Homecoming Was the 2012 reboot pointless?

[degraves93]

I've seen it only once, I should probably go back and see it again. But I'm one of those people who didn't like the mandarin twist.

Yep, IM3 pretty much took a giant dump on Iron Man's greatest enemy

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

Yep, IM3 pretty much took a giant dump on Iron Man's greatest enemy

his archnemesis. yes they did. but it also make $1.2+ billion, and is the second highest grossing film the MCU. $300~ million away from matching the avengers itself.

 

[degraves93]

his archnemesis. yes they did. but it also make $1.2+ billion, and is the second highest grossing film the MCU. $300~ million away from matching the avengers itself.

Oh well. I still dislike it. I really want to see Tony mature considerably more.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

Oh well. I still dislike it. I really want to see Tony mature considerably more.

I disliked it too and I agree with you (although perhaps his maturation is taking time because they intend to really develop his character further in avengers 2, and will then be tested in civil war) but at the end of the day, the film was massively successful. And won't stop the mcu train.

Spidey ain't as lucky. All the marvel IPs are enjoying boosts to their successes thanks to their cinematic universe. As I've been saying for years, one major reason for spidey's decline in quality and popularity and success is because he's been kept separate from it.

 

[degraves93]

I disliked it too and I agree with you (although perhaps his maturation is taking time because they intend to really develop his character further in avengers 2, and will then be tested in civil war) but at the end of the day, the film was massively successful. And won't stop the mcu train.

Spidey ain't as lucky. All the marvel IPs are enjoying boosts to their successes thanks to their cinematic universe. As I've been saying for years, one major reason for spidey's decline in quality and popularity and success is because he's been kept separate from it.

Even after Sony's denial, I still think a deal is likely.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

Even after Sony's denial, I still think a deal is likely.

It needs to be more than likely. It needs to be a reality.

 

[degraves93]

It needs to be more than likely. It needs to be a reality.

I know. I'm too much of a pessimist to be entirely confident in this.

 

[Spider2099]

Spidey ain't as lucky. All the marvel IPs are enjoying boosts to their successes thanks to their cinematic universe. As I've been saying for years, one major reason for spidey's decline in quality and popularity and success is because he's been kept separate from it.

Spidey's decline in popularity is due to several reasons:

1. Spider-Man 3 failed and was followed by a rebooted origin story
2. The reboot was the reason for no Spider-Man in the Avengers/MCU
3. The reboot was simply not well received
4. The sequel to the reboot was a critical failure
5. Spider-Man is currently the only popular superhero from Marvel/DC that is not part of a cinematic universe.

But I think the biggest factor here is poor quality movies. Even though everyone wants Spidey to be in the MCU, I think most people would be OK with Sony keeping the film rights and letting him be standalone.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

I know. I'm too much of a pessimist to be entirely confident in this.

Don't be a pessimist man. It's not about pessimism. It's about knowing how delusional sony can be.

Spidey's decline in popularity is due to several reasons:

1. Spider-Man 3 failed and was followed by a rebooted origin story
2. The reboot was the reason for no Spider-Man in the Avengers/MCU
3. The reboot was simply not well received
4. The sequel to the reboot was a critical failure
5. Spider-Man is currently the only popular superhero from Marvel/DC that is not part of a cinematic universe.

But I think the biggest factor here is poor quality movies. Even though everyone wants Spidey to be in the MCU, I think most people would be OK with Sony keeping the film rights and letting him be standalone.

I know there are several reasons bro. I said it was one major reason. but

1. The previous batman series also failed critically and was followed by the reboot. Although BB wasn't a huge commercial success it was generally positively received, same as asm1 (though I will say a lot more of the GA was divided about it than they were about BB, but asm1 was more successful than it).
2. that may be true, but don't forget, the reboot is also right WHEN the oscorp easter egg was talked about between the two conglomerates.
3. I'd say it was divided. There was a little flicker of hope prior to asm2's release.
4. Indeed
5. You also have to remember that the series rebooted, right when the first ultimate moment of culmination from the efforts of marvel studios came to fruition: the avengers. asm came out a few months after that, and it'd be pretty hard to compete with the juggernaut that the mcu had made itself at that point. In order to really win over the audience, asm1 had to really knock it out of the park. Like, critical acclaim status. And that obviously didn't happen either, and it was never gonna happen. Not even if we got a film as critically praised as SM2.

 

[Spider2099]

1. Batman Begins came out 7 years after Batman & Robin, and the Dark Knight was a critical success. Both films came out before the Avengers and the MCU came to fruition. But even now Batman will be part of a cinematic universe.

2. The easter egg is irrelevant. It is just an easter egg, nothing more... and it never happened.

3. It was somewhat divided and mixed, but overall the reviews were mediocre.

4.

