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

flazio

Remember all the Quick silver theories around Wandavision?

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118218577#Comment_118218577

That was insane, no question and IIRC some were even thinking the rabbit in Wandavision was actually mephisto or some such. The speculation went a bit overboard.

If Garfield/Maguire aren't in this then I will be genuinely surprised. Trotting out nearly all the villains from both the actors' series would be weird if neither iteration of Spiderman turned up to help out. There's a bunch of circumstantial evident floating about that suggests they are; we'll find out soon enough.

Certainly not invested in the outcome mind you. Though doubtless many might be more upset if all this time, Garfield was telling the truth.

elenaaustin87

Harry was also Goblin in the same universe. Wonder who or both would be brought back

kerplun k

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118219124#Comment_118219124

You think the rabbit was bad? I thought the insect was mephisto 😀

TheIrishGrover

I say bring in an animated Miles Morales :)

pjohnson

No way the'd shít the bed here like Wandavision.

Leaving Maguire and Garfield out totally would be better than casting them as Peter Ramsbottom and Dick Parker.

Stone Deaf 4evr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118218577#Comment_118218577

I am still irrationally bitter, that my theory regarding wanda being the one to bring mutants to the MCU, was paid off by having pietro just being cast aside as 'Ralph Bohner'.

I also kinda feel that they've shown too much of their hand so far with the trailers.

FunLover18

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118234069#Comment_118234069

I actually wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't, recent interviews suggest he isn't happy with his time as Spider-Man. I still think he is in it though.

flazio

I have a different theory about how there appears to be an "invisible" Spider-man in the trailer but I'm not willing to try spoiler tags. 😏

johnny_ultimate

As an aside, I rewatched the first two Raimi Spider-Man movies recently and damn they’ve held up well. If anything, everything that’s followed them only elevates them further. They’re now for my money the best live-action Marvel films: big, warm-hearted, romantic and properly heroic. Maguire and Dunst are perfect, as are Dafoe and Molina. Raimi directs the absolute hell out of them: definitely the best live action superhero action sequences of them all. He managed to use impeccable editing to make that first Doc Ock fight hospital scene really crunch in a way that’s entirely absent from the MCU. While those films use rapid cuts to sort of tone down the violence, Raimi uses the same techniques to tone up the violence (despite no blood or gore to be seen).

It also existed in that sweet spot the LotR trilogy exists in too - the early era of CG where the films hadn’t become totally overwhelmed by computer effects. Sure, some of the web swinging stuff looks a bit flat and basic these days, but lots of the key scenes take place on impressive physical sets with proper stunt work.

While it’ll be cool to see some of those characters back in this (although I’m not a fan of these Holland movies) it’s made me freshly curious about how well Raimi himself will fare with his return to Marvel next year.

Zero-Cool

Fully agree, first 2 Tobey films have been unmatched imo. I've watched them so many times but can't bring myself to do the same with the Tom ones. I actually tried to watch far from home for the 3rd time recently and kept fast forwarding bits. So much unnecessary filler combined with a neutered spidey kills the replay value for me. Sickened netflix put all the spidey films on except for Tobey 2.

pixelburp

You could do a pretty able reduction over the contrasting tones of Raimi and MCU by that "captured villain" scene from the trailer: of course the MCU has a knowing chuckle at Doc Ock's name; ohoho, it's so silly! While Raimi never once winked at the audience, treating it all with operatic seriousness.

I'm staying excited but deeply wary of Sam Raimi helming a MCU film. I don't believe Raimi carries the kind of clout anymore that he could realistically bend the MCU formula enough to make Dr Strange 2 a "Sam Raimi Film". We'll see though, my expectations are configured accordingly.

On the subject of Spider Man 2, this YouTube essayist did a very good breakdown on its most overtly horror styled scene; this is kinda what I mean in the previous paragraph: will Raimi have that kind of creative wriggle room?

https://youtu.be/VNxwdkzEM1s

johnny_ultimate

I wouldn’t agree Raimi plays everything seriously, there’s a Jameson scene which is an extended riff about Doc Ock’s name (and a Dr Strange wink towards the audience). I think maybe the difference is a lot of the comedy of the films is channelled through that one larger than life character (and a Simmons’ pitch perfect performance), rather than just cheap wisecracks.

https://youtu.be/2YPD5gE8O-4

I do agree about Raimi’s chances within the MCU though. Im curious but not necessarily confident. I mean his last film was nearly ten years ago and a bit of a dumpster fire. But he is maybe the only director to truly capture the vibe and look of an old fashioned comic book, so we’ll see what he comes up with.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118234711#Comment_118234711

In fairness I did say "operatic seriousness", in that heightened version of reality that's clearly ludicrous but also played by all totally straight - rather than being in on the joke that it's all bit silly. Jameson was perhaps the closest to that, Simmons playing the character with a likeable àssholery, knowing he's a bit of a Greek Chorus. Maybe it's all rose spectacles mind you, long time since I watched the Raimi films so I could be WAY off here.

