Far From Home The Uncle Ben Problem

[Mistah K88]

That you bring up Brad to compare to Uncle Ben and Aunt May kind of makes my point for me.

As to the rest, a pretty darn good cast of characters, who have all have something to them. Flash is a good example of this imo. He doesn't have much screen time, but has a bit of depth.

Spoiler

His general seeking of validation on the internet and how it ties back to his parents without having to spell it out, was quite nicely done imo.

Flash in this series definitely more of a traditional Harry Osborn before his friendship with Peter. (It's funny how other adaptations start with Peter and Harry as buddies) I think if some of his fellow classmates actually liked him then he'd be more FLASH... Then again they may have just taken Harry's main traits and threw them on this kid making a composite character I guess?

 

[Spider-Fan]

Weren't you just looking so deep into the context to try and convince other posters that Tony is more of a Captain Stacy? Yet its too much trouble to see the context in ASM that what contributed to Ben's murder was Peter's arrogance to think a robbery was not his problem? I get you don't like ASM, and I actually like your thought that Tony resembles Captain Stacy, but your oversimplification of the ASM scene contradicts what you're asking other posters to do in regards to the whole Tony - Uncle Ben conundrum.

Both TASM and the Riami films don't make it just that Peter didn't think the robbery was his problem. Both opted to add an angle of revenge to it. In Raimi, it is because the wrestling promoter wouldn't pay him out for beating Bone Saw McGraw, and in TASM it is because the cashier was an over the top jerk. The difference is execution. In the Raimi film, it works. The promoter is screwing him on a technicality because he didn't think or want to pay anyone the money from the ad. In TASM, the entire "take a penny" thing is just cartoony trash and makes Ben's subsequent death from such a laughably stupid scene garbage as well. Not only that, but in TASM, Ben's death is competing for importance with the whole plot about his father leaving him that night. In Raimi's film, Ben's death has no such competing factor. So, I 100% disagree with your hypothesis.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I agree. But then again Raimi's characters were all very broad imo. Especially Aunt May and Uncle Ben. They aren't really characters, they are plot mechanisms.

Yeah, I cannot disagree with this assessment strongly enough. How is Aunt May in Homecoming or FFH anymore fleshed out or a character than Raimi's? Because she is younger and seems pretty chill? What great arc was she given that was so much better than Raimi's? Also, Ben and May in Raimi's film definitely feel like real people. At least in this poster's opinion.

 

[Flint Marko]

Bens death in ASM makes no real sense from a narrative perspective and Peter’s reaction just cements him as an a-hole. He basically goes from cool moody teen who used his powers to get back at his bullies to cool moody teen who uses his powers to get back at dudes who moderately resemble his uncles killer.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Yeah, I cannot disagree with this assessment strongly enough. How is Aunt May in Homecoming or FFH anymore fleshed out or a character than Raimi's? Because she is younger and seems pretty chill? What great arc was she given that was so much better than Raimi's? Also, Ben and May in Raimi's film definitely feel like real people. At least in this poster's opinion.

I was not comparing Raimi's May to MCU May. I am presenting them in general in terms of how the characters are. As I already mentioned she hasn't had much to do in the MCU, but then again she is far down the pecking ordering in the MCU characters. Raimi's May is what, 5th in terms of importance in all the films but maybe the third? Peter, MJ, Harry, movie villain, then May. And even then, she isn't fleshed out in any meaningful way then the MCU May or TASM May.

What I was specifically talking about is how I find almost all of Raimi's characters, from Peter to random apartment girl, don't have much character to them. They are broadly written archetypes, who don't really do much outside of their general assigned role. The exception is JJJ, who is both written and performed with such relish, that he overcomes this imo.

In these situation we are presented with basically the difference between 1950s television characters (Raimi) and more modern television characters (MCU). Is the MCU HBO's Barry? No. But it does present these characters with a lot more character imo. What makes them tick, their quirks, etc. There is just more to them in general, then their character label. Beyond Peter (who in the MCU has been rather perfect imo), there is certainly no Tony Stark in the Raimi flicks. There is no Vulture, no Mysterio, no Michelle. Characters who live beyond being just the mentor, villain or potential love interest. Ned in comparison to Harry is a godsend imo. A far less interesting role on paper, but I buy that Ned is Peter's friend and is someone Peter would want around.

