-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Spider-Man: Far From Home |Spoiler OT| Even dead, I'm the hero
- Thread starter Deleted member 1248
- Start date
I read an interview with the writers who said that they didn't see Endgame until the premiere. All they knew while writing FFH was that everyone came back, and which Avengers died. Which is why there's no specific references to anything Spidey did in Endgame, like riding a horse with wings during the final battle, etc.
It's a reply to a 68 page thread full of examples. But the two that bugged me most: arbitrarily dropping Spidey-sense so the central conflict can happen, Stark leaving WMDs to Peter (I thought he was a reformed arms dealer who started a superhero civil war in favour of accountability and oversight?)
Sure, hit me with the headcanon fantasies why these things happen but let's be real: it's just the writers handwaving away consistency to make a clunky story work.
So, a comic book film. Anybody who has watched Iron Man fly will readily agree that it takes blatant liberties with basic dynamics and treats gravity in as cavalier as fashion as any Roadrunner cartoon.
He could have written it as he doodled his ideas for a time machine in 2023. A bequest to a person who is not able to claim it would simply send up in probate, and eventually go to Pepper. But as Peter was successfully returned he was there and the bequest could be executed. It's not necessary to make this a great mystery. Tony had confidence that his plan would work.
JJJ and the Bugle being modeled after Alex Jones and InfoWars killed any goodwill or interest I had in his return. Just insanely tone deaf. Alex Jones isn't funny or something to be parodied.
Come to think of it, it really is. Unrealistically fucked up, even.
He put a reference to 'I love you 3000' in his posthoumous message to his daughter. He believed in the plan, and also prepared for his death.
Last edited:
I only wish she had picked up on the houmous recommendation, instead of those ghastly cheeseburgers.
Last edited:
Fury can't use it himself, that's the whole point of why Mysterio has to trick Peter into giving him control of it.
For now. The film is set in 2023, so the USA better get Trump out of office and avoid that timeline.
Yes, at the bar scene. The Mysterio team found out that Tony incumbed Nicky Fury to deliver E.D.I.T.H. to Spider-Man / Peter, then they proceeded to contact Fury, to create a situation where it'd be need to have Spider-Man's help to defeat the "Elementals".
Right, but I wondering how he found out in the first place. Mysterio says something along the lines of 'then we find out that this project we helped build is being given to a high school kid', but I don't see where in the chain-of-command that information could leak.
Someone at the Stark Industries got the lead, it was an woman in the Mysterio team. Don't remember her name.
Oh, I see. I was confused during Mysterio's reveal, because there didn't seem to be a route by which Mysterio could have known about the glasses. The logic of the Stark Industries subplot isn't a big priority in the movie.
Last edited:
That's exactly what the Bugle always was though. Pushing through an agenda to make a person in to a villain just to get personal profit from it, no matter the repercussions.
In the age of the internet rather than newspapers, it's exactly what you'd expect the angle of that sort of news organisation to be and actually be in business. You might not like it, but you were never supposed to like what the Bugle does.
Hell, compared to comic Jameson who has on a number of occasions actually funded super villains to kill Spiderman, that's still small beans.
Why would Tony even give Peter the option to turn it over in the first place? Would have been better if Mysterio stole them and "hacked" it in order to kill people instead of being a death machine right out the gate.
Fun reminder that in the comics J. Jonah Jameson funded the second Mysterio (Daniel Berkhart) and when Mysterio was caught Jameson fled the country.
Guy has done some seriously shady shit.
Guy has done some seriously shady shit.
They didn't drop Spidey-sense, it's just something he has to refine. I don't think Peter is ever blindsided by imminent danger in the movie - when Mysterio gets the glasses he has no intention of hurting Peter, Peter catches on to Mysterio when he's about to be attacked in the fake office, and I recall him looking at the train just before it hits him.
The Stark subplot is something that isn't well explained, but there is sense you can make of it. In the 5 years it could've been a project to protect the Earth from future threats, if not something earlier that was shuttered. He didn't trust Fury, Rhodey did once hijack his armor and turn it over to the military, Happy is a fuck up, and he would probably want to keep his family out of it. It also doesn't seem like something you could self-destruct. It's irresponsible, which is Tony Stark's modus operandi, but I could see how Peter could end up the most responsible person in Tony's circle of trust. I agree that this subplot is clunky though.
Its not a news station, the daily bugle was like an inforwars thing. Which they would have no problem doing.
No, the clip from the Daily Bugle is broadcast on a mainstream news network in the MCU universe.
Yeah but we're talking about a world with AI like Karen and Friday, where you can have conversations with them and do random things like asking them to transfer control to strangers.
I feel that this whole debate is ignoring the screenwriting idea that writing should primarily be about characters and their choices, whereas plot and logic are secondary to this philosophy. The point of the movie is juxtaposing Peter's desires with Homecoming. In Homecoming he wanted more action, to be Spidey. In Far From home, he wants to be a teenager again. Giving away great power is a dramatic character choice, it's compelling and thought-provoking, we're watching a moment of weakness, a teenager rationalising a terrible betrayal of his uncle's classic motto.
When people get so caught up in trying to spot plot holes, I think they're missing the point of these stories. Sure, they could be neater and all plot holes and inconsistencies tied up like a bow, but sometimes it just doesn't pan out, whether due to production issues or producers/writers butting heads, but ultimately I feel Feige and the directors he gets for these movies, understand that character trumps plot, always. It's why this franchise is so successful. It sure as fuck isn't because of plots or CGI. The plots are insane and the CGI is often terrible.
I don't have any issues with Tony, still sore from Infinity War, building a drone army, entrusting it to someone he deemed his successor, and Peter in a moment of vulnerability and let's admit it, selfishness, giving it to someone he thought could take that responsibility away from him. It's all character development. If people don't like the direction of the character development, well that's something worth discussing more than plot details in my opinion. The more you discuss plot stuff, like the hows and whys of drones, logistics of Beck's plans, etc, the more you veer into fan fiction to plug the gaps or poke holes, whereas criticising characters and their choices is easier as it's all up there on the screen.
Tony reacting to the events of Infinity War by creating Edith is consistent with his arc and his character. Some of his lines in Endgame show that he had become convinced he was right that a suit of armor around the world was needed. Giving it to Peter also makes sense (for Tony) because he clearly is very fond of him and he believes in him.
1.Peter losing his powers due to psychosomatic reasons isn't new or arbitrary. He's lived through the harrowing events of Infinity War/End Game, saw his mentor die and now everyone is expecting him to step up. Peter is beyond stressed and is trying to cut himself off/take a break from being Spider-Man the entire movie. He is able to re-connect with his Spider-Sense the moment he begins trusting himself again.
Its as arbitrary as Peter losing his powers in Spider-man 2.
2. The Tony at the end of Civil War is not the same Tony that fought Thanos and had to live on a snapped earth for 5 years. At the beginning of End Game he yells at Cap that the threats he feared during Age of Ultron were real all along and the earth needed a suit of armor. He wasn't just sitting in a cabin for 5 years. He made Pepper an Iron Man suit and made sure the earth/his daughter would be protected from another cosmic invasion.
Tony is a well intentioned flawed character. He sees himself in Peter and spends the better of 5 movies trying to turn Peter into Iron Man Jr. Just like we saw when Peter took off the "safety wheels" protocol in Homecoming the goal was always for Peter to have lethal options down the line. Tony knowing he might die recovering the stones just pushed up the timetable. The drones were clearly made to take out alien armies not school kids. Tony leaving Edith to Peter makes sense for their messed up relationship.
These aren't that complicated movies folks. They have logical character arcs/motivation you can follow if you pay attention to the films.
Last edited:
My biggest problem with this is the cosmic invasion that killed half the universe the first time, happened again in Endgame, from the very person that haunted Tony for years, albeit from another timeline, the avengers were massively outmatched (he has no idea strange was going to show up with the cavalry), and at no point did he call for his army of drones he supposedly had prepared, that would have been extremely helpful in making sure Clint could get away with the gauntlet, if nothing else.
I could buy Edith being something he would consider building after listening to Cap blatantly did not work and he stated as much at the start of endgame, but it was clearly a decision made after Endgame was written and not actually something they had planned that he had done.
Well, the Avengers compound was razed to the ground before anyone had the chance to react so it seems plausible to assume that he was caught completely off guard. If the drone control center was located in the compound then he wouldn't have been able to launch them.
