Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Spider-Man: Homecoming' started by Thread Manager, Jul 28, 2016.
Wait, do we know who Barbieri's playing?
I don't think that's a bad idea. There are more films coming down the line anyway. You don't need to put the kitchen sink in the first flick.
I understand why people are mad about Marvel changing parts of the lore (like Ned Leeds apparently taking a Harry Osborn-esque role) and it's not something I'm going to enjoy per say, but they need to differentiate themselves enough to make this film worth the GA's time and money. As long as they are respectful of the history and characters and (most importantly) make a really good movie, I'll be alright. (I really still dislike the idea of introducing Michelle Gonzales though).
Father and son?
Zendaya isn't playing Michelle Gonzales.
Likely somebody insignificant
I still believe LMG and Barbieri are going to be our Norman and Harry, but you never know. Logan might end up being some other villain entirely but I'd hate for Marvel to repeat Sony's mistake and keeping the Osborns saved for a sequel. Same goes for the Daily Bugle. They're both a part of Peter's/Spider-Man's life.
As for Zendaya, it looks like my theory of her being White Tiger secretly isn't going to happen either. There was a rumor on CBM that Netflix may make a White Tiger show. But where are these reports she's not Michelle Gonzales now?
YES, Finally speculation, let's keep it going.
Personally I love the idea of Tinkerer using chitauri tech to make the wings/gauntlets, etc. gives it this different feel from past mech villains and Falcons wings.
Now you're getting it.
Welcome to the hype.
Michelle Gonzales isn't confirmed, all we know is Zendaya is playing a character named Michelle, from the sounds of it she's playing an OG character.
Welcome to the hype btw.
They should've used Randy instead of changing Ned imo
I already see comments on other sites like Youtube claiming that the amount of villains will make this akin to Spider-man 3. It's like people have forgotten about how Batmam Begins and The Dark Knight had multiple villains and were very well received films whereas The Amazing Spider-man 1 had just one villain and got mostly mixed reviews. So reducing it down to one villain isn't gonna automatically make everything better. It's all about the execution.
The problem with Spider-man 3 was that none of the villains were connected at all and they were all over the place and popping in and out. However it seems like only Vulture will be a big villain here. Shocker has always been a petty criminal that never had a grand scheme. And Tinkerer is most likely just gonna be tech support. As Spectacular Spider-man showed, he's pretty much useless in an actual fight. He won't be a physical threat to Spider-man at all.﻿ His role will probably be similar to Zola/Collector.
All the film has to do is focus on its main villain despite the others. The issue with Sm3 and ASM2 isnt that there were too many villains. Its that it was never clear who the big bad was. And there were too many MAJOR villains.
If Spidey films have multiple villains it shouldnt be all big names u less its the Sinister 6. It should be 1 big name like Electro or Goblin. And a petty thuf or two like Shocker or Tombstone. And dont focus too much on the petty criminals. This is all in SSM. It's a guide book for the do's and dont's of Spidey.
New Avatar unlocked!
The most logical thing to do would be to find out exactly what he wants and whether it's something I'm willing to do. What I'm saying is that if emotion trumped reason and I temporarily took leave of my senses, it wouldn't be in a way that favored him. Also, if I did go along with it, you can be sure I'd get a big payday out of it. Mr. Cocky Billionaire doesn't come looking for my very special help and not cough up the cash.
As for an impressionable 14-year-old, as hitmanyr2k said, 14 was around the time I was putting a lot of thought into why I didn't believe in God, who was the ultimate bigshot where I come from.
Now for Peter, the question isn't really whether I believe he could be starstruck by his hero and go with the flow, which is something that could certainly happen. I wouldn't say it's the best way to introduce him, though.
Thanks! It's great to be here. I have to say, as a long-time lurker, I don't always agree with you but it's a joy to watch your passion for the character and activity on the boards!
I'd honestly be more pissed if she is an original character than if she's Michelle Gonzales. Obviously, she'd be Michelle in name only but at least there's a passing wink at people familiar with the mythology that way--if they were going to make an OC, I think there is far too much history to mine. Why not Deb Whitman, Carlie Cooper, etc? I'm really hoping her last name is Gonzales.
Thank you as well! This seems to be a super friendly forum. Much appreciated.
It's Spider-Man. Everyone on the planet has been introduced to him multiple times already.
Not the MCU version
It doesn't matter. Spider-Man being rebooted didn't magically make people forget the last 5 movies. There's a reason they basically wrapped up his introduction in about 5 minutes. Everyone knows who he is.
But they never saw him in another superhero film up until that point. I personally would've rather they show Uncle Bem and the spider bite, plus give Peter an ideological reason (that makes sense) for siding with Tony like pretty much everyone else in the movie.
All in all, would've rather him a have a bigger role in the story but i'm hoping he gets a meaty part in AIW
Spectacular didnt show his origin either
Everyone knows it, its not necessary
Ehh, they did show parts of the origin.. In the intro of every episode and in full in "Nature vs. Nurture"