Page 4 of 18 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 262
  1. #46
    Incredible Member Jman27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    988

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vortex85 View Post
    Except in interviews it was stated she is NOT Mary Jane. So no, i dont know that she is the MCU’s version of Mary Jane. It’s actually the opposite. Ive seen confirmstion that she is not, but none that she is.

    Also, for me its not just the name but the personality as well. In many ways she is a very different character then outgoing party girl, comic book MJ.
    So if she had been called Mary Jane from the start but still acted as she did in the previous movies wouldn’t you guys still complain since she isn’t acting like comic book Mj? Like you said she isn’t Mj I still don’t understand why her character is so controversial here. Because I see the use of the initial as nod nothing disrespectful
    "He's pure power and doesn't even know it. He's the best of us."-Matt Murdock

  2. #47
    Mighty Member Vortex85's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,337

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jman27 View Post
    So if she had been called Mary Jane from the start but still acted as she did in the previous movies wouldnít you guys still complain since she isnít acting like comic book Mj? Like you said she isnít Mj I still donít understand why her character is so controversial here. Because I see the use of the initial as nod nothing disrespectful
    Yes I would still complain about her acting different, however, I would still hope maybe she adapts to the Mary Jane of the comics by college. And at least she gets credit for appearing on film.

    As for now, Mary Jane, the #1 iconic love interest for Spider-Man who has more appearances than any other character second to Peter in the comics, and decades of stories worth adapting on film... only gets a nod for a movie series that could span decades. Further, she gets replaced by an original character, who steals her initials and her role. I find that ridiculous and disrespectful to the source material and to fans.

    What if Peter Paker was replaced in the movie with an original character with the same initials? MCU Spider-Man was a brand new character and they say his initials PP are a nod to Peter with countless potential movies spanning decades, and Peter Parker never appears. Isn't that great? No, people would boycott. That's the same way I feel about Mary jane being replaced.

  3. #48
    Mighty Member Vortex85's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,337

    Default

    Honestly the more I think about it the more infuriating it is. This sends the entirely wrong message to the world about Mary Jane in Spider-Man lore. Basically they are saying she is replacable, not needed, and that it's better to have a break from her character so she feels fresh again one day. What about Peter Parker himself? Do we need a break from him? Shouldn't they have different people as Spider-Man for variety and to feel fresh? No? If not, I see no reason why Mary Jane shouldn't appear in every Spider-Man film thus far.

  4. #49
    Mighty Member Vortex85's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,337

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WebLurker View Post
    I was hoping that the movies would be a faithful adaptation of the USM comics, with MJ in her usual role from them myself, but that didn't happen. Way I see it, if I want Spidey movies with MJ in them, the Raimi movies and Spider-Verse do that. Guess I'm okay with the MCU stuff doing a different take since it's not the only option out there?
    Raimi Spider-Man's Mary Jane was not an enjoyable adaptation for me. Honestly, he did more harm to her character than good giving the world the impression Mary Jane is just a generic damsel-in-distress character. I do appreciate that those films established her importance in Spidey's world but I always hoped I'd soon see a better adaptation. However, in Webb's films her scenes were cut in ASM2 since the film got too bloated, and then in Watt's she is repalced with a new character. So I'm still waiting and hoping to see a better iteration of Mary Jane.

    ITSV looked like a great adaptation but she only appeared for like 10 seconds. This is the best I've got though. 10 seconds of screen time for a decent Mary Jane out of how many, 8 films now? Sad.

  5. #50
    Astonishing Member Revolutionary_Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    3,964

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vortex85 View Post
    If not, I see no reason why Mary Jane shouldn't appear in every Spider-Man film thus far.
    Well she was there in ITSV. And while it's a small role she got the biggest speech in the movie.

