Marvel Movies

[HarryTrotter]

Who cares at this point?

[stumpy]

In before fan rage concerning the recent Mary Jane announcement to say I'm actually super stoked about it an all ya'll haters gonna hate

If the presumed controversy is about what I suspect it's about, count me among those who don't care one way or the other. I am not familiar with Zendaya's work, but my baseline for a live-action Mary Jane was Kirsten Dunst's portrayal, so it won't take much to do better, IMO.

[Shogunn2517]

In before fan rage concerning the recent Mary Jane announcement to say I'm actually super stoked about it an all ya'll haters gonna hate

Nope, I'm on board too.

It's not that I or anyone else is technically "off board" but I think it's the acknowledgment of the problem is what we seek.  It's nothing against Zendeya and I'm sure her and Holland will be completely adorable kids on screen.  To that point very few batted an eyelash when she was announced.  Only now that she's filling the role of probably the most notable redhead in comics does this make news.  But there was a reason why Kirsten Dunst wore red in Raimi films.  It would be different if this was Betty Brant or even Felicia Hardy.  But like a Valkyrie before her or Johnny Storm or going back to Aquaman.  It isn't a racial problem because I  honest think people care more in those cases than a Deadshot or MCD's Kingpin or Jonn Jonzz.  In those cases those characters don't have specific characteristics of them that are essentials to the character.  It's just pretty wonky.  And as a minority myself I really don't feel it's necessary to shoehorn ethnicities on characters seemingly just for the sake of diversity.  I know I've said it before, but Marvel's big budget blockbusters STARTED with a ethnic character.  Their next series will have an black lead with a majority black cast.  Now the next movie they're making will feature similar.  This is on top of the Anthony Mackies, Hallie Barrys, Sam Jacksons they've already featured in starring roles in blockbusters.  I don't think people are saying "man I like Marvel but they need to appeal more to minorities by casting Zendeya."  I mean sure, I'm not gonna complain if they want to put more minority faces in movies and tv, that's reflective more of my life and real life in general.  But it's just an inescapable feeling that it's being done not to find an actress to play a role but an actress to appeal to an audience, particularly when it isn't really necessary.  And THAT'S the rub.

Maybe just me...

[HarryTrotter]

I'm curious about the Runaways show.  They're the kids of supervillains, but supervillains are still a pretty rare thing in the MCU, so I'll be interested to see how they play the setup and connections to the MCU at large.  I imagine a lot will have to change.

Yeah,but their parents were original characters created for the series,so I dont see a problem with the lack of supervillains this time.And I imagine it will be contained in its own bubble like the Netflix shows.

[Tomato]

A couple points here

-First, you're basing a lot of your argument on the fact that this is a Marvel Movie. It's not. It's a Sony film with Marvel's involvement. On that front, across all the Spiderman films (Raimi and Webb) how many black characters do you remember? Because offhand, I can remember all of two: Robbie Robertson (who didn't do much compared to the comics) and Max Dillon (who got zero character development and was turned blue anyway). So while you can point to a lot of racial diversity in Marvel Studios films, Sony isn't really on the same page. They've lagged behind Marvel, DC, and Fox in terms of representation for over a decade.

-Second, the director of Homecoming has gone on record stating that he is very specifically trying to get more diversity into the cast because Peter Parker lives in Queens. It makes ZERO sense that a high school set in Queens would feature mostly white students, and that every single character highlighted would be white.

-Third, and most important... I feel like the casting is based more on the spirit of the character than on appearance. Durst may have been a picture perfect Mary Jane as far as appearance, but in terms of character, she was just AWFUL. In my mind, Mary Jane was always the spunky neighbor who knew exactly who she was and what she wanted. Just based on what little I know about Zendaya, she'll make a FAR better Mary Jane Watson than Durst ever did.

-Fourth, we don't know she won't have Mary Jane's iconic red hair. Yeah, it may not be "natural" but neither was Durst's hair. And it's not like it'd be that out of place either... I've worked with several WoC who dyed their hair various shades of red, it's not uncommon.

[spydermann93]

What was the Mary Jane announcement?

[BentonGrey]

So, they aren't going to have Mary Jane in the new Spidey flick?  That's fine; they've already done her in a movie.  I would definitely prefer it if they didn't call the new character Mary Jane, though, if they don't want her in their movie. 

