|
Post by Lazy peon on Feb 11, 2015 17:16:58 GMT -5
ANOTHER Spiderman reboot? It better not be another f***ing origin story
|
|
Talent Name
Ozymandius
Got fined anyway. Possibly a Moose
James Franco is the white Donald Glover
Posts: 63,484
|
Post by Talent Name on Feb 11, 2015 18:37:15 GMT -5
Would you think less of me if I asked for an explanation? See the movie Perks of Being a Wallflower. That is such a dark dark dark joke
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2015 18:38:52 GMT -5
JK Simmons, Marvel. NOW. ANOTHER Spiderman reboot? It better not be another f***ing origin story I guarantee the joke's been made already, but I understand AVENGERS 3 or 4 is actually gonna be the Avengers being told the story of Spider-Man's origin.
|
|
|
Post by BlackoutCreature on Feb 11, 2015 18:46:37 GMT -5
These JK Simmons fanatics are starting to get annoying. If I was Marvel I would cast Laurence Fishburne as J. Jonah Jameson just to mess with them.
|
|
|
Post by wildojinx on Feb 11, 2015 18:49:31 GMT -5
I want to see Stan Lee as JJJ. It would be great to see Stan constantly bashing a character he helped create.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Feb 11, 2015 19:25:10 GMT -5
In all honesty, I feel bad for Andrew Garfield with all of this news and him not being involved is disappointing to me. It wasn't his fault that the second film underperformed, nor was it his fault that the material wasn't what it needed to be. If the material was stronger and more faithful, he would've been an excellent Peter and he was already a perfect Spider-Man. Obviously all great things come to an end at some point. Just wish they kept him and brought his Spider-Man into the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I can agree with that Garfield was great. It's not his fault the movies underperformed--though to be honest, I still like Amazing 2 warts and all.
|
|
|
Post by Some Guy on Feb 11, 2015 19:46:20 GMT -5
I want to see Stan Lee as JJJ. It would be great to see Stan constantly bashing a character he helped create. I don't see how a 92 year old can handle a part like that.
|
|
|
Post by Famous Rocking Chimes on Feb 11, 2015 19:48:10 GMT -5
I want to see Stan Lee as JJJ. It would be great to see Stan constantly bashing a character he helped create. I don't see how a 92 year old can handle a part like that. I posted earlier that he should play Uncle Ben in the opening credits ala Incredible Hulk.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Feb 11, 2015 20:00:50 GMT -5
Count me in as the JK chorus. He's the most perfect page-screen translation there's ever been.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,877
|
Post by Mozenrath on Feb 11, 2015 20:05:44 GMT -5
I really like JK Simmons, though the Lawrence Fishburne suggestion actually isn't too shabby, either.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Feb 11, 2015 20:14:09 GMT -5
Him as Perry White was so inconsequential that I don't care to see him as JJJ.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2015 21:28:29 GMT -5
Nah, but for real though... This whole desperate clinging to a Peter Parker/Spider-Man movie really strikes me as a farce and it seems like they're just leaving money on the table.
Which audience are they really making these movies for...?
Comic book movies are money juggernauts now so the majority of the people you're trying to court to see these movies are people who have actually never picked up a comic book in their lives. Even if they have, it strains credulity for me to believe they have any type of emotional connection to Peter Parker being The One "True" Spider-Man like what went on in this topic.
Hell, the people who don't have that type of emotional attachment to Peter Parker specifically are more numerous than the people who do, so I don't get why this is yet another Parker movie.
So really, I just have to ask a serious question: "Why can't they use Miles for a reboot?"
I mean, I "get" why, but I think overall it's Marvel just being ridiculously myopic, which is as generously as I'm going to put it. ...and I know I'm going to have to ask a similar question whenever DC decides to give Green Lantern another shot and not use Baz, Stewart or Cruz...
