Homecoming Promo - Bitches Love Spidey

Even in Homcoming, bitches love Spider-Man.

Confirmed for most accurate Spidey adaptation.

youtu.be/tjbjAeGm3k8

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/IQHWCfw2X1E
youtu.be/TK6gkuRPDLc
youtu.be/Go8zsh1Ev6Y
youtu.be/CJlCYNt2z9k
youtube.com/watch?v=PIlStdAb1EY
twitter.com/AnonBabble

As hamfisted as this entire thing is I fucking love it.

"Another one" will never not slay me.

Lebron was tnking for vegas, cavs in 7.

>SNAPCHAT
>THE EDM ANGLE

NOOOOOOOOOO

Fucking DJ Khaled goddamnit.

I enjoyed this. I hope the rest of the film is as cheesy as this.

Here are the other two tv spots that link up with this:

Part 1 - "The Invite"
>youtu.be/IQHWCfw2X1E

Part 2 - “Peter Arrives”
>youtu.be/TK6gkuRPDLc

Stan Lee does commercials now?

He's been doing that for a while now: youtu.be/Go8zsh1Ev6Y

I really do hope it's cheesy as fuck

Does anything in the footage released this far make you doubt that will be the case? A lot of the school scenes look like they are gonna be cheesy (in a good way).

It's going to be shit.

Gotta keep up the meme, right?

This. No Raimi = shit

Those were shit too.

Sure thing casual.

>Crackers as snacks
what?

Raimi's movies were garbage, though.

Why is Tony Stark asking Spidey to get snacks?
Why is Spidey getting snacks at a convenient store?
Doesn't Tony have a full tower full of people who can get him snacks?
Why wouldn't the snacks be set up beforehand?

This commercial angers me!

This movie is going to be fucking garbage

I was thinking the same thing.

>Why is Tony Stark asking Spidey to get snacks?
He isn't, Happy is. See:

Why does it look so fucking bad bros?

They're for Tim Duncan, he only likes bland but fundamentally sound food.

Because every shot feels so clean and inorganic. Like, no place in these trailers looks messy or dirty.

For comedy's purpose.

RELATEABLE EVERYMAN PROBLEMS *AND* THE EN BEE AYY FINALS?
HOLY FUCK I LOVE HOMECOMING NOW
CAN'T WAIT TO SEE IT

Yeah, lets have every shot be an incoherent mess, Michael Bay-style. Right?

My only question right now is:

Is this whole marketing idea Sony's or Didney's?

You know that's not what he means you retard. The movie looks like it was shot by an amateur film school student. It's bland and ugly.

Nigga you've never watched student films.

>You know that's not what he means you retard.
Its pretty clear that's exactly what the user meant.

>The movie looks like it was shot by an amateur film school student. It's bland and ugly.
Oh shit, guise. We got a film critic in the thread.

>The movie looks like it was shot by an amateur film school student. It's bland and ugly.

You know we can all see you samefagging, shill?

>40 seconds between 2 of the posts

I wasn't talking about the shots, I was talking about the sets.
And even then, this cinematography is pretty much "Set the camera down and shoot the scene". I could think of a ton of great shots, like a one full shot of Spider-Man running from class to get on the roof of the school and putting on the Spider-Man suit to then swing away.

It's pretty dull looking. It hasn't even shown off a sequence of Spider-Man swinging through NYC which have always been a highlight of the Spider-Man films.

Long takes are overrated. I still like them though.

...

>thinks he's a cinematographer
kek

Regardless that's not at all how student films look. They tend to go for plodding cinematography and heavy-handed symbolism because they want to show off their technical and artistic prowess.
Just go back to saying it looks like a TV show.

t. worked on student films

>It hasn't even shown off a sequence of Spider-Man swinging through NYC

True, but there have been plenty of really impressive shots that pull directly from familiar Spidey iconography. See pic related, for example.

...

