Movie: Spider-Man: Homecoming

My main thesis for this movie would be that it is Pure and Good. It's one of the more wholesome Marvel movies so far, and it's Good both in the sense that "wow, all the characters in this are so nice," and "it's not a groundbreaking superhero movie, but it's Good."

Its strengths laid largely on its fresh takes on the usual Spider-Man tropes, such as its ability to show the MCU from a young and innocent perspective, its simplicity and straightforward story-telling, Tom Holland being himself, and a narratively strong villain. Also, so many easter eggs!

Its weaknesses mostly centered on it erring on the side of being too plot-driven, resulting in (arguably/seemingly) stunted character growth.

Overall, however, I thought this was such a fun movie. It was a pleasure to watch and it ends on a hopeful, optimistic note, rather than a foreboding one, the latter being the norm for recent MCU movies.


Tony Stark disclaimer (you can skip this part; it's more of me needing to air out my grievances)
Let's get this out of the way because I don't want to talk or think about it anymore.

As an active participant in the Marvel fandom, I have borne witness to what seems to be the 6,000 Ways to Hate Tony Stark trend, and as someone who appreciates his complicated and long-suffering character, it's been pretty hard to watch. I'm not sure why this is a thing. Has RDJ played the role so well that the world is reacting to Tony Stark the way the unknowing General Public in canon would react to him too? I don't think Marvel has spared any time in exploring his character and subsequent growth in canon (in fact, constant focus on his character's growth is what most complainants grumble about because apparently You Just Can't Win), so fandom's constant misinterpretation is pretty confusing.

Why does fandom still call him a war monger despite this last being an issue literally in the first half of the first Iron Man movie in 2008 (aka literally almost a decade ago)? Why do people still call him a smarmy playboy despite his being in a monogamous relationship since, again, the first Iron Man movie? Why do they downplay his being a team player and love for the Avengers team when we canonically know that (1) he legitimately ASKED to be part of the team at the end of Iron Man 1 and was rejected, (2) had his self-made home invaded and attacked by aliens but he didn't blame SHIELD or the team because he was so happy he was part of it that (3) he gave them a whole TOWER as headquarters without being asked, and he feeds/shelters them without asking for anything in return, (4) in Civil War, he was the only one who actively worked and looked for ways to keep the team together, and (5) we know that without a doubt, his literal worst fear is the team dying and him not doing enough to prevent it? And more than that, that he was the only Avenger whose deepest darkest thoughts (shown via Wanda) involved the whole team? Why do they give passes to Bucky for being brainwashed by Hydra, Jessica Jones for being brainwashed by the Purple Man, but not Tony for being manipulated by Wanda into creating Ultron?

Is Tony Stark flawed? Definitely. Is he the villain fandom seems to be hell-bent on making him out to be? Of course not.

He comes into SMHC (great acronym, btw) from a world of hurt. He has PTSD from Avengers 1, he created killer AI in a misguided attempt to protect his team in Avengers 2, he lost all his friends in Civil War. It would be so easy for him to be mean and rude and bitter in this movie, and at many stages in his life, but instead he proactively decides to do good and "break the cycle of shame," as it were. How is that not reason enough to root for this guy?

So I will proceed with the review with this in mind. Tony being in this movie was a non-issue for me because it made narrative sense for him to be there, he was in character the whole time, and I don't think he overshadowed Peter in a way that undermined the Spider-Man name. If anything, he was an absentee mentor who was invested in making this kid's dreams come true without having him (Peter) get hurt in the process. In his character's most significant turning point buried under the rubble, when he's stripped down to the barest form of Peter Parker, the thing that gets him to push himself is Tony Stark's voice.


What worked
In summary, what I loved about the movie was how fun and new it was. That sounds trivial and insignificant, especially given the scope and nerdy depth of the MCU at present, but when you think about how this movie is yet another reboot of something that has been rebooted twice in the last decade with at least 2 movies per incarnation, it's actually a massive compliment.

