Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse (2023) (2 Viewers)

[Colin Jacobson]

That depends on what you're talking about. Marty and Doc had successfully restored the 1985 that they knew. But Marty was still stuck in 1955 and Doc in 1885. The characters did not end the movie where they intended to be after completing the mission. Therefore, the whole journey isn't done at the end of Part II. That's why Part III exists.

Exactly. The "teaser" of the 1985 movie is extraneous to the narrative of that film. Marty went to 1955 and needed to get back to 1985 - he did so, and thus that movie's story wrapped up. The teaser about going to the future is irrelevant.

"2" leaves no such sense of completion. While Doc and Marty might've fixed what they broke when old Biff went back to the past and altered the future, we're still left without any feeling of closure.

Like I said: 1985 audiences didn't groan at the end. They cheered and didn't think they needed to see another movie to "finish" the story.

1989 audiences were unhappy with the dangling ending.

 

[DaveF]

That was amazing.

It was visually overwhelming at times. One of those movies that makes me feel like I can‘t breathe at moments.

For fans of the original Spider-verse, absolutely must see.

 

[DaveF]

Can we talk about this for a minute?

I watched the first film again yesterday afternoon prior to my evening screening of the sequel. It held up as it always does, which was not a surprise. But coming out of the sequel and texting friends who haven't seen it yet, I was struggling to find the appropriate words because what they have done here really makes the original look quaint. As we know with sequels, bigger does not always necessarily equal better, but in this case they've made it bigger in pretty much every way without losing any of the qualities that made the first movie special. This is especially impressive considering that the directors of the first film did not return.

Was talking with my wife last night after the viewing about this. Spider-verse 2 is more is more. The first one is in hindsight small. One location, five extra spider-people. And the collider event. It focuses on Miles and family. This sequel is massive in comparison. And it worked. Incredible sequel triumph.

 

[JoeStemme]

. The sound was absolutely awful. I’m sure I missed more than 50% of the dialogue and I kept relishing scenes where the words were on the screen. A lot has been written about how bad sound mixes are these days, but this also had to be the theater’s fault. All I have near me are AMCs, and they’re literally crumbling. The seats are nice but the buildings feel like a ghost town. It’s sad. I will watch this on disc as soon as it comes, with the subtitles.

Lots of posts here about the sound mix. I found it distracting at times, too. But, I wouldn't pin it on AMC. As others have stated, it's a wide-spread issue with Spidey.

There are three AMC's I go to. Two are top notch, but, one is an older one they call "AMC Classic". And, they do charge cheaper admission fees to reflect that. I only go there when a movie is near the end of its run and its not playing anywhere else nearby (and, also NOT for a big blockbuster)

 

[TonyD]

A lot of dialogue was hard to understand early in the movie at the regal imax where I saw it.

 

[DigniT@DigniT!]

Lots of posts here about the sound mix. I found it distracting at times, too. But, I wouldn't pin it on AMC. As others have stated, it's a wide-spread issue with Spidey.

There are three AMC's I go to. Two are top notch, but, one is an older one they call "AMC Classic". And, they do charge cheaper admission fees to reflect that. I only go there when a movie is near the end of its run and its not playing anywhere else nearby (and, also NOT for a big blockbuster)

There has been a new and improved sound mix and print sent to all theatres as of earlier this week. I don’t know all the details although in the three showings i saw the sound mix was dynamic and excellent and all dialogue was clear. Nevertheless the Studio acknowledged the challenge and has sent an improved print to theatres.

 

[JoeStemme]

There has been a new and improved sound mix and print sent to all theatres as of earlier this week. I don’t know all the details although in the three showings i saw the sound mix was dynamic and excellent and all dialogue was clear. Nevertheless the Studio acknowledged the challenge and has sent an improved print to theatres.

Saw that, too. I don't see movies twice in theaters so too late for me.

But, I also want to emphasize that it's not AMC's fault.

 

[Jeff Adkins]

I caught it at an "Open Caption" screening. Having subtitles throughout made it easy to understand.