Seriously though, this is the same old thing, but, I'd say, it's actually more of an issue with MJ.  She's almost archetypal as the 'fiery redhead with a mind of her own.'  Her appearance, like every comic characters' appearance, is part of who she is, but it is arguably more of an integral element than most of those they've race-switched over the years.  This is the same conversation, though.  It is an issue, part of the disregard for source material that otherwise sends folks up the walls.  Is it enough to ruin a movie?  Of course not.  Can the actress still do a fine job?  Of course.  Is it just as good overall as a faithful adaptation of that character?  I'd say no.  It is hardly everything, but it is also not nothing.

It also just strikes me as lazy.  If you want diversity in your cast, why don't you actually create some diverse characters?  You don't want Spidey's love interest to be white?  Fine.  I think an interracial relationship would be a good thing, speaking about the medium at large.  So, make a new character.  Make your own character.  That's what you do when you want to innovate.  I'm reminded of a Jack Kirby quote on that subject...I wish I could remember how it went. 

Shogunn, good points, well said.

[kkhohoho]

Okay, first thing's first: Despite what you all may have heard, there has NOT been an official announcement that MJ is going to even be in the movie, much less so that she's going to be played by someone who ain't a red head. On top of that, the actress who which has been purported to be playing MJ is actually playing a new character named Michelle, so that's thrown right out the window. And last but not least, there has been an image of part of an official cast list, and while some of Peter's other girlfriends like Liz Allen and Betty are on it, MJ is nowhere to be seen. (Though Z(endeya) is; just as Michelle.) Read 'em and weep:

https://imgur.com/NMXDOdJ

So yeah, now you know. (And knowing's only half the battle!)

[Shogunn2517]

It's not just it being a Marvel movie.  I specifically pointed out Blade and X-Men as franchises that didn't need to do what they're doing.  Benton is right. If you want a diverse cast, then just have more diverse characters.  Or even do it in a way it would seem less conspicuous.  Again, if you want a more diverse cast I'm all for it.  Like you said, it makes sense in 2017 Queens.

But this seems like that.

Again the character is known for having a particular look. Say what you will about Dunst and her acting ability but it isn't uncommon to see a white girl with red hair.  Now I've been around hundreds of black women in my life and having red hair is far from a natural occurrence.  So much to the extent it can look completely unnatural(ie giving Jamie Fox a combover???)  I mean they can go the Rihanna route but why would you feel the need to do that?

Like Benton said it seems lazy and just being extra when you don't even have to.  Why can't she me Mia Watson or Maria Watson or Malyia Watson?

Again, if you want a diverse cast, that's completely fine. Audiences will watch.  But this just seems like you're not only ignoring the source material but purposely changing it when it ain't really that necessary.  Again, from the perspective of a minority I would rather have our OWN characters than a changed character just to seemingly fit a demographic represtation.

[BentonGrey]

Shogunn, it's interesting to hear from a person who is part of a minority yet who has your views on this subject.  I especially like your last point.  I can see that.

Well, if, as Kk says, this is a none issue, great.

[Tomato]

For clarification, this is the article that discussed her actually being Mary Jane Watson. The article brings up the cast list Kkhohoho mentioned, but according to them multiple sources involved in the process have confirmed that this was a subterfuge and that she is playing Mary Jane Watson. It's not OFFICIAL confirmation, sure, but the lack of more significant love interests in the cast list seems suspicious anyway. Plus, that cast list has some awful big gaps in it... even ignoring the fact that the numbers aren't sequential (it skips from 1 to 8) there are several additions to the cast we know about that are not on that list, and the fact that several cast members are listed only by initials means the list was made with leaks in mind.

As far as "oh, just create a new character" goes... yes, let's add yet another love interest to Peter Parker's growing gaggle of girlfriends, see how long that sticks. The reality is, only 3 love interests have had any real staying power in the Spider-Man books: Mary Jane, Gwen Stacy, and Black Cat (and even that last one is a stretch). Peter's been in dozens of other relationships, but they never last and very few people care about them at all. Mary Jane was his wife for over a decade, she's been in every cartoon and over half the movies that have come out since the 90s. It's her name joe schmoe on the street knows as Spider-Man's love interest, and creating a brand new one after we JUST had Gwen Stacy muddying the waters for people is just going to confuse the poor sheepy brains of the mass market.

