I kind of wish Andrew Garfield didn't piss off the film executive at that one party now. Really curious how Garfield-Spidey would've looked in the MCU. What? It almost happened.
[OOC] CLOSED - Ultimate One Universe: Season One Page 272
- Large Group
- Superhero
- Fandom
- Modern
- Fantasy
- Casual
- GM Master Bruce Co-GM Byrd Man Co-GM Morden Man
Join Status:
Full
mickilennial The Elder Fae
Member
Seen
0-24 hrs ago
Simple Unicycle ?
Member
Seen
1 mo ago
Ultimatizing it.
BREAKING NEWS: Man banned from RP for bad jokes.
1x Laugh
GreenGrenade
Member
Seen
0-24 hrs ago
I dunno, I don’t think they’re dated if they work. Spider-Man (Peter, specifically) has probably the best supporting cast in comics, and I think the MCU kinda fudged themselves by trying to shove them aside and give us new, much lesser alternatives.
3x Like
Retired "Hayao Miyazaki"
Member
Seen
0-24 hrs ago
What's that? Discussing the Homecoming supporting cast? How did this can of worms get here? The central problem I have with it is that the supporting cast is written like a bad RPG writer who shoehorns references even when they don't fit, just to sneak an established name in there. (Hey, that kettle over there looks pretty black; maybe I should say something...)
Seriously, though. Ned is just Ganke. But they didn't want to use the name Ganke, so eh, just take a name from elsewhere in the supporting cast gallery. Who cares? (Hint: this guy.) Michelle is a fine character, but there's no reason to call her MJ; even if you try to walk it back and pretend it was just a wink. If Flash Thompson is going to share absolutely nothing in common with his comic counterpart except that they're both dicks to Peter, then why not give him his own identity? Even the little girl on the morning show has to be called Betty Brandt, even that though defies all logic. (Sure, I'm splitting hairs on that one, but it's a symptom of the "disease.")
There's an almost pathological fear in inventing new characters, even though characters created outside the comic pages have sometimes done just fine for themselves. Harley Quinn, to name the obvious one. Phil Coulson, to stick within the MCU.
My laptop decided to shit itself seven hours ago, so I'm stuck on mobile with the inability to like posts. And I won't care anymore once I'm able to again. So take this as a psuedo-like.
2x Like
I dunno, I don’t think they’re dated if they work. Spider-Man (Peter, specifically) has probably the best supporting cast in comics, and I think the MCU kinda fudged themselves by trying to shove them aside and give us new, much lesser alternatives.
A good deal about what made Spider-Man such a hit was how relatable he was. Stan Lee said he created Peter Parker because he wanted a character for his young reader-base to identify with.
Obviously, Spidey is such a well written character with such a colorful supporting cast and rogues gallery that relatability isn't necessary to make his movies engaging and interesting. But him being a teenager is the core appeal. And modern day teenagers (most of them) don't live in a world with Raimi or even Webb's versions of Flash Thompson. They're caricatures of the often violent and insane bullies we saw in older films in the eighties and early nineties. It's hard to pull that off and expect a modern, young audience to be pulled in like your older viewers would be.
I'm not saying the reboot was necessarily successful- but the idea behind it isn't wholly without merit.
Eddie Brock
Member
Seen
6 mos ago
I dunno, I don’t think they’re dated if they work. Spider-Man (Peter, specifically) has probably the best supporting cast in comics, and I think the MCU kinda fudged themselves by trying to shove them aside and give us new, much lesser alternatives.
MCU Spidey is positively terrified of even sniffing a rehash of anything. Everything has to be different for difference's sake. Can't (directly) mention Uncle Ben. (Because God knows, say, the Batman movies have never returned to the "dead parents" well. Once you've told an origin, that's it! You may never mention it again.) Can't use the line "With great power comes great responsibility." Can't go back to the Daily Bugle. Can't have the Osborns. Can't have Spider-Man web-swinging through Manhattan.
Homecoming is a good movie. And in time, the MCU Spider-Man series may go back on some of these things; particularly since everything has to be watching the "evolution" of a character. (Because who wants the full version of the character anyway, amirite?) But when people say it's the definitive Spider-Man movie, I have to stop and wrap my head around it for a second...
3x Like
Eddie Brock
Member
Seen
6 mos ago
<Snipped quote by GreenGrenade>
A good deal about what made Spider-Man such a hit was how relatable he was. Stan Lee said he created Peter Parker because he wanted a character for his young reader-base to identify with.