What could have easily been written off as being Another Spider-Man Reboot actually ended up providing a fresh perspective on the hero. Putting aside the references to a bigger universe, this got the nuances of Spider-Man just right - from the snark (which we already saw and appreciated in Civil War), to the little side-adventures, to Peter's all-around niceness and desire to prove himself... it just hit the nail on the head.

A huge part of that is thanks to Tom Holland. Aside from looking like a kid (and being a kid lol), I feel like he really got the wide-eyed wonder of Peter, and the just-about-done-with-puberty timbre of his voice added so much charm to the character. A lot of the time, I was watching on worriedly like, "Hijo, please do not hurt yourself." (That might say more about me than the movie though, haha.)

They also wisely steered clear of many Spider-Man movie tropes and modernized the story-telling. First of all, we don't dwell on the Uncle Ben story line - it's referenced in the smallest possible way ("I can't do that to May, not after everything she's been through" or something to that effect), but the Peter in this universe seems to be motivated a lot by altruism. He wants to be a hero and he wants to do good, and that's what makes him so fun and compelling to watch. He isn't thrust into responsibility, he willingly volunteers.

We also steer clear of IMAX-pandering shots of Spider-Man webbing himself through New York, in favor of featuring the Washington Monument scene. This was also a great way to upgrade a trope - you get the adrenaline rush of soaring at heights, but it's infused with storytelling. Peter's afraid because there are real stakes for him - his friends are in the elevator, and he has a limited amount of time to be able to save them. It's also interesting that he's literally fought a roster of superhumans, but it's heights and the realization that he could die that makes him admit fear for the first time.

In addition, we see an Aunt May who isn't old (though, again, we've seen that in CW), an MJ who isn't girly or The One Who Has It All or The Most Popular Girl In School, and a non-traditional bully who gets in your head or under skin without being violent. These are small things in the grand scope of the narrative, but they help make Peter's world that more tangible, grounded, and relatable.

We also skip most of the origin story, with Peter being bitten by a spider. In fact, thanks to the introduction in Civil War, we skip most of Peter adjusting to being Spider-Man. He already knows what he wants to do, and he's adjusting to something else entirely.

This brings me to my next point: Spider-Man has always been a coming of age movie. Usually, that's manifested through the Uncle Ben storyline, with Peter having to face the very real and very dire consequences of his actions. He becomes Spider-Man carrying the weight of his loved one's death on his shoulders.

In this movie, however, Peter comes of age by earning the privilege of being Spider-Man. I find that so interesting as a story arc and it's such a new way of presenting his character without taking away from what made him so iconic in the comics. It would have been so easy for this movie to be swallowed whole by the sheer immensity of the MCU, but the main takeaway is what Tony imparts in what he's learned the hard way by being Iron Man: if you're nothing without the suit, then you shouldn't have it.

And therein lies the crux of Peter's main conflict - he's been so focused on trying to be an Avenger, of trying to prove himself to Tony and other people, that he's forgotten himself in the thick of it. He's neglected his family and friends (though not to a dire extent), and he was even ready to drop out of school. His main turning point was the realization that he doesn't need to rush, doesn't need to sacrifice his development and personal life to be a hero.

I think this is really the only superhero movie that tries to emphasize how you can be a hero and be yourself without having to draw a line somewhere, and I love that. It's ironic that this is his main arc even if he's one of the few current movie superheroes who actually has a secret identity, but that just makes his internal struggle all the more poignant.

This brings me to my unironic favorite part of the movie (which I can see other people finding cheesy or ham-handed, but I loved it, dammit): Peter finally understanding himself while buried under the warehouse rubble. I'm going to admit upfront that part of why I loved this scene was for personal reasons because he hears Tony's voice in his head and that makes me weep inside every time I think about it. Even putting that aside though, seeing him realize that Spider-Man is Peter Park and vice-versa (which we also see visually through the half-mask-half-Peter reflection in the puddle which, you know, yay, #symbolism), and finally being able to save himself by carrying the rubble was so freaking gratifying. He is 100% coming of age in that moment, and I live for it.

