Spider-Man: Homecoming -- your spoiler-sense should be tingling

[DaveSumm]

But shocker knew about the conversation as well. He said something like 'he gave you a choice and you made the wrong one' or something.

[mormont]

Vulture has time to pick up the phone. Shocker is in the area because of the earlier tracking.

[The BlackBear]

Right,so Shocker was sent there anyway, just because it was the only place they knew he had been. Then Vulture let him know he definitely was at the school.

I kind of assumed he'd be doing something else to do with the job. Not just hanging around a school, which seems like a hell of a long shot.

[DaveSumm]

I've been trying to get my head round the '8 years later' thing, reading various articles. It seems up until now, even though there was a more complicated timeline at work, you could largely ignore it and assume everything happens when that film's released. So nobody balked when Vision said 'it's been 8 years since Iron man revealed himself' in Civil War cos you thought "2008.....2016, yea that's right". But apparently it was wrong cos IM got bumped forward a year. But there's no good way of explaining this one, it seems really weird that's it'd be wrong. I mean you'd check that kinda thing. If Iron Man was actually set in 2009, and Civil War in 2017 (to preserve Vision's statement) then that marries up with this film being immediately after Civil War, but you can squeeze at most 7 years out of the gap I think, not 8.

[DaveSumm]

Double post.

[Quoth]

Finally saw it and enjoyed it. But, I gotta say I'm exhausted with the use of the words "awesome" and "dude".

[The Anti-Targ]

On 18/07/2017 at 11:30 PM, DaveSumm said:

I've been trying to get my head round the '8 years later' thing, reading various articles. It seems up until now, even though there was a more complicated timeline at work, you could largely ignore it and assume everything happens when that film's released. So nobody balked when Vision said 'it's been 8 years since Iron man revealed himself' in Civil War cos you thought "2008.....2016, yea that's right". But apparently it was wrong cos IM got bumped forward a year. But there's no good way of explaining this one, it seems really weird that's it'd be wrong. I mean you'd check that kinda thing. If Iron Man was actually set in 2009, and Civil War in 2017 (to preserve Vision's statement) then that marries up with this film being immediately after Civil War, but you can squeeze at most 7 years out of the gap I think, not 8.

I think this comes under, don't sweat the small stuff.

[john]

The names trickery (Liz and MJ) was a bit cheeky.  Either make them new characters, which I would be fine with, or give better explanations for how they're new versions of the classic characters. Like have Toomes marry Mrs Allan at some point and have Michelle, eh, not called Michelle? Calling yourself MJ when you're Mary Jane seems reasonable but calling yourself it when you're Michelle Jones is weird.

I also thought it was a little absurd that Toomes had a contract with the city which is apparently voided because Stark decided to create Damage Control. Is there no compensation for that? I would be thinking "lawsuit," not "must become arms dealer."

I also loved the car ride to homecoming scene. It was such good filmmaking, with Peter totally cowed by his date's father and all he can do is the most passive aggressive teenager thing of saying nothing but leaving his phone in the car in case he wants to follow it up later.  Also gave me a little thrill for some reason knowing the scene was devised by that little kid from Freaks and Geeks.

[RumHam]

4 hours ago, john said:

 Also gave me a little thrill for some reason knowing the scene was devised by that little kid from Freaks and Geeks.

Hah, I had to look up what you were talking about. That's good to know. I wonder if he pushed for Martin Starr to be in it.

[The Anti-Targ]

On 24/07/2017 at 8:18 AM, john said:

The names trickery (Liz and MJ) was a bit cheeky.  Either make them new characters, which I would be fine with, or give better explanations for how they're new versions of the classic characters. Like have Toomes marry Mrs Allan at some point and have Michelle, eh, not called Michelle? Calling yourself MJ when you're Mary Jane seems reasonable but calling yourself it when you're Michelle Jones is weird.

I also thought it was a little absurd that Toomes had a contract with the city which is apparently voided because Stark decided to create Damage Control. Is there no compensation for that? I would be thinking "lawsuit," not "must become arms dealer."

I also loved the car ride to homecoming scene. It was such good filmmaking, with Peter totally cowed by his date's father and all he can do is the most passive aggressive teenager thing of saying nothing but leaving his phone in the car in case he wants to follow it up later.  Also gave me a little thrill for some reason knowing the scene was devised by that little kid from Freaks and Geeks.

Not really. I know a few people who are called by their first and last name initials. It's probably considerably less common than first and second name initials, but it's not weird. And if you have a vanilla name like Michelle Jones it's understandable that you might spice it up a bit by getting people to call you MJ.

Of course there is the satirical fictional first-last initial situation in House of Card (British mainly but also US) with FU. Hmmm I wonder if first-last initial use is more of a British / Commonwealth thing and first-second initial is more a US thing.

@ second paragraph: I would think if the US govt passes a law that says all alien debris is property of the Federal govt and must be handled by federally approved contractors, then any city / contractor agreement is null and void with basically no recourse to the courts. But you can always try. I would think that in the MCU little guy vs Stark + US govt seems like a no win situation.