 

[DaveF]

A lot of dialogue was hard to understand early in the movie at the regal imax where I saw it.

I was struggling to understand Indian and English Spiders-man. Don’t know if it’s me or the mix. For vanity sake, I’ll now assume it’s the mix.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I caught this before the revised sound mix went out but fortunately I didn’t have an issue understanding everything. I guess whatever volume settings my local theater had were sufficient.

Someone forwarded me a Twitter post from Lord and Miller telling audience members they should ask projectionists to turn it up past 7, which is a ridiculous request on so many levels. “7” is reference setting for theater volume - no one should be mixing films in such a way that it has to be turned up louder than the default, industry standard volume setting. It was standardized that way for a reason. And the idea that every theater has a projectionist on duty in 2023 is laughable. The overwhelming majority of theaters in this country are owned by AMC, Regal and Cinemark, and those chains generally have one projectionist per district who visits each location once a week to program all of the showtimes and setting for that week. Frankly, filmmakers should be aware of the realities of how this industry functions and not place any pressure on paying customers to ask theaters to make adjustments they’re not equipped to be making. And if by some miracle an audience member actually found a projectionist, there’s no way that a customer is going to convince a projectionist to play the film at a setting that’s outside of what the calibration for that auditorium was set for.

As for the movie itself, I mostly enjoyed it but I found it to be neither groundbreaking nor revolutionary. The techniques used to make it aren’t really new - it’s just an obvious evolution in using classic, time honored techniques in slightly different combinations. And done very well. But in my opinion there’s a difference between “using the tricks and tools of the trade well” and “reinventing the wheel” and this film was the former for me. And there’s nothing wrong with that. I just don’t see why it was necessary for all of the hyperbole. Something doesn’t need to be groundbreaking to be good.

I’m sorta disappointed that these series of films aren’t really about Miles Morales - they’re about all the variations of Spider-Man, and I think that in and of itself is pretty cool, but I can also imagine that if you’re someone in the demographic that Miles was created for, it might be disappointing that he doesn’t get his own series of films but has to share with everyone else.

I thought comments claiming that this film was character assassination for Peter Parker were off-base, as it’s “Peter B. Parker” in this film, a distinctly different character than “Peter Parker,” as clearly explained in the previous installment.

Regarding the ending, I knew the film was a “part 1” going in, but I was massively unsatisfied with how it ended. I feel like it’s one thing to take an existing long work like a novel, decide that it can’t be trimmed to a single film length, and do it as two films because the source material demands it, than it is to create an original concept and intentionally do this to an audience.

I don’t think the Back to the Future Part 2 comparison is apt. The primary plot line of that film is that Marty is asked to go to the future to prevent something bad from happening to his kids, and in doing so, he inadvertently causes the past to be altered which destroys his present. At the end of the film, he has undone that alteration and restored his present day to normal. The primary plot line of the film gets resolved. I can watch it as a stand-alone film and be satisfied.

But I’m starting to get really annoyed at movies like this that don’t have endings. It feels like it’s taking advantage of the audience. It’s not satisfying. And it basically gives the audience homework - watch this again right before part 2 or risk permanent confusion! This film took over two hours building momentum to a conclusion that never arrived. The next film will begin in a heightened emotional state and it will be asking a lot for the audience to walk in ready to receive that instantly rather than earning that from the audience. It’s a disrespectful cash grab. In my opinion, this should’ve either had an ending that provided some level of closure, been cut shorter so that both parts could have been one film, or transferred to another medium like premium cable or subscription streaming limited series which would have been a more appropriate venue for a lengthy multi-part story.

It’s kinda ironic that most of the pushback here has been from people tired of multiverse stories and for me, I don’t mind that, I’m just tired of incomplete stories being sold to me as if they were complete experiences.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I went twice last weekend and I didn't have any problems hearing it either. But I assume the mix was completed and tested using the best possible equipment because of course Sony would be able to provide that. I don't know much about how sound mixing works, but it seems to me that all the sound systems in all the theaters around the world where the movie is playing probably aren't all quite as good as that top of the line equipment. So it might not work as well on less sophisticated systems, which could be a learning curve for the filmmakers.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I don’t think it should be a learning curve in 2023. The last major alteration to the theatrical audio spec was the addition of Dolby Atmos in 2012.