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Feb 11, 2015 22:08:00 GMT -5
My preference for Peter aside, I think to the vast majority you're talking about, they would see Pete as the One True, regardless of whether they've picked up a comic in their lives.
Five decades of cartoons, movies, video games etc have pretty well cemented that. Perhaps not to an an emotional level, but definitely to the level that seem odd to your average movie goer.
I'm not saying that's good or bad one way or the other, but it's definitely way beyond comics fans that would consider Peter the 'real' Spider-man.
|
|
|
Post by BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps on Feb 11, 2015 22:17:51 GMT -5
I'd be more than happy with them just saying "screw it" and putting Morales in the MCU canon alongside Peter.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Feb 11, 2015 22:50:43 GMT -5
Nah, but for real though... This whole desperate clinging to a Peter Parker/Spider-Man movie really strikes me as a farce and it seems like they're just leaving money on the table. Which audience are they really making these movies for...? Comic book movies are money juggernauts now so the majority of the people you're trying to court to see these movies are people who have actually never picked up a comic book in their lives. Even if they have, it strains credulity for me to believe they have any type of emotional connection to Peter Parker being The One "True" Spider-Man like what went on in this topic. Hell, the people who don't have that type of emotional attachment to Peter Parker specifically are more numerous than the people who do, so I don't get why this is yet another Parker movie. That argument sort of works if the character isn't that well-known amongst the mainstream audience, or long-forgotten. Spider-Man has been mainstream since the '60s, has had five films since 2002 with a total worldwide gross of $3.9 billion, and is arguably the third most well-known superhero after Superman and Batman. Even my 80 year-old grandfather, who has the cultural awareness of the Amazonian tribe that made first contact with society last summer, knows who Peter Parker is. Debuting a new character in the role just doesn't make any sense, and frankly would smack of "We're just doing it to shut up the ethnic diversity critics". In all honesty, since we've already seen Peter's origin story twice on screen since the turn of the century it would be creatively better to use Miles, but still far from satisfactory, as I've already explained in my post about "recasting" superhero personas. And with that I think you have a stronger case, since you have the Green Lantern Corps rather than a single character.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2015 23:05:47 GMT -5
My preference for Peter aside, I think to the vast majority you're talking about, they would see Pete as the One True, regardless of whether they've picked up a comic in their lives. Five decades of cartoons, movies, video games etc have pretty well cemented that. Perhaps not to an an emotional level, but definitely to the level that seem odd to your average movie goer. I'm not saying that's good or bad one way or the other, but it's definitely way beyond comics fans that would consider Peter the 'real' Spider-man. Even if that is the case (I'm not convinced) would they see Peter as the one Spider-Man because of the massive amounts of emotional attachment to Parker (like some are suggesting) or would they see it that way only because you've had five decades of cartoons, movies and video games with him being the only Spider-Man usually featured? Trust me, a lot of kids aren't going to find it odd looking at a black kid being a superhero in the movies for once. Maybe odd in the sense that...when's the last time we saw it? So yeah, a certain part of comic fandom does have an attachment to Parker but...nah. Not even the Parker lovers would boycott a Miles Morales/Spider-Man movie and even if they did it wouldn't make a dent in its box office just because that audience would be dwarfed by the amount of people who just don't care like that about Parker being in the Blue and Red as opposed to what it even means for Miles to be in the Red and Black. That's also why I don't jive with people talking about only using characters that have been around for some arbitrary amount of time: for a long time you only really had white characters being the center of the narrative with it still being the case in a lot of places. Peter got a hell of a head start to become "iconic." Peter wasn't always "iconic" nor is he in the way a lot of Marvel brass think so. Again, it took Marvel constantly shoving him to the forefront whether you even liked the character or not. So hey, Miles gets a movie and you know? **** it. Give him the focus as the Spider-Man of the MCU, meaning Miles Morales/Spider-Man franchise. Go whole hog.
|
|
riseofsetian1981
King Koopa
"I met him fifteen years ago. I was told there was nothing left."