I actually think a good example of this general issue in Raimi's movies for me is Bruce Campbell's characters in the first two films. I find them far more engaging, then any of the actual characters outside of JJJ in the movies. The little cameos have far more life to them, even as he is playing very typical roles. And we get a lot of that in the MCU. Donald Glover did that while being attached to a car for all 2 mins. Happy has continued to do that.

Give me fun, engaging, characters. It goes a long, long way with me.

 

[Schlosser85]

I don't find any of the annoying supporting ensemble of Peter's classmates/teachers engaging, except MJ I guess is......okay.

Ned and Flash are in a competition for who's most obnoxious. So were Mr. Harrington and Mr. Dell. I'm not a fan of Aunt Tomei and her character and dynamic with Peter is super shallow and underdeveloped.

Happy was fine, but he's a long-running character who's been around since the MCU began with the first Iron Man.

Tom Holland himself is super likable and engaging, IMO, enough to help things coast along through the tedium. I just wish he got better material sometimes.

 

[TheVileOne]

Yeah, I cannot disagree with this assessment strongly enough. How is Aunt May in Homecoming or FFH anymore fleshed out or a character than Raimi's? Because she is younger and seems pretty chill? What great arc was she given that was so much better than Raimi's? Also, Ben and May in Raimi's film definitely feel like real people. At least in this poster's opinion.

I agree. I also thought the Aunt May scenes in Spider-Man 2 were incredibly powerful.

 

[TheVileOne]

I don't find any of the annoying supporting ensemble of Peter's classmates/teachers engaging, except MJ I guess is......okay.

Ned and Flash are in a competition for who's most obnoxious. So were Mr. Harrington and Mr. Dell. I'm not a fan of Aunt Tomei and her character and dynamic with Peter is super shallow and underdeveloped.

Happy was fine, but he's a long-running character who's been around since the MCU began with the first Iron Man.

Tom Holland himself is super likable and engaging, IMO, enough to help things coast along through the tedium. I just wish he got better material sometimes.

I don't mind Ned so much in these films, even though he really should be Ganke. Also, Harrington and Mr. Dell were horrendous in Far From Home. I thought Harrington was tolerable in Homecoming and not nearly as annoying.

 

[fan4stic]

Agreed. Raimi's characters are incredibly cartoonish which has its own charm (the Raimi films are great fun as action/comedies but outside of some moments in Spider-Man 2 they don't really work as actual dramatic stories) but TASM's Ben and May feel like actual flesh and blood people even if the script doesn't quite live up to its potential. Great characters and concepts in messy, underwritten scripts was the bread and butter of that short-lived franchise.

If they were to show Uncle Ben in the MCU it would be exciting rather than a retreard. It's not as if an Uncle Ben that fits with their version of May is going to bear any real resemblance to previous iterations, it would be something unique. Hell, in general I'd love to see Holland's origin in general explored at least in dialogue even though it's hard to imagine his Peter ever being an arrogant ass about his new powers like your classic Peter.

in spite of being broader, May still had what I'd call more depth thsnn MCU's.

 

[fan4stic]

That is like asking why devote a character arc to Theoden, who it does not serve Frodo. MCU has characters, not plot devices. Which is my point. You just reduced Raimi's Aunt May and Uncle Ben to plot devices.

In FFH MJ definitely has relevance to the plot (you can't just suggest you can remove her from the film), and Peter's character arc as a whole. There is a lot more character to her here as opposed to Raimi's imo. Where she functions as almost as if she was ordered out of a catalog to be the most overly broad superhero girlfriend. It is one of the reasons her relationship with Peter is such a car wreck and is then fatally stabbed in the chest in Spider-Man 3. Same with MJ's character.

Also, there is a clear through line so far with Flash in the first two films.

I'd say the opposite. Raimi's has characters, MC Spider-Man at least has plot devices.

What you described for MJ is a plot concept, not a character. As far as I've heard/read she could be replaced with Betty or a new character entirely. I'd say Raimi's is a better written character entirely. We learn about her goals, issues, homelife in the first hour of Raimi's. More than I think the majority of MCU Spidey characters have had in 2 movies, even MJ. And she's also relevant to Peter' arc in all the movies.

Peter and MJ end the movie on a note of what I think is forgiveness in their issues. I'll take complicated characters over what I think these MCU has.

 

[fan4stic]

I was not comparing Raimi's May to MCU May. I am presenting them in general in terms of how the characters are. As I already mentioned she hasn't had much to do in the MCU, but then again she is far down the pecking ordering in the MCU characters. Raimi's May is what, 5th in terms of importance in all the films but maybe the third? Peter, MJ, Harry, movie villain, then May. And even then, she isn't fleshed out in any meaningful way then the MCU May or TASM May.

