REVIEW: Spider-Man: HomecomingBy Quinn OxleyJuly 7, 2017Of course I’m going to proudly herald the arrival of a new MCU film. They may not be majorly substantive, but they’re fun, they’re hilarious, they’re engaging, and for what they are, they’re massively successful, and I’m proud to be a fan.

But this one - this watershed film - was and is particularly interesting. This generation has seen three Spider-Men in its time. It’s becoming increasingly difficult to relate to the character and the surrounding mythos; however, the character is finally back in the hands of its creators, which presents incredible promise - but more for the MCU than the Spider-Man character, if you’re looking for an introspective piece like the Raimi movies.

Regardless of what you go in expecting, Homecoming is par for the MCU (Marvel Course… Umbrella).

I’d love to get my negatives out of the way first, because, honestly, my negatives didn’t ruin the movie for me. I still had a blast.

Some of the acting was iffy. Liz (Laura Harrier), the new love-interest, felt as though she were just reciting lines with little character or inflection, and Ned (Jacob Batalon) was pretty stiff for much of his screentime. I’ve also seen better performances from Jon Favreau, who reprises his role as Happy Hogan. I also had a hard time taking Michael Keaton seriously for the majority of the film, but it’s possible that’s because I kept seeing him as his cameo on 30 Rock. (Although, I did love every design aspect of the Falcon suit and he was very formidable when he utilized it.)

I’ve also never been a fan of too much help for the hero. Some heroes - like Iron Man - invent assistance for themselves in the form of technological servants, drones, tracking devices, and other helpful gadgets. These are a main facet of their heroic status and their character arc, and since they’ve usually invented these gadgets for themselves, they are an expression of the hero’s ingenuity. Spider-Man is not one of those heroes. Giving him so much help takes away from his character and feels like both copping out and pandering to a younger demographic. To avoid spoilers, that’s all I’ll say on the subject.

However, there are three things that make this movie absolutely wonderful.

1) The entire third act. Most of the movie feels okay, you know, not mind-blowing in any sense of the word. Alright. Fine. But I can pinpoint the moment when it the ceiling fell down and crushed everyone in the movie theater and the movie suddenly became “real,” if you catch my drift. I won’t get into spoilers, but let me just say that after that point, Homecoming became incredible. Then again, my friends and I were still reeling from the turning point, so it was hard to focus.

2) Tom Holland’s performance. That boy (man, excuse me, but he’s playing a fifteen-year-old) can act, and he nails the awkward, ambitious Peter Parker. His inflection, facial expressions, and overall demeanor are not only spot-on for the character, but they’re age-appropriate (or, at least, more so than Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield).

3) It’s absolutely hilarious. Genuinely, cleverly, authentically hilarious. Apart from the mechanized suit, we get a fairly practical look at Peter Parker’s double life, which makes for a lot of laughs. Without spoiling too much… there are also a few hysterical cameos that tie into the post-credits scene.

Is it good, though?

It is. It has its flaws, but so does every movie. It may serve a totally different purpose than every Spider-Man movie before it, but it’s hilarious, it’s entertaining, and it’s worth the watch.

Rating: 7.75/10

2016 © ScreenFellas Entertainment