The Amazing Spider-Man Are they going to force the romance plot down our throats...again?

[Vid Electricz]

You're still not getting it, are you?

It's nothing to do with adaptation. I don't give a **** about the comics or comic book accuracy.

I don't care if MJ from Raimi's movies was a completely brand new character created for the movies. The character was poorly written and I didn't buy that Peter Parker was so enamoured with her. It's nothing to do with her appealing to me. It's that simple. It has nothing to do with it being comic book accurate or not. Hell, it has nothing to do with it being a comic book movie. Even if it was just some generic rom/com MJ would have been a poorly written character because there is nothing about her that is appealing.

You're so busy with your righteous indignation about "little fanboys" you're completely missing the point.

Comic book movie or not, accuracy to the source material or not... MJ was a poorly written character that apart from the first film had zero redeeming features and I couldn't buy that the lead character was so in love with her.

Basically, what you are doing is just taking shots at people who disagree with you. Who is the silly person now? People disagree with you, get the hell over it. Why are you so defensive about it? Seriously? Are you ****ing Sam Raimi or Avi Arad in disguise or something?

Not getting what? You keep repeating that MJ wasn't an "appealing" character as though it's fact, when it's really quite subjective. The character didn't appeal to you (you contradicted yourself in the bold up there). That's fine. Don't pretend like it's not your opinion.

Comic book accuracy etc... The source material should always be considered when evaluating an adaptation, but as well, a movie and a comic book are completely different animals and should be treated as such.

LOL! I love how everyone plays "teams" around here. You're either with Raimi or against him. as soon as anyone disagrees with someone else, they must LOVE Raimi. What a simplistic, black and white way to see things. I never once got defensive, but you sure as heck are! I just happen to find some of the ignorant remarks made by the obsessively juvenile (forever-stuck-in adolescence) fanboys to be endlessly disturbing/fascinating.

The only thing I find to be absurd are the "macho" fanboys decrying a female character, calling her a b*tch or **** (because she got with a few guys), who in the very next sentence will whine because Peter didn't get with enough women. That's literal minded, fanboy hypocrisy, plain and simple.

 

[Vid Electricz]

Some of you really know nothing about the characters. MJ didn't want to be tied down. She was a serial dater in the damn comics. Pete asks her to Marry him and she says no and leaves. Peter throws a ***** fit and MJ gets tired of that **** and leaves. MJ didn't know what she wanted and she certainly wasn't ready for a commitment. But oh noes she leaves JJ Jr. on the alter. What a ***** right?

MJ was ****ing known as a 'party girl'.

Finally, someone else with a brain!

I have to wonder if like, 99% of the guys (and they are guys) around here ever really pay attention to character motivation or progression in a movie, or if they just take everything at complete and literal face value.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

edit

 

[FreeRadical]

Finally, someone else with a brain!

I have to wonder if like, 99% of the guys (and they are guys) around here ever really pay attention to character motivation or progression in a movie, or if they just take everything at complete and literal face value.

Do you have to be sexist and insulting to everyone who doesn't agree with you? It's fine that you like Raimi's MJ, but to call everyone who doesn't an abnormal fanboy? Remember that you are posting on a site that discusses and analyse movie characters and their comic counterparts, and most of us will like how a character is portrayed in a film, some won't.

You don't have to be mean and insulting to get your point across.

 

[Panthro]

Some of you really know nothing about the characters. MJ didn't want to be tied down. She was a serial dater in the damn comics. Pete asks her to Marry him and she says no and leaves. Peter throws a ***** fit and MJ gets tired of that **** and leaves. MJ didn't know what she wanted and she certainly wasn't ready for a commitment. But oh noes she leaves JJ Jr. on the alter. What a ***** right?

MJ was ****ing known as a 'party girl'.

Fair enough.

Of course if we're all really honest with ourselves, we all know that nobody - or very few people - went to see these films for MJ (unless they were fans of Kirsten Dunst). The audiences - the fans & general movie goers - that made these films successful went to see Spidey, and if we're still honest with ourselves, nobody - or very few people - are going to see this film for Gwen (unless they're fans of Emma Stone). Yes, I'd like to see a believable relationship between Pete & Gwen as much as everyone else here, but at the end of the day the romance really isn't as big a make or break factor in a summer tent pole film's success as some believe.

Pardon my cynicism.

 

[kedrell]

What in the hell does Peter see in her? She is possibly the worst love interest ever put in a comic book movie.

Eh, I'd say Rachel Dawes is worse but MJ is a close second.

 

[FreeRadical]

Eh, I'd say Rachel Dawes is worse but MJ is a close second.

Lana Lang in Smallville *shudder*

 

[kedrell]

Lana Lang in Smallville *shudder*

Well I was just restricting it to movies. Besides, I never really watched Smallville.

 

[chaseter]

Party girl, not a ****.

Besides, I don't care about comic book accuracy. I couldn't buy the fact that Peter was just utterly infatuated with this woman.

Excluding the first movie, what actual reasons does Pete have for being head over heels in love with her?

Look up the word ****.

Some of you either have had no relationships what so ever or the people on the screen aren't your version of your perfect woman. Then again these are the same people that call Megan Fox a **** even though she has been with the same guy her entire adult life. If MJ was a **** in the Raimi verse then she was a dirty ****e in the comics Peter has always loved MJ but then again I guess if a girl dates another guy or backs out of a wedding because she is having second thoughts then she is automatically a ****.

Here is what MJ has done in the comics:

- Dated Harry and flirted with Peter
- Flirted with Peter when he was dating Gwen
- Completely abandoned Harry when he needed her most because she didn't want to deal with it
- Was called a 'party girl'
- Dated Flash while her and Peter were seeing each other to get back at Peter for always ditching her to be Spider-Man only to get back at Peter
- Turned down Peter's proposal because she wasn't the sort of girl that could, and I quote, "be happy with just one man".


Some of you people are so ridiculous. You bash the movies because they aren't comic accurate when you have no idea what happened in the comics. Or, you degrade a actress/character because she wasn't at home cooking dinner. 1940 called, they want their stereotype back.

 

[FreeRadical]

Well I was just restricting it to movies. Besides, I never really watched Smallville.

My bad, yeah I agree with Rachel Dawes. What did Bruce ever see in her, other than being his childhood friend?

 

[chaseter]

HAHA I really want to know what Morningstar's version of a **** is.

 

[WarriorDreamer]

Okay, well, I think I'll weigh in on my view on this.

While alot of people may not like Kirsten's Mary Jane and while she's really nothing like the comics, in looks or personality, I still think I kinda know what Raimi was doing.

I think he wanted to create Peter and Mary Jane as the boy next door/girl next door counterparts. I think MJ was created as an object of desire for Peter, most of all in the 1st two movies. As I said before, I think giving her boyfriends makes her seem that much more unattainable.

As people know in the comics MJ had an abusive past and childhood. You got the sense of that in the films but she had no facade, she was just written as a vulnerable girl and didn't pretend to be anything more than that, unlike the comics where she had a very fun and vivacious front.

I think that's where the problems came in for her character in the 3rd film. I think they wanted to make her a downtrodden young actress and we're supposed to feel sympathy for her. Now that Peter had gotten her, after having his life emotionally and physically tortured in Spider-Man 2, in Spider-Man 3 it was MJ's turn to be tortured, in every way possible.

So, you can kinda see where they (Raimi) was going with her.

I also think in Spider-Man 3 Peter should take some of the blame for the relationship. He got addicted to the feeling of being Spider-Man, in the sense that everyone loved him and he got too proud. I think he neglected Mary Jane and didn't take her seriously.

But I agree with the people who said she was selfish and a b**** in the 3rd movie. She should have fully understood what could and probably would come from being a superhero's girlfriend, yet she somehow made everything be about her. It makes it seem like she doesn't really love him if she fails to take on board what he has to go through everyday.


But yes, I FULLY agree that MJ needs to be written alot better for the reboot. She can still be a struggling vulnerable actress/model with a bad past but she should also be fun and vivacious. She should put a smile on Peter's face and bring him up (so to speak). As in lift his spirits and not bring him down like MJ did in SM3.

 

[Spider-Fan]

You're not going to see that until you see the film itself. But at least were not 100% sure he can't do romance, like with Raimi, Peter and MJ relationship was dreadfully painful to watch on film.

Agreed, but nothing shows me he will either. I think the people assuming it will be are counting their chickens before they hatch.

 

[©KAW]

Agreed, but nothing shows me he will either. I think the people assuming it will be are counting their chickens before they hatch.

Perhaps, but I think people are assuming because the relationship between the two leads in the director's only film (500 DOS) was handled much better. In other words, well crafted acting, character interactions and dialogue. And the two characters seem like real people, instead of two awkward zombies taking up space and spewing unrealistic sappy dialogue.

 

[Mary Jane Watson]

Okay.

3 things that I hate about Sam's movies.

1. MJ was just really very bad written character like Ocsorp said up here. Whole movies is all about that stupid....Heck I dont even know how to explain that.
2. There goes same with Peter/ little with Spidey too ( jokes)
3. I just need MORE and MORE actions, IMO

But SM 1/2 are still amazing movies tho.

Thats it.

