone else in my scenario. Black Widow should be more than capable. And like Hawkeye, Rocket can always kick ass later in the final battle.

Originally Posted by Endscape

Except Hank and Janet needed to die for the timeskip and eventual Unsnappening to happen and there's no real reason to put Goliath in when Tony can do what he did.

Like I said, it’ll be nicer if they can share intelligence a bit. I know that Hank & Janet got snapped in my scenario but don’t make Tony the expert of anything and everything. Let’s give Goliath (the quantum expert left) the “high ground” when it comes to the quantum knowledge, with Tony, Rocket, Banhulk learning just behind him. That will certainly add more sense of camaraderie & entertainment value to the story.

Originally Posted by Endscape

I read some of them. IMO, plot convinience is bad when dealing with character arcs, but to move the plot along, there's a necessary evil.

Well, it’s not really necessary in my scenario.

Originally Posted by Endscape

OK, I was not aware the van was Luis'. It is possible then.

Yes, finally you get what I’m saying.

Originally Posted by Endscape

Time has a way of bringing everything into context. For as long as we've known Steve, he's been jumping from one conflict to another. Even his time on the run was likely another mission in a way. The timeskip was probably the first oppurtunity Steve had to slow down, look at life and really see what he wanted from it.

Well, it’s YMMV then.

Originally Posted by Endscape

Thor needed to be at absolute rock bottom to really reconcile the fact that he's no longer the Prince of anything,to get over the fact that he had built his whole identity around his title.

Also YMMV.

Originally Posted by Endscape

On one hand, I agree about the weird Puritanism of Americans, on the other hand, the world can do without another reason for impressionable kids to let idiot horny adults take advantage of them. Nothing to do with being "PC". I'll err on the side of the latter.

I think the solution is to not make the older-MJ horny or being overtly flirty/sensual/seductive with Peter until he reach proper age. Just portray the romance between PP & MJ in a healthy way by showing to audience that they care for each other. Just tame stuffs. They don't even have to kiss, like Clint & Nat.

Originally Posted by Kanon

I think this movie will in fact be about him stepping out of Iron Man's shadow. We see him wearing his regular costume in some scenes (and the Noir costume in others), I'm guessing the Iron Spider scenes are from the beginning of the movie.

For Spiderman character's sake, I hope you're right.

[Endscape]

Originally Posted by Obelisk ze Tormentor

No. I really can’t easily say the same thing to the rat-ex-machina. Not when it happened in the middle of the long Infinity-arc starting from IW, and it doesn’t establish anything except for the superheroes being blessed with a ridiculous amount of astronomical luck to the point where even destiny & cosmos assist them . That's bad in my book.

They were already in a 1 in 14,000,000 scenario. Astronomical luck is the baseine for entry.

Eh, the audience seem to be okay when Hawkeye did not present in IW. They just made a bunch of memes about his absence and that’s pretty much it. Clint's only arc in EG is just this: lost family -> went EMO & gone rogue -> accept mission -> lost Nat -> gets family back -> EMO no more. In my scenario where Nat doesn’t die, Hawkeye doesn’t need to be there until the final battle where he can do a cameo. The writer can just make him and his family be among the lucky ones who didn't get dusted so he doesn’t need to go the EMO route.

That's not giving the guy an actual conclusion to his story on screen, which I think he merited as a founding Avenger.

As for Rocket, his real contribution is forcefully extracting Aether from Jane. You can literally give that job to anyone else in my scenario. Black Widow should be more than capable. And like Hawkeye, Rocket can always kick ass later in the final battle.

Everyone else isn't Rocket. They added him because he was popular. I don't think a cameo at the end would have cut it. Besides, I don't think anyone else would be quite assholish enough to kick Thor in the but and get him moving.

Like I said, it’ll be nicer if they can share intelligence a bit. I know that Hank & Janet got snapped in my scenario but don’t make Tony the expert of anything and everything. Let’s give Goliath (the quantum expert left) the “high ground” when it comes to the quantum knowledge, with Tony, Rocket, Banhulk learning just behind him. That will certainly add more sense of camaraderie & entertainment value to the story.

