Spider-Man: Homecoming (a movie review post)

I don't think I've made a secret of my longtime love of Spider-Man. Spider-Man goes back before Star Wars for me, back to at least when I was four. As such, I waited a long time for a Spider-Man movie. When that movie finally came in 2002 -- the Sam Raimi/Toby Maguire feature -- it was pretty perfect. Toby Maguire really captured Peter Parker, and I couldn't have been happier.

I was less happy when Sony decided to reboot the series. It's not that Andrew Garfield didn't do a fine job -- he wasn't as good as Maguire, but he was fine -- but a reboot just wasn't needed. Sure, change the actors, but keep the continuity of the series going.

Needless to say, I was a little unsure of how I felt about another reboot of the series. On the one hand, Marvel Studios was taking a hand in it, and Marvel has proven themselves a master at handling their own characters. [Unlike Warner Brothers, who continually show they don't know crap about how to make a super hero movie. For their one real success so far (Wonder Woman), they had to steal the plot of Captain America: The First Avenger to make it work.] On the other hand, it was going to be another reboot.

But Marvel, evidently, felt the same way I do about the idea of doing another reboot and went around it by not doing another origin story. It was pretty brilliant, actually. They summed it all up with one line, "I was bit by a spider." It was great.

And Tom Holland was... Okay, I'm going to skip the "amazing" joke. Tom Holland was incredible. Better than Toby Maguire, which I didn't think was actually possible. Of course, I thought that might be the case after Civil War, but I wasn't certain. Homecoming dismissed any doubt within the first few minutes. Seriously spectacular. [Sorry, I had to slip something in.] It's not that he's a wisecracking super hero; he's a nervous teenager. I'm looking forward to more from him.

All of the cast was great, though I wish Donald Glover had had a bigger part. I hope he becomes a recurring character. However, summing up everyone with "great" is probably devaluing Michael Keaton, and I wouldn't want to do that. Keaton was a better Adrian Toomes than Toomes ever was in the comics. Yeah, I was never much of a Vulture fan. But Keaton was wonderful and believable. And more than a little frightening. And I'm not going to say more than that because of spoilers (but my son was in full suspense mode as we watched, so I know it was working; he's a tough audience, even tougher than me).

I also really liked Bokeem Woodbine as The Shocker.

Oh, and Damage Control. That they introduced them was pretty great. I have the original limited series from 1989. Not that it seems it's done anything for the prices of the issues. It's still fun.

My daughter came out of the movie saying it's her favorite Marvel movie ever. I think Homecoming probably lands in my top three super hero movies. I'm not sure what that order is, actually. The top five, at this point, are all pretty great movies, and it's very difficult to tell which is better than another. It might be somewhat flexible depending upon how I'm feeling at the time. Right now, I just want to go see Homecoming again. Seriously great movie. And you don't really need to have seen any of the other Marvel movies to "get it," so don't let that get in the way if you haven't seen the other movies or aren't up to date on them. Just take the Tony Stark bits in stride and enjoy the movie.

Oh, and the Steve Rogers cameos are brilliant. Especially the one at the end.

A Study in Super Heroes: Part Two -- Civil War (review)

Captain America: Civil War is a complicated movie full of complicated issues, but the main conflict centers around individual freedom. How much of our personal liberty, our personal right to make choices, should we give up for the well-being of the whole, for society? Should that ever be compelled?

That's a tough question in these days of border walls and religious exclusions. There is something to be said for providing protection and safety for society, but how much of our freedom should we give up for that? How much should be required and how much should be by choice?

But the actual question is, "Is the movie good?" That's not a tough question, though it does have a complication. If you've been following the Marvel movies, this movie is great. Incredible. It has everything in it you could want and Spider-Man! (And Spider-Man was amazing (Pun totally intended).)

The complication is that if you haven't been following the Marvel movies (and why haven't you!?!?), this is not the place to jump in. It's not enough to have just seen the Captain America movies or just seen the Avengers movies, you need to have seen all four of those to really understand what's happening in this movie. And, so, while I can understand that being frustrating for someone coming into this without the background, it's so very satisfying to see a complex story come together like this, and, honestly, in a way that I'm pretty sure has never been done before.

I'm tempted to break the movie down and walk through it, but I don't want to spoil it for anyone, so I'm not going to do that. Also, there's no real reason to talk about the principal actors. All of them gave the kinds of performances you've come to expect. Chris Evans and Robert Downey, Jr. are incomparable. And I love Anthony Mackie as The Falcon. I think he's tremendous.

However, let's look at the new guys:

Chadwick Boseman: The Black Panther has never been a character I've followed all that closely. Wakanda is interesting, but it's never been sustainable as a setting for a comic book series much like the ocean has never been sustainable as a setting for a Namor series (or an Aquaman one, for that matter). Inevitably, they have to bring those characters into "our" world, and they have never, at least back in when I was reading comics, managed to successfully integrate those characters in a way that made them interesting as primary characters. I hope that changes, because Boseman was excellent as the Panther. He brought just the right amount of gravitas to the role.

Tom Holland: Spider-Man, on the other hand, is a character I've followed closely. Since I was, like, four or five. Maguire's Spider-Man has remained one of my top three super hero movies and portrayals. He really just nailed the role. Holland seems to have returned to that mold, the geeky high school student, something never quite believable from Garfield. To cut it short, Holland was perfect. I have been ambivalent about another Spider-Man re-boot, but I'm now quite looking forward to Spider-Man: Homecoming (and not just because of the ties to this movie).

Emily VanCamp: Okay, so, technically, she's not a new-comer, but she steps up her role in Civil War, so I'm going to treat her as one. She's good. She's good opposite Evans, at any rate. I'd say I need to reserve judgement to see what they do with the character, but it's not clear there will be any further development for the character. At any rate, I'm satisfied.

Daniel Bruhl: Ah, now, this one could be controversial, because the Zemo of the movie is certainly not the Zemo of the comic books. I'm okay with that. The movie universe is not congruent with the comic universe. I'm okay with that, too. And it's probably better that Zemo wasn't running around with a purple hood on his head. Bruhl does a great job in the role. He's convincing. And that's really all anyone can ask of an actor: Did he make you believe?

It's fair to say that I'm biased in favor of these movies, but I think it's safe to say that my bias has somewhat negated by how successful they've been. Marvel has not just made flashy super hero movies; Marvel has made good, even great, movies. They just happen to have super heroes in them.