Jamie Foxx to (supposedly) play Electro in Spider-Man 2

[Picard Sisko]

The only time I get annoyed is when their is a recast in a sequel (Rachel from The Dark Knight, or Rhody from Iron man 2).

[Jick09]

So, is there NO way that Foxx will be closer to Ultimate Electro than the classic Electro? The one that looks like this?


He doesn't seem definetely white, to me. It's ambiguous enough for Foxx to look like him.

[Colossal Spoons]

They might even make a brand new costume for him. One that fits better with the tone of the new franchise. Heck, he might not ever get a proper "costume" and stay in his electrician gear.

[Picard Sisko]

Originally Posted by Jick09

So, is there NO way that Foxx will be closer to Ultimate Electro than the classic Electro? The one that looks like this?


He doesn't seem definetely white, to me. It's ambiguous enough for Foxx to look like him.

Earlier Ultimate Electro designs looked much different.

[Jick09]

Does he have a lot of hair, is wearing a green outfit and have no lightning motifs in his suit on that picture you posted?
If not, then it's not much different.

[CEREBRAL....]

Originally Posted by Colossal Spoons

I've already said why it matters to me. I'm not trying to get anybody to boycott the franchise or anything. As tired as you are of fans belly aching, I'm tired of the race-changing. I'm still going to see the movie and will probably love it like I did the first.

I just don't see how hard it is to find somebody who looks the part and can act, there are 6 billion people in the world. I feel the same way about recycling actors for comic book roles like Chris Evans and Ryan Reynolds.

well i guess you're just one fed up dude, because hollywood (as i stated) has been "race changing" for years....it's a fictitious character, in a fictitious world....a lot of these characters can be any race... especially if they are wearing a mask! As Nolan wanted to approach the dark knight raises...."batman as a symbol"...these comic book characters are symbols of our imagination, they are for every race to envision their selve being...



ps: And i get certain characters have to bear some characteristic of their comic book counter parts, it's what makes them..

and this is coming from someone who seen his childhood favorites get dismantle; TFers and G.I.Joe....

[NewYorkSpider]

Originally Posted by Picard Sisko

The only time I get annoyed is when their is a recast in a sequel (Rachel from The Dark Knight, or Rhody from Iron man 2).

The recast of Rachel didn't bother me since I'm not a big fan of Katie Holmes. Rhody from Iron Man did.

[Picard Sisko]

I'm not a fan of Katie Holmes either, but I actually preferred her as Rachel over Maggie in TDK. Although, I was never a fan of Rachel to begin with, but I do understand that WB forced Nolan to put her character in Batman Begins.

Recasting someone ruins the illusion that the movie is connected to the other films in the franchise.

[pr0xyt0xin]

I agree Picard, but most often its better they recast than reboot. Rachel Dawes and Rhodes definitely weren't reboot worthy. Neither was Fandral in T:TDW.

changing Peter Parker is reboot worthy. i'd even say changing Bruce Banner is reboot worthy, but in the MCU it was a special circumstance so i let it slide (even though i preferred Ed Norton).

I hope that one day, when RDJ has had enough and hiss story has been told with a successful and respectful arc, that they do recast Tony Stark. But when the time comes I hope they give us a little flashback/refresher action of Tony in the cave with the new actor. And that will be enough for me.

[pr0xyt0xin]

Originally Posted by Colossal Spoons

I've already said why it matters to me. I'm not trying to get anybody to boycott the franchise or anything. As tired as you are of fans belly aching, I'm tired of the race-changing. I'm still going to see the movie and will probably love it like I did the first.

I just don't see how hard it is to find somebody who looks the part and can act, there are 6 billion people in the world. I feel the same way about recycling actors for comic book roles like Chris Evans and Ryan Reynolds.

I'm late to this party, but I read most of this convo and listen buddy, I used to have the same problem you do with this. Michael Clarke Duncan as Kingpin bugged the crap out of me. I also had the same issue with dark haired Matt Murdock, and tall Wolverine. But almost ten years later (and no shortage in the variety of these inconsistencies) I realize a few things.