Obviously, Spidey is such a well written character with such a colorful supporting cast and rogues gallery that relatability isn't necessary to make his movies engaging and interesting. But him being a teenager is the core appeal. And modern day teenagers (most of them) don't live in a world with Raimi or even Webb's versions of Flash Thompson. They're caricatures of the often violent and insane bullies we saw in older films in the eighties and early nineties. It's hard to pull that off and expect a modern, young audience to be pulled in like your older viewers would be.
I'm not saying the reboot was necessarily successful- but the idea behind it isn't wholly without merit.
The idea behind it may not be without merit, but there are still plenty of athletic, attractive assholes in high school. There comes a point where reimagining a character crosses a line to "This is a totally different idea, but we need a recognizable name, so shoehorn it in." That's all my original point was. And I get what you're saying that you can't throw the baby out with the bathwater; but if you're finding yourself stretching the adaptations so far that you are rewriting the supporting cast wholesale... shouldn't you ask yourself if you really want to be doing an adaptation at all?
GreenGrenade
Member
Seen
0-24 hrs ago
<Snipped quote by GreenGrenade>
A good deal about what made Spider-Man such a hit was how relatable he was. Stan Lee said he created Peter Parker because he wanted a character for his young reader-base to identify with.
Obviously, Spidey is such a well written character with such a colorful supporting cast and rogues gallery that relatability isn't necessary to make his movies engaging and interesting. But him being a teenager is the core appeal. And modern day teenagers (most of them) don't live in a world with Raimi or even Webb's versions of Flash Thompson. They're caricatures of the often violent and insane bullies we saw in older films in the eighties and early nineties. It's hard to pull that off and expect a modern, young audience to be pulled in like your older viewers would be.
I'm not saying the reboot was necessarily successful- but the idea behind it isn't wholly without merit.
Yeah, I’m not gonna deny that. But there’s ways to do a more relatable Flash without turning him into something he’s not. The thing that never made sense to me about the guy is why, after seeing all the shit he’s put Peter through, and then watching Peter grieve for his uncle who got murdered, he insists on still being an asshole. That’s why I have to give points to Webb’s Flash – after Ben died, he showed remorse. That’s how you can update Flash, I think – show him as remorseful, realising that he treated Peter badly, and trying to make up for it in his own bullheaded way (all while Peter is, understandably, reluctant and abrasive). Bullies aren’t just bullies, y’know?
2x Like
<Snipped quote by Superboy>
The idea behind it may not be without merit, but there are still plenty of athletic, attractive assholes in high school. There comes a point where reimagining a character crosses a line to "This is a totally different idea, but we need a recognizable name, so shoehorn it in." That's all my original point was. And I get what you're saying that you can't throw the baby out with the bathwater; but if you're finding yourself stretching the adaptations so far that you are rewriting the supporting cast wholesale... shouldn't you ask yourself if you really want to be doing an adaptation at all?
I'm pretty well in agreement with you on this one. Homecoming went too far in the 'make it different from the previous movies' direction, to the point where they missed the mark on a lot of potentially great stuff. There's no need for them to shy away from the origin so hard that they don't dare utter the phrase that makes Spider-Man...Spider-Man.
I was miffed by the fact that Liz was only ever namedropped as MJ at the very end of the film- it was totally unnecessary to make that a 'reveal!' Just call her MJ! AH.
Ninja edit:
<Snipped quote by Superboy>
Yeah, I’m not gonna deny that. But there’s ways to do a more relatable Flash without turning him into something he’s not. The thing that never made sense to me about the guy is why, after seeing all the shit he’s put Peter through, and then watching Peter grieve for his uncle who got murdered, he insists on still being an asshole. That’s why I have to give points to Webb’s Flash – after Ben died, he showed remorse. That’s how you can update Flash, I think – show him as remorseful, realising that he treated Peter badly, and trying to make up for it in his own bullheaded way (all while Peter is, understandably, reluctant and abrasive). Bullies aren’t just bullies, y’know?
I'd actually completely forgotten that happened, but yeah. Totally agree with you there. One of the better points of the first Amazing Spider-Man was how well they handled inter-character relationships. Peter and Gwen's relationship felt a great deal more genuine than how Raimi handled MJ and Peter, if I'm remembering everything correctly.
2x Like
Eddie Brock
Member
Seen
6 mos ago
I will say, though, that while on an emotional level it will always bother me if they don't bring back "With great power...", intellectually I do love watching them squirm, right? So we had:
Raimi: "With great power comes great responsibility."
Then:
Webb: "Your father believed that if you could do something to help people, it was your duty to do those things."
And then:
MCU: "Because when you can do things I can, and you don't? And then the bad things happen? They happen because of you."