People keep saying

"it hasn't shown off a sequence of Spider-man swinging through NYC"

that is the ENTIRE point of this film, no matter what they say, this is another origin, but just without uncle bens death/spiderbite

they're working UP to Spidey becoming a proper Spider-man and swinging through NYC, which is sort of cool, if they do it correctly. I doubt you will get raimi style swigning through the concrete jungle in this film, however, in the 2nd, more so the 3rd, 100% you will, when he really is, a Spider-man.

They're one of my favorite things in films. It shows they are dedicated.

This user gets it.

I wasn't the one who said Students Film.
Even that lacks the umph because it's in Queens.

>Even that lacks the umph because it's in Queens.
Oh fuck off. Go back to fapping to your grimdark Snyder shots.

>Spider Man not swinging
>Entire point of this film

The shills are getting desperate. This is how I know the movie will flop.

>flop

>because it's in Queens.
What moronic reasoning.

>but just without uncle bens death/spiderbite
Oh thank god.

No doubt they're super hard to pull off but that in itself doesn't make it the artistically correct choice every time. Some people tend to use them because even the most pleb movie goear can see they're doing something cool.
Here though, have this one, one of the longuest and one of my favorite: youtu.be/CJlCYNt2z9k

Is anyone be actually excited for this piece of garbage? I thought the Raimi movies strayed far from the source material but this is straight up sad. They turned Spider Man into Spider Meme.

>They turned Spider Man into Spider Meme.

Raimi's movies being good is a meme.

And the even bigger meme is that they're true (or have the same "spirit") to the source material.

Instant casual detection anytime these memes pop up.

I love how when Sony even strayed SLIGHTLY away from the comics, that peter got his web fluid from oscorp, the entire fucking internet went BATSHIT insane, screaming bloody mary about how it isn't like the source material

Marvel gets the rights back, and now EVERY single thing is different, NOBODY complains.

Funny thing is Amazing Spider-man is the closest adaption to all of them, now we have Spider-man with a god damn iron suit and people will still leave the cinema saying IT'S JUST LIKE THE COMICSXD

add some imported American cheese and cured ham

>Marvel gets the rights back, and now EVERY single thing is different, NOBODY complains.

Where the fuck have you been? Did you just wake up from a coma or something? Is this your first time on the internet?

Fucking tons of people are bitching about this movie.

>NOBODY complains.
You're seeing what you want to see.

Literally everyone I know says this movie looks like shit though, although the comics are the least of its problems

>Raimi's movies being good is a meme.
youtube.com/watch?v=PIlStdAb1EY

Eat shit. I'm tired of people shitting on those films because "Spider-Man should be acting like Deadpool"

>Eat shit. I'm tired of people shitting on those films because "Spider-Man should be acting like Deadpool"

I don't think he should either. But he sure as shit doesn't act anything like the "Spider-Man" in Raimi's movies. Peter was never some socially inept turbo beta who could barely form coherent sentences.

>tfw liked the Raimi movies and think Homecoming could be neat too
They're certainly different but I can get behind this Peter characterization and I don't mind the supporting cast shuffling around, it's not like his HS era supporting cast was that good to begin with (sorry Flash). Kinda nice Pete has a friend who's not a complete douchebag for once too.
Not sure I like the Spider-Man side of things as much as the Peter side of things though, it may depend on whether Vulture ends up being decent which is a tall order.

>Fucking tons of people are bitching about this movie.

With matching damage control. Not calling you but MCU fanboys are out full force defending it everywhere.

How is that different from any cape movie ever? There are still people who defend BvS for example. You'll always find people on both sides of the fence. Stop being so dense.

>It's another "let's suddenly start shitting on Raimi" thread

Jesus fucking Christ, you guys make every Spider-movie thread fucking insufferable. You wouldn't be able to recognize a good movie if someone smashed your head with it, let alone a good adaptation

Pro-tip: adapting a character doesn't mean copypasting panels or writing, or forming a checklist of "shit i saw happening in the comic". That's how you get the soulless Webb cashgrabs or stuff like Watchmen

>you guys make every Spider-movie thread fucking insufferable.
Easy solution: have less shit taste.

