I missed this post since the thread was moving so fast.
... Are they? Maybe. But not in the way you presented them above.
Tony Stark taking over the movie or/and suiting up to help Spidey defeat the Vulture or possibly defeating him by himself.
- Beyond Stark being in the movie, there is nothing to suggest that he will be "taking over the movie". The same argument, based on that, could be made for any character. We have no idea how big - or small - his role might be. The possibly defeating Vulture by himself is totally invented by you. That's not even a valid concern. That's just being overly dramatic and making up reasons to be upset about Stark. That won't happen.
Okay, Tinkerer is tied to Stark in this movie which means means Vulture is a spawn from an Iron Man villain. Stark taking on and/or defeating by himself isn't that out of the question. I could see a scenario where there's some ******** team-up between Spidey & Stark where they fight Vulture & Stark takes the final shot on Toomes-- knocking him out before Peter can.
Tony being too involved in the plot
- If he fits the plot, I don't see how this would be an issue. Really this seems to be the same as your "taking over the movie" point, so this shouldn't count as a seperate concern.
Because the writers deliberately MADE him fit into the plot. Everybody from Feige & his great grandpa have said that this is suppose to be a Spider-Man SOLO movie, not "Iron Man 4: Homecoming' or "Spider-Man AND Iron Man' but then again, who knows what they changed when RDJ jumped on board. Maybe the script was changed to accommodate his inclusion because didn't Justin Kroll imply that RDJ had something to do with Keaton initially turning down the movie?
Tony dating Aunt May and replacing/taking Uncle Ben's role (a vital figure in every version of Peter Parker, even the Ultimate cartoon realizes this)
- Again, nothing to suggest this will happen. It'd go against Stark's character - he's "taking a break" with Pepper, and clearly not over her. How can he take Uncle Ben's role if the only role Uncle Ben would have is being dead and a memory? Peter has already learnt his lesson from Uncle Ben, hence his speech in Civil War.
The "Taking a break' from Pepper thing, I feel, was deliberately mentioned as a gateway for him to bone Aunt May. He was already flirting with her. And Peter's characterization as well as Tom's comments about his "struggle" in Homecoming suggests otherwise.
Tony's supporting characters having too much screen time.
- You mean Happy? The sole supporting character from the Iron Man franchise in the movie? Who was added to the cast way into filming, suggesting his role is tiny? Who is probably going to just be in one, maybe two scenes, tops? 'Kay.
He didn't need to be in this movie.
Tony is rumored to be teaching Peter the meaning of responsibility in this movie which would be a slap in the face to the Spider-Man character and his core.
- Never heard that rumour; wouldn't make sense, so likely bull. Where did that even come from? This is honestly the first time I've seen it mentioned. Again, Peter already learnt this lesson from Uncle Ben.
So why is tagging along with Tony Stark fo beat up Cap & co just to impress Tony? That's not responsible at all. Remember that New Avenger guy on Instagram? That's where the rumor originated from. Apparently Stark is testing him, examining his character to see if he qualified to be an Avenger... Which is ******** on Marvel's part. The only reason I think it might be legit is because it was mentioned last year, remember? That Tony would train and teach him to be an Avenger.
Peter continuing to be Tony's puppet boy, as well as being irresponsible with twisted priorities like he was portrayed in Civil War. Basically missing the entire point of why Lee & Ditko created him in the first place.
- This I don't understand. He wasn't Tony's "puppet boy" - that's a deliberate skewing and misunderstanding of his role in the film. I also don't see how he was irresponsible, or had twisted priorities... If anything, he was doing the right thing, given what he knew at the time. I didn't see anything in Civil War that suggested that the MCU version of Spidey was going against the character Lee & Ditko created.
Tom himself said, in the Civil War Blu Ray features "Peter is such a young kid that he doesn't even ask Tony why, He's just like, have my back when I go to Germany and he's like okay." Ditko's Spider-Man or any Spider-Man would NEVER just go with Tony Stark without asking "Why?'. He's asking him to go take on half of the Avengers and Captain America who Peter said he was a fan of, but apparently he's more of fan of Tony so that's where his loyalty lies.
The puppet boy thing comes from how he acted on the battefield: he was reliant on Tony for everything. Literally EVERYTHING he said was a variation of "Mr. Stark is awesome' he didn't give a **** about anything else besides impressing Tony, he didn't care about who was right or the bigger issues at hand. Either that or talking about how cool his opponent looked. He was out of character. He wasn't Peter Benjamin Parker.
Part of the problem here is you're assuming that what we saw in Civil War is all there is to his character, whereas that was an introduction. We don't get to see all the facets of his personality beacuse in Civil War he's merely a minor character in a much larger narrative. Perfect example of this is Ant-Man - we get a very narrow view of his personality in Civil War, which makes him kinda one-dimensional. But look at his solo movie, and you see a lot more. The same will be the case here. Difference here is we don't have Spidey's solo movie yet, so we can't see that broader picture yet. But to assume there wouldn't be any change to his character, any deeper look at Peter's psyche, just seems to me as yet another way of bashing what we have and being negative.
This, unlike Ant-Man was the introduction of
Spider-Man into the MCU, like you said, we know about Ant-Man's character because he had a full solo movie, so the way he was portrayed in Civil War is justified. Spidey should not have been one-note because he's Spider-Man & he deserved to be more than just Tony's ultimate fanboy. I would've preferred to see a more wholesale version of the character if there was "more than meets the eye' to him.
I noted that your other concerns were totally valid, if in some cases presumptuous - although the counters to those would be also. There's nothing wrong with the concerns laid out above in principle - yeah I get not wanting Stark to be too tied to the Spidey mythos. I'd probably prefer that too.
But saying Stark will 'hijack' the movie, take out the Vulture by himself, saying he'll be Aunt May's love interest, or even taking Uncle Ben's place... None of these are likely scenarios. You're making huge exaggerations, both in these assumptions but also in regards as to what was actually presented in terms of Peter's character, particularly in terms of his relationship with Stark. That's what becomes kinda tiresome and wearing to see over and over again. Not legitimate concerns, not insightful contributions to discussion, but instead endless variations of "Stark's lap dog", "muh Mr Stark", "Iron Man: Homecoming", etc. etc.. That's not raising concerns. It's just being over-reactionary and repetitive.
I completely understand people getting tired of hearing about it, and i'll cutback from talking about Stark. But those are real issues, and they're legitimate concerns.
That's all I have to say until we see Stark in a teaser or poster, marketing for the movie.
And the worst part of it is that they've made Spidey into Stark's little pet project who will always need his help. It's annoying and really pisses me off the more I think about it.