What I was specifically talking about is how I find almost all of Raimi's characters, from Peter to random apartment girl, don't have much character to them. They are broadly written archetypes, who don't really do much outside of their general assigned role. The exception is JJJ, who is both written and performed with such relish, that he overcomes this imo.

In these situation we are presented with basically the difference between 1950s television characters (Raimi) and more modern television characters (MCU). Is the MCU HBO's Barry? No. But it does present these characters with a lot more character imo. What makes them tick, their quirks, etc. There is just more to them in general, then their character label. Beyond Peter (who in the MCU has been rather perfect imo), there is certainly no Tony Stark in the Raimi flicks. There is no Vulture, no Mysterio, no Michelle. Characters who live beyond being just the mentor, villain or potential love interest. Ned in comparison to Harry is a godsend imo. A far less interesting role on paper, but I buy that Ned is Peter's friend and is someone Peter would want around.

I actually think a good example of this general issue in Raimi's movies for me is Bruce Campbell's characters in the first two films. I find them far more engaging, then any of the actual characters outside of JJJ in the movies. The little cameos have far more life to them, even as he is playing very typical roles. And we get a lot of that in the MCU. Donald Glover did that while being attached to a car for all 2 mins. Happy has continued to do that.

Give me fun, engaging, characters. It goes a long, long way with me.

I don't see how MCU May is more fleshed out than any Raimi's.

That's not true. Ditkovitch in SM3, showcases a caring for Peter along with him wanting rent.

JJ in the SM1, aside from disliking Spider-Man, showcased an unwillingness to rat Peter out to Goblin even when his life is threatened.

Even then I'd argue it's not about quantity but about quality and that Raimi's main characters are all better written than every MCU Spider-Man character, except maybe Vulture. I think we learn more about Raimi MJ than even any main character in MCU's except for Vulture and Peter. I'd even argue that Webb's Flash Thompson in TASM1 is a better written character than MCU's Flash, Ned and May combined.

Fun engaging characters don't make them well written.

 

[Lantern Venom]

This probably isn't a consolation to fans who really miss Uncle Ben, but Spidey isn't alone in having at least one key element from his comic origin heavily modified for the MCU. With all of the headling heroes, there have been personality/power/supporting character changes to fit them into the greater picture. Spidey's just seems more shocking since his origin has been adapted so many times.

 

[Another_Fool]

Both TASM and the Riami films don't make it just that Peter didn't think the robbery was his problem. Both opted to add an angle of revenge to it. In Raimi, it is because the wrestling promoter wouldn't pay him out for beating Bone Saw McGraw, and in TASM it is because the cashier was an over the top jerk. The difference is execution. In the Raimi film, it works. The promoter is screwing him on a technicality because he didn't think or want to pay anyone the money from the ad. In TASM, the entire "take a penny" thing is just cartoony trash and makes Ben's subsequent death from such a laughably stupid scene garbage as well. Not only that, but in TASM, Ben's death is competing for importance with the whole plot about his father leaving him that night. In Raimi's film, Ben's death has no such competing factor. So, I 100% disagree with your hypothesis.

So wait. What do you think my hypothesis is?

 

[fan4stic]

I don't necessarily agree that it was half assed nonsense. But I'll tell you what. Since we're taking about it, I've always had a slight gripe how both the Raimi film and ASM somewhat sugarcoat Peter in both robbery scenes where they give him and the audience a reason to feel the people getting robbed was deserved at the moment. I tend to like how in the comics Peter didn't need to be screwed over for him to let that robber get away. It really makes his feeling of guilt more powerful.

While you might see it as sugarcoating it in Raimi's movie, Sam Raimi seems to see it differently, I think, based on what he says in the commentary for SM1, as almost it makes him worse for it:

SAM RAIMI: He's a sinner. He's like, 'Pride and anger rule.' You see a look on his face there that you won't see anywhere else in the picture. He's full of himself. He feels as though his own bitter justice has been served, like the guy deserved it. It's a sin he'll end paying for for the rest of his life.

He's right in saying this. It wasn't an action of ignorance. He let a criminal go and took pleasure in it.

TASM1 I think is almost over the top. Like, did Peter have an affair with his wife or something? What's with that? I also couldn't tell you if the movie thinks of it as an evil action or not.