Support NeoGAF

[jason10mm]

Oh, all that shit is chocked full of 'gods'... which I guess is why they never bother with 'god' because he'd be just another supernatural entity alongside all the others.

That's my point. MCU, DC, and Star Trek depict powerful beings as "gods" but never really address a being that does what GOD does (i.e., create the universe, take a personal interest in humans made in his image, lay down moral laws, etc) yet there are hints of it in these shows with a vast intelligence that seems to care about the actions of humans. Religion, as a concept, is slways underdeveloped or shown to be hollow in a "rip away the curtain hiding Oz" kinda way.

 

[FunkMiller]

That's my point. MCU, DC, and Star Trek depict powerful beings as "gods" but never really address a being that does what GOD does (i.e., create the universe, take a personal interest in humans made in his image, lay down moral laws, etc) yet there are hints of it in these shows with a vast intelligence that seems to care about the actions of humans. Religion, as a concept, is slways underdeveloped or shown to be hollow in a "rip away the curtain hiding Oz" kinda way.

Well, you've got to remember that shows and movies like that are made for a global audience - which contains many different religions, and many with no religion at all. Focussing on a specific religion is a very niche thing to do, which isn't really what these shows are after!

On Star Trek, Rodenberry was a staunch atheist, so heavy religious stuff would be anathema to what he created - and frankly the stuff they do have of it these days is way too much.

 

[jason10mm]

Yeah, I'm not advocating for clerics in these shows, just pointing out the elephant the writing is circling around. Be interesting to see how more overtly religious characters like Daredevil, Blade and Constantine interact with the more cosmic elements if/when they are all playing together.

I don't remember much of Shang-Chi and never watched Miss Marvel, curious if religion played much of a role there.

 

[Blade2.0]

Finally caught this now it's on demand.

Not bad. 7/10.

Nowhere near as good as the first one... but then it's all

Spoiler

one giant set up for a third movie, with absolutely zero pay off, so that's really what hamstrings it as a story. They would have done better to at least have a climax where something is resolved - even if it's not the full narrative. The best middle films of trilogies always do this - or stay self contained, with threads that flow out into the final part. Leaving the audience as unsatisfied as this does is not the best storytelling.

Also, the easter eggs and fan service stuff gets a bit much after a while. I'm hoping they rein it in a bit for part 3.

Unfortunately this film does suffer a bit from multiverse apathy syndrome, thanks to Disney and Warner Bros overplaying the concept so badly. A shame, given that this is the series that started the whole thing at the cinema, and did it best.

I disagree with your assessment on the end.

Spoiler: spoiler

I thought that the ending had a great setup for the next film and left me satisfied. It had a Empire Strikes back "woah, he just got fucked up and the big bad is in control now" type atmosphere plus the new team of Spider-people coming together to go find him was great.

I for one, loved the number two and if 3 sticks the landing, this could possibly be my favorite trilogy ever. We shall see, though.

 

[Toons]

Spoiler: Story spoiler

Was it actually explained why Morales is the only one to loose 2 people? All the other Spiderman have only lost one. He already lost his uncle (Prowler) in the first part 1 and now he is supposed to lose his dad as well? Sounds kind of stupid. Or was it explained and I just missed it?

All of the other spideys absolutely did not lose only one lol.

They literally show captain Stacy's death being a constant, yet we all know thats not what creates peter, his uncle ben does.

Spider Man's life is mired by near constant tragic loss, especially in the comics. Pretty much everyone close to him has died or suffered at some point.

 

[Toons]

Not really. It's all a bit woolly on that front, to be honest. It's more that

Spoiler

every Spider-man has to suffer some kind of personal tragedy for them to 'be' Spider-man. And how many tragedies? OG Pete lost Ben, Gwen and even May eventually.

It is kind of stupid when you think about it, because what is a tragedy, when you get right down to it? How would different tragedies affect different versions of Spider-man?

It would have worked a damned sight better if it had just been the one tragedy that has to happen in every universe - something like Ben dying. Much better focus. But this movie is about Miles, so they had to broaden it out to include anyone close to whichever Spider-man it is.

Frankly there's probably a better movie, with Peter having to fight a whole shit load of other Peters in order to save 'his' Uncle Ben.

