Spider-Man: Across The Spider-Verse (Part One)

[Bloop]

More thoughts: one thing I kept thinking about was the different art styles for the different spider people/creatures. From an esthetic standpoint, it was cool to see, but hasn't it already been established in Dr. Strange and the Multiverse of Madness that when you enter a universe different from your, you take on the physical look and characteristics of that universe? They clearly showed Dr. Strange and America as cartoons, even as paint, as they passed through different dimensions in that film. Spider-Man: ATSV ignores that.

Also, this movie establishes that cartoon-looking univeres and our own "normal-looking" universes co-exist. So why do all the Spider-Men/Women/Animals that are part of Miguel O'Hara's chosen group look like cartoons? It can't be because "humans" would stand out too much in cartoon worlds, because there were lots of different characters that had art-styles that stood out from the universes they popped into (and cartoons went into human worlds too).

 

[Usagi Pilgrim]

More thoughts: one thing I kept thinking about was the different art styles for the different spider people/creatures. From an esthetic standpoint, it was cool to see, but hasn't it already been established in Dr. Strange and the Multiverse of Madness that when you enter a universe different from your, you take on the physical look and characteristics of that universe? They clearly showed Dr. Strange and America as cartoons, even as paint, as they passed through different dimensions in that film. Spider-Man: ATSV ignores that.

Also, this movie establishes that cartoon-looking univeres and our own "normal-looking" universes co-exist. So why do all the Spider-Men/Women/Animals that are part of Miguel O'Hara's chosen group look like cartoons? It can't be because "humans" would stand out too much in cartoon worlds, because there were lots of different characters that had art-styles that stood out from the universes they popped into (and cartoons went into human worlds too).

There were live-action characters shown as well.

 

[NakedMoleRat]

The bracelets not only kept them from glitching, but also held their own shape when in different universes.

 

[Bloop]

There were live-action characters shown as well.

I didn't notice any, other than the few cameos. If I missed any amongst the throngs of animated characters, I apologize. Even if there were live-action Spider-Men among the animated ones, the vast majority were still animated. I get that it's an animated movie and they were in an "animated" universe, but if they're going to suggest all of Marvel's multiverse includes live-action AND animated characters, they haven't done a good enough job balancing them for me.

My point is more that the whole MCU multiverse is very loose, and varies from film to film. They want to give each filmmaker creative license, which is great, but it lacks cohesion. Loki's multiverse is different from the Spider-Man live-action multiverse which is different from the Spider-Man animated multiverse which is different from the Dr. Strange multiverse which is different from the Avengers multiverse...etc. It's hard enough to try to keep the characters from all the different live-action MCU "prime" universe cohesive, now they've thrown in the multiverse which further complicates things.

 

[HMSwolfe]

I didn't notice any, other than the few cameos. If I missed any amongst the throngs of animated characters, I apologize. Even if there were live-action Spider-Men among the animated ones, the vast majority were still animated. I get that it's an animated movie and they were in an "animated" universe, but if they're going to suggest all of Marvel's multiverse includes live-action AND animated characters, they haven't done a good enough job balancing them for me.

My point is more that the whole MCU multiverse is very loose, and varies from film to film. They want to give each filmmaker creative license, which is great, but it lacks cohesion. Loki's multiverse is different from the Spider-Man live-action multiverse which is different from the Spider-Man animated multiverse which is different from the Dr. Strange multiverse which is different from the Avengers multiverse...etc. It's hard enough to try to keep the characters from all the different live-action MCU "prime" universe cohesive, now they've thrown in the multiverse which further complicates things.

You’re expecting this multiverse to somehow be canon to a universe made by an entirely different company. Hence the disconnect. Spider-verse’s “multi-verse” used its cameos as…get this…cameos. Jokes. References. Not meant to be anything more than that. You’re supposed to hear the quip about Dr. Strange and go “haha I saw that movie”, just like in the first Spider-verse when they reference the famous Tobey Macguire upside-down kiss, or the infamous dance from Spider-Man 3. Not declaring that the Chris Pine Peter Parker of Miles’ dimension was unequivocally Tobey Macguire.

 

[Bloop]

You’re expecting this multiverse to somehow be canon to a universe made by an entirely different company. Hence the disconnect. Spider-verse’s “multi-verse” used its cameos as…get this…cameos. Jokes. References. Not meant to be anything more than that. You’re supposed to hear the quip about Dr. Strange and go “haha I saw that movie”, just like in the first Spider-verse when they reference the famous Tobey Macguire upside-down kiss, or the infamous dance from Spider-Man 3. Not declaring that the Chris Pine Peter Parker of Miles’ dimension was unequivocally Tobey Macguire.

