If in previous incarnations the bet was made on the hero and his actors, then with the belated return of Spider to Marvel, the studio seemed to correctly assess its strength and realized that it would not be able to hastily, on purely commercial rails and on the fresh memory of the viewer to create another cult image. Therefore, she did not even try and immediately made a bet on the entourage, on an inflated sense of celebration, on teenage comedy, on references, on copying past successful scenes. And the villain. In fact, the main star here is not Holland, but Keaton, who at that time was so skillfully bought from DC, and even drawn in Oscar Birdman. This movie would have gone down without Keaton. He took it out on himself.
Otherwise, it is almost unseemly porridge:
- The film begins with a dating error. The authors failed to count twice-two and gave the wrong number of years since the Chitauri invasion. And after the premiere, critics pointed them out, and before the dvd release it was still not corrected. However, replacing the text is not expensive.
Did Parker make a documentary about himself? And he was allowed to? Considering how illegal and secret an adventure all this was?
- The authors in the pre-release materials rested on the fact that the Spider will be canonical to the bone: here he has web shooters, apertures in front of his eyes, a drone, a parachute, a membrane of flyers (everything like in comics)... Yeah, but he's got some weird sleeves and a navigator in a suit that totally contradicts the canon.
- In general, a significant part of screen time is taken over by a talking suit with the functions of Inspector Gadget. But I wasn't going to watch Iron Man 4 with Jarvis' wife. Talking costume is a slut, he's not really needed here, it's a chatty plug in a half-empty plot.
- There are almost no whites in the movie. The entire school consists of Hindus, Negroes, Latinos, Asians, as well as Jews. Hindu made Ned Leeds, Indian made Flash Thompson, Liz Allan became mulatto ... I am not against other races, I am against changing characters. As one reviewer put it, to reboot a modern franchise, it needs to be refreshed, but all that freshness here comes down to changing the races and genders of familiar characters.
- Spider doesn't look very heroic. Did you ask for Spider to return to Marvel? Get it and sign it. But in his own film, he becomes a supporting character and even a second-class character who is busy curing to Stark. And then there's Happy Hogan, who's basically nobody in this context. Everything is even put so that the Vulture is actually the villain of Stark, this is the third offended by him (and in the sequel there was another). So why would Parker have to deal with these issues? Because he's a six?
And that way, no. The film is extremely secondary, not independent, not brave, it has a lot of stupid, vulgar, unnecessary. The only plus was the fact that the heroes in the suits of lawyers managed to pick up the same villains and temporarily returned Spider to Marvel, and this fact became such a high-profile event that he was put in the title of the film. Three movies. Apart from flaunting this fact and tons of kringe fan service, there is nothing special in them.