So I can only assume the next reboot will be something like: "Wherefore as a person or persons is possessed of some unique capabilities, and being so possessed has the agency with which to enact change, they should and must then comport themselves in a manner displaying all due responsibility of such a station."
Raimi: "With great power comes great responsibility."
Then:
Webb: "Your father believed that if you could do something to help people, it was your duty to do those things."
And then:
MCU: "Because when you can do things I can, and you don't? And then the bad things happen? They happen because of you."
So I can only assume the next reboot will be something like: "Wherefore as a person or persons is possessed of some unique capabilities, and being so possessed has the agency with which to enact change, they should and must then comport themselves in a manner displaying all due responsibility of such a station."
Retired "Hayao Miyazaki"
Member
Seen
0-24 hrs ago
I will say, though, that while on an emotional level it will always bother me if they don't bring back "With great power...", intellectually I do love watching them squirm, right? So we had:
Raimi: "With great power comes great responsibility."
Then:
Webb: "Your father believed that if you could do something to help people, it was your duty to do those things."
And then:
MCU: "Because when you can do things I can, and you don't? And then the bad things happen? They happen because of you."
So I can only assume the next reboot will be something like: "Wherefore as a person or persons is possessed of some unique capabilities, and being so possessed has the agency with which to enact change, they should and must then comport themselves in a manner displaying all due responsibility of such a station."
Nah. You used 'responsibility.' That won't do, you may confuse the audience.
GM
Master Bruce Winged Freak
Member
Seen
29 min ago
I honestly did not mind and don't find any of what's being brought up about Homecoming to be annoying. I liked the cast alot and thought that the individual roles that the kids at Peter's school played served a nice purpose of establishing a very different status quo that ultimately serves to distance the MCU version of Peter Parker into it's own thing. It reminded me alot of when they shifted dynamics around for the Ultimate comics, but in a less annoying way than having Mary Jane take on the Gwen role while Gwen takes on the Mary Jane role, or something (Damn you, Bendis! You had me up till that!). I like doing new things with old characters in the service of a story, provided the story is enjoyable, and I thought Homecoming very much was.
Stuff like making Betty Brant an intentionally bad news prompter for the school was funny to me, and I don't really see how going with the traditional "She's Jonah's secretary that Peter may or may not have the hots for" alternative really would've make the movie better beyond the fact that it'd have made Jonah a factor. Ned being essentially Ganke worked for me because Peter being a lonesome character who doesn't have any friends while dealing with these issues as Spider-Man was something even the comics were quick to throw out after that initial learning curve period with the character, and I understood the reason to change it from Ganke to Ned Leeds due to the possible future of Miles Morales popping up. Flash was an enjoyable douchebag, and I didn't need to see a dude bigger than Peter stuffing him into a locker for thankless scenes that provide no real character development yet again after the movies tried it twice. I can actually remember stuff that the Flash in this movie did beyond act gruff and brainless for one scene to help established that, oh, Peter Parker has superpowers.
Now, that being said, the one thing I do agree was bullshit and should've been rethought immediately is the Michelle character. Every aspect of her personality screams a coming-of-age Mary Jane Watson who uses her snarky personality to deflect from a troubled homelife, or in the case of Michelle, loneliness from being a self-imposed social outcast. I was actually really looking forward to a scene where they actually get to the Homecoming dance itself and "Michelle" appears all glammed up, reflecting MJ's change into the consummate party girl that she becomes in college. That... scene didn't happen, and instead she was just called MJ near the end as a sort of apologetic wink for chickening out on that.
It was a really dumb decision to me because Zendaya, I thought, would make a great Mary Jane to Holland's Peter. She basically had everything there except for the aforementioned glamming up and the red tint to her hair, both of which she could have still acquired in sequels if she'd just been allowed to be named Mary Jane. As it stands, I'll wait to see if Far From Home makes any headway in making up for that, but it's kind of going in on shaky ground due to that hesitation to just call her that. And I think it stems moreso from the culture of studios believing that if a character's appearance is spoiled, however major or minor, that it ruins the movie for the audience. I guarantee that in the early 2000's, Homecoming would have never minced words about her totally being Mary Jane Watson from the first press release onward.
That, or it's a dumb Sony thing. Which I can actually see, come to think of it. They probably want to make Mary Jane Watson the star of the next phase of their cinematic universe.
As Carnage.