If they're going to include live-action characters - played by the same actors in the MCU movies - how is the viewer not supposed to assume this movie is connected to the live-action MCU (and the Sony Spider-Man/Venom) movies? The same way Spider-Man: No Way Home included Toby Maguire and Andrew Garfield reprising their roles as Peter Parker/Spider-Man, Spider-Man: ATSV is using them and other characters to connect the animated films with the live-action films.

This movie may be made by "a completely different company," but Sony and Disney have an agreement to allow the use of Spider-Man and the ancillary characters in the MCU. Even the Venom films, which are technically non-MCU, have been connected to the MCU. So these movies - animated, live-action, Sony, Disney - they ARE all connected now. Whatever argument you try to make doesn't alter that fact.

And yes, the first animated Spiderverse movie did use references to the live action movies, which were meant to be jokes, just references. This movie, however, uses actual live action actors and footage from the live-action movies as "cannon." There's a huge difference from the animated Spider-Man recreating a version of the Peter Parker dancing scene from Spider-Man 3 to now including live-action footage taken directly from those films and referring to them as "cannon events."

 

[HMSwolfe]

If they're going to include live-action characters - played by the same actors in the MCU movies - how is the viewer not supposed to assume this movie is connected to the live-action MCU (and the Sony Spider-Man/Venom) movies? The same way Spider-Man: No Way Home included Toby Maguire and Andrew Garfield reprising their roles as Peter Parker/Spider-Man, Spider-Man: ATSV is using them and other characters to connect the animated films with the live-action films.

This movie may be made by "a completely different company," but Sony and Disney have an agreement to allow the use of Spider-Man and the ancillary characters in the MCU. Even the Venom films, which are technically non-MCU, have been connected to the MCU. So these movies - animated, live-action, Sony, Disney - they ARE all connected now. Whatever argument you try to make doesn't alter that fact.

Like I said, it could be just, like, a movie. Not a whole canon you have to learn to take a test on afterwards. Sometimes things just happen. No Way Home has characters from the Sam Raimi films. But they don’t follow the canon of those to a T. Octavius mentions Osborn going crazy and becoming the Green Goblin, but I’m pretty sure no one knew that outside of Spider-Man and Harry Osborn. The first Spider-verse has a billboard in Times Square for a sequel to Shawn of the Dead that never happened, is that canon too? Or is it just a joke? A joke that the filmmakers made because they were having fun? You’re getting caught up in details. I guess to each their own; if you want to examine the minutiae of the film, be my guest, and I’m not trying to come across as though as I’m attacking you, I’m just saying. Sometimes a movie is just a movie. Like, I agree with your earlier statement that all the MCU multi-verse stuff hasn’t been super consistent up ‘til now. None of them have seemed to acknowledge the events of Loki as the instigation of all this multi-versery. But I wouldn’t and don’t consider the Spider-verse films as beholden to Kevin Feige’s “master plan for Marvel”.

 

[Paul Andrew]

It's most likely that we're looking at an acknowledgement of the live action spiderman movies existing in the multiverse rather than having them carry any import in this story.

A wink and nod, kind of a reward for the fans who've seen all the films, and adding just a little bit of weight to Miles discovering how wide the multiverse goes.

Probably a hint that at some point a live action version of Miles will happen too.

 

[NakedMoleRat]

I was a fun movie. I’ve seen it 3 times now.

I really don’t care what it’s ‘connected to’ in any way whatsoever.

I got what I wanted, a fun Spider-Man movie.

Why can’t it just be that? Why is everything now an endless debate on how, whether, why, it fits into all of this other things?

 

[Bloop]

Like I said, it could be just, like, a movie. Not a whole canon you have to learn to take a test on afterwards. Sometimes things just happen. No Way Home has characters from the Sam Raimi films. But they don’t follow the canon of those to a T. Octavius mentions Osborn going crazy and becoming the Green Goblin, but I’m pretty sure no one knew that outside of Spider-Man and Harry Osborn. The first Spider-verse has a billboard in Times Square for a sequel to Shawn of the Dead that never happened, is that canon too? Or is it just a joke? A joke that the filmmakers made because they were having fun? You’re getting caught up in details. I guess to each their own; if you want to examine the minutiae of the film, be my guest, and I’m not trying to come across as though as I’m attacking you, I’m just saying. Sometimes a movie is just a movie. Like, I agree with your earlier statement that all the MCU multi-verse stuff hasn’t been super consistent up ‘til now. None of them have seemed to acknowledge the events of Loki as the instigation of all this multi-versery. But I wouldn’t and don’t consider the Spider-verse films as beholden to Kevin Feige’s “master plan for Marvel”.

Nothing I write can alter your contention that you don't believe they clearly want the viewer to tie their movie to the MCU by using footage from other movies that are tied to the MCU. I'll stop, since I've already made my case.

