Spider-Man: No Way Home *spoilers from post 185*

If you read my post fully I said he wasn't a big name until the Raimi trilogy and i mean big name as in coming into the mainstream the regular every day cinema goer either knows or probably cares what Osbourne has done in the comics I'm a huge fan and I love how we ran the Dark Avengers and basically turned Shield into Hammer but again all of that is double dutch to most people

In my own experience the 1st marvel heros I heard of was Hulk , probably because of the live action TV show and Spiderman cos he was everywhere , 1st villain I remember hearing of was Doom cos of that distinctive look and he was in all the cartoons and kids annuals and stuff 1st time I saw the Goblin was the awesome 90s animated series anyway it's just my own perspective

It's a hereditary disease that affects the Osborns, and was part of what drove Norman to try different experiments with animals and insects, such as Richard Parker testing with spiders, and Connors testing with lizards. Norman was trying to find something that could heal him. Norman died from it and told Harry it'd affect it him too. Harry then started being affected by it (which was stupid because Norman lived to mid-50's to 60's with it, yet it started affecting Harry almost instantly after he finds out about it and he is rushing to find a cure immediately). Harry was given Norman's secret files about his research and realised he needed Spiderman's blood to try and cure him. But he didn't know that Richard Parker had used Parker DNA in his experiments and so the healing properties of his experiments would only work on someone with Parker DNA. Harry got some of Spiderman's blood and used it to try and cure himself, but it made him worse and turned him into the Green Goblin.

Harry was still alive by the end, he says the effects of the Goblin potion he took comes and goes.

Yeah, it just comes back to my main criticism of TASM films which is that they had some good ideas, but taken a few steps too far.

Really enjoyed the movie but more because of the Spider-Men interactions than the villains. Made me realise that apart from mysterio all the Spider-Man villains have been pretty cartoonish with quite hammy acting, especially Green Goblin. I like the way they had the Garfield peter Parker sort of getting some redemption for saving MJ. Also for once didn't find MJ annoying.

Just moved above The Avengers to become the 8th biggest movie of all time.

The only MCU films ahead of it now are Infinity War and Endgame.

I'm really happy for Andrew Garfield in particular. Given how hated his SM films were to the point where he didn't get a third film and Sony's struggles with the films (and their proposed spin-offs) ended up causing them to get together with Marvel, for Garfield to be getting so much love now for his NWH appearance is great. The issues with the TASM films were never his fault and he and Emma Stone were always lauded for their roles, but he does seem like the kind of actor who would take stuff like that to heart.

The love he's getting for his appearance and the redemption his character gets for saving MJ is fantastic, and whether or not they do go for a third TASM film or does lead to further appearances, I think this has helped bring him up to a similar level to Maguire and Holland.

I think people say his Peter Parker was a bit of a d*ck, and that's true in a sense. Particularly once he gets his powers, he became very over-confident and played around with the guy he caught a bit too much before the cops came. But I think that's natural enough in a way, that he was a kid being bullied and now has all this strength and power. There was a clear shift though when he saved the kid in the car on the bridge, I think his confidence balanced out a bit more and he realised the responsibility he had. After that, I had no real issue with either his Peter or his Spider-Man, I thought he was excellent in both roles. Definitely more of the quippy, sarcastic side of the character than the nerdy, unlucky side that Maguire's character focused on. Also I think he moved a lot more like Spider-Man than any of the others.

Holland was ruined because marvel/Sony felt like they had to tag on an avenger to each film, even far from home, he's basically Tony jr with the gadgets and living in his shadow. Calling everyone sir, just wasn't the Spidey i grew up with and loved. Agree with above, Tobey nailed Peter and Andrew almost nailed Spidey. He definitely nailed him in No Way Home and overshadowed Tom imo.

The only saving grace for Tom was the ending, clean slate on his own has me really excited for the next Trilogy.

Well, my knowledge of Peter Parker's Spiderman was (Rightly or wrongly) that he was a kid somewhere between 15-17. Was a bit dorky and self-conscious when not Spiderman but pretty quippy and more confident when in suit.

As a result, for me, while I enjoyed Toby Maguire's films to various degrees, most of that was down to my enjoyment of Sam Raimi and the villains. I always thought Tobey Maguire looked too old for the part. He always looked like his biggest problem wasn't teenage angst but keeping up mortgage payments :)

Also, while Garfield was more into the quips as Spiderman, I thought he was also slightly too old and more traditionally handsome to be an average self-conscious geeky teenager.

Having said that, it was fantastic to see them both in the movie and did bring a laugh and smile to my face (Especially, as I said before, Garfield. He was awesome and I could have watched the three of them chat for another hour. lol) ,

So for ME (A non-reader), I thought Tom Holland was a great choice. He looks about the right age. Looks sufficiently "Hollywood Average" and portrays the right amount of awkwardness. (And, especially in Civil War, the tight amount of banter. Not so much quippy but banter).

But, once again: NON reader.

They pretty much reboot most of the comics every decade or so, so at times in the comics he's high-school late-teens, at other times he's working as a photographer to put himself through college, and at times he's been mid-to-late 20's working as a scientist. His personality kinda shifts and evolves over the years in the same way too. Then they reboot the comics universe in some way and start again.

So all versions of him that we've seen are pretty much right in some way or are pulling from certain eras or styles of the character, but everyone has different familiarity with it and will recognise some parts of the character and not others. But it really boils down to something I've said previously about things like comparing Joker or Batman actors; they each suit the films they were in and probably wouldn't have been as good as others. Maguire's Spider-Man/Peter wouldn't have suited Garfield's films and vice-versa. Tom Holland is actually a good mix of the two and I think he probably would have been good in the other SM films, but probably still wouldn't have been as good as Maguire/Garfield.

He was never even an Avenger really. Pushed into the MCU team up for the sake of it, Spiderman and all his properties. Avengers was a b team to X-Men, for second rate heroes who couldn't stand on their own.

Since it got huge due to the MCU, Spiderman and his properties are still too big to need the Avengers or MCU. Spiderman acting as a protege to Iron Man was a joke..

Before I wanted Marvel to get the rights to Spiderman back, now I'd prefer Sony hold onto them. He and his properties are far too big to be a MCU sideshow, nor do they need it

As a side note, I think it should be acknowledged just how popular Spiderman has become since his creation. An enduring popularity never seen before really. To this day, the everyman, who everyone can relate to.

There are huge franchises like Star Wars, Harry Potter or whoever. Global brands. But purely from an individual level, one singular character, nothing has ever had the continued impact and appeal of Spiderman.

My mate put it to me one day, he loved Iron Man and his films. Into cars, could relate to the tech stuff or whatever. A few years later said the character bored him, a fad or phase.

Spiderman for decades, transcends that and continues to do so, regardless of what's the in thing. His enduring popularity as the everyman is something everyone can relate to and is timeless.

People may role their eyes but I think it's fascinating. My daughter, now 6, watched his cartoons as a toddler, interested, and now watches them in a manner where she understands them. A large proportion of every demograph and minority relates to him on some level, an unintended, huge reaching appeal no other character has ever encompassed, or had that impact.

I'm confident you could reboot his films every year for the next 20 years with the same origin story over and over again, and people would still go to see it. I always thought the characters persistently huge and widespread appeal is incredible.

Remind me, wasn't the spell "the whole world will forget Peter Parker"

Well what about those not on the world. Nick Fury, Peter Quill, Nebula etc. They still remember him don't they?

Finally saw it tonight. I enjoyed it but thinking that being late to the party kinda ruined it. As I knew about the three spideys and aunt may.

Lesson learned I guess is to see these movies pretty quick.

Finally get to see it last week - I have heard bits and bobs beforehand but pretty much has no impact to my experience.

So ya nostagia factor to the max, DocOct and Willem dafou stole the show hard, and not to my least surprise that we have 3rd installment of Tom Holland's spiderman and he is still not the 'core' character in this another movie supposedly about himself/spiderman.

I enjoyed it overall (nostalgia warmy feeling and god damn DocOct and Willem performances are on another level), but I just can't help to feel pity on this writing with so many missed opportunities. My god they were given a big pile of amazing source materials and this is how they did it - nothing get fleshed out (again DocOct Willem truly stole the show with their limited screen time), rushed and lazy plot devices throughout the film. I mean, the project basically cannot fail due to the massive source materials given to it and somehow it makes me felt disappointed. Well, why do I get my expectation up for a marvel film aha.

The film feels cringey at times like Tom Holland calling himself spiderman 1 and it is so american that 'oh i will fix you' - seriously did no one tell them by doing that they are fcking up the multiverses/timelines further lol. The death of Aunt May - i am sorry the scene just felt forced since she has been a comic relief all these times - and ya come on adrenaline rush or not, they let her live to do that scene after the point blank explosion...And I don't know why but that Michelle-Jones pissed me off lolol - why is she the only one with such different name vs other people in multiverses? Oh ye subverting expectation huh.

And oh so smart that the whole trilogy is Tom Holland's spiderman origin story - ya you know when Strange casted the spell to make everyone forgets Spiderman = Peter Parker - why is that not impacting to other Peter Parkers? Oh because Tom Holland's spiderman apparently is the Main timeline now? I mean sure it is so convenient Strange's spell send back the other Peters and the villains, that's it. That spell is the strongest (plot device) ever that it could delete all media footage of Spiderman = Peter (just imagine the spell is able digitally delete some pictures of the newspapers records lol), and also apparently stopping Tom to write down the facts right there for MJ and Ned.

Anyway, I am just glad that Sam Raimi didn't work on this - I think Multiverse Madness fits his dark/grimmy style better and most importantly less attachments like a spidey movie nowadays.

And ye you know what, I would recommend Into the Spiderverse even more after watching this - now THAT is how a good project on spidey multiverse looks like, with so much fun and thoughts put together.