1. Most of these characters were invented for comics written in the 50s 60s and 70s. Race was an issue. White men were the stars. They were the heroes and the villains for whatever reason. Either there was no market for black/female/gay characters in comic books or it just came more natural to Stan Lee, Ditko and the rest.
2. They have all been reimagined and spun-off in almost every fashion. Theres Spider-Woman, Spider-Boy, Spider-Girl, Miles Morales, Miguel O’Hara, Noir, 1602, Powerless, and thats just one hero's likeness. Theres a black Nick Fury, a bearded Thor, a British Psylocke and a gay Green Lantern. And who doesn't love Terry McGinnis?
3. There are perfect actors for roles, and amazing actors for roles. Dane Dehaan is the perfect actor for Harry Osborn. Jamie Foxx is an amazing actor for Max Dillon. Ray, The Kingdom, Collateral, The Soloist, all amazing films. but now I want to see him as a villain. A supervillain no less. And, being that there are no viable black Spidey villains (unless you count the albino Tombstone) Electro will have to do. At least Electro's race has little to nothing to do with his character (i.e. Shocker with his southern twang)

So yes, because of some of the above reasons, I'm okay with black Heimdall, and Algrim the Strong. I'm okay with American accented Black Widow, Old English speaking Asgardians, and fluent English speaking Nazi Germans. I'm okay with Jarvis as a robot, Detective Flass as a fat man, and The Mandarin's race being 100% ambiguous (assuming).

In the end its a matter of how enjoyable the film is, what they do with the script, and how well the actors own their roles. At this point I am far more concerned about Woodley as MJ than Foxx as Electro.

[Picard Sisko]

Originally Posted by pr0xyt0xin

I agree Picard, but most often its better they recast than reboot. Rachel Dawes and Rhodes definitely weren't reboot worthy. Neither was Fandral in T:TDW.

changing Peter Parker is reboot worthy. i'd even say changing Bruce Banner is reboot worthy, but in the MCU it was a special circumstance so i let it slide (even though i preferred Ed Norton).

I hope that one day, when RDJ has had enough and hiss story has been told with a successful and respectful arc, that they do recast Tony Stark. But when the time comes I hope they give us a little flashback/refresher action of Tony in the cave with the new actor. And that will be enough for me.

I thought I was the only one!

[pr0xyt0xin]

But I'll be the first to admit Foxx wouldve also been great for the role of Robbie Robertson.

[pr0xyt0xin]

Originally Posted by Picard Sisko

I thought I was the only one!

Ed Norton is twice as good an actor and (despite what anyone may say) a more visually accurate Bruce Banner. Even though I just got done with my rant about a black Max Dillon lol.

I think Ed Norton did just about everything better on screen. Too bad he didn't play nice off screen. Oh well. Ruffalo was good too.

[Picard Sisko]

If only he was in the Avengers... I would have loved to have seen what he would do with the character.

[Jick09]

Originally Posted by NewYorkSpider

The recast of Rachel didn't bother me since I'm not a big fan of Katie Holmes. Rhody from Iron Man did.

Agreed.
I felt that the chemistry between Rhodes and Stark was broken in the second movie. Maybe because they didn't have as much interaction as they should, but in the first movie it was just so much more...right.

[NewYorkSpider]

Originally Posted by Picard Sisko

I'm not a fan of Katie Holmes either, but I actually preferred her as Rachel over Maggie in TDK. Although, I was never a fan of Rachel to begin with, but I do understand that WB forced Nolan to put her character in Batman Begins.

Recasting someone ruins the illusion that the movie is connected to the other films in the franchise.

I'm the complete opposite on this. I preferred Maggie over Katie.

Originally Posted by Jick09

Agreed.
I felt that the chemistry between Rhodes and Stark was broken in the second movie. Maybe because they didn't have as much interaction as they should, but in the first movie it was just so much more...right.

I like Don Cheadle, but I was upset when they replaced Terrence Howard

[zeptron]

Originally Posted by CEREBRAL....

this!


So tired of comic book fans belly aching cause hollywood changed the race of a character...stop! If the actor or actress does a superb job in the role, then why should it matter.

Some comic book fans seems to have a sense of entitlement with these characters and movies....geez

Changing the race of minor characters is fine, but I think if you’re casting main characters that are iconic like Superman, Batman, or Spider-man(Peter Parker) then the character's race shouldn't be changed. Regardless if their race never played a role. I mean I've seen people get up in arms about the creators of Spectacular Spider-man making Liz Allan hispanic or that Laurence Fishbourne will be Perry White in Man Of Steel. These characters are minor and aren't that important. The only ones that care so much about a minor character's race being changed are uptight comic nerds.

I mean while Electro isn't exactly minor, he's not A-list. Norman Osborn and Doc Ock are more iconic and important in the Spider-man mythos. I mean if Shocker appeared in a movie and they made him black, I wouldn't care. I don't think his real identity really meant anything anywhere else. What do we know about Herman Schultz aside from that he robbed banks? His real name was never said in the 90s Spider-man cartoon. And in Spectacular Spider-man they made Montana of the Enforcers Shocker because like the producer said "Who is Herman Schultz? What's so iconic about him? He's not Otto Octavius. And he sure as hell aint Norman Osborn."

[CEREBRAL....]

Originally Posted by zeptron

Changing the race of minor characters is fine, but I think if you’re casting main characters that are iconic like Superman, Batman, or Spider-man(Peter Parker) then the character's race shouldn't be changed. Regardless if their race never played a role. I mean I've seen people get up in arms about the creators of Spectacular Spider-man making Liz Allan hispanic or that Laurence Fishbourne will be Perry White in Man Of Steel. These characters are minor and aren't that important. The only ones that care so much about a minor character's race being changed are uptight comic nerds.

I mean while Electro isn't exactly minor, he's not A-list. Norman Osborn and Doc Ock are more iconic and important in the Spider-man mythos. I mean if Shocker appeared in a movie and they made him black, I wouldn't care. I don't think his real identity really meant anything anywhere else. What do we know about Herman Schultz aside from that he robbed banks? His real name was never said in the 90s Spider-man cartoon. And in Spectacular Spider-man they made Montana of the Enforcers Shocker because like the producer said "Who is Herman Schultz? What's so iconic about him? He's not Otto Octavius. And he sure as hell aint Norman Osborn."

i'm gonna take from a follow poster because it was put well, and like i said before some characters i understand they would have to stay the same race.. even though Peter Parker could be black because his arc story is not that of any particular race...

but to quote the poster on this matter as a whole..

Originally Posted by pr0xyt0xin

1. Most of these characters were invented for comics written in the 50s 60s and 70s. Race was an issue. White men were the stars. They were the heroes and the villains for whatever reason. Either there was no market for black/female/gay characters in comic books or it just came more natural to Stan Lee, Ditko and the rest.
2. They have all been reimagined and spun-off in almost every fashion. Theres Spider-Woman, Spider-Boy, Spider-Girl, Miles Morales, Miguel O’Hara, Noir, 1602, Powerless, and thats just one hero's likeness. Theres a black Nick Fury, a bearded Thor, a British Psylocke and a gay Green Lantern. And who doesn't love Terry McGinnis?
3. There are perfect actors for roles, and amazing actors for roles. Dane Dehaan is the perfect actor for Harry Osborn. Jamie Foxx is an amazing actor for Max Dillon. Ray, The Kingdom, Collateral, The Soloist, all amazing films. but now I want to see him as a villain. A supervillain no less. And, being that there are no viable black Spidey villains (unless you count the albino Tombstone) Electro will have to do. At least Electro's race has little to nothing to do with his character (i.e. Shocker with his southern twang)

So yes, because of some of the above reasons, I'm okay with black Heimdall, and Algrim the Strong. I'm okay with American accented Black Widow, Old English speaking Asgardians, and fluent English speaking Nazi Germans. I'm okay with Jarvis as a robot, Detective Flass as a fat man, and The Mandarin's race being 100% ambiguous (assuming).

In the end its a matter of how enjoyable the film is, what they do with the script, and how well the actors own their roles. At this point I am far more concerned about Woodley as MJ than Foxx as Electro.

well said

[pr0xyt0xin]

Young Justin Hammer is another one people could get uppity about. To be quite honest. If people only enjoyed superhero flicks for their comic book accuracy, they wouldn't enjoy a single one. Except maybe Sin City?

because in that vein, even the MCU, TDK trilogy and every Spider-Man movie has been a cluster****. But still, theyve been been some of my all time favorites.

[Jick09]

Originally Posted by NewYorkSpider

I like Don Cheadle, but I was upset when they replaced Terrence Howard

I like Don too. Just preferred Terrence in the role.

[Picard Sisko]

I'm still excited to see Foxx as Electro. I demand to see some concept art!

[Colossal Spoons]

Well this is Electro from the March 2013 issue of Avenging Spider-Man:



It looks less like the "classic" Electro and much like something Jamie could be made to look like.

[Picard Sisko]

Originally Posted by Colossal Spoons

Well this is Electro from the March 2013 issue of Avenging Spider-Man:



It looks less like the "classic" Electro and much like something Jamie could be made to look like.

Holy ****... that's amazing!

[Colossal Spoons]

Yeah, that cover is awesome. Can't wait to see Electro's face when he tries to electrocute Thor

[Oscorp]

Spidey looks amazing there, but Electro? Looks very uninteresting in that pic to me. I don't want him to look like Dr. Manhattan.