    My husband Peter Parker was an ordinary person. He always said that it could be anyone behind the mask. He was just a kid who happened to get bit...He didn't ask for his powers. But he chose to be Spider-Man...My favorite thing about Peter is that he made us each feel powerful. We all have powers of one kind or the other and in our own way we are all Spider-Man, and we are all counting on you.
    — Mary Jane Watson, Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)


    Look I doubt Tom Holland will be Peter Parker forever and in fact the whole MCU Spider-Man movies won't be a thing forever. Eventually something will give way.

    What counts is if we ever get a movie with an adult married Spider-Man, because that's what I want I know that much. ITSV is the only time I got that, with both the Peters there being married.

  6. #51
    Mighty Member Vortex85's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,337

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Well she was there in ITSV. And while it's a small role she got the biggest speech in the movie.

    My husband Peter Parker was an ordinary person. He always said that it could be anyone behind the mask. He was just a kid who happened to get bit...He didn't ask for his powers. But he chose to be Spider-Man...My favorite thing about Peter is that he made us each feel powerful. We all have powers of one kind or the other and in our own way we are all Spider-Man, and we are all counting on you.
    — Mary Jane Watson, Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)


    Look I doubt Tom Holland will be Peter Parker forever and in fact the whole MCU Spider-Man movies won't be a thing forever. Eventually something will give way.

    What counts is if we ever get a movie with an adult married Spider-Man, because that's what I want I know that much. ITSV is the only time I got that, with both the Peters there being married.
    Yes, I agree. Seeing an adult married Spider-man would be great to see. I'm just kind of pissed that we have so many films duing my lifetime wasted potential with no Mary Jane. It makes me want to live for like 500 years so I can see what they do in the future since so much of my life is going to be movies where I don't get what I want.

    Had Mary Jane appeared in Webb's and Watt's versions, we would have gotten to see 2 additional, potentially great and memorable versions of her character, but instead they cut her out or replace her character so that opportunity was lost.

  7. #52
    Incredible Member Jman27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    988

    Default

    If you honestly believe that two movies of Zendaya playing a non Mj is going to erase all of current Mj history I really don’t know what to say
    "He's pure power and doesn't even know it. He's the best of us."-Matt Murdock

  8. #53
    Mighty Member Vortex85's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,337

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jman27 View Post
    If you honestly believe that two movies of Zendaya playing a non Mj is going to erase all of current Mj history I really don’t know what to say
    I never said it's going to erase of of MJ's history. What I'm saying is that the vast majority of people don't and will never read comics. They are not getting a good represtentation of the comics and Spider-man's world with Mary jane thus far. That could change one day, but if Zendaya's character sticks around and we don't see Mary Jane out of fear of backlash that they are replacing Michelle Jones, it could be another decade or more before her character even begins to get a proper representation again. And the longer we go without seeing the real Mary Jane, the harder it will be to correct the perception that she isn't really an important character to be featured in most Spider-Man movies.

    Also, as the years go, more and more people are going to grow attached to alternative/new characters, and be more likely to reject the same love and respect that comics fans have for the actual/true/important characters.

    So you have comic fans loving the comic characters, and you have movie fans rejecting them in favor of new characters. That sucks. If you want to adapt Spider-Man, it should properly adapt the characters so there is not a huge disconnect between comic book fans and movie goers on who and what characters are Spider-Man's world. I want the world to get a proper view of the characters so I can share the love I have for the characters with the world. However, all my friends and family don't know or love the characters I do because they aren't being adapted.
    Last edited by Vortex85; 01-18-2020 at 09:00 PM.

  9. #54
    Extraordinary Member WebLurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    7,019

    Default

    Nice artwork. The summaries the artist attached to the artwork explaining the story had it as a superhero team-up (MJ is apparently secretly doing Spidey stuff somehow). Silly me, my first thought was that it was set in a world where Peter didn't exist and that MJ and Black Cat where a lesbian couple (a la Cat and Peter's relationship during their dating/team-up years).