Stuff like making Betty Brant an intentionally bad news prompter for the school was funny to me, and I don't really see how going with the traditional "She's Jonah's secretary that Peter may or may not have the hots for" alternative really would've make the movie better beyond the fact that it'd have made Jonah a factor. Ned being essentially Ganke worked for me because Peter being a lonesome character who doesn't have any friends while dealing with these issues as Spider-Man was something even the comics were quick to throw out after that initial learning curve period with the character, and I understood the reason to change it from Ganke to Ned Leeds due to the possible future of Miles Morales popping up. Flash was an enjoyable douchebag, and I didn't need to see a dude bigger than Peter stuffing him into a locker for thankless scenes that provide no real character development yet again after the movies tried it twice. I can actually remember stuff that the Flash in this movie did beyond act gruff and brainless for one scene to help established that, oh, Peter Parker has superpowers.
Now, that being said, the one thing I do agree was bullshit and should've been rethought immediately is the Michelle character. Every aspect of her personality screams a coming-of-age Mary Jane Watson who uses her snarky personality to deflect from a troubled homelife, or in the case of Michelle, loneliness from being a self-imposed social outcast. I was actually really looking forward to a scene where they actually get to the Homecoming dance itself and "Michelle" appears all glammed up, reflecting MJ's change into the consummate party girl that she becomes in college. That... scene didn't happen, and instead she was just called MJ near the end as a sort of apologetic wink for chickening out on that.
It was a really dumb decision to me because Zendaya, I thought, would make a great Mary Jane to Holland's Peter. She basically had everything there except for the aforementioned glamming up and the red tint to her hair, both of which she could have still acquired in sequels if she'd just been allowed to be named Mary Jane. As it stands, I'll wait to see if Far From Home makes any headway in making up for that, but it's kind of going in on shaky ground due to that hesitation to just call her that. And I think it stems moreso from the culture of studios believing that if a character's appearance is spoiled, however major or minor, that it ruins the movie for the audience. I guarantee that in the early 2000's, Homecoming would have never minced words about her totally being Mary Jane Watson from the first press release onward.
That, or it's a dumb Sony thing. Which I can actually see, come to think of it. They probably want to make Mary Jane Watson the star of the next phase of their cinematic universe.
As Carnage.
GM
Master Bruce Winged Freak
Member
Seen
29 min ago
And as far as the 'With Great Power...' mantra goes, I'm sure that it's coming. Infact, I wouldn't be surprised if Uncle Ben does appear at some point in the series via flashback and that some form of the origin is mentioned later on, now that they've gotten some distance from the Raimi films and Sony in general with their established version of Peter.
I can see why waiting for it again is annoying, but this is also a studio that has yet to have Cap yell 'Avengers Assemble!' after however many movies. And that's a line that I'm also pretty much convinced is being saved for Evans' final outing, whether that's Avengers 4 or something else.
I can see why waiting for it again is annoying, but this is also a studio that has yet to have Cap yell 'Avengers Assemble!' after however many movies. And that's a line that I'm also pretty much convinced is being saved for Evans' final outing, whether that's Avengers 4 or something else.
2x Like
I honestly did not mind and don't find any of what's being brought up about Homecoming to be annoying.
<snipped>
2x Laugh
mickilennial The Elder Fae
Member
Seen
0-24 hrs ago
I like Michelle Jones. Don't @ me.
1x Thank
Retired "Hayao Miyazaki"
Member
Seen
0-24 hrs ago
1x Thank
Eddie Brock
Member
Seen
6 mos ago
Here's what I'll say as my last words on the subject:
1.) Betty Brandt: Sure, it's not much of a character lost, and I fully admitted that we were splitting hairs, but say we do go back to the Bugle eventually. If you want or need a secretary/intern/cub reporter character that fits the Betty mold... what do you call her now? You went and blew a chance at a real reference on a joke one. Unless you're going to use Glory Grant, which... okay, well, then I'd be back on board. Disregard.
2.) Ned Leeds: See, we've heard the argument that you can't call him Ganke because what if Miles Morales comes along, but they already ripped the rest of Ganke's character out wholesale. Appearance, personality, relationship to Spider-Man. So if we ever do see live-action Miles, what do you do now? A) Have an identical character to Ned who's just called Ganke this time around? B) Have a completely unrelated character called Ganke because the Miles Morales bylaws clearly state that Miles' best friend must be named Ganke? It would not bother me in the slightest if Ganke got transplanted to the Peter timeline rather than the Miles one; what bothers me is doing it and fudging the name for no reason. (Also, now you can't use a "real" Ned Leeds later, as above.)
