There are a few movements for Spider-Man that tend to come across better in the "squash-and stretch" space of animation and 2D drawings, but that's not what I meant. I think there is totally room for a live-action Spider-Man that nails the character since we got to see glimpses of it in IW, CW, Homecoming, and even in the ASM films at times (despite how much I didn't really care for that series in other aspects). I think Homecoming was trying a little too hard to be distinct from the other Sony Spider-Man films, while also trying to serve 2 masters (what Marvel wanted as well as what Sony's demands were as part of the deal), and while it was a fun movie, it missed the mark a bit on the less "grounded" aspects of the character that are distinctly part of a Spider-Man story. The movement was part of that (although, I can understand they're trying to show that he's still new), but Civil War started off the character on a great foot and I felt things like Peter being poor is no longer a noted aspect of the character or no Spider-sense or even how he moved and quipped felt like a step back.
Granted, with Into the Spider Verse not having to worry about setting up a believable world so much due to being animated, they can jump into stuff like a multiverse and Miles being a second Spider-Man and apparently multiple villains without having the same worries about expectations from the audience of character development or exposition and it can be light and breezy in it's world building while also going as far out there as they want or go a bit deeper than surface level character moments whenever and however they choose simply because expectations are not the same as for live-action films.
It makes me think how a Lord and Miller Han Solo film probably would have been amazing as an animated film, especially since that is where they thrive and it gives them a little more freedom visually as well as tonally to play around in a space because things are looser and a bit more surreal than in live-action because every choice doesn't have to be justified or stand up to scrutiny like it has to when it's compared to real life. I could see where things could have went wrong with trying to fit that aesthetic with a live-action film with a very specifically depicted lead character with a specific tone and presentation of the world that character inhabits as well as a script that doesn't fit that vision at all.
