Sony's Spider-Man 4 (sequel to "No Way Home")

[Andrew NDB]

Just seems pretty needless. 6 months after "No Way Home" or a year, tops, would be fine. But 4 years? That would be like the entirety of someone's whole high school tenure, or even college. Why leap frog over that when you don't have to?

[ToTheNines]

Yeah that's what people online are speculating, that they're just completely skipping Peter's college career.

[Andrew NDB]

It's kind of becoming a trope with superhero movies. Juuuust when [fill-in-the-blank superhero] is about to become their "ideal" self there's a huge time gap and they become something entirely entirely or start thinking about retirement or are just forcibly replaced.

Like the Nolan Batman movies. You finish Dark Knight, like, "OK, great. Batman is now fully Batman and we're ready to see at least a movie or two of him at his peak doing peak Batman stuff" but then nope, it's 8 years later suddenly and his joints hurt and time for the retirement movie.

Captain America similarly, too. "OK good, now all the baggage of Civil War and Winter Soldier and Infinity War and all that is done, we can FINALLY get some 'pure' solo Captain America movies now." NOPE! Let's immediately make him an old man and retire him right as we get there for some reason.

Snyder's Superman, too. "OK, Superman JUST became Superman like 5 minutes ago on the world stage in Man of Steel, so I can't wait to see what the next Superman movie will be like now that he's freshly embraced his role in the world!" NOPE! Time for "The Death of Superman" right away.

So, so stupid. Why do they do this?

[ToTheNines]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

It's kind of becoming a trope with superhero movies. Juuuust when [fill-in-the-blank superhero] is about to become their "ideal" self there's a huge time gap and they become something entirely entirely or start thinking about retirement or are just forcibly replaced.

Like the Nolan Batman movies. You finish Dark Knight, like, "OK, great. Batman is now fully Batman and we're ready to see at least a movie or two of him at his peak doing peak Batman stuff" but then nope, it's 8 years later suddenly and his joints hurt and time for the retirement movie.

Captain America similarly, too. "OK good, now all the baggage of Civil War and Winter Soldier and Infinity War and all that is done, we can FINALLY get some 'pure' solo Captain America movies now." NOPE! Let's immediately make him an old man and retire him right as we get there for some reason.

Snyder's Superman, too. "OK, Superman JUST became Superman like 5 minutes ago on the world stage in Man of Steel, so I can't wait to see what the next Superman movie will be like now that he's freshly embraced his role in the world!" NOPE! Time for "The Death of Superman" right away.

So, so stupid. Why do they do this?

Yes, I hate shit like this. It's the opposite of worldbuilding.

More examples off the top of my head:

- Ghostbusters II

- Avengers 1 has them all split up at the end, but Age of Ultron at least revealed they got back together and had been fighting Hydra for a year after the events of Winter Soldier.

- Mother ****in Force Awakens and Last Jedi... bleh

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by ToTheNines

- Ghostbusters II

lol... yes, whether it's from the end of Ghostbusters 1 ("Now that the Ghostbusters have 'made it' and saved the city, I can't wait for what big ghost busting adventures are next now that everyone knows they're legit is!") or it's from the end of Ghostbusters 2 ("YAY! The Ghostbusters are back and NOW they're legit for sure. Can't wait for Ghostbusters 3 where they don't have to worry about going out of business and they're in their prime and all. Probably won't take long at all to see it, either!" And then it ends up taking 30 years to get the movie and they're out of business again, all retired and one of them dead. And it's mostly about the dead one being a bad father instead of any big ghost-busting adventure, lol.

Avengers 1 has them all split up at the end, but Age of Ultron at least revealed they got back together and had been fighting Hydra for a year after the events of Winter Soldier.

Yeah, they seem weirdly fascinated by breaking up the Avengers, over and over again. It's like reaching a destination needs to be an immediate call to deconstruct everything, every time.

[oldmanwinters]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

It's kind of becoming a trope with superhero movies. Juuuust when [fill-in-the-blank superhero] is about to become their "ideal" self there's a huge time gap and they become something entirely entirely or start thinking about retirement or are just forcibly replaced.

