Skip to main content

Spider-Man Uses the Familiar to Chart New Waters


Marvel’s decision to make the multiverse a thing is not something I’m terribly interested in. It kind of seems like an intellectually lazy idea honestly, at least the way I’d expect Disney and the MCU to use it. A multiverse would either over-complicate the world of this already extremely stuffed franchise by drawing from every reality the comics have concocted for them, or it would just dispense fan service permitted to Marvel via the grander influence of Disney. Spider-Man: No Way Home, in every bit of marketing, embodied this second scenario: villains from previous iterations of Spider-Man film series’ being brought into the folds of this universe, with every expectation that two former Spider-Men would be joining them as well. Just a big ol’ crossover event to pull in the old fans of those earlier movies -especially the Raimi ones, which remain beloved even outside the superhero movie cult (Spider-Man 2 remains frequently and rightly cited as one of the best in the genre). It’s also clear that the MCU and Sony saw what Into the Spider-Verse did (a movie that actually did make something interesting and singular out of the multiverse concept), and decided to try their hand at that idea.
Obviously of course it’s just for the money and shallow hype; and that same insultingly pandering attitude that allowed for such empty nostalgia pumps as The Rise of Skywalker and Ghostbusters: Afterlife. It’s also simply a great way to attach further tendrils to the Marvel apparatus, which no doubt legitimizes them in Marvels’ eyes and in those of its’ fans. Add to that the trailers emphasizing heavily Benedict Cumberbatch’s Doctor Strange as prospective co-lead (MCU Spider-Man can never be allowed to escape the shadow of goateed father figures), and this movie had all the warning signs of being perhaps the most insufferable Marvel product yet.
What Spider-Man: No Way Home instead delivered was by far the most mature of these MCU Spider-Man films and a movie that owed almost as much thematically to those Raimi films as it did intellectually. This is a film that actually creates believable personal stakes, that delivers consequences, and that grows a character who has frankly coasted up till now in this franchise. Amid the indulgence in fan service and references, the transparently cynical guest appearances, and the typically Marvel-style humour and visual blandness, there’s some honest depth to this film, some genuine pathos and thematic integrity. I was stunned.
The main basis behind the plot is that Peter Parker (Tom Holland) having been exposed as Spider-Man at the end of Far From Home, is finding life increasingly difficult due to his identity being in the public consciousness. Primarily though, it has a direct impact on the academic futures of him and his friends, which causes him to go to Doctor Strange for a spell that would cause everyone to forget his identity. But Peter messing it up due to second thoughts leads to some figures spilling over from other universes: namely the five principal villains of the five non-MCU live-action Spider-Man movies. This part of the movie plays out pretty much as drably as could be expected, as neat as a de-aged Alfred Molina as Doc Ock and Willem Dafoe as Green Goblin are to see again.  A chunk of the first act involves Spider-Man and his friends hunting these villains and trapping them in Strange’s containment cells. Here is where the movie plays the hits, each villain referencing their own movies and relationship to Spider-Man, lame jokes like the kids laughing at Doc Ock’s name or Dafoe replaying that popular Norman Osborne meme, or Jamie Foxx’s lampshading the poor reception to his Electro (he’s completely redesigned for this film). It’s cute, but there’s not a lot of substance behind the nostalgia -even less in the kids’ plot based around their determination to get into MIT (although I did appreciate Strange calling out the shallowness in this). There’s a level of self-awareness as to Peter’s immaturity that right from the start captured my attention.
It’s when Strange is indisposed that the film starts to get interesting in it’s narrative trajectory, as Spider-Man’s empathy is raised to a core value. Learning that all of these figures are destined to die in their own universes, he instead sets out to rehabilitate them -to save them, as a superhero is supposed to do. It’s a curious inverse of the typical superhero formula, which has of late been about solving problems by punching the bad guys rather than try to understand them. The results are a bit mixed, the Green Goblin’s mental issues can’t so easily be reversed, but it’s noble and actually makes some use of these characters beyond the gimmick of their presence.
And it’s motivated in part by Peter’s higher awareness of his fault in all this, and his need to do right, which has never felt more genuine before. Holland’s performance in these movies I’ve never felt was anything special, he lacked a certain honesty and humility -always felt like he was being propped up by other figures. No Way Home is the first time that Holland actually gets to be compelling in this role, the first to really explore those psychological repercussions of being Spider-Man -and the emotional trauma. There is a big one in this movie and it is shocking how hard Marvel allows it to be. Peter goes through real adversity here as he deals with the consequences of his actions and is forced to make a tough choice. This movie really has much more to say than it initially appeared: it’s about Peter having to grow up, deal with his problems without taking shortcuts or relying on elder superheroes, and what it means to actually be a hero. And credit to director Jon Watts, whose been among the least interesting of Marvel’s for-hire directors, he captures a lot of the intensity of this very well. As much as the fan service may come in and cloud the film around Peter and these themes, it never loses sight of them.
That fan service still plays out the expected beats though (we all knew what was coming in spite of Disney and Sony’s coyness), and when it gets to that third act stage, there’s definitely some repeat of scenes from Into the Spider-Verse (and done less well), but overall it manages fine. The movie just in general feels way less crowded than I anticipated, in spite of all the interlopers. Sandman (Thomas Haden Church) and the Lizard (Rhys Ifans) are sidelined in a favour of the more popular villains, but otherwise everyone seems to get their due. MJ (Zendaya) and Ned (Jacob Batalon) are actually given richer parts as Peter’s sidekicks, Marisa Tomei’s Aunt May gets some good moments, and the film actually knows to restrain Doctor Strange -keeping him out of the action for a sizeable portion of the movie. And I’d be remiss not to mention J.K. Simmons’ brilliant reinvention of J. Jonah Jameson as a Rebel News-type conspiracy peddler. The climactic battle though, which features just about all of them, is mostly the same sludge, the action often unclear and the visual effects pretty bland. It pays off some plot beats well and in its’ last stage brings the stakes, but is largely underwhelming until about daybreak comes.
At the critical moment though, it all falls into place, and the MCU takes one of its’ first big narrative risks in a long while. Spider-Man has always been associated with the phrase “with great power comes great responsibility”. This film marks the first time it has ever been uttered in the MCU, and also the first point where its’ Spider-Man must take responsibility in a very meaningful way. And after the climax, this movie’s ending is such that I would rate among the very best of any Marvel film -one that prioritizes mood and character and feeling above logic and continuity -and is just really tenderly shot too.
Spider-Man: No Way Home is in some respects the movie I feared, but not to the degree I imagined. Indeed, it’s qualitatively not very consistent, having stretches and moments that exceed much of what we’ve seen from the MCU in terms of engaging character drama, but also falling every so often into the common comforts of the brand and the safety of the familiar. However, even in these it’s not so obnoxious, and I’m so blown away by the movies’ unexpected strengths. It’s a good Spider-Man movie at the end of the day, albeit with a few unflattering or just mediocre hiccups. This is preferable however to the alternative; and though I still haven’t much faith in the multiverse as a concept of focus, if more Marvel properties choose to draw ideas from it in service of enhancing existing characters and themes, I could perhaps be on board for this next phase in their continuum.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Disney's Mulan, Cultural Appropriation, and Exploitation