I think you missed the point. Its not that the tragedies have to happen, its that the opening of the multiverse is the only thing that even allowed the possibility of one having the foresight and foreknowledge to prevent it from happening, and assuming another version of themselves life, or even seeing how a different choice would play out.

In the first movie that collider was due to kingpin trying to do exactly what Miguel ended up doing in his life, replacing his lost family. But the ramifications of opening that portal led to this whole mess where people got to see other versions of themselves and knew what could, would, or may happen to their own loved ones.

Heck, miles wasn't even supposed to know about the threat posed to his father, Gwen screwed up and thats how he found out.

As for Peter saving Ben, Peter wouldn't save Ben, not if he knew that would mean he never becomes spider man. Theyve played around with ideas like that but Peter is very much a "needs of the many" type, and he certainly wouldn't save one life knowing that thered be no one to protect from all the threats faced. In fact, we saw this play out in no way home essentially; he had the choice to ensure the safety of his loved ones in exchange for the lives of the villains but he didn't do that, because Peter never does.

That's one of the places where miles differs and why he's an interesting protagonist for this sort of thing. He's an anomaly amongst the endless Peters... he doesnt do everything the same way Peter does.

 

[FunkMiller]

I think you missed the point. Its not that the tragedies have to happen, its that the opening of the multiverse is the only thing that even allowed the possibility of one having the foresight and foreknowledge to prevent it from happening, and assuming another version of themselves life, or even seeing how a different choice would play out.

Dude, bit of a word salad there

It’s made pretty clear that these tragedies

Spoiler

have to happen for the multiverse to survive. Miguel‘s motivation is to prevent any more universes from falling, by ensuring Spider-man suffers from some sort of loss to preserve the canon. It’s pretty woolly.

 

[Toons]

Dude, bit of a word salad there

It’s made pretty clear that these tragedies

Spoiler

have to happen for the multiverse to survive. Miguel‘s motivation is to prevent any more universes from falling, by ensuring Spider-man suffers from some sort of loss to preserve the canon. It’s pretty woolly.

Well, no, its not clear. That's simply what Miguel says/thinks will happen based on anecdotal evidence.

Its hinted if not outright confirmed that Gwen inadvertently avoided her "canon event", without actively stopping it but by technicality. Miguel has tunnel vision and can only see one possible outcome, but I think in the follow up it will be revealed hes dead wrong.

 

[Arsic]

Finally got to see it today. Much better than the first which I felt was the best Spider-Man film ever. This trumps it. Miles developed a lot in the movie, other characters shine, and Miles felt more front and center than Peter was for the first.

Action was aces, visuals were dynamic and so well done, cohesive plot, and I never felt bored. Already wanting to watch it again.

Might be my favorite Marvel adaptation film on a big screen of any kind. Will let it simmer.

 

[Esca]

Great movie. Saw it in the theater and bought it digitally and have watched it a handful of times this week. I love the animation and visual styles, the music, voice acting sound all great. I'm really glad Gwen is grown to new heights and popularity

 

[TGO]

I do have a problem with Gwen Stacy in this version or should I say the Miles Morales version.
Why is she so young when in every version except for Miles Morales she was the same age as Peter.

 

[Doom85]

I do have a problem with Gwen Stacy in this version or should I say the Miles Morales version.
Why is she so young when in every version except for Miles Morales she was the same age as Peter.

She is the same age as the Peter from her universe. Peter B. Parker (and the Peter from Miles’ universe) are not from her universe.

 

[ForAcademicPurposes]

Worth the five year wait for the tracking shot of Gwen walking over the ledge.

 

[ForAcademicPurposes]

 

[StueyDuck]

so finally got around to this and welp talk about a great movie marred in really really low brow Gen-Z politics, easily could have been a 10 but overall it's a 6/10 for me, just a shame it seems like 15 year olds wrote the final product considering how fantastic the first one was.

 

[Arsic]

Curious if anyone knows :

What comic series is better for Miles, Ziglar or Bendis runs ?

 

[Hastelander]

Needs a better screenplay that doesn't make it seem like a overextended trailer (just like Into, but for different reasons), and more fun in it. Voice acting is slightly worse, but visually it's ace and a step up from Into, and puts many animated/superhero films to shame. It's also surprisingly... individualised(?) despite the premise and current blockbuster norm of an "ensemble" cast. Overall, it's a shame that just like Into, it leaves one hanging for more.