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    If that was really their intention then they shouldn't have given Zendaya's character the "MJ" nickname.
    I see it as an Easter egg. In any case, I guess I see the whole "MJ should've been in the MCU version" like how I see the "Gwen Stacy should've been a major love interest instead of a minor diversion" in the Raimi movies; neither series is telling the story of MJ/Gwen and Peter's relationship. There have been many different tellings in the past, there will be more in the future. While I may prefer the Raimi movies a bit more due to Mary Jane being a lead character in them, I guess I think it's fine if the MCU does their own thing in the here and now.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I was hoping for more Spec Spidey, but can't win 'em all.
    The cartoon? I think that's kind of a updated, improved version of the early 616 ASM comics, at least how I see it. Since I preferred the Ultimate iteration to 616, that's why I was hoping that they'd skewer more to that then not.[/QUOTE]
    Doctor Strange: "You are the right person to replace Logan."
    X-23: "I know there are people who disapprove... Guys on the Internet mainly."
    (All-New Wolverine #4)

  10. #55
    Mighty Member Vortex85's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,337

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WebLurker View Post
    I see it as an Easter egg. In any case, I guess I see the whole "MJ should've been in the MCU version" like how I see the "Gwen Stacy should've been a major love interest instead of a minor diversion" in the Raimi movies; neither series is telling the story of MJ/Gwen and Peter's relationship. There have been many different tellings in the past, there will be more in the future. While I may prefer the Raimi movies a bit more due to Mary Jane being a lead character in them, I guess I think it's fine if the MCU does their own thing in the here and now.
    HM, that's a pretty healthy way to view it. I like that. I need to print that out and read it to myself whenever I start to get depressed about MCU Spider-Man. I just really hope your right about that last part about... "there being more in the future" and I hope I'm around long enough to see it done in a satisfactory way.

  11. #56
    Astonishing Member Revolutionary_Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    3,964

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vortex85 View Post
    Yes, I agree. Seeing an adult married Spider-man would be great to see. I'm just kind of pissed that we have so many films duing my lifetime wasted potential with no Mary Jane. It makes me want to live for like 500 years so I can see what they do in the future since so much of my life is going to be movies where I don't get what I want.

    Had Mary Jane appeared in Webb's and Watt's versions, we would have gotten to see 2 additional, potentially great and memorable versions of her character, but instead they cut her out or replace her character so that opportunity was lost.
    The important thing to understand is that the MCU, in general, doesn't do romance and love stories. It doesn't target that audience.

    Tony and Pepper are a love story as is Cap and Peggy but the main focus of Tony's story isn't the relationship with Pepper. She's important to him, and she's very much the "first lady" of the MCU in the way Susan Storm is in Marvel Universe (though unofficially we all know it's MJ). The relationship with Pepper is not the main focus of Tony's story and journey. Peggy is maybe more central to Cap than Pepper is to Tony at least in the case of the denouement but Cap's story isn't a love story.

    Whereas in Spider-Man 1 and Spider-Man 2, and also Amazing Spider-Man by Garfield, those movies are love stories front and center. They are about relationships being central to the character more than anything else.

    MCU Spider-Man likewise isn't a love story. The main focus is Peter's relationship with Tony Stark and his legacy. Likewise, it's Peter and Ned Leeds. The movie after that will obviously be Peter and Jonah Jameson.

    And ultimately Tobey's Peter and Kirsten's Mary Jane is the most iconic romance in superhero movies. In fact the biggest romance after Titanic. I mean that upside down kiss is one of the all-time great romantic images in movies.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jman27 View Post
    If you honestly believe that two movies of Zendaya playing a non Mj is going to erase all of current Mj history I really donít know what to say
    Zendaya isn't non-MJ. She's "a" MJ. She's not "the" MJ or the definitive Mary Jane, but she's as valid as real and acceptable as Bendis' Ultimate MJ (who isn't entirely like her 616 character but shares her spirit) as Kirsten Dunst's MJ as MJ PS4, and so on. FFH calls her exclusively MJ and never once refers to her as Michelle. And I would bet good money that the third movie would reveal her real hidden name to be Mary Jane.