I’m late on this one I know. I wasn’t willing to spend thirty bucks back in September for a movie experience I knew was going to be far poorer than if I had paid half that at a theatre. So I waited for it to hit streaming for free to give it a shot. In the meantime I heard that it wasn’t very good, but I remained determined not to skip it entirely, partly out of sympathy for director Niki Caro and partly out of morbid curiosity. Disney’s live-action Mulan  I was actually mildly looking forward to early in the year in spite of my well-documented distaste for this series of creative dead zones by the most powerful media conglomerate on earth. Mulan  was never one of Disney’s classics, a movie extremely of its time in its “girl power” gender politics and with a decidedly American take on ancient Chinese mythology. It got by on a couple good songs and a strong lead, but it was a movie that could be improved upon, and this new version looked like it had the potential to do that, emphasizing

The Hays Code was Bad, Sex in Movies is Good

Don't Look Now (1973) Will Hays, Who Knows About Sex In 1930, former Republican politician and chair of the Motion Picture Association of America Will Hayes introduced a series of self-censorship guidelines for the movie industry in response to a mixture of celebrity scandals and lobbying from the Catholic Church against various ‘immoralities’ creating a perception of Hollywood as corrupt and indecent. The Hays Code, or the Motion Picture Production Code, was formally adopted in 1930, though not stringently enforced until 1934 under the auspices of Joseph Breen. It laid out a careful list of what was and wasn’t acceptable for a film expecting major distribution. It stipulated rules against profanity, the depiction of miscegenation, and offensive portrayals of the clergy, but a lot of it was based around sexual content: “sexual perversion” of any kind was disallowed, as were any opaquely textual or visual allusions to reproduction, and right near the top “No licentious or suggestiv

Pixar Sundays: The Incredibles (2004)

          Brad Bird was already a master by the time he came to Pixar. Not only did he hone his craft as an early director on The Simpsons , but he directed a little animated film for Warner Bros. in 1999, that though not a box office success was loved by critics and quickly grew a cult following. The Iron Giant is now among many people’s favourite animated movies. Likewise, Bird’s feature debut at Pixar, The Incredibles , his own variation of a superhero movie, is often considered one of the studio’s best. And for very good reason, as the most talented director at Pixar shows.            Superheroes were once the world’s greatest crime-fighting force until several lawsuits for collateral damage (and in the case of Mr. Incredible, a hilarious suicide prevention), outlawed their vigilantism. Fifteen years later Mr. Incredible, now living as Bob Parr, has a family with his wife Helen, the former Elastigirl. But Bob, in a combination of mid-life crisis and nostalgia for the old day