3.) Flash Thompson: Now, this is the controversial one because you either think the update makes sense or it doesn't. And I'm not really going to rehash the discussion we've already been having vis-a-vis that particular point. But what I will say in response to @Master Bruce's post is that his issue with jock-Flash seems to be that he's a flat character... is that really the character's fault, though, or is it unimaginative writers squandering the potential there? The fact that jock-Flash has such a big following certainly attests to the fact that in the right hands, he can be just as compelling as anyone else in the supporting cast. We just haven't seen it, and now that we have nerd-Flash we probably won't for a long, long time. (Hence the sore spot.)
1.) Betty Brandt: Sure, it's not much of a character lost, and I fully admitted that we were splitting hairs, but say we do go back to the Bugle eventually. If you want or need a secretary/intern/cub reporter character that fits the Betty mold... what do you call her now? You went and blew a chance at a real reference on a joke one. Unless you're going to use Glory Grant, which... okay, well, then I'd be back on board. Disregard.
2.) Ned Leeds: See, we've heard the argument that you can't call him Ganke because what if Miles Morales comes along, but they already ripped the rest of Ganke's character out wholesale. Appearance, personality, relationship to Spider-Man. So if we ever do see live-action Miles, what do you do now? A) Have an identical character to Ned who's just called Ganke this time around? B) Have a completely unrelated character called Ganke because the Miles Morales bylaws clearly state that Miles' best friend must be named Ganke? It would not bother me in the slightest if Ganke got transplanted to the Peter timeline rather than the Miles one; what bothers me is doing it and fudging the name for no reason. (Also, now you can't use a "real" Ned Leeds later, as above.)
3.) Flash Thompson: Now, this is the controversial one because you either think the update makes sense or it doesn't. And I'm not really going to rehash the discussion we've already been having vis-a-vis that particular point. But what I will say in response to @Master Bruce's post is that his issue with jock-Flash seems to be that he's a flat character... is that really the character's fault, though, or is it unimaginative writers squandering the potential there? The fact that jock-Flash has such a big following certainly attests to the fact that in the right hands, he can be just as compelling as anyone else in the supporting cast. We just haven't seen it, and now that we have nerd-Flash we probably won't for a long, long time. (Hence the sore spot.)
2x Like
I like Michelle Jones. Don't @ me.
Fifteen year old me would've been head over heels. I still think she's wonderful.
EDIT: BUT NOT IN A WEIRD WAY.
Edit 2: Never mind her actor's twenty one. Nothing to see here folks.
1x Laugh
GM
Master Bruce Winged Freak
Member
Seen
29 min ago
3.) Flash Thompson: Now, this is the controversial one because you either think the update makes sense or it doesn't. And I'm not really going to rehash the discussion we've already been having vis-a-vis that particular point. But what I will say in response to @Master Bruce's post is that his issue with jock-Flash seems to be that he's a flat character... is that really the character's fault, though, or is it unimaginative writers squandering the potential there? The fact that jock-Flash has such a big following certainly attests to the fact that in the right hands, he can be just as compelling as anyone else in the supporting cast. We just haven't seen it, and now that we have nerd-Flash we probably won't for a long, long time. (Hence the sore spot.)
Oh, don't get me wrong, I do like the jock version of Flash quite alot in the comics and the animated shows. My problem is that the movies just don't have a really big frame of time to establish his more likeable quirks, such as being a massive Spider-Man fanboy or the fact that underneath all of his douchebaggedness, he has a heart of gold and only needs to grow out of a phase that made Peter's life a living hell.
In a movie, I just can't see them tagging up on those qualities with the alotted time that Flash gets, despite it being probably an appropriate time to allot to that character, so they pretty much have to go with the type of scene I described above just to make end's meet with the character for the sake of having him in there. Nerd Flash by contrast, to me, was a neat way to utilize that time to establish something a little more for the times themselves and give his torment of Peter more of a wry edge, where he doesn't resent Peter for being his better so much as sees him as legitimate competition because he's just as smart but is seen as an asshole, unlike unreliable Peter Parker who still gets to have his seat on the Math Quiz after dumping it. That, I found, to be interesting.
But, you said your piece, I said mine. I don't want to take that away from anybody - everyone's got their Spider-Man, and I'll freely admit that despite thinking Homecoming is the best Spider-Man movie to date solely for nailing the main character as I see him (and I do stress as I see him, given that everyone sees him a different way), there's still alot of nostalgic residue left over from that first Raimi movie to keep me from ever saying that it's my favorite. The 2002 movie literally changed my life by introducing me to internet speculation and forums, and thus the RPGs themselves, while also helping to solidify my interest in superheroes other than just Batman. It's always gonna be king for that, just like the first Tim Burton Batman movie will probably be my favorite movie of all time until I die despite Batman Begins being objectively a better representation of the character.
2x Like
© 2007-2024