Tom Holland made an incredible first impression in CAPTAIN AMERICA : CIVIL WAR but where Holland is a very good (but very young) Peter Parker, his own movies have never been able to really to fascinate me. That is not Tom's fault: he is wonderful in his acting but for me the films never really captured Spider-Man at his best.
I understand as a screenwriter you try to create new stories while learning from the past. Then you can improve on older stories while creating something worthwhile, something of interest that is fresh and new. Yet, with SPIDER-MAN: NO WAY HOME, I saw a film that was hardly at its best.
Example: everybody knows J. Jonah Jameson is a wonderful character. His hatred of Spider-Man is wellknown and yet you can believe him because there have been moments where we were allowed to see inside his character. When Jameson was being reintroduced into these Jon Watts films at the end of SPIDER-MAN: FAR FROM HOME, there seemed to be no reason to bring him back other than to plague Spider-Man. To reveal the Peter Parker identity of Spider-Man at that same moment, that makes no sense.
The point to Jameson is that Peter Parker would be able to fight crime and make pictures of that and sell these to him. Parker needs the money, Jameson needs the pictures. The irony there being a love hate relationship between the two that would allow humor and pathos to work both ways. In the Jon Watts films however, Peter Parker had never heard of Jameson before his surprise announcement. So that makes no sense. It just comes too soon. That would have worked if Peter Parker had already been familiar with Jameson, like in selling him pictures. Then for Jameson the impact of knowing that Parker is Spider-Man would also be double as big. A missed opportunity here.
(I must point out that with THOR: RAGNAROK Marvel has also missed out on a major opportunity there. This would have served very well to have Mark Ruffalo be able to do a mini-series of PLANET HULK. But no, I suppose in the long run of Kevin Feige's plans, that was not something meant to be included.)
I would like to say here that if these films had been more evenly spread out, it might have been possible to spend more attention to the stories themselves because now SPIDER-MAN:NO WAY HOME is so full of story content that it is bursting at the seems. This also means other parts that could have been better have to be rushed. The DOCTOR STRANGE part, I really like but there, too, you see that they are trying to do too much at the same time. Parker and Strange know each other.
I see Dr. Strange as being the more reasonable person because he had been arrogant in the past. That arrogance cost him his earlier career and possibly a marriage. Unfortunately, in the film he only keeps the arrogance intact. At least this story will be continued for him into his own next film, which I look forward to. But had he been given more time, it would have worked better for him as well. For me, SPIDER-MAN: NO WAY HOME is a film that is overburdened with story ideas that are barely given enough time to be worked out properly. ( You see this as well when the 3 Spider-Men are working to solve the medical issues of the villains. In less than 5 minutes those problems are solved. That's maybe a little too convenient?!!)
Mind you, there is a lot too that is absolutely wonderful. The appearance of TOBEY MAGUIRE and ANDREW GARFIELD as the former SPIDER-MEN, together with Tom Holland here, that is TRUE MOVIE MAGIC!!! Had these men together been granted just a little more time together, I am positive it would have worked out even better, too. It's a shame that at that point in the movie, everything seems to be rushed. But for Andrew, the moment that he saves MJ by diving after her, catching her and landing with her intact and then realizing that that was how he could have saved his GWEN STACY, that is PURE SPIDER-MAN GOLD !!! Andrew was a far better Spider-Man than he was being given credit for. And Tobey, Tobey has always been magnificent. Except in Sam Raimi's SPIDER-MAN 3.
One major objection for me: I do understand that for the Peter Parker character development there are some hard lessons that have to be taken to heart but killing off MAY PARKER (the wonderful Marissa Tomei), that is a mistake. Aunt May is an anchor for Peter Parker and in the comics they have tried to kill her off as well. And subsequently they retconned it. (Corrected it with a terrible excuse.)
I think Peter Parker should have that anchor to fall back on if he is down on his luck. What's going to happen now? Is Parker going to grow bat ears and skulk around in caves? That's the other guy who has the money to engage in funny hobbies with lots of toys. Peter Parker lost his parents earlier already and needed his aunt for that reason. Taking her away now, while I understand the purpose of the action, seems unwarranted to me. But mind you, Parker going his own ways now, also with a new selfmade SPIDER-MAN suit, that was very cool to see. I just wish she would have been there still for the odd moments now and then. And that is out of the picture now.
Now, you ask me, was there nothing good about SPIDER-MAN: NO WAY HOME? Please forgive me: the film has a lot of really good stuff, too. The 3 Spider-Men working together, that was awesome. And I think I only now really got to appreciate Zendaya for playing this version of MJ, while I have earlier stated that this was not Mary Jane Watson as I know her. (And Zendaya is not playing Mary Jane Watson, indeed.) She was good, as was Jakob Batalan as Ned. And Benedict Cumberbatch was wonderful too as Dr. Strange (but what is it that he has in his hair? It looks like too much gel.) and I cannot say enough of the villains. WILLEM DAFOE ! Wonderful!!! How I despise you now for killing Aunt May, he he he !! ALFRED MOLINA: the one and only Dr. Otto Octavius, you are AMAZING !!! Thomas Haden Church, Jamie Fox and Rhys Ifans were good, too, but in their own respective spots could have used some more time to work out some issues.
As a film music lover, I can clearly say I did not think there was a good score here (and I hated the end title animation). But that does not mean Michael Giacchino should be worried. The film was also not aimed at me, a 55 year old Spider-Man fan who still tries go get some kicks from the comics and then finds the new stuff doesn't cut it.
There is still a lot to like on SPIDER-MAN: NO WAY HOME but I do realize that now with the trilogy HOMECOMING - FAR FROM HOME and now NO WAY HOME, it was the intention to have Peter Parker become a man the hard way. Not that I oppose this but I would have dealt with it in different ways. For one thing, it is understandable that he wishes to spare MJ and Ned the grief of being endangered every time because they know he is Spider-Man but is he going to go thru college now in a complete isolation or will he be allowed to have friends? Good friends are hard to come by and they can support you in many ways even if they can not be with you.
If Mr. Watts is going to continue making Spider-Man films with Tom Holland, I wish him good luck. (I hear you will be doing FANTASTIC FOUR first now? About time.) I will be watching them, no matter if I am critical now and then. (And I will be.) SPECIAL THANKS TO CHARLIE COX !!!!!
BRING BACK DAREDEVIL !!!!!