The reality is, I don't care what a person's race is, so long as the character is done properly. It doesn't matter one single iota whether Mary Jane is Black, Asian, Latino, White, or Purple. I care a HELL of a lot more about getting her personality right, and that's something Durst NEVER EVER did for me. So yeah, casting an actress who clearly has chemistry with Tom Holland and seems to be a much better fit for the character? Cool, I'm down with it.

Me, I see this as no different as one of the 2000 Spider-Verse universes out there. Spiderman might be white in 616 and others, but there's several where he's black, where he's japanese, and even at least one where he's indian. And yet, in each of those world, most of the general attributes of the Peter Parker character are kept in place... So why can't the same be true of his supporting cast?

(Speaking of whom, even if the MJ thing isn't true, Ned Leads, Flash THompson, and Liz Allen are ALL non-white actors. MJ being black isn't that far from left field)

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

I did see a rather good point that the racial makeup of New York has changed since Spider-Man debuted and it makes sense to update that to fit in with what the city actually looks like now.

Which is, I suppose, a rather decent point.  Spider-Man was supposed to be a believable character set in a realistic version of our world and it is odd in this day and age that nearly everyone he has regular contact with in New York is white.  I'm normally against arbitrary changes, but I see the point.

[HarryTrotter]

@Tomato,I think the general audience isnt that stupid as you give them credit.If people can figure out this is the third Spiderman reboot in 10 years,they could figure out that Spiderman has a new love interest.

[stumpy]

I take your point, Spade, that the audience isn't going to be especially confused by Peter having a new girlfriend who isn't Mary Jane or Gwen. I am not sure that Tomato was saying that audience confusion was the issue, but I agree that they could deal with it.

However, I think that changing the girlfriend entirely would be seen as a much bigger departure from canon than just ethnic background. That is, I think that the people who are concerned with keeping the movies more or less in line with the comics would be even more upset if movie Peter's new love interest isn't even one of the known ones from comics. I mean, change MJ's ethnic background and she's still MJ and there really isn't any substantial change to the Spider-Man corner of the Marvel universe (Sony version). But, make it so that Peter's steady GF is now some unknown instead of MJ or Gwen, and that's a more substantial change.

Think of it this way, if a Spidey movie had Peter dating Elektra, comics fans would blow a gasket, a la, "What the...!??!? These clowns don't even know what character they're filming!" I think Spidey dating a new unknown would be seen as a lesser affront, but an error in that same direction, where the film isn't even paying attention to who is who in the Marvel dramatis personae.

[Talavar]

From what I've read, it sounds like Zendaya is playing MJ, but but not "Mary Jane."  Her credit listing as Michelle isn't wrong, just misleading.  If this is true, she's halfway between a new character and just race-swapping an existing one.

[Tomato]

I guess from my perspective I fail to see why this is always such a big deal. On the one hand, this has been going on forever, and we have discussed ad nauseum times where it's benefited the films (Idris Alba, Sam Jackson, etc). On the other, it is absolutely asenine for people to complain that "MJ isn't like that in the comics!" when I can point you to comics where MJ is a waterbuffalo, not to mention several realities where she's a brunette. They've said from the planning stages of the latest SM films that each set of films is its own universe, so why do different rules apply to film universes than they do to alternate universes in the comics?

[HarryTrotter]

Yeah,we did have this talk way too many times,but that's kinda not the point now.Point is that the movie would probably function all the same no matter is it Mary Jane or Michelle.And yes,there are probably hundreds of reasons why they went with MJ,but "to avoid confusing the audience" is probably the weakest of them all.

[BentonGrey]

The 'it's the same character' argument is flawed in my estimation.  As soon as you change a core aspect of a character, they cease to BE that character, and race is a pretty central aspect of someone's identity, whether it's obvious or not.  Of course, the whole 'appearance is character' element of comics also comes into play here.  Nonetheless, 'Mato's argument about alternate realities and different versions of the characters doesn't work for me, as you still recognize that this is not, say, Nick Fury, this is ULTIMATE Nick Fury.  This isn't Superman, it's ANTI-MATTER Superman.  They are different characters, even if they share the same name.  That's sort of the entire point.  Sometimes the differences are subtle, sometimes they are major, but they add up to a new character.  It's in the basic foundation of modern comics, with the reinvention of the Golden Age in DC.  Those were all NEW characters, even when they had many of the same qualities as their predecessors. 