The MCU has never quittttte felt confident enough to drop the winking or faint sense of... maybe not total embarrassment, but apology almost for being stories of characters with silly pseudonyms and whatnot. The best MCU films have owned that silliness, the worst trying to push against it - worse, roll its eyes at the audience. It's like the Gilmore Girls, where everybody's such a bloody smartàrse all the time (though to be fair, that is MJ's entire thing so hey)

And yes I absolutely name dropped the Gilmore Girls and will not apologise for it lol.

FunLover18

Personally I didn't think of Otto Octavius line as winking at the audience, it is a rather ridiculous name. In the context of the movie I don't think they're going to turn Dock Ock into some Austin Powers villain that everyone takes the piss off. I actually saw a theory on the plot of the movie that sounds really promising, I'll spoiler it in case. Credit to @ellardent on Twitter.

Spoiler Warning

Spider-Man No Way Home theory: Peter has to recover the ‘doomed to die in defeat’ villains arriving from other universes, but finds Doc Ock sympathetic and ultimately a friend. So he won’t allow Dr Strange to send them to their dooms…leading to utter multiverse madness.

Penn

I kinda see the Otto Octavious line as more a twist on Spierman 2, where he was known as Dr. Otto Octavious and became Doctor Octopus, whereas here they know him as Doctor Octopus first and then learn his real name. From their point of view his real name seems more like nominative determinism.

Either way, as much as you can praise Raimi for the first two Spiderman films, he also did 3. Regardless of studio interference or arguing with Tobey Maguire or whatever else was going on, that's his movie too. And it is god awful.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118235489#Comment_118235489

That's an interesting theory, and would track with various points in the comics.

Spoiler Warning

Doc Ock has sometimes been an ally IIRC, and was even Spider-Man for a time, for reasons that are way too "comic book" contrivance to go into. I believe he's a friend in the recent, well received video game.

Not like anyone who has ever seen more than 2 films would believe he'll stay in that glass prison for the whole movie either. Without checking, he's not in that line up of villains (which I'll speculate is from the last act). So does join the fight.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118235821#Comment_118235821

Could anyone have made that film work though? There was just too much going on, too much asked of him and while the "evil Peter" stuff remains toe curling, none of the Venom arc was Raimi's idea. I believe that was studio mandated. I think Vulture was meant to be the fourth film's antagonist, Raimi getting as far as storyboards.

pah

Tickets out now, got mine for the afternoon of 15th 🙂

Sad Professor

Johnny Ultimate's post above promoted me to revisit the Raimi trilogy (yes all three), which I have been meaning to do for some time having not watched any of them in years. I remember seeing the first shortly after leaving school. It was a strange time in the world and there was something comforting about the film, which was made pre-9/11 though ended being edited to remove the twin towers. I think it holds up well. The second film is definitely the best. In particular I always loved the final shot (a tribute to The Graduate) of MJ, the joy slowing fading from her face as she considers an uncertain future.

The third film is often maligned for being overstuffed with villains and sub-plots but looking back it really doesn't seem that bad, especially compared the amount of plot Nolan squeezed into the TDK trilogy. It's definitely an uneven film but it's also a darker and more interesting film than the previous two. It delivers on the promise of the final shot of 2 by having Peter and MJ grapple with the consequences of being together as Peter struggles to remain good. The climax is messy but I very much like the bittersweet ambiguity of the ending.

As compromised as he may have been by commercial factors, Raimi managed make a trilogy of superhero movies that feel like they were personal to him, which was striking enough at the time but even more so now.

AMKC

What happened? I thought this was supposed to be out on the 30th of November just gone?

pixelburp

Mephisto confirmed.

Penn

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118267658#Comment_118267658

I think a few months ago all the MCU release dates for 2021 were pushed back by about 2 weeks, so that included the dates for Eternals and maybe Shang Chi as well. Release date has been mid-december for a while now.

kerplun k

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118268841#Comment_118268841

I noticed that as well... If you turn the latest theatrical poster upside down and invert the colours, you can clearly see a rabbit, which is obviously Mephisto. 😉

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118270090#Comment_118270090

Well if Sony are only allowing some of the film to be shown to critics, then either the Garfield stuff truly was the worst kept secret in Hollywood - or else what else could it be? Such that the studio would intentionally be this coy?