>That's how you get the soulless Webb cashgrabs or stuff like Watchmen
>soulless
See: There's the spirit meme.

Try reading a comic some time, user.

Listen, I think the Raimi movies are great but 80% of the characteriization is different from comics. Only May, JJJ and maybe Sandman really act somewhat like you'd expect them to.
Peter, MJ, Norman, Harry, Ock, Eddie, they're nothing like their comics counterparts.

That said I think the "adapted the tone" argument is somewhat valid, but it picks elements from the 60s (corny as fuck quips) through the 90s (New Yorkers being Spidey stans) so I can see why some people would object to that too.

Nobody takes Kinosseurs seriously.

He's not saying they have the same spirit as the comics though, he's saying they have spirit period.

>and maybe Sandman really act somewhat like you'd expect them to

You've never actually read a comic with Sandman in it, have you? The movie version is -drastically- different.

I have a few but he usually doesn't have much character in them, hence the "maybe". I guess I mostly mean "he can be redeemed", but yeah he's certainly more of a sobber in the movie.

Taking the fans words and then claiming them to be a meaningless meme isn't exactly an argument, it's a cheap tactic to make sure you're winning before you even start talking to people

But i do kinda mean that. The thing is that details like, for example, how tough Peter acts aren't all that important as they don't drastically change his general character, trope or whatever we wanna call it

So yes, you can argue in the comics Peter is a resentful loser instead of a quiet/whiny one (i find the whiny argument fucking retarded), but at the end of the day both are losers and serve the same role within their respective worlds

Yeah he was in the kirby books. He was school shooter material.

He's a cocky sonnova bitch in the comics who genuinely likes crime. Sure, he cares about his daughter later on. But he isn't this broken guy who only steals to protect his kid, like in the movie.

Don't you mean Ditko?

>it's a cheap tactic to make sure you're winning before you even start talking to people
Oh quit bitching. Come with an acceptable counter argument and show how it "captures the spirit of the comic." 'Cause, you know, it doesn't. In fact, it shits all over the Lee/Ditko legacy by changing nearly all of those characters into Raimi's twisted versions of them.

Every time I watch those movies, I wonder if Raimi ever actually read a Spider-Man comic. I get the feeling he may have when he was a kid, but never bothered to go back and re-read them. Instead he just skimmed over a couple wiki articles, looked at a couple iconic covers and went from his skewed memory.

You've never read those issues.

If I wasn't in class I'd write a novel exposing you as a damn casual shill.

My argument is in the post, you blind fuck

And Raimi is a CLEAR fan of Spiderman and capeshit in general, no amount of bitching will turn those movies in the betrayal you're trying to paint them as

You guys repeat these things over and over in every thread without ever elaborating and then try to act all cute about how you're the only ones with arguments. You're like Kevin Smith and his "Burton never touched a comic" deal, you're so damn superficial

Do it then. Don't give me this "I would, but I won't 'cause I'm too busy!" cop out. You won't do it because you can't.

>And Raimi is a CLEAR fan of Spiderman and capeshit in general

Then how did he get nearly every character's characterization so painfully wrong? If he cared, he'd make it a point to actually adapt them well.

I've actually read most of that run but to be fair a lot of the Lee/Ditko era villains had paper thin characterization, They were mostly either cackling mad scientists, unapologetic small-time gangsters, or both.
You're not going to adapt that in a modern movie.

But then my most marking image of Sandman in my childhood was that time Doc Ock changed him into glass, which iirc was because he was objecting to his plan.

>You're not going to adapt that in a modern movie.
And yet that's exactly what Raimi was trying to do. Adapt the Lee/Ditko/Romita Sr era stuff to film. That's the entire point of the alleged god tier Spider-Man 1 and 2.

Spider-Man 3 is kind of the outlier in that Raimi was still trying to do Lee/Ditko era stuff (with Sandman, which he failed at adapting well) and then had to shove in Venom because of Avi Arad's meddling.

He get nearly all of his adaptations painfully wrong, though. How do you screw up your title character that bad?

You're still only repeating the same shit over and over

>And yet that's exactly what Raimi was trying to do. Adapt the Lee/Ditko/Romita Sr era stuff to film. That's the entire point of the alleged god tier Spider-Man 1 and 2.
Really? Because I thought a lot of it felt like 90s Spider-Man mixed in with elements of 60s Spidey. Like the Doc Ock mentor thing was a brief 90s thing iirc. Probably part of why I liked it too since those were, you know, the comics I read as a kid.

I don't honestly care that much how faithful of an adaptation they are though, they're straight-up good movies.

Ok, let me elaborate. Lets look at the supposed god tier Spider-Man 2. Just looking at his relationship with Mary Jane and the 'will they? won't they?' plot thread.

During that, Peter can barely blurt out a full, coherent sentences. Any time he comes in contact with Mary Jane, the vast majority of his dialogue regresses to long pauses and "ummm", "eh" and "err".

While, in the comics, its established very early on that even at his most beta, Peter is still smooth as fuck (he also didn't take shit from Flash, pretty much at all and antagonized Flash just as much as Flash did him). Pic related is from ASM #7. If Raimi had bothered to go back and even read the first 10 issues of ASM, he'd have a better grasp of Peter's characterization. Instead, because of those movies, casuals and normies think Peter is supposed to be this socially inept loser.

What teams do you think they're rooting for? MCU Tony is from California right?

So I assume Tony is for the Dubs and Pete is for the Cavs.

Only people in Cleveland want the Cavs to win, the rest of the east hate them.

Good job comparing two completely different situations. Your page is Peter flirting with Betty without a care in the world but then you compare it to the movie focusing on his dual life where the whole time he has to make up excuses to justify the fact he has no time for his family and friends

Good job proving you're a fucking retard

>Your page is Peter flirting with Betty without a care in the world

Thanks for confirming you've never read the issue. I'll safely disregard anything you have to say.

Bitches love Spider-Man, but too bad no one loves his new movie.

Yes user, i haven't read that issue from a character with 60+ years of history, doesn't change what I'm seeing, Peter is cheerfully flirting. You know movies are a limited medium compared to comics that run for years, right? And that thus someone like Raimi has to find his own balance and condense shit to focus on a theme and plot instead of running wild and insert every possible flirting situation just to please your autism, right? Refute what i fucking said about context and adapting instead of no-true-scotmanning your way through

>i haven't read that issue from a character with 60+ years of history

60+ years worth of history that you make more and more apparent you lack a great deal of understanding of. Its important to note that the issue you clearly hadn't read (ASM #7) is dealing with the exact scenario you describe in and dealing with Peter's dual life. Its NOT "Peter flirting with Betty without a care in the world".

By arguing and showing you clearly lack any understanding of the material being discussed, it just shows that you're a fuckin' idiot.

>You know movies are a limited medium compared to comics that run for years, right?
Yes? And? Where did I say Raimi had to make a page-for-page adaptation? I would be an idiot to expect that. My problem is that Raimi's adaptation is SO different from the source material, that it might as well be an entirely different character all together. Outside of superfluous stuff like costuming and the character's name, the one we see in the movie is unrecognizable.

>And that thus someone like Raimi has to find his own balance and condense shit to focus on a theme and plot instead of running wild and insert every possible flirting situation just to please your autism, right?
Again, I wasn't expecting him to. I wanted Raimi to get just the bare basics of the character's relationship down (or, ANY of his relationships with the supporting cast, for that matter). You'd know the nature of those relationships if you bothered to even casually dip into those 60+ years of history. Its clear you haven't even done that.

Additionally, its ironic that you're calling me autistic.

Another one.

WE THE BEST

I love what I have seen of his new movie. Trailer seems to indicate it will be good.

Another one

I really hope Tim Duncan actually appears in these commercials

>With the whole "pshh pshh" thing
>Not 'thwip thwip"
REEEEEEE

Another one.