I don't think that anyone is saying that this is "such a big deal," but it does matter, at least a little.  As I said, it is hardly everything, but neither is it nothing.  The way I look at it, once again, as I've said before, is that this is a point against an adaptation.  It is hardly a major strike, and it can certainly be overcome, sometimes simply by the amazing job the actor/actress does (Idris Elba, etc).  Still, it is a little mark against the faithfulness and thereby effectiveness of an adaptation, akin to changing any part of a character that isn't necessary for the translation.   

The girl, if she is playing "Mary Jane" won't actually be playing the character herself.  She'll be playing a different version of her.  That's fine, but that isn't an actual adaptation of that character.  It isn't the same.  If she's playing "MJ" but NOT "Mary Jane," I can't imagine the movie will make enough of the distinction for it to amount to anything.  If Mary Jane is so important to the Spider-Man mythos that you can't possibly replace her with a new character, then don't.  Put that character on screen.  That argument falls apart as soon as you put a DIFFERENT character, even if they share the same name and many qualities, on screen. 

I've said about all I care to about this subject.  It doesn't matter all that much to me.  I just wish that folks would take a more innovative approach to adding diversity to these casts.  Making The Falcon a major part of the Avengers is a much better solution than, say, suddenly making the Hulk black, Asian, or what have you. 

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

Actually, the comic book Hulk is Asian, although in his case it's a previously established character becoming the Hulk.

[BentonGrey]

You know what I mean.   

[HarryTrotter]

Well,the same things could be said about the comics.Surprise,its the same company,so same handling.
But like I said,the story can probably work no matter the name.And no,I dont buy "fans would complain about the new girlfriend" theory either.Its a third take,you might as well do something new and just your own.And anyhow,fans complain,but still watch movies.

[Tomato]

Here's where I guess my perspective differs from ya'lls though. For you, you're seeing yet another character you love changed by the Hollywood elites. Me though? I see the excitement from all my black friends and coworkers, who admittedly aren't that into comics, about Zendaya being cast as Mary Jane. I see tweets from Mica Burton, daughter of Levar Burton and member of an internet gaming group I admire, excited at the prospect of getting to cosplay as movie Mary Jane, without having to be a "black version" of the character. So if I seem dismissive about the notion of Hollywood making changes to characters to satisfy a quota, it's only because I see the impact that it has for real people. It's not as ideal as actually making characters who were always black from the start, but it's still better than looking at 5 spider man films and seeing a grand total of two significant black roles because there's 200 white characters we have to focus on first.

That having been said, I take umbridge with the entire notion of movies being perfect adaptions of the comics anyway. As I have pointed out ad nauseum, Kirsten Dunst was NOT an adaption of the Mary Jane Watson of the comics on any level except her appearance. Neither was Emma Stone playing anything even close to a faithful adaption of the 616 Gwen Stacy... If anything, I'd say she was closer to Ultimate Mary Jane than any version of Gwen Stacy. And frankly, those films were all the better for it.

Adaption is about more than just translating a story from the comics and making it work in a film script. In the case of comic book adaptations in particular, it's also about taking stories written in the 1960s and adapting them to be palatable for a modern audience. It's why Iron Man's origin isn't set in Vietnam, or why Hulk wasn't a byproduct of an Atomic Gamma Bomb. These things made sense in the era during which they were written, but that is no longer the case.

Likewise, if you're adapting Spider-Man to be a high school student in 2016, and setting his high school in Queens, surrounding him with all white people is as outdated as having all of Iron Man's enemies being dirty Commies.

[Talavar]

Here's where I guess my perspective differs from ya'lls though. For you, you're seeing yet another character you love changed by the Hollywood elites. Me though? I see the excitement from all my black friends and coworkers, who admittedly aren't that into comics, about Zendaya being cast as Mary Jane. I see tweets from Mica Burton, daughter of Levar Burton and member of an internet gaming group I admire, excited at the prospect of getting to cosplay as movie Mary Jane, without having to be a "black version" of the character. So if I seem dismissive about the notion of Hollywood making changes to characters to satisfy a quota, it's only because I see the impact that it has for real people. It's not as ideal as actually making characters who were always black from the start, but it's still better than looking at 5 spider man films and seeing a grand total of two significant black roles because there's 200 white characters we have to focus on first.

That having been said, I take umbridge with the entire notion of movies being perfect adaptions of the comics anyway. As I have pointed out ad nauseum, Kirsten Dunst was NOT an adaption of the Mary Jane Watson of the comics on any level except her appearance. Neither was Emma Watson playing anything even close to a faithful adaption of the 616 Gwen Stacy... If anything, I'd say she was closer to Ultimate Mary Jane than any version of Gwen Stacy. And frankly, those films were all the better for it.