At best, it was a mistake made in mixing that didn’t get caught until the film was out in the wild. At worst, it was hubris on the part of the filmmakers creating a mix that fell outside of the industry standard parameters, who went ahead and did it anyway and somehow felt the rules that applied to every other film somehow didn’t apply to theirs too.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I don’t think it should be a learning curve in 2023.

Oh, I totally agree with that. This should not have been an issue at all. It wasn't for me. But apparently it is for enough people that Sony felt the need to correct it. So the filmmakers should learn from it and keep this in mind when mixing the next film so that there is not a repeat of this situation next year.

All filmmakers should take lessons from their previous films with them into the next one. That is not unique to this situation.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but given Lord and Miller’s prior history demonstrating an inability to follow directions, it’s a lot easier for me to believe it was their hubris rather than a professional sound mixer’s mistake.

 

[Malcolm R]

I’m sorta disappointed that these series of films aren’t really about Miles Morales - they’re about all the variations of Spider-Man

I think that's one reason why I didn't care so much for the first film. Instead of just having a neat self-contained origin story about Miles, we end up with all the multi-verse versions. I guess that's to be expected when the title itself includes "spider-verse", but I that's part of why I didn't find it that engaging.

 

[Edwin-S]

But I’m starting to get really annoyed at movies like this that don’t have endings. It feels like it’s taking advantage of the audience. It’s not satisfying. And it basically gives the audience homework - watch this again right before part 2 or risk permanent confusion! This film took over two hours building momentum to a conclusion that never arrived. The next film will begin in a heightened emotional state and it will be asking a lot for the audience to walk in ready to receive that instantly rather than earning that from the audience. It’s a disrespectful cash grab. In my opinion, this should’ve either had an ending that provided some level of closure, been cut shorter so that both parts could have been one film, or transferred to another medium like premium cable or subscription streaming limited series which would have been a more appropriate venue for a lengthy multi-part story

I'm curious if you felt the same way about Tarantino's Kill Bill 1 & 2.

 

[Wayne_j]

I think it is easier to take if the movie is actually titled "Part 1".

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I'm curious if you felt the same way about Tarantino's Kill Bill 1 & 2.

I wasn’t a fan of either of those films in general; I honestly can’t recall where the first one ended and wasn’t enjoying myself watching it so I was probably just relieved to be able to go home.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I think I would have to cover this entire post in a spoiler bracket and that isn't really helpful to easy reading. So if anyone is still reading the thread who hasn't seen the movie yet, close your eyes and scroll down.

I’m sorta disappointed that these series of films aren’t really about Miles Morales - they’re about all the variations of Spider-Man, and I think that in and of itself is pretty cool, but I can also imagine that if you’re someone in the demographic that Miles was created for, it might be disappointing that he doesn’t get his own series of films but has to share with everyone else.

I find it interesting that you don't think the movies are really about Miles because I thought the opposite. Obviously, I'm happy to agree to disagree on this point. But for me, it is clear that Miles is the center of the story and the other Spider-People are there as support or counterpoint for his journey. The first film was set entirely in Miles' universe and the other characters were there to provide insight and guidance as he began to use his powers and understand his responsibilities as Spider-Man.

In this film, specifically, Miles and Gwen are juxtaposed against each other because they are each learning opposite things. We as the audience want to see them together, but they are very much in different places, even when they are physically together. Gwen is cornered into revealing her identity to her father and has to literally leave the universe to run from her problem. Miles starts out being terrified to tell his parents the truth but gains the self-confidence to volunteer the information. He goes from wanting to be accepted by the other Spider-People to realizing that he is strong enough to do his own thing. Gwen goes from leaving her band because she prefers being alone to literally getting the (Spider-)band back together in order to save Miles because she has learned the value of connecting with others. She is also able to (sort of) start the healing process with her dad instead of running away again.

