Spider-Man: Far From Home assuaged all concerns about the MCU after Avenger's: Endgame. It tells a solid standalone story while also giving a sneak peek on where the hero may end up in the future.
Given that it is the second film the new Spider-Man series, one can't help but compare it to the web slinger's other sophomore efforts, particularly Sam Raimi's Spider-Man 2. That movie also followed up excellently on the classic 2002 film, and it still holds up to this day. Let's look a little closer at both of them, though, and see how they stack against each other. More specifically, here are five things Far From Home did better than Spider-Man 2, and five things it does worse.
Worse: New York
This is a problem that plagues the entire MCU, though they have gotten better at it over the years. Whenever the heroes are in the Big Apple, it never feels genuine. It's certainly not the only location that feels ersatz, but it sticks out so much more because of how many classic movies are set in the city that never sleeps.
Spider-Man 2, on the other hand, has a more authentic representation of the iconic city. It doesn't hurt Far From Home all that much, of course, since the majority of the film takes place in Europe.
Better: Villain
Alfred Molina is a superb actor and does a standup job as the legendary villain, Dr. Octopus. However, the whole personality manipulation by the arms feels too similar to the dual personality Norman Osborne develops in the first film.
Far From Home's Mysterio is a vastly different beast from Homecoming's Vulture, and the movie benefits greatly from it. Vulture was out to support his family, making the audience sympathize with his efforts. Mysterio was greedy and only wanted fame and worship.
Worse: Video Game Tie-In
Readers old enough to have been playing video games in the early aughts will fondly remember Spider-Man 2. The adaptation of the first Sam Raimi film was decent and certainly a cut above the low standard set by other games based on movies, but the sequel blew it out of the water with its vast open world. It was the first game based on a superhero that truly made the player feel like the protagonist. Far From Home lacks any direct video game companion. To be fair, it is better they didn't try, since Insomniac's stellar Spider-Man game is still fresh in everyone's minds.
Better: Humor
People decry the MCU for adhering to a specific formula. Fans can argue day and night over the validity of this argument, though one has to remember that the franchise has covered numerous genres from science fiction to political thrillers. One plus side of Marvel's well-oiled machine is the abundance of comedy found in each film. The writers know how to make these characters quip, and Far From Home is brimming with jokes. Even when the situation gets dire, at least one character always has one wisecrack to relieve the tension.
Worse: Feeling Grounded
This isn't a slight against Far From Home since one wouldn't expect realism from a movie about a high-school student donning a spider costume and fighting crime, but the movie does feel like pure fantasy.
Sam Raimi's films had the luxury of being one of the first of its kind, slowly introducing audiences to the world and character. Because things happen more gradually, Raimi's films do a feel more grounded, even when things get crazy. At the end of the day, though, how important is realism in a superhero film?
Better: Differentiating Itself From The First Film
Spider-Man 2 feels like deja vu. The action stays in New York City, and Doctor Octopus is too similar to the Green Goblin. It certainly doesn't make it a bad movie, but some people want sequels to shake things up more. Far From Home does a lot to the Spider-Man formula that helps it stand out.
For one, it takes place almost entirely in Europe, with scenes in New York bookending the movie. Secondly, Mysterio is way different than Vulture in both motivation and ability. One could watch both movies back to back without burning out.
Worse: Underutilizing Its Talent
Far From Home has a stellar cast all around. The major players deliver stand out performances. The supporting cast are all talented individuals, too, but some of them aren't given any time to shine. JB Smoove, for example, is a particularly talented comedian but contributes little to the comedy of the film. Granted, he couldn't pull off his profanity-laden routine from Curb Your Enthusiasm in a PG-13 movie, but he should have had more lines. Perhaps his best material was edited out of the picture.
Better: Visual Effects
For this one, Far From Home has time on its side. CGI typically gets better and more advanced as the years roll by. Spider-Man 2 is still an impressive visual display, but some of the CGI has noticeably aged.
The recent film looks great visually. No one will mistake the digital effects for the real thing, but they don't look laughable, either. Both of them are tactful, however, using them only to showcase things that would otherwise be impossible with practical effects.
Worse: Distinct Visual Style
The MCU films all have a certain look, which helps establish that they are in the same universe. It also prevents any of them from having a unique visual style. A couple of them have managed to break the mold, such as Thor: Ragnarok, but Far From Home looks fairly uniform. Spider-Man 2 was directed by Sam Raimi, who has a unique way of shooting films that make them all his own. Fans of his older films can even see similarities between Spider-Man and Evil Dead.
Better: Supporting Cast
As previously mentioned, Far From Home's cast is pure fire. Sam Jackson heightens anything he's in, and Jake Gyllenhaal does a stand out job as the villain. Jon Favreau's Happy Hogan also fully delivers, and it's great to see his character still play such a big role after Tony's death. Spider-Man 2 is no slouch in this department, either, but Far From Home's cast simply knocks it out of the park.