Adaption is about more than just translating a story from the comics and making it work in a film script. In the case of comic book adaptations in particular, it's also about taking stories written in the 1960s and adapting them to be palatable for a modern audience. It's why Iron Man's origin isn't set in Vietnam, or why Hulk wasn't a byproduct of an Atomic Gamma Bomb. These things made sense in the era during which they were written, but that is no longer the case.

Likewise, if you're adapting Spider-Man to be a high school student in 2016, and setting his high school in Queens, surrounding him with all white people is as outdated as having all of Iron Man's enemies being dirty Commies.

Hear, hear.

[HarryTrotter]

Yeah,but setting Tonys origin in Afganistan was also a product of its time,and it will probably be just as outdated in 20-30 years as Vietnam seems now.
Another thing,they are adapting characters themselves as story engines,not STORYLINES from the comic directly(at least in this case).You cant really point a finger and say,this was based on Clone Saga,or Gauntlet,or  Spider Island or XY.Its a Spiderman movie,work from there.
And a "Russian scientist who lost everything when Soviet Union fell apart" is really just an update on the dirty commie stereotype,btw.

[Tomato]

I don't disagree with you on most of that, but you're actually helping to underline my point: These aren't SUPPOSED to be 1:1 adaptations. Complaining that they're straying from the source material when they're creating their own stories and their own character arcs is like ignoring that the BBC Sherlock series is set in the 21st century but then complaining that Moriarty isn't a schoolteacher. Again, these can and should be looked at as no different than yet another Marvel Alternate Reality.

[HarryTrotter]

I don't disagree with you on most of that, but you're actually helping to underline my point: These aren't SUPPOSED to be 1:1 adaptations. Complaining that they're straying from the source material when they're creating their own stories and their own character arcs is like ignoring that the BBC Sherlock series is set in the 21st century but then complaining that Moriarty isn't a schoolteacher. Again, these can and should be looked at as no different than yet another Marvel Alternate Reality.

I wasn't actually against you;Im pretty neutral towards the whole thing(I got used to it at this point).Just saying that they could have the same results without even mentioning MJ.(And btw,we all know 1984 series is the only Sherlock adaptation that counts.)

On the other hand;i think fans care more a good Spiderman movie that respects the source material,then about seeing a realistic portrayal of Queens.I mean,is that so important?Is it going to help anyone in any way?

[Tomato]

On the other hand;i think fans care more a good Spiderman movie that respects the source material,then about seeing a realistic portrayal of Queens.I mean,is that so important?Is it going to help anyone in any way?

Here's where I guess my perspective differs from ya'lls though. For you, you're seeing yet another character you love changed by the Hollywood elites. Me though? I see the excitement from all my black friends and coworkers, who admittedly aren't that into comics, about Zendaya being cast as Mary Jane. I see tweets from Mica Burton, daughter of Levar Burton and member of an internet gaming group I admire, excited at the prospect of getting to cosplay as movie Mary Jane, without having to be a "black version" of the character. So if I seem dismissive about the notion of Hollywood making changes to characters to satisfy a quota, it's only because I see the impact that it has for real people. It's not as ideal as actually making characters who were always black from the start, but it's still better than looking at 5 spider man films and seeing a grand total of two significant black roles because there's 200 white characters we have to focus on first.

Yes.

[HarryTrotter]

So people can now cosplay characters they cosplayed anyway?OMG,thats almost like they found a cure for cancer.

Its a Spiderman movie.The world will continue to turn just the same after it.Either way,its not important.

[spydermann93]

So people can now cosplay characters they cosplayed anyway?OMG,thats almost like they found a cure for cancer.

I think you're missing the point on that one, Spade.

Clearly the decision is making some people very happy and excited, not necessarily just for Cosplaying. It's getting many new people into our medium; the medium that we love so much. They are feeling more welcomed to share our passion and feel comfortable doing so by finding a hero that they can relate to. They can see themselves more clearly in these new versions of characters.

That was Tomato's answer to your question.

[HarryTrotter]

You meant a supporting character?Not like its a Mary Jane movie.Like I was saying,its not a major breakthru in anything,its just a movie.Probably on the same formula like every other MCU movie.