Intwining Miles and The Spot also make it about Miles. Yes, The Spot will fight all of the Spider-People who come after him, but he doesn't really care about the rest of them. He wants to go after Miles specifically because of their shared history. The whole mess the Spider-Society is trying to clean up relates specifically to Miles and events from the last film that he was involved in. It all comes back to him.

In my opinion, this should’ve either had an ending that provided some level of closure, been cut shorter so that both parts could have been one film, or transferred to another medium like premium cable or subscription streaming limited series which would have been a more appropriate venue for a lengthy multi-part story.

A few things here.

1) I think the things that make this single movie a satisfying experience for me are the measurable character arcs I mentioned above. Miles and Gwen both end up in very different places on their respective journeys at the end of this film than they were in the beginning, and I'm not talking about their physical locations. It is easy to see, within the confines of just this movie, how much they have grown and changed from the beginning of this one to the end of this one. Yes, there's more to come, but that doesn't mean their arc in this film is lacking. It's not like they haven't learned anything in this movie's running time.

2) I don't really see the difference between the ending of this movie and something like The Empire Strikes Back or The Dark Knight or Far From Home which also end with cliffhangers that lead us into the conflict of the next film. I don't remember anyone complaining about those when they came out. (I wasn't alive for Empire, but the other two.) And those movies were produced one at a time so had much longer wait times between installments. Beyond the Spider-Verse is scheduled for next March. We have to wait less than a year.

3) I'm definitely not in favor of any option that shortens this story. I've seen it twice and I really can't think of anything in it that didn't contribute to the story. There is no fat on it.

Spider-Man, across the various iterations, has been a (mostly) hugely successful franchise for more than two decades at this point. The audience at large has demonstrated their willingness to continue to show up for these movies in substantial numbers. We know Sony is going to keep making Spider-Man movies as long as the audience shows up. Given this, I don't see what the problem is with them saying that this particular story is going to take longer than the previous ones and needs two films. And I definitely would not want to see this edited into as a cable or streaming series. It would be a travesty if something this beautifully made did not have a theatrical release.

I can understand why some people might be unsatisfied by this ending. I wasn't, but I get it. I don't expect to change your mind on any of this, so I'm happy to agree to disagree, and as usual I enjoy reading your perspective. But evidence suggests that the general audience is very happy with the film. The Cinema Score from opening night audiences last week was an A. The opening weekend grosses kept getting revised upward every time there was an update last week, which indicates that more and more people were going to see it.

This weekend, Sony has estimated a decline of -55%, which is a pretty good hold considering how big its opening was. And it was extremely competitive despite the entrance of Transformers into the marketplace. If the cliffhanger ending was ticking people off left and right, the movie would not be doing as well as it is doing. We've seen movies open huge and then fall off sharply. due to poor audience response. Quantumania is a recent example. That is not what this film is doing. So it would seem that the majority of audiences are not being substantially put off by the cliffhanger.

I can only speak for myself here, but the presence of the cliffhanger has no impact whatsoever on my decision to buy a ticket for the third film next year. That is because I would absolutely have bought that ticket either way even if there was no cliffhanger on this one. So I don't feel taken advantage of at all. I'm happy that they have given this part of the story the time that they felt it needed. I'm happy to go back next year for the rest of it. I'd go back for the rest of it tomorrow if I could.

I always enjoy reading your posts, even when we disagree. So thanks for the interesting discussion.

 

[TravisR]

I don’t think it should be a learning curve in 2023. The last major alteration to the theatrical audio spec was the addition of Dolby Atmos in 2012.

At best, it was a mistake made in mixing that didn’t get caught until the film was out in the wild. At worst, it was hubris on the part of the filmmakers creating a mix that fell outside of the industry standard parameters, who went ahead and did it anyway and somehow felt the rules that applied to every other film somehow didn’t apply to theirs too.

Yeah, when was the last time that a studio had to send the movie out again with a better mix? I'm shocked that the "Turn it up too loud" idea didn't fix the problem.