After a certain point every film discussion devolves into "Why didn't they just fly the eagles to Mordor?" For the sake of drama certain things play out certain ways on a script level . A reasonable in universe reason for why Tony didn't use it during the final battle is Edith wasn't completely built at the moment .Far From Home takes place 8 months after Endgame so maybe Peter got it a little bit after it was done. Another example could be Edith/Friday don't have access to the same things and the Thanos sneak attack prevented Tony from activating Edith before the building got destroyed.
Either way the Russo's will probably answer this question at comic con.
Because it is? EDITH is an insanely dangerous and highly illegal device, it's not only a highly efficient weapon of mass destruction, it also is a device that just casually invades everyone's privacy, literally nothing's a secret to the person wearing EDITH (except I guess for the very few who are <Redacted>, like Chameleon).
That Tony would think some 16-year old kid would be the best person to have that is insane and highly irresponsible. Am I supposed to buy that the guy who was fighting for government regulation and oversight would haphazardly give a kid a device like this? Especially since he has zero control over how this kid uses the device?
And sure, Peter is "pure hearted", but he's also a teen boy. And like all teen boys he's stupid and impulsive with his actions. Hell, Tony even sees this in action in Infinity War, with Peter just jumping to the rescue and not thinking for a second about how this will put him against things he's absolutely not ready for.
Why exactly would Tony choose Peter over someone like Bruce Banner? He's the far more logical option. Bruce can be trusted with tech like that, Spidey has shown zero reasons why he could be trusted with a tech like that and hey, turns out he totally couldn't because he fucks it up in ten seconds.
Because this story is about Peter and Tony, Hulk has nothing to do with the narrative. Sure he might be a more logical choice, but the writers want to explore Peter's relationship with Tony and how he acts when under pressure. I imagine most of the narrative began with a simple question: "What's the worst thing that could happen to Peter?". They wanted Peter to shun a big responsibility in the 2nd act, in addition to avoiding wearing his suit, and EDITH is what they came up with.
I mean, I agree with you, it is quite insane Tony left him EDITH, but it creates great drama, tension and humour. It's a comic book movie, I totally bought it while watching the movie. Some people can't get past it, and I do get that because it is a big ask from the writers, but at the same time I think you have to look at the tone of these movies, how they can be both serious and grounded, yet also weird and fantastical. Peter accidentally calling a drone strike on a classmate is hilarious though, c'mon...
Also, I just realised, maybe a reason why Tony made EDITH is because after Infinity War, a ton of heroes were dead, so EDITH could pick up the slack by identifying threats around the world. Maybe Rhodey and co were using it for their missions.
Tony Stark is prone to making irresponsible decisions. He probably trusted Peter to not just do nothing with it (which I would expect Banner to do), but to do the right thing with it. Of the people he knows and trusts seeing Peter as having the best moral character.
True, it's Peter's story and the reason why Peter got it is obvious within the movie, but as you say, for me it was a step too far in my suspension of disbelief. Every time EDITH was brought up I thought "God, this is so stupid and Tony's a huge asshole for giving this device to a child".
Peter calling a drone strike on a classmate and it being played for laughs was terrifying though. It was such a bizarre thing to do IMO.
How messed it up it was made for some good dark humor, laughed my ass off seeing the satellite out in space
Dude gave a 15 year old kid a suit with an instant kill mode. Tony has always been portrayed as a well intentioned but irresponsible and impulsive character. Civil War didn't solve that. He momentarily agreed with government regulation because he felt guilty after Ultron and continued with it as a fuck you to Steve protecting Bucky. As soon as Thanos invaded/won Tony was back on his bullshit because he felt justified that his Ultron defense was 100% right from the start.
I've enjoyed some of the irony that the lesson learned in the film is basically "Spider-Man can't be defined by his predecessors," and a sizable amount of criticisms is that it isn't like the movies that came before it. Not singling anyone here out, just more of a general vibe.
Just saw it and I am rather confused how Mysterio's technology did the Water Elemental in Venice. That was real water manipulation.
I took it as the drones being able to suck up water and use it. Same way the drones could shoot fire which burned Spidey's webs.
It exists, Dr. Strange already introduced the concept, Mysterio just happens to be full of shit is all.