Like the Nolan Batman movies. You finish Dark Knight, like, "OK, great. Batman is now fully Batman and we're ready to see at least a movie or two of him at his peak doing peak Batman stuff" but then nope, it's 8 years later suddenly and his joints hurt and time for the retirement movie.

Captain America similarly, too. "OK good, now all the baggage of Civil War and Winter Soldier and Infinity War and all that is done, we can FINALLY get some 'pure' solo Captain America movies now." NOPE! Let's immediately make him an old man and retire him right as we get there for some reason.

Snyder's Superman, too. "OK, Superman JUST became Superman like 5 minutes ago on the world stage in Man of Steel, so I can't wait to see what the next Superman movie will be like now that he's freshly embraced his role in the world!" NOPE! Time for "The Death of Superman" right away.

So, so stupid. Why do they do this?

Originally Posted by ToTheNines

Yes, I hate shit like this. It's the opposite of worldbuilding.

More examples off the top of my head:

- Ghostbusters II

- Avengers 1 has them all split up at the end, but Age of Ultron at least revealed they got back together and had been fighting Hydra for a year after the events of Winter Soldier.

- Mother ****in Force Awakens and Last Jedi... bleh

Sounds like Hollywood won't greenlight a movie unless it's somewhat of an underdog "journey."

[neatoman]

So what do you think of the rumor that Sadie Sink's characters is:

Spoiler:

Jean Grey?

Personally, I'd say a Spider-Man movie is not the appropriate movie to introduce her in.

Spoiler:

And it just reminds me of that weird episode of that Teenage Iron Man cartoon in which Jean Grey is introduced under an alias and is only revealed to be Jean right at the end, which was just... I don't understand why that was being kept a secret, the villain of the episode was Magneto, it's not like there weren't X-Men connections there.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by neatoman

So what do you think of the rumor that Sadie Sink's characters is:

Spoiler:

Jean Grey?

Personally, I'd say a Spider-Man movie is not the appropriate movie to introduce her in.

Last I saw was that that rumor was un-confirmed and she is

Spoiler:

going to be some other Summers sister or something? Nothing particularly exciting. But also some of her deflections about, "Why would you assume my hair color wouldn't be changed?" also pointed things towards Gwen Stacy.

[neatoman]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Last I saw was that that rumor was un-confirmed and she is

Spoiler:

going to be some other Summers sister or something? Nothing particularly exciting. But also some of her deflections about, "Why would you assume my hair color wouldn't be changed?" also pointed things towards Gwen Stacy.

Spoiler:

Like Cyclops' cousin or something?

[Xav]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Just seems pretty needless. 6 months after "No Way Home" or a year, tops, would be fine. But 4 years? That would be like the entirety of someone's whole high school tenure, or even college. Why leap frog over that when you don't have to?

Actors age, Tom Holland is almost 30. How long do you expect him to play a teenage for?

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Xav

Actors age, Tom Holland is almost 30. How long do you expect him to play a teenage for?

Probably another 10 years. Look at him. He's a weird looking dude. Plus, yeah... recast at a certain point. You certainly don't retire Peter Parker because the actor ages out.

[IMJ]

"They are going to make him do this until he's 90"....

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by IMJ

"They are going to make him do this until he's 90"....

At the rate Holland is going he'll look 50 by the time he's 90.

[ZariusTwo]

There's a Marvel story where Peter's still active as Spidey in his 60s.

[Daytona]

Idk how this film will turn out but it’s the most excited I’ve been for a Spider-Man movie in a long time. The tonal shift and new director is exciting. I think Homecoming is a great movie but after that one the director, John Watts, lost my interest. Far From Home was just bad and I should have loved No Way Home but wasn’t able to.

From what I’ve heard of this movie it sounds like it could go either way but I’m glad we are at least taking the gamble and doing something fresh.

[Andrew NDB]

As long as this basically makes good on the promise of the last 3 minutes of No Way Home then we should be OK.

[Galactus]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Just seems pretty needless. 6 months after "No Way Home" or a year, tops, would be fine. But 4 years? That would be like the entirety of someone's whole high school tenure, or even college. Why leap frog over that when you don't have to?

I think it's dumb but people have been been begging for Peter to be an adult in the movies for years. If it's true they're skipping the college years then I think they are just giving fans what they want. Also since they've established MJ and Ned as attending MIT if you want them in the movie it makes sense that they've graduated and moved back to NY.

