How much Spider-Man is too much Spider-Man? This was likely on the minds of many when Sony announced their second reboot of Marvel's A-lister in just three years, after the dumpster-fire, universe building disaster than was Marc Webb's The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (you'll always get a pass for 500 Days of Summer, Webb), and in the process decimating all of Sony's plans for two more sequels, a Sinister Six spin-off and an... Aunt May spy flick? This planned universe was definitely caught in a tangled web of a mess.

The silver lining out of that announcement was that their third(!) Spider-Man will be part of Marvel Studios/Disney's Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), with a young Tom Holland (The Impossible) cast in the role soon after. This culminated in a memorable yet well-received debut in 2016's Captain America: Civil War, as this new edition blended well with the long established Marvel characters right on the get-go. So, with the new Spider-Man: Homecoming following Holland off the heels of Civil War, is this third Spider-Man in 10 years more Sam Raimi's original trilogy or more Webb's Amazing series?

If you've never warmed to the MCU films over the past decade, chances are that Homecoming would do little to convince you otherwise, as it retains most of the pros and (few) pitfalls that is apparent in this billion dollar franchise. Marvel had always preferred to hire indie directors to direct their latest projects, and it's no different with the hiring of Jon Watts to write plus helm Homecoming, having just come off the $5 million-budgeted Cop Car starring Kevin Bacon. The end result is a film with all the makings of a Marvel Studios film, and this new series retains the aesthetics of the Marvel movies with little repercussions for our heroes, for better or for worse. Quips have always been Spider-Man's other superpower since his printed debut, and it's certainly a match made in heaven when combined with level of banter which are omnipresent in the MCU.

Speaking of which, the integration mythos of past MCU's films appear to fit Homecoming like a glove, providing a more complementary relation between the new film and previous entries, rather than just throwing in blatant references for the sake of continuity. Adrian Toomes's turn to crime is deeply rooted from the Chitauri invasion from 2012's Avengers, while his dastardly plans all stem from technology salvaged/stolen from past battles (an Ultron head makes a cameo too). Don't worry, it's not the Spider-Man & Iron Man adventure the trailer had us worried, as Robert Downey Jr. only appears in a glorified four-scenes cameo, for which most were shown in the various commercials. In fact, take out the Iron Man and Avengers angles and you'll still have a pretty solid Spider-Man movie on its own.

Onto the new dude in the suit, this new... new Spider-Man by Tom Holland is an absolute delight on-screen, and by far the best young version of Peter Parker. Don't get me wrong, but each rendition of Spidey thus far has brought something to the table. You could argue that Tobey Maguire is great as an "Adult Parker", while Andrew Garfield shines as a "Boyfriend Parker", but it'll be interesting to see whether Holland could snatch these (hastily thought of) accolades in future sequels.

The lack of an origin story, which is pretty unnecessary by now, meant that this rendition of the web crawler does not have the weight of a dead Uncle Ben or his parents on his shoulders, and for once we get a Peter Parker who's definitely enjoying his superhero life, and one that we actually see converse through his school life and his crime fighting duties. Thankfully, Holland's rendition comes off as uncertain, stubborn yet equally eager, energetic and enthusiastic, while Parker's personality seem to trade seamlessly between his alter-egos (you'll notice the mega bump in confidence when Maguire dons the suit in the original).

What really sets this new Parker apart from those before him are his interactions with practically everyone in this film, from his young Aunt May (Marisa Tomei) to Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau), and it is with his peers that serve as Homecoming's better moments. Parker's classmates are given a 2010-esque makeover, focusing more on diversity in not only ethnicity but also in personality, while straying pretty far from their comic book counterparts.

Parker's best friend Ned Leeds (Jacob Batalon) is his best friend as well as confidante to his secret identity, and has perhaps the funniest lines and scenes in Homecoming. The stereotypical meathead bully Flash Thompson now a cynical, compensating nerd played by The Grand Budapest Hotel's Tony Revolori, while Zendaya's Michelle is equally narcissistic as she is sarcastic. We don't see these classmates all too often outside of Ned, but given that Homecoming takes place during Parker's sophomore year, they'll likely is plenty of sequels to get reacquainted with these colourful characters.

Michael Keaton is a fine addition to the storied franchise. Much like Jeff Bridges in the original Iron Man, the seasoned actor brings plenty of gravitas and tension to a role that admittedly looks bloody silly in the comics, as the former Beetlejuice is now playing his third flight-based character after Batman and Birdman. One memorable scene at the end of the second act really showcases the veracity and terror that Keaton can bring to the screen. Even if he does become a one-off villain, he was certainly one of the more memorable, even if that bar is still *shockingly* low in the MCU's Hall of Baddies. While the Vulture does command a presence whenever he's on screen, it's still nowhere as storied or layered than the likes of Willem Dafoe or Alfred Molina preceding him.

Spidey's rogue gallery is also present, but are presented as more of a support unit for the Vulture than full blown super villains integral to the plot à la Spider-Man 3, played by the likes of  Bokeem Woodbine (Fargo), Logan Marshall-Green (Prometheus, also discount Tom Hardy), and Donald Glover (The Martian; Childish Gambino). Glover in particular steals the show in one confrontation with Spider-Man in an empty parking lot.

Spider-Man: Homecoming is a noteworthy entry into the Marvel Universe, but while it couldn't match the dizzying heights or scale of Raimi's Spider-Man 2, arguably the gold standard of Spider-Man flicks, Homecoming's emphasis on the 'FUN' side of being the web-crawler is an enjoyable romp, and the new set of heroes and villains rarely put a foot wrong. Tom Holland's Spider-Man is one for the ages, and one that's likely struck a web cord with audiences  to embrace in the long haul. For Sony, maybe third time really was the charm? Hell, there was one blatant Sony product placement in sight this time around, and that's already a 'Stark' improvement.

After Captain America: Civil War got Marvel Studios' Phase 3 slate of franchise films off to a flyer, matters now turn to another one of Marvel's classic comic characters Stephen Strange, whose last real-life portrayal coming all the way back in a 1978 television film! Scott Derrickson, known for his work in the horror film circuit, with Sinister & Deliver Us from Evil under his resume, is tasked with introducing Doctor Strange, with his mystical powers into the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), and while last year's Ant-Man benefited from its Avengers connection, can Doctor Strange pull a rabbit out of the hat with a new horizon for the franchise into the realm of magic?

Right from the get-go, Doctor Strange treads very closely to the usual origin story beats, and more particularly in tandem with the original Iron Man way back in 2008, with the film beginning with your egotistical protagonist (played by Benedict Cumberbatch) whose accident puts him on a path to help others with the assistance of irregular abilities. Sounds like someone took the Iron Man script and labelled a sticky note saying "ADD MAGIC!" (no discredit to the writers here).

#OscarSoWhite! Scarlett Johanssen in Ghost in the Shell! Women in Ghostbusters! Hollywood can't seem to get a break when the race card rears its unpleasant head around here. Almost every time a controversy regarding casting of an ethnic character gets blown up on the Internet, we're treated to the same myriad of articles proclaiming that Hollywood isn't exactly a diversity-friendly haven for actors of ethnic minority, and for good reason. Other than the whitewashing of ethnic characters in many big budget films, the same minority groups have to endure the brunt of severe stereotyping on screen which can be traced back to the decades.

We get it, Hollywood is a convoluted system, and many decisions are rarely decided by single person. There's also the business element when creating films, where forecasted revenue are brought to the fore in favour of  pleasing the fickle minds of the audience. I certainly believe that while whitewashing is not the worst action condone on screen, the creative liberties taken with it mist be justified in a manner that persuades the audiences that the studios made the right call, and does not spark further outrage. 

In this piece, we're going to be looking at the for and against elements towards Hollywood whitewashing, focusing on the Asian American dilemmas this time around.

"Everything they built will fall, and from the ashes of their world... we'll build a better one!" bellows Oscar Isaac's Apocalypse in pretty much all the trailers in X-Men: Apocalypse, the latest installment in the long-running X-Men franchise. That may be a reference, or indeed a pitch of sorts, when 20th Century Fox went about making X-Men: The Last Stand, the Brett Ratner-directed final film in the previous trilogy which tarnished all the goodwill created from Bryan Singer's first two mutant efforts.

With all those bridges burnt, the silver lining that came out of this was the birth of the prequel trilogy starting with Matthew Vaughn's X-Men: First Class and followed by the critical darling of a sequel Days of Future Past (DOFP). The newer films worked as it centers on the main three trio of younger versions of Professor X (James McAvoy), Magneto (Michael Fassbender) and Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence)... and Nicholas Hoult's Beast for that matter, as well as tying their stories by the decades with links to real world events. Having the old cast and Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) returning in DOFP certainly gave the series a commercial boost it lacked from First Class, and here we are now with the latest world-ending installment. With the last two films being high watermark for this 16 year old franchise (along with a hysterical Deadpool film this year), can X-Men: Apocalypse continue the hot streak?

Comic book movies are a dime a dozen these days, with one released pretty much every season in a year. Back in the early days (till this year anyway), these films' premises were simple yet effective: it was always the case of good guys vs the bad guys. This doesn't seem to be the case anymore, with the desire for more convoluted plots and an array of characters, fueled by the success of 2012's The Avengers, has prompted film studios to craft up fresh takes on these fabled comic characters, often resorting to their long list of comic iterations for a hint of inspiration.

We've already seen the first of these, Warner Bros' Batman v Superman serving up an overstuffed and frankly depressing take on their planned DC Comics Universe, with that film also failing to consolidate itself in terms of box office receipts after a lofty opening. Thus, a month later on, we now have our second seismic Hollywood face-off of 2016, pitting the Captain of America against the Man of Iron in Captain America: Civil War.

Directed by Antony and Joe Russo, the 13th Marvel Cinematic Universe entry aims to follow up on the events of 2014's The Winter Soldier (which the Russos' also directed) as well as last summer's Avengers: Age of Ultron, and like Dawn of Justice, both films tackle the nature of a superhero's responsibilities on civilian casualties amidst their display of strength in saving the world, resulting in a  divide of super-heroic proportions. All of these, whilst introducing a third Spiderman in less than a decade, seems like an almighty feat indeed, but did the Russo Brothers' second Marvel feature do a better 'clash of the superheroes' depiction than Zack Synder's DC offering?

What exactly is The Huntsman: Winter's War? Is it a sequel to 2012's Snow White & The Huntsman? Or is it a sequel to the that same 2012 film? Well, in the vein of 300: Rise of an Empire, The Huntsman looks to be a bit of both, looking to fill in the gaps before and after the original story of Snow White. The real question though is: did anyone ask for a sequel for that? I personally didn't see the original as it looked uninspiring and wasn't the biggest fan of Kristen Stewart at the time, even with a then newly minted Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and Charlize Theron in supporting roles.

Well, the powers that may be (in this case, just Universal Pictures) decided a prequel/sequel was in order, and due to off-screen reasons chucked out Stewart and director Rupert Sanders as well, bringing in Cedric Nicolas-Troyan to the director's throne (he was visual effects artist for the original). With Stewart gone, Universal not only retained Hemsworth and Theron, both fresh from 2015 smash hits (Avengers and Mad Max respectively), but also brought the entire cavalry to the table by adding in Emily Blunt and Jessica Chastain to the mix. With an even more star studded cast this time round, is The Huntsman considered the fairest of them all? Or was the poison apple the more viable option?

Man of Steel was pretty okay right? I just want to put it out there that I quite enjoyed Zack Synder's installment of the American hero, especially the action-packed fights during the film's second half. Well, Synder's back at it again with Superman in tow, and he's brought along a certain bat vigilante and Amazonian warrior along for the ride in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (BvS). Using the aftermath of Man of Steel as a template for bigger things to come, BvS continues Clark Kent's journey into Superman, while having to introduce a new Batman and our first film iteration of Wonder Woman. The trailers released over the past year have been great, save for that one which basically condensed this 2 and a half hour film into a two minute synopsis, complete with story beats, Doomsday spoiler and Wonder Woman reveal.

The beginning of Dawn of Justice drops us right into a reiteration of the Metropolis destruction seen in Man of Steel, which showed us the destruction caused between Superman (Henry Cavill) and General Zod's (Michael Shannon) neck-snapping battle from the eyes of Bruce Wayne/Batman (Ben Affleck) down below... but not before we were treated to yet another rendition of Bruce Wayne's family murder for the umpteenth time (also: bats floating Bruce out of a well). Anyway, Batman feels responsible for taking down Superman for his reckless savings (and I don't mean in terms of money) while a sinister corporate leader (Jesse Eisenberg) intents to have the Son of Krypton and Bat of Gotham butt heads... because reasons.

Fortunately, the events of 2014's X-Men: Days of Future Past retconned that continuity out of existence, allowing for a faithful representation of the Rob Liefeld-created comic book character. However, a Deadpool film, a R-rated one at that, wasn't greenlit over at 20th Century Fox until a test footage was 'leaked' online to online critical acclaim. So here we are years later, with the long gestating film's eventual release, but is Deadpool more 'worthy of the hype'? More 'game changer in the R-rated superhero genre'? Or is it more so 'average film resorting to profanity to cover its faults'?

2015 ended with a blast from the past in the form of Star Wars: The Force Awakens, tearing up box office records in the United States and on course to be the highest grossing blockbuster not directed by James Cameron. With that year just passed, we'll hence shift our minds to the Hollywood offerings for the next 12 months, which yet again includes a glutton of superhero adaptations, remakes, reboots, prequels and sequels. 

While there's the usual suspects in the form of Marvel, DC and Disney offerings, signifying another franchise overload in 2016, some original entries still manage to trickle into this list, and some films, especially those released at the year end for awards buzz, are still difficult to gauge at this point (as with last year's Ex Machina, The Martian, Creed, Room and Bridge of Spies). Be warned though, those listed here aren't guaranteed to be goodies, as evidenced by my previous list, where I had the abysmal Mortdecai and Terminator Genisys listed as hot picks.

So sit back, relax with a warm cuppa, and dive into the biggest offerings 2016 has to deliver!

With Ant-Man rolling out in pretty much around the world already (save for the usual suspects - China and Japan), thus ends another billion dollar era in the short history of Marvel Studios. Unlike Phase 1, the second phase in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) was tasked with not only expanding on the stories of our established heroes after the events of 2012's The Avengers, but at the same time introducing newer characters to the mix, these new entities deriving from more obscure source materials than the likes of Iron Man and Captain America.

As evidenced over the past three years, all films improved greatly over their respective installments, with two billion dollar-spinning entries (Iron Man 3 and Avengers: Age of Ultron), but the biggest surprise was 2014's Guardians of the Galaxy, which attained universal acclaim on its way to a $750 million worldwide gross.

On the flip side, criticism soon surfaced over the recycled storylines and forced connections for a wider universe, leading to some quarters to believe that Marvel are getting both lazy or lethargic, though the revenue on-hand speaks for itself entirely. With fan demand at a fever pitch after The Avengers, and with DC Comics' on universe building steam sooner rather than later, how does the six Phase 2 films released stack up against each other?