*shrugs*

Doesn't seem worth the added narrative resources it would take up. Simpler to let Tony handle everything, especially as a last hurrah.

I think the solution is to not make the older-MJ horny or being overtly flirty/sensual/seductive with Peter until he reach proper age. Just portray the romance between PP & MJ in a healthy way by showing to audience that they care for each other. Just tame stuffs. They don't even have to kiss, like Clint & Nat.

No matter how you write it, it would come across that way, by sheer virtue of it being Peter and MJ, one of comics most iconic couples. I doubt they could even write them as friends that way.

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

Originally Posted by Endscape

They were already in a 1 in 14,000,000 scenario. Astronomical luck is the baseine for entry.

I mean it's astronomical even for MCU standard.

Originally Posted by Endscape

That's not giving the guy an actual conclusion to his story on screen, which I think he merited as a founding Avenger.

If Clint's story conclusion is "being happy with his family" then he already achieved it when his family was spared from the snap in my scenario. The only thing that's going on with him at the end of EG is missing the late Natasha. That doesn't need to happen when Nat is not dead in my scenario.

Here's where we probably differ: I don't think Clint's sidestory is that necessary. Most of his screentime can easily be reduced by making his family survived the snap and I don't think the audience will mind (like in IW). If you don't feel that way then let's just agree to disagree.

Originally Posted by Endscape

Everyone else isn't Rocket. They added him because he was popular. I don't think a cameo at the end would have cut it.

Rocket doesn't even talk much in the movie and his interaction with everyone else is superficial at best. You can have him running around in the background helping with the QTS without consuming a lot of screentime.

Originally Posted by Endscape

Besides, I don't think anyone else would be quite assholish enough to kick Thor in the but and get him moving.

But here's the fact: Rocket did not succeed in getting Thor to move. Thor still cowered in self-pity until his mother Frigga found him out. It's her that managed to get him going, not Rocket. So, at the end of the day, Rocket didn't really do anything except for Snake-ing around & subtracting the Aether (which BW is more than capable of doing). This will also cut the runtime for Rocket's ineffective pep-talk to Thor.

Originally Posted by Endscape

*shrugs*

Doesn't seem worth the added narrative resources it would take up. Simpler to let Tony handle everything, especially as a last hurrah.

YMMV then. It think it's worth it and it will be a lot more fun & make sense. It will also reduce the "Tony worship"-bias/sentiment that the movie has in the eyes of some people.

Originally Posted by Endscape

No matter how you write it, it would come across that way, by sheer virtue of it being Peter and MJ, one of comics most iconic couples. I doubt they could even write them as friends that way.

Then there's no helping the US audience. They're hopeless .

[Endscape]

Originally Posted by Obelisk ze Tormentor

I mean it's astronomical even for MCU standard.

Again, they're in a deliverately cultivated 1 in 14,000,000 scenario. Strange probably picked this one because of the rat.

If Clint's story conclusion is "being happy with his family" then he already achieved it when his family was spared from the snap in my scenario. The only thing that's going on with him at the end of EG is missing the late Natasha. That doesn't need to happen when Nat is not dead in my scenario.

Clint needed to have a conclusion on screen, not a simple "He's with his family".

Rocket doesn't even talk much in the movie and his interaction with everyone else is superficial at best. You can have him running around in the background helping with the QTS without consuming a lot of screentime.

But he's still present on screen, still walking around and being Rocket.

But here's the fact: Rocket did not succeed in getting Thor to move.

Rocket got Thor off his couch.

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

Originally Posted by Endscape

Again, they're in a deliverately cultivated 1 in 14,000,000 scenario. Strange probably picked this one because of the rat.

That defense can honestly be used to excuse any kind of bad writing. "Oh, this, this and this shitty plot progression happens. Doesn't matter, because this is the only one out of the 14+ million paths where the Avengers win, so deal with it".