 

[Bloop]

Sorry, HMSwolfe, I didn't mean for my last message to sound so defensive. I understand, we just have differing views. I shouldn't have gotten defensive about it. You're right, there's not really any need to to worry about the details of whether or not all these movies are connected. Going back to my original post, I really didn't mean to make it sound like this was a major disqualifying factor for the movie for me. It was just a minor issue I had that I thought was worth mentioning.

 

[Bloop]

I was a fun movie. I’ve seen it 3 times now.

I really don’t care what it’s ‘connected to’ in any way whatsoever.

I got what I wanted, a fun Spider-Man movie.

Why can’t it just be that? Why is everything now an endless debate on how, whether, why, it fits into all of this other things?

You're right, it doesn't have to all be connected. I'm not saying it needed to be, and, as I said in my last post, it's really not that big of an issue to me. I just got wrapped up in trying to defend my position, so it ended up sounding like I had a bigger problem with it.

I will reiterate that I believe the filmmakers wanted the viewers to see this and all the Spider-Man films as being connected. That's why I took some issue with the inconsistencies. If they hadn't included live-action characters and footage in the way that they did, I'd be fine with accepting the movie on it's own. And, to bring it back to my point about the characters having different art styles, I'd be okay with that if they hadn't already established characters adopting the esthetic of whatever universe they travel to in Dr. Strange 2.

And I'm sure they could (still) offer an explanation of why characters in the animated film keep their visual style while in other universes. Maybe since the method they travel through the multiverse is different than America's portals in Dr. Strange 2 it keeps their individual style (the wrist devices could play into that too).

I know I can get unnecessarily bogged down in the details. Moreso after watching the film than during, so it didn't really affect my enjoyment as I viewed it.

 

[Thain]

When I saw Into the Spider-Verse back in 2018 I really enjoyed it, but for whatever reason I wasn't as blown away by it as everyone else was. Only saw it once in theaters. Even the revolutionary animation didn't grab me, and to this day I don't know why. Must have just not been in the right head space or something, idk.

But Across the Spider-Verse? I feel like I'm finally having the experience everyone had with ITSV. I'm absolutely captivated. I've seen it twice already and am planning to see it again this week. I can't stop thinking about it. I've had the Metro Boomin album on repeat since last week. It was one of those rare movies that felt like I was actually watching magic, and don't fully understand how they made it. This movie feels like ESB for me, not just that it's a stunning sequel, but that it's darker & more mature, it expands upon the world established in the previous film, and takes the themes from the first and explores them on a deeper level. The script is so good, each supporting character is reflective of the central theme in some capacity and are all in service of the story and Miles’ (& Gwen's) journey. I love the meta commentary on Miles as a character and how people reacted to him being introduced in the comics. I can't even express how stunning the visuals are. The opening prologue in Gwen's world is probably my favorite part of the whole film (the way the watercolors change with the emotions of the characters..c'mon!). Daniel Pemberton's score was one of my favorite parts of ITSV and he delivers an even more impressive score this time around. Like how at the very end he mixes the Prowler & Miles theme together, then brings in Gwen's drumming motif, and then Hobie's punk rock guitar building to an epic crescendo until "TO BE CONTINUED..." just f*ing brilliant. I could go on and on, but this movie rocks and I just want to live in this wildly creative world again and again.

 

[HMSwolfe]

Sorry, HMSwolfe, I didn't mean for my last message to sound so defensive. I understand, we just have differing views. I shouldn't have gotten defensive about it. You're right, there's not really any need to to worry about the details of whether or not all these movies are connected. Going back to my original post, I really didn't mean to make it sound like this was a major disqualifying factor for the movie for me. It was just a minor issue I had that I thought was worth mentioning.

Sorry, my posts were a little too sarcastic, too. Glad we can have a space to debate ideas here.

 

[NakedMoleRat]

It was a familiar story told in a completely new and mind blowing way.

So, characters we already love combined with amazing visuals that not only tell the story, but as mentioned, the feelings of the characters as well, made it a Van Gogh meets Mozart on the big screen.

 

[Treadwell]

Finally saw it, quite liked it, moreso than the first one.

Too long, though. One or two twists/surprises too many. Not that they aren't good ones, but just too many in one movie. Maybe it should have cliffhangered at an earlier moment.

Still bothered by frame rate and the "3D movie without the glasses" rainbow thing they do for foreground out of focus objects/people. Not that it's wrong, but like any artistic choice, you're either on board or you're not. But either they've worn me down or these things are not as prevalent this time around.

Send me to a shrink if you have to, but I have a crush on a cartoon character. Gwen is adorable.

 

[NakedMoleRat]

Send me to a shrink if you have to, but I have a crush on a cartoon character. Gwen is adorable.

How many guys ‘dated’ Jessica Rabbit back in the day?

 

[Treadwell]

Miles' mom, too!

 

[NakedMoleRat]

Miles' mom, too!

Mmmmmmmmm Miles’ Mom…….