AND OF COURSE, in as much as internal conflict is good and adds depth to the movie, external conflict is what makes it compelling to watch and, as this is a superhero movie, is what brings the action. The main ~twist of the movie was the reveal of Toomes being Liz's father, and they did that so well, especially if you're watching the movie in a packed theater. Gasps, silent shock, etc. Michael Keaton is TERRIFYING as Toomes, and that car scene had me in cold sweat and hiding half my face behind a bag of popcorn (I wish I was exaggerating, but that is what actually happened). I love that Peter saves him from death in the end, and I love that he's an everyman who isn't evil by nature. Yes. Good.

Finally, even all these aside, there are so many fun things, which I don't have the patience to discuss one by one so here they are in a bulleted list with my less-than-articulate commentary:

• Literally the whole opening bit with the vlog of Civil War. I am going to formally start a petition for there to be a blu-ray extra where the whole of Civil War is just vlogged by Peter Parkrer. This is the only version I will then accept as canon.
• The Pure Friendship of Peter and Ned oh my god
• Ned is the actual incarnation of Wade from Kim Possible, y/y?
• All those easter eggs Happy put in the jet to the new Avengers base! YO
• The background dialogue like "Today we'll talk about Niels Bohr, but there's really nothing BOHR-ING about him" and casual mentions of the Sokovia Accords lord
• Everyone snarkily referring to Cap as being a war criminal *cackles*
• I LOVE THE SUIT I don't care what anyone thinks. It's amazing and powerful and KAREN yes, good, I agree.
• The Tony love quadrangle of Peter-Pepper-Happy-(off-screen) Rhodey ♥ And Vision too?! IDK I don't want to assume anything
• DONALD GLOVER AS MILES MORALES'S UNCLE don't touch me literally do not even breathe in my direction or I will break down and weep see if I don't

What didn't work

Despite everything I said, I think that maybe a casual viewer (not necessarily someone who isn't a fan of the source material) who isn't as emotional about characters would see the movie as fun and breezy, and leave it at that. Despite Peter's conflict being present, it isn't presented with as much gravitas as the previous movies, and the tone isn't as solemn and heavy as it usually is - which is understandable, as the previous incarnations dealt directly with death.

As such, the movie can appear shallow for most of its lengthy run time, with the overly emotional parts, like the rubble scene, seeming ham-handed in its treatment of Peter's struggle. The overbearing dialogue doesn't help much with this, especially with the cliche of seeing your ~reflection on some surface as you ~reflect in your head (High School Musical 2's Bet On It comes to mind lol).

This can, in turn, affect a lot of the what makes up the heart of the film. Some might find that glossing-over of Uncle Ben's storyline as a cheapening of the character, for example.

Also, because it bears mentioning, this kinda screws with the MCU timeline a bit because it mentions that present day is 8 years before the battle of New York, which, if we go by movie release date, was actually 5 years ago in 2012. So either The Avengers was set in 2010, or this movie is taking place in 2020. OR, as many have theorized, the actual timeline is condensed and a lot of the MCU movies happen concurrently. You're going to have to just YouTube this instead of relying on me because truthfully, I have read too much canon divergence fanfic to tell you when which event happens, haha. This goes in the "not work" category, though, because it probably hung over many of the more invested viewers' heads, leaving them unable to pay attention to the movie by itself.



In any case, I really enjoyed Spider-Man: Homecoming - I enjoyed it even upon rewatching it twice! It was a fresh take on the iconic hero without losing what made him one of the most beloved comic book character in the past 50+ years. I will probably keep coming back to it whenever I need a pick-me-up. Seeing the *allegedly leaked Infinity War preview, I'm probably going to need that. Until then, bring on Ragnarok and Black Panther!