Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Spider-Man: No Way Home offers a multiverse of redemption instead of revenge
Spider-Man: No Way Home offers a multiverse of redemption instead of revenge
Nov 23, 2025 12:29 AM

Needless to say, spoiler alerts galore!

Read More…

In superhero movies, it’s a given that the good guys will try to save innocents from the bad guys. Sometimes they save individuals, sometimes they save cities, and all too often—especially in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU)—they save the entire planet or, increasingly, the entire universe. (Once you’ve raised the stakes so high and swatted them back down, every subsequent threat on that scale seems less threatening because more unreal.)

But what if the good guys tried to save the bad guys from themselves?

That’s the question raised by Spider-Man: No Way Home, the first COVID-era blockbuster, which not only brings the current Spider-Man trilogy to a satisfying close (while leaving the door open to future movies, of course), but unites all three of the live-action Spider-Man movie franchises—and in the process tries to redeem some of their villains.

Spider-Man: No Way Home isn’t entirely breaking new ground here; the potential for redemption was always there in the other films. Unlike the power-hungry General Zods or the nihilistic Jokers of the Superman and Batman movies, the villains in Spider-Man films have tended to be tragic figures whose good intentions went awry. In some cases—Doctor Octopus in 2004’s Spider-Man 2, Harry Osborn in 2007’s Spider-Man 3—the antagonists have even switched sides in the final act and sacrificed their lives to help Spider-Man and his friends.

In the new film—and for reasons plicated to get into here—several of these villains are yanked out of their worlds and deposited in the MCU, where Spider-Man, aka Peter Parker, is now a high school student played by Tom Holland. Peter has to send all the villains back to their worlds, but when he learns that most of them were yanked out before they died—effectively, they were yanked out of the middle of their respective movies—he decides he has to save them by “fixing” the chemical, electrical, or cybernetic accidents that brought out their darker sides. He won’t just leave them to their fates.

One or two of these characters e the chance to be “cured.” But Norman Osborn, aka the Green Goblin (Willem Dafoe, who finally gets to let his face and not a mask do the menace-projecting), fights back and persuades most of the others to fight back, too. And because Peter got some of his moral inspiration from his Aunt May (Marisa Tomei), who works at a charity for the homeless, the Green Goblin makes a point of killing her. “You tried to fix me,” he tells Peter before striking the fatal blow. “Now I’m going to fix you.”

And so the film raises questions that go even deeper than the basic redemption theme, namely: What is the source of our morality? Is it something programmed into us, whether by nature or nurture? Or is it something we choose, for better and for worse?

While the Spider-Man movies have featured the occasional villain who actively chooses to be evil—Spider-Man 3’s Eddie es to mind, and he is noticeably absent from the proceedings here—they have always played heavily on the idea that villains are “made” by external factors: a pound that increases aggression, a puter chip that allows “smart” robot arms to override a person’s higher brain function, and so on.

Sometimes the films have underlined the idea that those darker impulses were always there, that the potential for evil lurks within all of us, and that the external factors simply made it easier to give in to those impulses; even Peter Parker succumbs to Venom’s influence in Spider-Man 3. Sometimes the point is made that people like Norman Osborn and Dr. Otto Octavius (Alfred Molina), aka Doctor Octopus, were blinded by hubris when they invited these external factors into their lives.

But still, given how these movies have tended to portray villains as victims of outside forces, it makes sense that this movie’s Spider-Man talks about “fixing” those villains, as if to say that basic goodness is a person’s natural state, being bad is not something a person would choose, and all you have to do to make someone good is remove that outside influence.

But not so fast. The Green Goblin challenges this line of thought by asserting that Peter Parker’s goodness is, itself, the product of an outside influence. He says Peter has been “trapped” in Aunt May’s “holy moral mission,” but now he’s going to free Peter from that trap.

The question that hangs over the rest of the film is whether Peter will respond to the death of his aunt the way the Goblin expected, or whether he can prove the Goblin wrong by actively choosing a higher moral path. And it’s at this point that Tom Holland’s Peter Parker is visited by the Peter Parkers of the other films (played by Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield), both of whom have had to deal with grief and loss in their own ways, and both of whom agree to help the Peter Parker of this universe save the bad guys from their universes.

So one Peter Parker gets moral support from the other Peter Parkers. But this just raises yet another question: Where does any Peter Parker get his morality from?

In the Tobey Maguire films, it was strongly implied that he got it from his Catholic upbringing; Parker himself professed no faith, but his Uncle Ben and Aunt May quoted the Bible, said their prayers, and thanked the angels (or statues of angels) that came to their rescue. What’s more, director Sam Raimi set key scenes in or near churches, which lent a religious dimension to his morality tales. (Not for nothing does one of the other Spider-Men say Maguire’s Peter Parker is dressed like a “cool youth pastor” in the new movie.)

The Peter Parkers played by Andrew Garfield and Tom Holland are less clearly defined, and they seem to have had more difficulty ing their darker sides. Garfield’s Parker says, in the new film, that he got bitter and angry and stopped pulling his punches after his girlfriend fell to her death in his last film (the fact that he saves Holland’s Parker’s girlfriend from a similar fate in this film is another of the second chances that the film gives its characters). And while Holland’s Parker doesn’t blame any of the other villains for his Aunt May’s death, es very close to killing Norm Osborne before Maguire’s Parker intervenes.