5. At this point I think Spidey just needs to be a part of the MCU. Bad movies and no cinematic universe isn't going to get him anywhere.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

1. Batman Begins came out 7 years after Batman & Robin, and the Dark Knight was a critical success. Both films came out before the Avengers and the MCU came to fruition. But even now Batman will be part of a cinematic universe.

2. The easter egg is irrelevant. It is just an easter egg, nothing more... and it never happened.

3. It was somewhat divided and mixed, but overall the reviews were mediocre.

4.

5. At this point I think Spidey just needs to be a part of the MCU. Bad movies and no cinematic universe isn't going to get him anywhere.

1. asm1 came out 5 years after SM3, which isn't as long the gap between batman series, but, it was half a decade. which is a good amount of time. and I honestly think part of the reason TDK was sooo succesful financial was the hype behind ledger's death. we really don't know the film would've turned out otherwise. as far as I remember, there's never been a batman film before that that crossed even $500 million worldwide.

2. Na man. If the oscorp easter egg was in the avengers, it would've been proof that all the events that happen in the mcu up till avengers, happened in the universe of asm1. the easter egg could've been the next big step in the inevitable crossover.

3. it got a 66 on metacritic, which is close to the score avengers got and it also got above 70% on RT. the audience's reviews however is what was more mixed. but the film's reception was positive, generally speaking. generally positive reviews.

4. holla atcha boi

5. at any given point spiderman should've been incorporated in the mcu. and it can't be his own cinematic universe it has to be marvel's that he's a part of.

 

[Spider2099]

1. I honestly think part of the reason TDK was sooo succesful financial was the hype behind ledger's death. we really don't know the film would've turned out otherwise.

2. Na man. If the oscorp easter egg was in the avengers, it would've been proof that all the events that happen in the mcu up till avengers, happened in the universe of asm1. the easter egg could've been the next big step in the inevitable crossover.

3. it got a 66 on metacritic, which is close to the score avengers got and it also got above 70% on RT. the audience's reviews however is what was more mixed. but the film's reception was positive, generally speaking. generally positive reviews.

4. holla atcha boi

5. at any given point spiderman should've been incorporated in the mcu. and it can't be his own cinematic universe it has to be marvel's that he's a part of.

1. I guess we'll never know

2. An easter egg is just an easter egg. It wouldn't guarantee an inevitable crossover or confirm that TASM is part of the MCU.

3. Whatever the case, the reviews weren't stellar. And I think people have become less favorable as time passes and the failure of TASM2

5. Exactly. I mean you could have a Spider-Man film series and make it standalone, but not a "cinematic universe." A spin-off here and there does not make it a spin-off, but Sony doesn't understand that.

 

[The Overlord]

Yep, IM3 pretty much took a giant dump on Iron Man's greatest enemy

Again, Marvel wasn't going to risk access to the Chinese market by trying to please some fan boys and introduce a character a lot of people think is a racial stereotype? I think some fans are unrealistic in regards how far Marvel would willing to go to please them and maybe there are some things best left in the past. If you had elements of Spider-Man's mythos that came off as dated as the Mandarin does sometimes, then Marvel or Sony likely would have gotten rid of them. I don't see how that decision reflects on any sort of Spider-Man movie they may make.

And really why is the Mandarin Tony's arch nemesis? What is interesting about their rivalry? Why does the Mandarin hate Tony Stark? Why would Tony Stark hate the Mandarin over any other villain?

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

Again, Marvel wasn't going to risk access to the Chinese market by trying to please some fan boys and introduce a character a lot of people think is a racial stereotype? I think some fans are unrealistic in regards how far Marvel would willing to go to please them and maybe there are some things best left in the past. If you had elements of Spider-Man's mythos that came off as dated as the Mandarin does sometimes, then Marvel or Sony likely would have gotten rid of them. I don't see how that decision reflects on any sort of Spider-Man movie they may make.

And really why is the Mandarin Tony's arch nemesis? What is interesting about their rivalry? Why does the Mandarin hate Tony Stark? Why would Tony Stark hate the Mandarin over any other villain?

it wasn't a stereotype. i'm pretty sure they did the twist just for the sake of a film twist.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

1. I guess we'll never know

2. An easter egg is just an easter egg. It wouldn't guarantee an inevitable crossover or confirm that TASM is part of the MCU.

3. Whatever the case, the reviews weren't stellar. And I think people have become less favorable as time passes and the failure of TASM2

5. Exactly. I mean you could have a Spider-Man film series and make it standalone, but not a "cinematic universe." A spin-off here and there does not make it a spin-off, but Sony doesn't understand that.

1. yap. that is just one thing that will go down in cinematic history. it is a legacy.

2. true, an easter egg is just an easter however, one like this would've been one like never before. just imagine how everyone would react once it becomes common knowledge that THE oscorp from the asm series was seen in an mcu film, none other than avengers. i have a whole thread about in the spiderman sequels section.

3. the reviews were not stellar but they were not bad. and yeah, the fact that the audience was mostly mixed didn't help asm2 or the series' case.