Like the Nolan Batman movies. You finish Dark Knight, like, "OK, great. Batman is now fully Batman and we're ready to see at least a movie or two of him at his peak doing peak Batman stuff" but then nope, it's 8 years later suddenly and his joints hurt and time for the retirement movie.

I would argue the Nolan Batman was fully realised at the end of Batman Begins. The big break Bruce was partly due to Nolan's commitment to 'realism' that someone couldn't be Batman for years without incurring permanent injuries. Mostly though it was they could pull from the ultra popular The Dark Knight Returns.

Snyder's Superman, too. "OK, Superman JUST became Superman like 5 minutes ago on the world stage in Man of Steel, so I can't wait to see what the next Superman movie will be like now that he's freshly embraced his role in the world!" NOPE! Time for "The Death of Superman" right away.

Same thing. WB have been desperate for years to adapt The Death of Superman as it sold a lot back in the day and think it would make huge numbers at the box office. If they smoosh it together with The Dark Returns all the better in their minds.

Captain America similarly, too. "OK good, now all the baggage of Civil War and Winter Soldier and Infinity War and all that is done, we can FINALLY get some 'pure' solo Captain America movies now." NOPE! Let's immediately make him an old man and retire him right as we get there for some reason.

In this case it was because the actor was tired of the role and wanted to quit. Sure, you could have him ride off into the sunset with Sharon Carter (his actual main love interest in the comics) but then we'd be wondering why isn't Steve coming out of retirement every Avengers level threat.

I know you've Marvel Studios should just recast but some actors are too tied to certain roles that the audience will never accept a new actor. Besides, from a narrative perspective I think Steve had to an ending. The MCU has done the previously unthinkable of getting general cinema go-ers to accept a lot of comic book tropes but I think people really expect stories to have...well, endings. Endgame would have been a huge disappointment if there had been no long-term consequences. There are many that argue that the reasons comic books don't is their cyclic nature were nothing is ever permanent and everything always reverts back to the status quo.

[ToTheNines]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

lol... yes, whether it's from the end of Ghostbusters 1 ("Now that the Ghostbusters have 'made it' and saved the city, I can't wait for what big ghost busting adventures are next now that everyone knows they're legit is!") or it's from the end of Ghostbusters 2 ("YAY! The Ghostbusters are back and NOW they're legit for sure. Can't wait for Ghostbusters 3 where they don't have to worry about going out of business and they're in their prime and all. Probably won't take long at all to see it, either!" And then it ends up taking 30 years to get the movie and they're out of business again, all retired and one of them dead. And it's mostly about the dead one being a bad father instead of any big ghost-busting adventure, lol.

Yeah, very frustrating.

I do like Afterlife, but my headcanon will always be that Ghostbusters 3 (aka The Video Game) takes place 2 years after II. Then the IDW comics span 7 years after that.

Of course they end rather unceremoniously, but I just assume business dries up and things fizzle out.

Originally Posted by Galactus

I would argue the Nolan Batman was fully realised at the end of Batman Begins. The big break Bruce was partly due to Nolan's commitment to 'realism' that someone couldn't be Batman for years without incurring permanent injuries. Mostly though it was they could pull from the ultra popular The Dark Knight Returns.

Realized enough, but there’s only one year between Begins and TDK, which is basically nothing. Then you have an 8 year gap between TDK and Rises, but the movie assures you that absolutely nothing happened.

Except FAKE Robin joined the city police.

[Barkworm]

It‘s mind-boggling how bad Rises is.

[Daytona]

I am highly tolerable of Rises, for whatever reason. Maybe I’m a sucker for some of the music and visual experience. I love seeing Batman vs Bane, I love the intro scene despite it being a bit ridiculous, I love seeing citizens of Gotham remember Batman with chalk drawings and statues. I just like the tone and seriousness that Nolan brings to Batman even if I do see some of Rises flaws.
It’s definitely a step down from The Dark Knight imo but it’s not quite as painful as going from Raimi’s Spider-Man 2 to Spider-Man 3. I mean, I actually enjoy Spidey 3 as well, but it’s a bumpy ride watching both films back to back.