Posts: 10,323
|
Post by riseofsetian1981 on Feb 12, 2015 1:25:02 GMT -5
Slightly off-topic here regarding the news here. But I couldn't help but notice the discussion regarding Miles Morales. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Marvel see's how well Black Panther does before introducing an African-American superhero.
Me personally I grew up with Peter Parker as Spider-Man. From comics, cartoons, video games, films, fan fiction, and the television show I used to watch on VHS has more or less branded into my mind that Peter Parker will always be Spider-Man to me, as a fan, that cannot change for me as it's not something I would care for as a whole.
But depending on how Black Panther does then it wouldn't surprise me to see a character like Luke Cage make an appearance and maybe even Miles Morales as well.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Feb 12, 2015 1:38:12 GMT -5
But depending on how Black Panther does then it wouldn't surprise me to see a character like Luke Cage make an appearance and maybe even Miles Morales as well. We're getting Luke Cage already. www.imdb.com/title/tt3322314/
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2015 3:29:57 GMT -5
That argument sort of works if the character isn't that well-known amongst the mainstream audience, or long-forgotten. Spider-Man has been mainstream since the '60s, has had five films since 2002 with a total worldwide gross of $3.9 billion, and is arguably the third most well-known superhero after Superman and Batman. Even my 80 year-old grandfather, who has the cultural awareness of the Amazonian tribe that made first contact with society last summer, knows who Peter Parker is. Debuting a new character in the role just doesn't make any sense, and frankly would smack of "We're just doing it to shut up the ethnic diversity critics". In all honesty, since we've already seen Peter's origin story twice on screen since the turn of the century it would be creatively better to use Miles, but still far from satisfactory, as I've already explained in my post about "recasting" superhero personas. And with that I think you have a stronger case, since you have the Green Lantern Corps rather than a single character. You know, that's all well and good... But at the end of the day, I support a Miles Morales/Spider-Man for the same reason I'll support a Kamala Khan movie and a Robbie Reyes movie, and a Monica Rambeau movie, and a Simon Baz movie: White people aren't the only people deserving enough to see themselves portrayed front and center as superheroes. Literally that's all I've got to say as to why a Miles movie among others should always be a thing and not have to rely on the success of "Black superhero #2" in order to even get greenlit. Shit like this should just be done because black people exist. People not seeing themselves as anything worthwhile or important is proven to affect self-esteem. This isn't old news. And again, you can't prop up an argument appealing to the "popularity" of heroes and the order these movies are coming out especially when we're getting a GODDAMNED ANT-MAN MOVIE. Despite what we may hear around in the comic fandom bubble, nobody outside of that gives a shit about Ant-Man. I'd be hard pressed to find many within the bubble who do and yet...
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Feb 12, 2015 5:41:41 GMT -5
White people aren't the only people deserving enough to see themselves portrayed front and center as superheroes. Literally that's all I've got to say as to why a Miles movie among others should always be a thing and not have to rely on the success of "Black superhero #2" in order to even get greenlit. Shit like this should just be done because black people exist. Again, I agree with you. I just think it's lazy writing to stuff a black guy in the Spider-Man costume when they could have taken the exact same character and given him his own unique powers. By most accounts Miles is a well-written character, so why have him leech off the identity of one of Marvel's all-time top characters? 1) It's already been pointed out in this thread that Marvel pretty much have been ordering these movies by the popularity of the characters due to the fact that they didn't have the rights to their #1 and #2 franchises (Spider-Man and X-Men). After them they had Hulk, which was a cinematically damaged property, and B-list characters like Iron Man and Thor. Now they're moving down the list to the C and D-list characters. 2) My argument was that if you have 50 years of mainstream media driving home the point that Marvel's #1 superhero's alter-ego is a specific person, you can't really expect them to write him out of their cinematic universe before the first chance they have to use him, or - even more asininely - kill him off ten minutes into the first appearance do you?
|
|