This column discusses the plot, and ethical dilemmas, of Spider-Man: Homecoming.

Spider-Man: Homecoming, which zipped into theaters last weekend, is almost everything a summer blockbuster should be: Its very funny without using humor as an excuse to be less than emotionally accessible; its super-sized throw-downs are anchored in real, human-scale conflicts; its world is richly populated with characters who arent solely defined by their powers or lack thereof; and it resists the urge to revisit the most famous story beats associated with its title characters origin story. All of these elements made Spider-Man only the second blockbuster this year Im eager to rewatch as soon as possible. And another element has left me thinking of it with more than mere amusement: Spider-Man: Homecoming is at its most poignant when its concerned with how to be a good person often, specifically, a good man.

Superhero movies by their nature tend to be at least lightly ethically engaged: If nothing else, when you figure out you have powers or the means to build them, you have to choose whether youre going to be a hero or a villain. Both the DC and Marvel universes have tended to situate the moral development of their characters in the context of larger conflicts.

The DC universe is concerned with what happens when humans receive definitive proof that God, or at least godlike figures, are real. For Superman (Henry Cavill), emerging as a demigod requires him to discern the right path: Can he kill? Is it more appropriate to sacrifice? Batman (Ben Affleck) attempts to reassert human influence and the primacy of human morality in the universe by ensuring that supremely powerful beings cant run roughshod over ordinary people without consequences. Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg) is driven mad by his sense of what is coming.

Though the Marvel Cinematic Universe also includes actual gods from Norse mythology, most prominently Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and Loki (Tom Hiddleston), its ethical conflicts have tended to play out on the more quotidian level of regulation. For Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.), the question has often been to what extent he can regulate himself, his companies and the world at large, and at what point government regulation becomes necessary. (Spider-Man: Homecoming sharpens, but does not resolve, the long-lingering question of how much Tonys efforts are driven by genuine decency versus the profits he gains from new lines of technology and disaster clean-up.) Captain America (Chris Evans), by contrast, is driven by a strong internal moral compass from an earlier age and a suspicion that government can regulate morality with nuance and discernment.

WhatDCs excellent Wonder Woman and Spider-Man: Homecoming have in common is that they zoom in more closelyon the moral development of individuals during important inflection points in their lives. Outside forces matter, of course, though the scenarios are a little different: Wonder Woman is set during Dianas (Gal Gadot) first foray into the outside world, decades before the events that will introduce her to Bruce Wayne. And Spider-Man: Homecoming focuses on a teenage hero (Tom Holland) who is auditioning to become an Avenger, and sees new super-suits and brawls at the Berlin airport as opportunities for unboxing videos and life-casting.

Neither movieadvocates a withdrawal from worldly concerns in pursuit of private moral purity; in fact, Wonder Woman suggests that Wonder Womans seclusion is a heartbroken response to horror that is itself a kind of tragedy. But both suggest that its worth taking a pause to examine what great events do to our small, solitary selves. World-scale problems deserve considered responses. We shouldnt lose track ofour own quests for goodness in the process.

What makes Adrian Toomes, who becomes Spider-Mansmost significant antagonist in Spider-Man: Homecoming, the Vulture, such a compelling villain isnt simply a crackling performance by Michael Keaton. Rather, its that the Vultures clear-sighted analysis of the world Tony Stark and the other Avengers have created leads him to a morally destructive conclusion with devastating consequences for the people he wants to protect and for the world at large.

The Vultures anxieties, to use the parlance of contemporary politics, are both cultural and economic.

Things are never going to be the same now, he muses after the events of The Avengers, which end with Lokis rampage through New York. When I was a kid, I used to draw cowboys and Indians.Though a member of his demolition crew points out that the preferred term is Native Americans, the Vulture-to-be is referring more to the scale of the conflict than to its racial dynamics, and in that, he is entirely correct. His resentment sharpens when he learns that the disaster cleanup has been federalized, and that Tony, the man who helped make this mess possible, is going to get the contracts to do the work that others were counting on for their livelihoods. For all the parallels Marvel movies have drawn to other conflicts, the Vultures acid breakdown of the situation is one of the sharper critiques the franchise has ever offered of Tonys brand of newly benevolent capitalism.

If the Vulture is the character in Spider-Man who sees the larger picture most clearly, his response to it is the petty and sad self-justification of any mobster who has vowed that he is simply buying his family a better life. He stays in the salvage business, turning alien technology into weaponry for sale to criminals who want to pull off increasingly daring heists. Its a business that makes him wealthy: The Vulture and his family retreat to quasi-suburban splendor, even as the weapons the Vulture puts on the streets tend to escalate crime dramatically. Suddenly, an ATM robbery can blow up an entire bodega.I just need something to stick up somebody, not send them back in time, small-time crook Aaron Davis (Donald Glover) observes, unnerved. The Vulture diagnosed Tony and then became him on a smaller scale. He holds off his familys financial ruin but ends up exposing them to greater ruination and shame when his criminal enterprises are exposed and he is apprehended.

The Vultures ultimate demise doesnt necessarily prove his analysis wrong: Tonys vastly greater wealth and the way he has made himself integral to global security infrastructure protect him from being held personally accountable for the far larger damage he has been a part of. But the Vultures morally degraded response to an ethically complex situation does prevent him from securing long-term happiness for his family or a fairer system for him and for everyone else.

If the Vulture rages against the corruption of big men, Peter Parker spends much of Spider-Man: Homecoming longing to become one. His response is a natural one: After being called up to the big leagues for the airport throw-down in Captain America: Civil War,taken on his first private jet ride and treated like a probationary adult, hes sent back to Queens*to await further instructions. If Peter isnt contentto be a friendly neighborhood Spider-Man, giving directions and foiling petty crimes, its because his supposed mentors dont exactly teach him to value being a hometown superhero. These lesser gigs are what keep Peter busy and out of their hair, rather than being part of a larger idea about the protection that civilians deserve all the time.

The older men in Peters life, who ought to recognize what theyve gotten themselves into, blow off Peters calls and then get angry when he winds up in over his head. When Peter explains, I just wanted to be like you! and Tonysnaps back at him, And I wanted you to be better, its doubly unfair. Not only is Tonyolder, richer and more experienced, he also has placed the freight of those expectations on Peter without taking the time or initiative to lay out a different vision of superheroics or to talk to Peter about the lessons the younger man might learn from Tonysmyriad mistakes. In a world where Captain America stars in educational videos and teenage girls debate which superhero theyd rather marry, there arent exactly other role models for the kind of superheroism Tony would like Peter to occupy.

The most striking thing about the end of Spider-Man: Homecoming is the way it shows that Peter has discovered a better way all on his own. When Tony offers Peter a spot on the Avengers, hes giving Peter what Peter wanted, rather than what was good for him. Peters decision to opt out, stay in high school and make his own way is the realization that Tony wanted him to have all along, reached with little help or guidance from the adults in his life. Better, it turns out, doesnt always mean bigger or flashier or more violent. Sometimes it means recognizing that whats right for you what matches your physical capacity and ethical ideals might also be best for your family, your neighborhood and your city.

*I always mix up Spider-Mans boroughs. Apologies to Queens.

Go here to read the rest:

'Spider-Man: Homecoming' is a superheroic meditation on how to be a good person - Washington Post