5. a spiderman cinematic universe is not enough. it has to be spidey in the mcu. again, i have a whole thread about it in the sequels section.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

1. Batman Begins came out 7 years after Batman & Robin, and the Dark Knight was a critical success. Both films came out before the Avengers and the MCU came to fruition. But even now Batman will be part of a cinematic universe.

2. The easter egg is irrelevant. It is just an easter egg, nothing more... and it never happened.

3. It was somewhat divided and mixed, but overall the reviews were mediocre.

4.

5. At this point I think Spidey just needs to be a part of the MCU. Bad movies and no cinematic universe isn't going to get him anywhere.

Agreed on everything.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

i didn't, but I explained myself where necessary

 

[degraves93]

it wasn't a stereotype. i'm pretty sure they did the twist just for the sake of a film twist.

Like they said in the film, the "Mandarin" was a hodgepodge of different ethnic symbols, and was based more on our modern-day conflicts in the Middle East than our past conflicts with China. Why couldn't they have just had Killian as the inventor of the virus, and then Slattery take up the mantle?

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

Like they said in the film, the "Mandarin" was a hodgepodge of different ethnic symbols, and was based more on our modern-day conflicts in the Middle East than our past conflicts with China.

to be completely honest I didn't like how they changed the mandarin's (let's say even if he was real in the movie) ethnicity to middle eastern. I suppose it would've been okay if the chinese-influenced mandarin essences were still here but it seemed completely changed for contemporary times.

 

[The Overlord]

it wasn't a stereotype. i'm pretty sure they did the twist just for the sake of a film twist.

No, I am saying Mandarin back in the Silver Age, was pretty well a racist stereotype and that has always marred the character's legacy, Shane Black called comic book Mandarin a racist stereotype.

I also am hard pressed to find Mandarin compelling in general, if I am welling to overlook his unfortunate origins, because each writer gives him a different personality, I have no idea what his deal is. Its hard for Mandarin to be an effective arch nemesis, when the writers seem have no clue who he is, how does he contrast with Tony Stark, if he keeps on changing all the time?

 

[degraves93]

Seriously. Who in that creative team thought the idea of RDJ vs. Guy Pearce sounded cooler than RDJ vs. Sir Ben Mother****in' Kingsley, a man who is born to play comic book villains?!

 

[spiderman2]

Seriously. Who in that creative team thought the idea of RDJ vs. Guy Pearce sounded cooler than RDJ vs. Sir Ben Mother****in' Kingsley, a man who is born to play comic book villains?!

For what it is worth I never heard of kingsley before that movie and iron man 3 is the best of the 3 to me but iron man 1 is so so overrated that it makes me laugh.

 

[The Overlord]

Seriously. Who in that creative team thought the idea of RDJ vs. Guy Pearce sounded cooler than RDJ vs. Sir Ben Mother****in' Kingsley, a man who is born to play comic book villains?!

Ben Kingsley is pretty old, a little too old to have kung fu fights with RDJ.

Killian is hardly a perfect villain, but I think comic book Mandarin is a character only hard core fan boys would love, he would a really hard sell, both to an local and international audience. I think a lot people would think Mandarin is dated in the worst way possible.

 

[degraves93]

Ben Kingsley is pretty old, a little too old to have kung fu fights with RDJ.

Killian is hardly a perfect villain, but I think comic book Mandarin is a character only hard core fan boys would love, he would a really hard sell, both to an local and international audience. I think a lot people would think Mandarin is dated in the worst way possible.

Kingsley was so good in the movie before the reveal though. That's what pissed me off the most. He was menacing and genuinely evil, and then we get a bait and switch that says the real Mandarin is another rival businessman that Tony stood up at New Year's Eve 13 years ago? Come on, man.

 

[The Overlord]

Kingsley was so good in the movie before the reveal though. That's what pissed me off the most. He was menacing and genuinely evil, and then we get a bait and switch that says the real Mandarin is another rival businessman that Tony stood up at New Year's Eve 13 years ago? Come on, man.

That's a fair complaint, like I said Killian is far from a perfect villain. I think the twist speaks to a larger issue, that comic book Mandarin is not a really character, but an archetype. The fake Mandarin plays to old archetypal Mandarin from the comics, the fake Mandarin makes a bunch of scary speeches that don't really say anything when you think it about, they never conveyed a real ideology.

I also understand what Shane Black was going for, that a smart villain would not make a public spectacle of themselves and it plays with idea that people would assume the scary middle eastern guy was the terrorist and ignore other possibilities.

I will admit, I thought the twist lower the scope of the film, instead of a globe spanning adventure where Iron Man fights an ancient terrorist cabal, he is fighting some corporate jerk in Florida.

I have mixed feelings about the twist, but I would have been more offended by it, if I didn't have a couple of problems with comic book Mandarin. I think Marvel thought he would be a hard sell to audiences and I do see why they thought that.