Originally Posted by Endscape

Clint needed to have a conclusion on screen, not a simple "He's with his family".

And I'm saying he doesn't need it because the conclusion & his "development" itself is superficial. Clint always love his family and he always love Nat. He practically goes back to his old self at the end of the movie with no progression to his character except for the fact that he lost Nat now (is that even a progression?).

Originally Posted by Endscape

But he's still present on screen, still walking around and being Rocket.

And I'm saying keep him walking around and crack jokes every now and then but scrap his ineffective pep-talks. Wouldn't take much screentime that way.

Originally Posted by Endscape

Rocket got Thor off his couch.

Not really. FaThor only agreed to tag along because they said they had all kind of drinks in the jet and in the Avengers HQ .

[Shinji103]

Just finished watching the movie......

Holy s***, did everything just go Fubar with the mid-credits scene?

Spoiler:

Not only did they actually bring back J. Jonah Jameson with the same actor from the original Spider-Man trilogy,

not only did Spider-Man get framed for murdering the “hero” Mysterio,

but he even announced Spider-Man’s identity as Peter Parker to the world.

Holy s***. To the nth power.


Honestly.....I was really looking forward to Spider-Man without Jameson being there to dump on him. I’m just not a fan of watching that happen to the good guys. First we had to suffer through Ross, but now Peter has to suffer through Jameson. Ugh. -_-

But then.......that after credits scene................WHAT THE-?!?!?!

[Tokkan]

Spoiler for Mid-Credits scene:

I think J. Jonah Jameson being there to tear the hero down is an important part of Spider-Man's identity, so I'm glad he's finally here even if he's presented as a reactionary internet pundit instead of a guy in charge of a newspaper. And J.K. Simmons is pretty much the definite live action J.J. so I'm glad he's back.

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

After watching the movie yesterday, the feelings that I got coming out of the theater is that of a mixed fun, but it’s still fun nonetheless. The mixed feelings that I get resulted from, you guessed it, a mix between the pros & cons in the movie:

Spoiler for Plot Points. Don't Open if you wanna watch the movie blind.:

The Pros:

• Good villain. Jake Gilly played Mysterio greatly. If there’s a weakness in the character, it mostly came from the writing, not the acting. I really really enjoy this villain and his tricks. It’s too bad that he seems to have perished at the end of the movie.
• MJ having some sort of “edgy complex/syndrome” is actually pretty amusing.
• Happy is surprisingly tolerable in this movie.
• All the plot twists & callbacks are pretty enjoyable. Obviously, if you have any knowledge or have googled Mysterio, you’ll know that he’s the bad guy all along but the way they reveal it is hilariously entertaining. Mysterio’s reveal is actually an example of “exposition-dump” done right and makes sense.
• Thankfully, the visual is nice. The CGI is not jarring and the setting being European tourist-spots really help it.
• The mid-credit & post-credit scenes are actually quite important for the Spidey & MCU's larger plot.

The Cons:

• This is a con by default considering the nature of MCU’s Spiderman: This Peter/Spidey is too much of a Tony’s boy and “Iron-Man lite” even more so in this movie. I have already explained in length about why I don’t like it in my previous post in this thread so I won’t repeat it. I miss the days when Spiderman has to figure out something on his own with his own resources.
• The movie throws comedic bits & moments like no tomorrow. They pretty much follow the “Let’s throw everything at the audience! Don’t worry, some will most likely stick.”-formula with the jokes. The parts where the black teacher spout one-liners about witches aren’t funny at all and can easily be cut from the movie in order to not bloat it (ditto for the other lame jokes).
• Peter's relevant-friends got blipped & un-blippedwith him is still a convenience.
• Ned & his girlfriend are useless and their screentime could’ve been cut or used for better things. The reason that pair even exist is just as one gag that overstays its welcome.
• Sound design & music is rather average for a blockbuster movie, especially compared to the recent Godzilla: KOTM.
• Peter’s class’ teacher is too stupid & gullible to be real, which is jarring considering all the smart things that the MCU has done to break old traditions (such as keeping secret identities). He feels like a relic of a character from the 80s & 90s.
• They spent a considerable amount of time & focus when Peter is designing his final Spidey-suit for the climactic battle but the result is just your run-of-the-mill Spidey-suit. Like, really? So, what is the point of drawing such attention to it in the first place? If you gave Peter all of Tony’s resources to make a final suit and you highlighted the making process, you’d better deliver a suit with more “oomph” than the Iron-Spider.