In the end, Holland’s Parker makes the right choice, gives Norman Osborn the stuff that brings him back to his senses, and sends everyone back to their worlds. (Which of course leaves fans to ponder all the various plot holes—like, if the villains were yanked out of the middle of each movie but the Spider-Men were yanked out of their universes years after their movies ended, are the villains and the Spider-Men who saved them being sent back to the same timelines now?)

And if I may get deeper into the MCU weeds for a minute: If Holland continues to play Peter Parker, the issue that future Spider-Man films will have to deal with is how his Spidey es a hero in his own right. Holland has now played the character in six films—three solo efforts, two Avengers movies, and the Captain America movie that first introduced him in the role—and in all of them, he has either lived in Iron Man’s shadow or, in the new film, found his strength by teaming up with the Spider-Men that came before him.

Still, it’s remarkable how this film offers something quite different from the usual us-versus-them triumphalism. There’s a scene in the new film where the Spider-Men are going about their plans and M.J. (Zendaya), the girlfriend to Holland’s Peter Parker, says, “We’re going to kick some ass.” To which one of the Spider-Men replies, “Cure. We’re gonna cure some ass.” Now that’s a sentiment to lift all our spirits.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Video: Arthur C. Brooks Outlines The Formula For Happiness
The 2015 Acton Lecture Series continued on January 29th with a presentation by American Enterprise Institute President Arthur C. Brooks, who delivered a great talk on whatreally leads to happiness in life. In an era when Americans are finding less and less satisfaction with their nation while enjoying great pared to much of the rest of the world and overall human history, what can we do to regain our confidence in the American enterprise system that has lifted much of...
Why Keep Funding Ineffective Government Programs?
Head Start doesn’t work. More people than ever are now on food stamps. Medicaid is staggering under the weight of its own bloat. Why are we continuing to fund bad programs? This is what Stephen M. Krason is asking. Such programs keep expanding: There has been a sharp increase in the food-stamp and Children’s Health Insurance programs. Obama has proposed more federal funding for Head Start and pre-school education generally, job training for laid-off workers, and Medicaid. In fact, the...
Affordable Energy Drives Basic Needs in the Developing World
“Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day,” wrote Maimonides. “Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.” With all due respect to Maimonides, much has happened since the 12th century. Among those changes is inexpensive, plentiful energy which powers refrigeration, which frees a man from the burden of fishing every day and allows him to engage in other worthy pursuits. That is only if the progressive crusade to strand fossil fuels...
Federal Court Rules Religious Organizations Can Hire (and Fire) for Religious Reasons
Earlier today a federal appeals court handed down an important ruling that protects the liberties of religious organizations. In the case of Alyce Conlon v. InterVarsity Christian Fellowship/USA, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit rejected a plaintiff’s attempt to enforce state and federal gender discrimination laws on one of the nation’s largest Christian campus ministries. According to the court opinion, Alyce Conlon worked at InterVarsity Christian Fellowship/USA (IVCF) in Michigan as a spiritual director, involved in...
A Parable for the Entrepreneur
In this week’s Acton Commentary, “A Parable for the Unemployed,” I provide a brief survey of the biblical view of work, concluding with reference to the parable of the workers in the vineyard in Matthew 20. As I argue, this parable “might just as well be called the parable of the jobless. It teaches us to wait patiently and expectantly for ways that we can be of service to God through serving others.” Or as the Theology of Work mentary...
You Can’t Separate Stewardship from Economics
As Christians continue toturn their attentionto the intersection of faith and work, it can be easy to dwell on such matters onlyinsofar as theyapplyto ourindividual lives. What is our purpose, ourvocation, and our value? How does God view our work, and how ought we to render it back tohim? What is the source ofour economic action? These questions are important, butthe answers will inevitably point us to a more public (and for some, controversial) context filled with profound questions of...
Samuel Gregg: The Anglosphere As Actor On The World Stage
Samuel Gregg, Acton’s Director of Research, asks whether or not the Anglosphere nations (Britain, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and the United States) continue to be a viable political force in the world today at the Library of Law and Liberty. Gregg begins with his unique Anglosphere experience: Given that I am of Scottish and English descent, grew up in Australia, did my doctorate in Britain, and now live and work in America, I am about as much a product of...
Mini-Grants on Free Market Economics
Are you a professor interested in free market principles? Do you know of one? The Acton Institute is offering mini-grants between $1,000-$10,000 for faculty at colleges, universities, and seminaries in the United States and Canada. The purpose of these mini-grants is to enhance the effectiveness in the teaching and scholarship of market economics. In the past, these mini-grants were only available for business and economics faculty at Christian schools, but this year any faculty (in the U.S. and Canada) working...
Explainer: President Obama’s FY2016 Budget
What is the President’s budget? Technically, it’s only a budgetrequest—a proposal telling Congress how much money the President believes should be spent on the various Cabinet-level federal functions, like agriculture, defense, education, etc. (A PDF of the 150 page document can be found here.) Why does the President submit a budget to Congress? The Congressional Budget Act of 1974 requires that the President of the United States submit to Congress, on or before the first Monday in February of each...
How Puritans Became Capitalists
In his book,Heavenly Merchandize, Mark Valeri, professor of church history at Union Presbyterian Seminary, finds that the American economy as we know it emerged from aseries of important shifts in the views of Puritan ministers: IDEAS:You’re saying that the market didn’t rise at the expense of religion, but was enabled by it? VALERI:You need to have a change in your basic understanding of how or where God works in the world before you can envision different economic behaviors as morally...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved