Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
It would be like making a black batman

Because there isn't a black batman

There is on the other hand, a half Black/Half Hispanic Spider-Man.

And this;

What I'm saying is that these movies are made for a wider audience

What? America and the world is too engrained into Peter Parker to ever accept anyone else as Spider-Man? I think Miles Morales setting a sales record or two says that's just not true.

Not for those who don't read comics. And have no inclination to follow them.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Not for those who don't read comics. And have no inclination to follow them.

If they don't read comics and have no inclination to follow them, why would they care? If they're so disinterested they don't even follow comics (and have no interest), I think they're disinterested enough to not care who is under the mask.

Believe to not, I bet the wider public do care who plays spider man in the movie.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I bet the wider public do care who plays spider man in the movie.

So your argument is they don't care about comic books, but they care that Spider-Man is white enough that they'll be outraged is we switch him out?

I think America still has some ghosts of racism around but you make my cynicism almost seem like optimism.

Im a realist, not a cynic

I agree with Hotsauce, actually. The WORLD knows that Peter Parker is Spiderman. A very small audience knows Miles Morales (and an even smaller one accepts him) as Spiderman. I think it would be a terrible decision. Not because he's black/hispanic; who really cares? It matters because lots of people will show up for a Spidey flick-until they see it's "Spiderman" as somebody they've never heard of before and going "okay, what the hell is this?" and skipping it. So...no. It would be a terrible decision. Maybe USM sells better than ASM. But the fact is that there is a MUCH larger audience than comic readers. Miles would be a huge mistake. You like him? Great. Most of the world has no clue who he is. But everyone knows Peter.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
I agree with Hotsauce, actually. The WORLD knows that Peter Parker is Spiderman. A very small audience knows Miles Morales (and an even smaller one accepts him) as Spiderman.

Actually, the world knows that Spiderman is a super-hero. A very small part of that audience know that his alter-ego is Peter Parker. And an even smaller part knows that Miles Morales is too.
But hey, are the new movies not supposed to introduce the change made into the comics to the movie audience?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
Of course, another recast starts to turn the role into what Batman became during the '90s.

Widly different situation there.

The situation doesn't really matter from an audience perspective. The role is becoming a bit of a revolving door.

Of course, Bruce Banner hit the "3 actors in 10 years" mark too. But then Banner has never been that great of a character...it's the green guy that audiences gravitate toward. And it doesn't appear that Ruffalo will be getting his own solo film and origin story either.

We've also had *5* Spider-Man movies in the last 13 years with other actors that have covered many of the biggest villains and storylines. I'm not sure what new ground there is to be broken other than the novelty of having him in the MCU. And they could still do that with Garfield (and even do a 'soft reboot' if they want), something Sony would undoubtedly be just fine with since they cast him in the first place.

I'm not sure that I see compelling reasons for another full reboot and recasting in this particular case other than some ego and control freak tendencies on Marvel's part. Hell, half of the audiences probably thought the last two films WERE MCU stories.

Getting Spidey somewhat back in the fold is a good move for them though (assuming we're talking about Parker-Spider), since they're going to need headliners if they really intend to eventually move forward with Bucky Cap, etc. I don't think it's wrong to say that they're rolling the dice a little in that regard, just so they can say that they have 'continuity' and a functioning 'cinematic universe' out to 2037 or whatever silly number Feige threw out a while back.

And everyone knew Sean Connery as Bond once. And Nick Fury as that guy from Baywatch (the dreamy one) and Jon Jones used to be white too.. There've been what, a half dozen Flashes by now (more?)? Watson is Lucy Liu. We just released an version of Annie with a mostly black cast (admittedly it's pretty mediocre). The last Starbuck was a woman.

I'm sorry, but you can't say "this character can never be someone else" when personas get replaced with new people all the time. Especially in long running franchises. Hell the next Human Torch to be on the big screen is black (and there is no black HT in the comics).

I think you give people too little credit.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
I agree with Hotsauce, actually. The WORLD knows that Peter Parker is Spiderman. A very small audience knows Miles Morales (and an even smaller one accepts him) as Spiderman.

Actually, the world knows that Spiderman is a super-hero. A very small part of that audience know that his alter-ego is Peter Parker. And an even smaller part knows that Miles Morales is too.
But hey, are the new movies not supposed to introduce the change made into the comics to the movie audience?

Really? Go out and poll 100 random people on the street. Give them 4 choices of Spider-Man's identity. Put Miles Morales and Peter Parker in there, along with, say James Howlett (most people know Wolverine as Logan) and Bucky Barnes. See how many people say PP vs any of the other 3. I bet you get 4 or 5 who say it's rigged because MM and PP are both Spidey, 70 who say PP, and the remaining 25 get it wrong.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Really? Go out and poll 100 random people on the street.

Which street? Which city? Which country? Which continent?
Reminder: one third of the world population is either Indian or Chinese.
Now, of course, what we are interested here is more people that are susceptible to go watch a Spiderman movie, not random people, but even then, I think you would be surprised.

timetowaste85 wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
I agree with Hotsauce, actually. The WORLD knows that Peter Parker is Spiderman. A very small audience knows Miles Morales (and an even smaller one accepts him) as Spiderman.

Actually, the world knows that Spiderman is a super-hero. A very small part of that audience know that his alter-ego is Peter Parker. And an even smaller part knows that Miles Morales is too.
But hey, are the new movies not supposed to introduce the change made into the comics to the movie audience?

Really? Go out and poll 100 random people on the street. Give them 4 choices of Spider-Man's identity. Put Miles Morales and Peter Parker in there, along with, say James Howlett (most people know Wolverine as Logan) and Bucky Barnes. See how many people say PP vs any of the other 3. I bet you get 4 or 5 who say it's rigged because MM and PP are both Spidey, 70 who say PP, and the remaining 25 get it wrong.

You're probably right!

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Really? Go out and poll 100 random people on the street.

Which street? Which city? Which country? Which continent?
Reminder: one third of the world population is either Indian or Chinese.
Now, of course, what we are interested here is more people that are susceptible to go watch a Spiderman movie, not random people, but even then, I think you would be surprised.

You're probably...er...I don't know - not right?

 Goliath wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
Is anyone else crossing their fingers for the modern Venom to get a movie? Thompson is a far better character then Brock, isn't a sociopath, and is highly sympathetic. Probably would get along swell with MCU Cap as well.

Agent Venom would be a brilliant film character, but I worry that it'd require too much backstory to work properly. Most people don't know who Venom is, but if they do it's generally as the giant hulking monster of Mac Gargan, rather than the heroic character of Agent Venom.

It shouldn't take too much backstory. If I was in charge, I'd just have the opening shot pan over a hospital room filled with pictures from Thompson's childhood and friendship with Parker while audio plays of birthday parties together, chatter together in high school, then switching to bootcamp and screams in a firefight as it starts to pan over a new set of pictures featuring photos from Iraq or Afghanistan before finally stopping at a pair of bandaged stumps where there should be legs. After a pause it then continues, then finding pictures of Peter visiting Flash in the Hospital and finally pictures of Spider-Man. Then some shots of a depressed Flash mulling through his daily cycle of physical therapy and moving around in his wheelchair. Then on the second day, US Fed goons are standing in front of his door when he opens it.

 Alpharius wrote:
You're probably...er...I don't know - not right?

Do you mean wrong?

Nuthin' gets past you Hybrid. Mind like a steel trap.

After reading... er, skimming, the article I had an idea. An epiphany, more like.

Marvel can put Spider Man in their ensemble movies, but Sony gets to keep him for solo projects, right? So Marvel doesn't get to do a solo Spider Man flick, right?

Okay.... so... what if, Marvel does a J. Jonah Jameson movie (with him as the point-of-view character), but has Spider Man in it, fighting the guys from his rogues gallery that haven't been in movies yet (Scorpion? Mysterio? etc). That would let Marvel make a Spider Man movie, without making a Spider Man movie. Also, if they got J.K. Simmons to play J. Jonah, they could have all of our money.

J. Jonah would make great One-shot material if they go back to doing those!

I think the idea is that all future Spiderman films will be Sony-funded, Sony-Marvel produced. In other words, Sony still stump up the cash, but Marvel keep some degree of creative control to tie them into the MCU.

I would love to see Mysterio in a future Spiderman film. While he can be a little camp in the comics, play him along the lines of Heath Ledger's Joker (or even Mar Hamill's from Arkham/animated Batman) and it would be awesome.

squidhills wrote:
After reading... er, skimming, the article I had an idea. An epiphany, more like.

Marvel can put Spider Man in their ensemble movies, but Sony gets to keep him for solo projects, right? So Marvel doesn't get to do a solo Spider Man flick, right?

Okay.... so... what if, Marvel does a J. Jonah Jameson movie (with him as the point-of-view character), but has Spider Man in it, fighting the guys from his rogues gallery that haven't been in movies yet (Scorpion? Mysterio? etc). That would let Marvel make a Spider Man movie, without making a Spider Man movie. Also, if they got J.K. Simmons to play J. Jonah, they could have all of our money.

I don't know if it would work, but that would be a fascinating effort to watch. Imagine a superhero movie where we don't see behind the curtain. Perhaps our viewpoint is in possession of the Macguffin, or simply unwittingly related to the costumed crusader's alter ego. Either way, they struggle to live their normal life as wildly improbable disasters occur around them- perpetually saved by some masked vigilante. They come to feel cursed, then creeped out by this crazy stalker, and finally develop stockholm's for the weirdly devoted freak. I have no idea how you'd end it, or keep the audience interested. Man, if I had a script I'll bet you could get that idea funded.

I wouldn't do it with Jonnah Jameson (personally) but rather a random original background character. You know. A day in the life of one of those extras who just shows up and walks by the camera while all the important stuff is happening? The potential for easter eggs is limitless

The Batman Assault on Arkham DC animated film played with this. Its basically a Suicide Squad vs the Joker film with Deadshot as the main character, then oh and the Batman turns up a bit in it.

Mysterio is one of my all time favorite Spidey villains - I'd love to see him on the big screen, done right, of course!

But he's a dude wearing a fishbowl using parlour tricks to get at people. He's not MCU material.

On the inverse, if race isnt important, why the need to change it?

Miles should be introduced on his own terms, not a substitute in place of a Peter Parker story.

Diversity for diversity's sake isnt diversity its more like shoehorning.

But I digress

If they get JK Simmons back I'm sold, but if the rumors are true and they want highschooler peter, not sure if the Bugle would be relevant

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
On the inverse, if race isnt important, why the need to change it?

Miles should be introduced on his own terms, not a substitute in place of a Peter Parker story.

I agree. Miles is enough of a fully fleshed out character that he doesn't need to be someone's replacement. He can stand on his own.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Diversity for diversity's sake isnt diversity its more like shoehorning.

The word you're looking for is 'tokenism'.

I find that kind of odd, cause replacing Peter Parker is a significant part of Miles' own 'with great power comes great responsibility' tragedy. I liked the way they handled the events leading to him becoming Spider-Man, namely getting his powers when Peter was still alive and active, and only taking the mantle of Spider-Man himself because he felt guilty for having never done something before and feeling Peter might have lived had he acted when he first got them.

Though, in that sense rebooting the Spider-Man films with Miles (rather than bringing him in later in the series) is probably a bad idea, cause then that aspect of the character gets either lost or watered down.

They could easily skip an origin movie and handle that with flashbacks. Even show parts of the current movies, then someone in the Spiderman suit being killed, hinting that Garfields Spiderman was who he replaced. That would tie the current movies into the MCU without needing a reboot but still letting them recast the character for Miles.

There's ways they can do it. I'm not thrilled with the idea of yet another origin for a Peter Parker Spiderman so soon after getting two.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
But he's a dude wearing a fishbowl using parlour tricks to get at people. He's not MCU material.

And the Joker is a guy in a purple suit and makeup who uses parlour tricks to get at people...

And in The Dark Knight Heath Ledger gave a performance of a man in the void between genius and insanity, who just wants to watch the world burn, and it still knocks Hiddleston's Loki into a very distant second place in the 'villain' stakes. Mysterio played along those lines, insane but in control and always one step ahead would work perfectly.

 Paradigm wrote:
And the Joker is a guy in a purple suit and makeup who uses parlour tricks to get at people...

'Cept he's not fighting a super-human who can lift cars above his head. Batman is still human.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
'Cept he's not fighting a super-human who can lift cars above his head.

Yeah, you kind of need superpowers to be a threat to a superhero with tons of totally insane superpowers. For instance, to pose a threat to Superman, you will need at least a Lex Luthor-like amount of superpowers!