-
[QUOTE=Castle;5042989]Do we have to see uncle ben die twice? NO.
Do we have to see Spiderman always mention Uncle's ben impact at some point in a movie series? Yes.
Those who are saying Holland's Spiderman is the most faithful seem to be ignoring how we want Ben to be protrayed.. they are all jumping to the conclusion that we all want to see him die for the 3rd time in a movie.
its not about Ben's death, its about the legacy of his death.[/QUOTE]
Please don’t speak for what other people want. Especially if you’re trying to speak for me.
Thanks.
-
I think outside of Captain America most of the other characters don't mirror their comic characters all that well. This is not saying that they were bad portrayals though. The movie portrayals were inline with the MCU brand and overall storyline and in many ways made the characters more appealing to a broader audience. The characters did allow for a newer generation to get into comics, which is a good thing. While I think Marvel comics are crap right now as a whole because they are allowing the film portrayals to be the source of the comic portrayal and that has made for some less than desirable stories, the newer generation likes it.
-
I think Cap (616) and Nick Fury (Ultimate) might be the truest to their source material counterparts.
-
[QUOTE=Speed Force League Unlimited;5045478]I think Cap (616) and Nick Fury (Ultimate) might be the truest to their source material counterparts.[/QUOTE]
I don't think Nick Fury is like his Ultimate counterpart, except for looking like Samuel L. Jackson. In the comics he was far more extreme, like he baited Red Skull out of hiding to get the Ultimates to get back together just so he could get his job back, he used Gregory Stark to overthrow governments, and exploited Spider-man death to guilt trip Carol danvers into resigning so he could be director again. IIRC he was a serial cheater/womaniser, to a stupid degree. As in he slept with his ex-wife's mother and sister. Something ridiculous like that. The rest is just plain old 616 Nick Fury.
-
[QUOTE=Steel Inquisitor;5045619]I don't think Nick Fury is like his Ultimate counterpart, except for looking like Samuel L. Jackson. In the comics he was far more extreme, like he baited Red Skull out of hiding to get the Ultimates to get back together just so he could get his job back, he used Gregory Stark to overthrow governments, and exploited Spider-man death to guilt trip Carol danvers into resigning so he could be director again. IIRC he was a serial cheater/womaniser, to a stupid degree. As in he slept with his ex-wife's mother and sister. Something ridiculous like that. The rest is just plain old 616 Nick Fury.[/QUOTE]
0_o
He didn't show any signs of that in Ultimate Spider-Man, which is what I had in mind. I steered clear from the rest of that line of comics especially the Ultimates because characters annoyed me there, especially Bruce Banner (upset that the team were discussing which actor portrays who and injects himself with the Hulk serum and goes on a city destroying rampage) and Steve (rude to everyone) Rogers.
-
As an aside, the greatest strength of the MCU has always been cherry picking the best parts from their sources (Ultimate, 616, cartoons, etc.) to make the best versions of their characters.
-
Iron Man has always struck me as the closest. But the MCU is based on the Ultimate verse, so none of them are going to be all that close to anything in the 616.
-
[QUOTE=Scott Taylor;5047970]Iron Man has always struck me as the closest. But the [B]MCU is based on the Ultimate verse[/B], so none of them are going to be all that close to anything in the 616.[/QUOTE]
This myth really needs to stop. MCU is not based on Ultimate universe. It takes a few things from it, sure. But overall, I would still say it's closer to 616 than Ultimate, especially when it comes to characters' personalities and general tone.
[QUOTE=BeastieRunner;5047697]As an aside, the greatest strength of the MCU has always been cherry picking the best parts from their sources (Ultimate, 616, cartoons, etc.) to make the best versions of their characters.[/QUOTE]
This guy gets it.
-
[QUOTE=Speed Force League Unlimited;5045478]I think Cap (616) and Nick Fury (Ultimate) might be the truest to their source material counterparts.[/QUOTE]
Because Nick Fury from Ultimate was already based on Sam Jackson.
[QUOTE=Bunch of Coconuts;5043397]Please don’t speak for what other people want. Especially if you’re trying to speak for me.
Thanks.[/QUOTE]
Was not speaking for others but was pointing to a fundamental flaw with Spiderman. Didn't Ben make a small cameo in Spiderverse and Spiderman Game 2018?
-
[QUOTE=Frobisher;5043031]Now, reboots - I think we've clearly seen properties like Batman, Spider-man, and Superman reach a point where there's a level of saturated cultural knowledge, and we can go into a Nolan or Snyder reboot and people already basically know what the deal with the character is. This may not be as true for markets such as China and India where Western properties like Star Wars haven't had as much traction, but even that seems to be changing.[/QUOTE]
That's true when it comes to broadstrokes, but there's still a lot about a characters' history a reboot should make clear. DC characters have it worse than Marvel characters. What was Krypton like? Was Superman ever Superboy? Did he have a Kryptonian dog? Are the Kents still alive? Most interpretations will be based on something in the comic books, even the ones that contradict another show or movie.
Spider-Man is getting to that point as well because of all the cartoons in addition to the movies that differ from each other. Was Mary Jane his neighbor growing up or did he meet her later in life? Was the spider that bit him radioactive or genetically altered? When did he meet Harry? Was Gwen his girlfriend who was killed or is she an active superhero named Ghost-Spider?
-
[QUOTE=SpiderClops;5048750]This myth really needs to stop. MCU is not based on Ultimate universe. It takes a few things from it, sure. But overall, I would still say it's closer to 616 than Ultimate, especially when it comes to characters' personalities and general tone.[/QUOTE]
Based on doesn't mean exact copy. The MCU is still its own thing.
-
At no point in any of the marvel movies did I ever feel like I was watching an Ultimates movie. Ultimates tended to vary on edgy with everybody acting like jerks. MCU was far more light hearted and fun.
-
[QUOTE=Alan2099;5049134]At no point in any of the marvel movies did I ever feel like I was watching an Ultimates movie. Ultimates tended to vary on edgy with everybody acting like jerks. MCU was far more light hearted and fun.[/QUOTE]
Agreed overall. I think the Ultimates comparison goes up to appearance only, like Cap's costumes and the number of layers and straps on most costumes replacing comic book spandex and tightness overall. But Ultimate Cap and MCU Cap have very different personalities.
-
[QUOTE=Cyke;5049410]Agreed overall. I think the Ultimates comparison goes up to appearance only, like Cap's costumes and the number of layers and straps on most costumes replacing comic book spandex and tightness overall. But Ultimate Cap and MCU Cap have very different personalities.[/QUOTE]
Hawkeye is the closest to his Ultimate version. Thor is miles off any comics version. Feige, et. al picked and chose from different things for different characters.
-
[QUOTE=Cyke;5049410]Agreed overall. I think the Ultimates comparison goes up to appearance only, like Cap's costumes and the number of layers and straps on most costumes replacing comic book spandex and tightness overall. But Ultimate Cap and MCU Cap have very different personalities.[/QUOTE]
I think Stark's personality may be partially based on his Ultimate rendition - which was like a parody of 616 Stark. In 616 he's nowhere near as smug or narcissistic. At first, anyway, in the later movies he felt more like his 616 self.