So, I hate how MJ took soooo many space from all SM movies.
Heck, each movie is all about : Spider man l...ooo...vv...eee..ss... MJ.
Enough is enough.
MJ is just realllly bad bad written character.

 

[Mary Jane Watson]

Look up the word ****.
Some of you people are so ridiculous. You bash the movies because they aren't comic accurate when you have no idea what happened in the comics. Or, you degrade a actress/character because she wasn't at home cooking dinner. 1940 called, they want their stereotype back.

Okay, I think that their point is that: The people from the whole world watched all SM movies. Now they think that: Oh? Thats MJ?...Okay cool.
This is not COOL.
We just don't want to see that. So thats why they are still bashing on MJ in movies.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Eh, I'd say Rachel Dawes is worse but MJ is a close second.

No way, that one went to Harvey without explaining why, that thing still is stupid
But seriously, MJ is terrible in the movies, much much worse than Dawes

 

[The Morningstar]

Look up the word ****.

Some of you either have had no relationships what so ever or the people on the screen aren't your version of your perfect woman. Then again these are the same people that call Megan Fox a **** even though she has been with the same guy her entire adult life. If MJ was a **** in the Raimi verse then she was a dirty ****e in the comics Peter has always loved MJ but then again I guess if a girl dates another guy or backs out of a wedding because she is having second thoughts then she is automatically a ****.

Megan Fox? Who gives a **** about Megan Fox?

And yea maybe **** is too harsh a word. But she plays fast and loose. It's noting to do with "the perfect woman". It's to do with her not being a complete and utter *****. Seriously, are you going to answer my question? In SM2 and SM3, what does Pete actually see in this woman that would make him completely, almost religiously in love with her?

Here is what MJ has done in the comics:

- Dated Harry and flirted with Peter
- Flirted with Peter when he was dating Gwen
- Completely abandoned Harry when he needed her most because she didn't want to deal with it
- Was called a 'party girl'
- Dated Flash while her and Peter were seeing each other to get back at Peter for always ditching her to be Spider-Man only to get back at Peter
- Turned down Peter's proposal because she wasn't the sort of girl that could, and I quote, "be happy with just one man".


Some of you people are so ridiculous. You bash the movies because they aren't comic accurate when you have no idea what happened in the comics. Or, you degrade a actress/character because she wasn't at home cooking dinner. 1940 called, they want their stereotype back.

What? I've said on numerous occasions... I don't give a crap about the comics.

As a movie character, as the love interest in a movie, comic book movie or not, I just can't believe in Pete and MJs relationship. I cannot believe that this guy would be completely head over heels in love with her. Because, she's a ****ing *****. What, is Raimi trying to say that guys are idiots when it comes to falling in love or something? Because yea, Peter Parker is a idiot for wanting to be with MJ so desperately.

We're talking about a woman who is jealous of a ****ing superhero, at the end of the day.

 

[kedrell]

No way, that one went to Harvey without explaining why, that thing still is stupid
But seriously, MJ is terrible in the movies, much much worse than Dawes

I wasn't merely refering to the whole 'flirting with other men' thing as a sole reason she was worse IMO(MJ is INDEED worse in that regard). They're both bad but for different reasons. At least MJ in the films was never a preachy, self-righteous, nagging know-it-all who was so unlikeable that getting blown up ended up being a crowd pleasing moment. To me that's worse than what MJ was like. MJ at least early on in SM1 was somewhat likeable but then squandered it later on. Dawes was never likeable.

 

[Ajendo]

Look, regardless of MJ being comic book accurate or not is no longer the sole point here.

MJ as a character in Raimi's movies was horribly conceived and executed conveyed with such minimalist appeal that it's an annoying mystery as to why our hero gave a damn about her at all. What's worse is, Peter giving too much of a damn and MJ being used as the dominant catalyst to provoke spidey into action saturated all 3 movies to what imo can only be described as, colossally crappy effect.

 

[chaseter]

MJ being comic book accurate or not is no longer the sole point because the people who use that as a crutch have been proven wrong.

At the end of the day, it's what you personally thought of the character aka your opinion. The only problems are when people go overboard because they want to get their point so far across your face that they will come just shy of figuring out where you live to beat it into you. The general consensus was that she was fine in SM1 and SM2 and too whiny/needy in SM3. The end.

 

[Mary Jane Watson]

^Well said.

Also Kirsten Dunst was not the problem with SM3...it was a poor story.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

MJ being comic book accurate or not is no longer the sole point because the people who use that as a crutch have been proven wrong.

Best post so far today.

 

[chaseter]

MJ was the problem yes, not Kirsten.

 

[©KAW]

The horrible script and direction screwed the character up.