    And yeah, totally agree that it won't erase the MJ history. It just confirms it and double downs on it, rather. I think Marvel is at a point where they realize that they no longer have to synch comics to movies to get people to buy more comics. There's so much content and mediums, so many different versions that it doesn't make sense to do it.

    Quote Originally Posted by WebLurker View Post
    In any case, I guess I see the whole "MJ should've been in the MCU version" like how I see the "Gwen Stacy should've been a major love interest instead of a minor diversion" in the Raimi movies; neither series is telling the story of MJ/Gwen and Peter's relationship. There have been many different tellings in the past, there will be more in the future. While I may prefer the Raimi movies a bit more due to Mary Jane being a lead character in them, I guess I think it's fine if the MCU does their own thing in the here and now.
    Agreed.

    We'll never really have the comics. Or rather the comics that once was. Since even the comics aren't the comics. You are gonna have to strap together your own personal canon out of what's given to you.

  12. #57
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    22,125

    Default

    I still ascribe to the theory that Zendaya's MJ is just using a false identity to hide from her abusive father.

  13. #58
    Astonishing Member Darkspellmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    I still ascribe to the theory that Zendaya's MJ is just using a false identity to hide from her abusive father.
    Agreed. I quite like her as MJ, she has her personality with a bit of USM MJ. Eventually I bet we get her red hair. There is nothing wrong with different versions of MJ existing. I've seen fan comics with Latin MJ, gender flipped MJ, south Asian, east asian and middle eastern MJ.

    As long as the spirit of the character remains than she's still MJ to me. Period.

  14. #59
    Mighty Member Vortex85's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,337

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darkspellmaster View Post
    Agreed. I quite like her as MJ, she has her personality with a bit of USM MJ. Eventually I bet we get her red hair. There is nothing wrong with different versions of MJ existing. I've seen fan comics with Latin MJ, gender flipped MJ, south Asian, east asian and middle eastern MJ.

    As long as the spirit of the character remains than she's still MJ to me. Period.
    Thats the problem though, the spirit of MJ’s character is not being honored thus far. According to Fiege, Michelle in Homecoming was always a new original character. It was only later after she was written that they thought it would be cool of her initials happened to be MJ as a shout out to Peter’s “past love interest”. I believe him because its clear they did not even look at Mary Jane when writing Michelle for that movie. Its hard to find a single similar trait between Michelle and MJ of the comics. Far From Home made me a little more suspicious since all they called her was MJ. Are they trying to link her more to Mary Jane going forward? IDK, maybe. I dont know what they are going to do in the future but thus far all they have similar is the initials and in being a love interest in Far From Home.

    I am curious what you see in MCU MJ that is maintaining the spirit of comic book MJ. Let me know, thanks.

  15. #60
    Astonishing Member Inversed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    2,957

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darkspellmaster View Post
    Agreed. I quite like her as MJ, she has her personality with a bit of USM MJ. Eventually I bet we get her red hair. There is nothing wrong with different versions of MJ existing. I've seen fan comics with Latin MJ, gender flipped MJ, south Asian, east asian and middle eastern MJ.

    As long as the spirit of the character remains than she's still MJ to me. Period.
    Yes this. She fits the spirit of MJ very well, while being her own unique thing, just like Tom Holland's Peter still evokes the spirit of who Peter is, while still in a different way. She's fun and sassy, Zendaya performs her greatly, and her chemistry with the rest of the cast is great.

    Like I mentioned already, people are so obsessed and insecure with comic book accuracy that they'll take every little detail and change as a personal attack to them. She IS MJ. She IS this universe's "Mary Jane". Just because she's not called "Mary Jane" doesn't change things. Anybody who truly thinks in Spider-Man 3 they're going to introduce a new character named "Mary Jane" and that alone will make everything better, I think you're only fooling yourself.
    Current Reading List: Amazing Spider-Man, Spider-Gwen: Ghost Spider, Sonic The Hedgehog, Absolute Carnage, Friendly Neighbourhood Spider-Man, Gwenpool Strikes Back, Runaways, The White Trees

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •