Breja: I think it's a strange idea to have him be introduced in this movie at all.
TheMonkofDestiny: Can't disagree with that. I've had strong suspicion that Marvel Studios execs had worried about what Sony would've done further with the character beyond the Amazing Spider-Man film(s), so the quickest way to ease that was to put the character into something as soon as they possibly could once a deal was ironed out that allowed him to appear in the Marvel Studios films.
rampancy: ...but was anyone else annoyed at the animated eyes?
TheMonkofDestiny: I wasn't annoyed by it but like I mentioned in my previous post to this thread, it really gives off a cartoon-y vibe that stands in considerable contrast of the "realistic" approach that the film's directors seem keen to stick toward.
The ASM series was dead well before Sony went to Marvel, hat in hand, and begged to be let into the MCU. The failure of ASM2 is what forced Sony to strike a deal with Marvel. Once that deal was in place, Marvel had nothing to worry about as they essentially took most of the creative control away from Sony (Marvel has over a decade of films already mapped out). The only reason Spidey is in Civil War is because a) it was the easiest way to introduce him to the MCU before his solo film and b) Spidey is a core part of the Civil War storyline in the comics (it basically ruins his life), so assuming they are still using some of the framework from the comic storyline, he is a core part of the movie.
The eyes might seem cartoony, but they are very accurate to the comics; his eyes have been doing that in the comics since Steve Ditko drew him. Also, if you listen closely to the trailer, you can hear a slight mechanical whirr when they change shape, so unlike the comics, his expressive eyes might actually have an explanation in the MCU.