That sounds like a lot more negatives, but in FFH case, the positives actually overpowered the negatives which made me really enjoy the movie overall. IMO it’s not better than Spiderman 2 or Spider-Verse because FFH lacks some poignant moments in it, but I do like it just as much as Homecoming. My advice to you all: don’t get swept up by the hype from people who said that “FFH is the best Spiderman movie to date!!!” before watching it. Go to the theaters with sensible expectation and you’d most likely come out very entertained.


Also, Questions:
So…the people who returned from the “Blip” appear in the spot where they disappeared? Wouldn’t that mean a lot of “Un-Blip”-people were killed when it happened? Why? How? Let’s think about the millions of people who were riding various vehicles throughout the universe. Those who rode airplanes would’ve un-blipped mid-air and fell to their deaths and those who rode spaceships in the vacuum of space would've suffocated to death. Those who rode boats & ships in the middle of the oceans and un-blipped there would’ve drown, got eaten and starved to death. Those who rode cars & bikes and un-blipped in the middle of busy roads would’ve gotten killed & injured by the passing cars & trucks. Train passengers are probably the luckiest of the bunch since they most likely un-blipped on top of quiet railways except for the unlucky ones who un-blipped in front of oncoming trains or on narrow rail-bridges. And those are just some un-blip cases that involve vehicles. What about other dangerous situations? So, The Avengers un-blipping people in Endgame actually caused a lot of them to die horrible deaths instead of being “harmlessly” erased? Wow

Note: I did miss probably 5-7 minutes of the start of FFH. I started watching when Spidey was doing the press meeting. So… if there’s an error in my question above, please point it out.

[Illsteir]

Originally Posted by Obelisk ze Tormentor

Also, Questions:
So…the people who returned from the “Blip” appear in the spot where they disappeared? Wouldn’t that mean a lot of “Un-Blip”-people were killed when it happened? Why? How? Let’s think about the millions of people who were riding various vehicles throughout the universe. Those who rode airplanes would’ve un-blipped mid-air and fell to their deaths and those who rode spaceships in the vacuum of space would've suffocated to death. Those who rode boats & ships in the middle of the oceans and un-blipped there would’ve drown, got eaten and starved to death. Those who rode cars & bikes and un-blipped in the middle of busy roads would’ve gotten killed & injured by the passing cars & trucks. Train passengers are probably the luckiest of the bunch since they most likely un-blipped on top of quiet railways except for the unlucky ones who un-blipped in front of oncoming trains or on narrow rail-bridges. And those are just some un-blip cases that involve vehicles. What about other dangerous situations? So, The Avengers un-blipping people in Endgame actually caused a lot of them to die horrible deaths instead of being “harmlessly” erased? Wow

Kevin Feige answered that in a Reddit AMA:

Originally Posted by dwallace3099

Hi Kevin, thanks for doing the AMAA!

People have expressed views that, in Endgame, those brought back by the snap could have died in accidents (like someone being brought back 100 ft in the air where a plane used to be). Is it possible that Hulk, when doing the snap, not only brought everyone back, but also brought them back in a safe place?

Thanks and have a good one!

Originally Posted by KevFeige

We refer to the version of Hulk in Endgame as Smart Hulk. So, yes.

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

Originally Posted by Illsteir

Kevin Feige answered that in a Reddit AMA:

I love the fact that the ones who are actually concerned with the safety of the un-blipped people in the MCU are the fans instead of the writers & showrunners. It's almost like such important point is just an afterthought for them which is evident coz Endgame didn't even bother to address it.