10 Reasons Why Spider-Man: Homecoming is Complete Garbage

not as bad as ghostbusters 2016

remember sony doing seth rogen as green hornet?

Sony is improving very slowly, can't wait for Barbie

Here come the idiots calling you racist!

Most of them aren't even using their brains. Good post.

Was gonna go point-by-point, but I'll restrict myself to a few observations, which address all of them in one way or another.
A LONG time ago, a bunch of us nerds would congregate at comic conventions, and laugh at the attempts by Hollywood to make movies about these characters we loved So Much. And EVERY TIME, we'd bump fists and predict the day when someone would put Real Money behind a CBM.
Flash forward to today, and what we're getting is So Far beyond what we ever imagined, that I feel a little ungrateful to complain At All. We really are living in an incredible age for movies; perspective is Everything.
HOWEVER.
It would be So Amazing if we could get on-screen versions of what we grew up with, hoped, wished, and dreamed (literally!) about. I have Never understood the knuckleheads who insist "You can't do the same thing! You HAVE to adapt it, that's just how it works!!!" Um. . .No. You DON'T have to make Ras al Gul Bruce's original teacher, or Spidey's webbing organic, or give Bruce armor, or make Johnny Storm black, or Jean the literal Phoenix before being possessed by a cosmic force, or Clark mopey and dark, or Hulk a result of the Super-Soldier program. You DON'T. These are all a result of creators wanting to do Their version of beloved characters, rather than presenting us those characters we've been reading for decades. Period.
HOWEVER.
You, after a while, have two choices: Don't watch; or accept that faithful adaptations aren't going to happen, & just see these as alt-versions. If you pick the latter, it's just a matter of deciding if you like the movie on its own merits. At this point, the MCU (and DCU) are well-established, and MUCH different from their print counterparts.
So, for me, I approach these flicks with a two-pronged view: how faithful does it adapt the source, and how good is it on its own? I give SM: H a 6 for the first, and a 7 for the second. average: 6.5 for this movie, bumped up to a 7 (after-credits made me LOL)

You really need to get out more.

https://lebeauleblog.com/2017/07/07/spider-man-homecoming-a-review/

This iteration of Spider-Man smartly avoids the well-known origin story and instead spends its time on showing the fifteen year-old central character struggling with adjusting to his new super hero life. He has both outsized expectations and undersized competence. You know, sort of like a real life fifteen year-old would. It’s actually pretty frustrating sometimes watching Spider-Man stumble in situations we’ve seen him knock out of the park so many times before. But that’s actually a pretty big part of the story here. Peter’s status as a super-powered being who doesn’t yet really know how to handle himself and hasn’t matured into the role he’s destined to play is not just entirely appropriate, but central to who the character is.

Anyone who has read any of the original Stan Lee/Steve Ditko comics (I caught many of them in reprints when I was a comics reader back in the eighties) knows that this is actually pretty accurate to that early iteration of the character. He had a tendency to make some pretty stupid or foolish mistakes sometimes and he pretty much always got his head handed to him the first time he faced one of his growing cadre of super villains. It was only with experience and maturation that Spider-Man grew into the confident and ultra-competent hero he had become by the time I was reading his books. There was always a suggestion that his powers were growing as he learned life lessons – and there is a version of an iconic Spider-Man moment from 1966 that drives this point home here in this movie.

You’ll also notice that the movie spends a significant amount of time establishing Peter’s life in high school. Yet again, this is an element that was also present in the earliest Spider-Man books which were almost as concerned with Peter Parker’s love life as they were with his exploits as Spider-Man.

Even though I recognize your opinions, I respectfully disagree on multiple points. This movie was received well by critics and audiences alike. It also accomplished artistic and commercial objectives. Yes, takes some departures from the comics, but it serves the whole of the movie itself as well as the connected universe. It's fine that you didn't like it, so why not just say that?

I will somewhat agree with the TC about some things except saying that Laura Harrier is ugly. But something I want to point out is that Ned is not made to be Ned Leeds. He's an Ultimate Universe character named Ganke who was friends with Miles Morales in the comics. Why they didn't just call him that I don't know. But nothing about him is anything like the character Ned Leeds. But he is very similar to the character Ganke. I did like the movie but my problem isn't the race change. It's the fact that all of Peter's classmates with the exception of Betty Brant and Liz barely resemble their comic selves. I don't like the version of Flash in the movie who makes fun of Peter because he's jealous of him for being smarter than him. But something I really don't like is the school he goes to is a special prep school for geniuses. So most everyone around him is just as nerdy as he is. That takes away Peter being an outsider in highschool when most everyone in the school is just like him. I also didn't like that Peter is so young and the fact it's probably going to be 2 sequels before he graduates highschool.

There ALWAYS has to be at least one idiot that comes with this take.