Half baked idea... Peter Parker is the MCU's first mutant

Indominus

Civilian
Joined
Oct 13, 2019
Messages
5
Reaction score
2
Points
3
Got to thinking about this the other night... We know from an outside view point why Spider-Man's MCU origins have yet to be explained.. Why explain what we already know?.....
That is unless we were wrong all along. What if, in naive teenage thinking peter was bitten by a spider he thought was radioactive but his superhuman reflexes, enhanced strength and wall crawling abilities were naturally dormant all along?

It just might be ( by too giant a leap) changing too much but what an interesting change up that would be...

Indominus theory 1
 
tumblr_mc42de4nTa1r7ge2r.gif
 
There is a difference between using the X gene for his origin and the public assuming that is his origin once existence of widespread mutations becomes known. At the moment there might be a debate among MCU citizens between Spider-Man being an alien or the latest super soldier test subject.

They played that plot on Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D with Robbie Reyes. Since his gift was not just strength but that physical transformation of a flaming skull Daisy just assumed he was an Inhuman in denial when he was telling his origin.
 
Strong no to the idea. Peter Parker is supposed to be a normal teenager who happens to be granted with amazing power by happenstance. Taking that away from the character, and retroactively making him a Mutant would undermine the Everyman aspect of the character that partly is what makes him so endearing.

Speaking strictly in traditional Marvel comics terms, Peter Parker would be considered a mutate not a mutant. A “Mutate” is a person who’s mutation does not happen due to a latent gene that they were born with but through a science experiment or accident that causes the mutation. In comparison, a Mutant is someone who manifests their mutation through a latent abnormal gene they’re with born called the “X-gene”.

Funny enough, in the Ultimate comics universe, Peter Parker is actually mistaken for a Mutant quite a bit but even there they draw a distinction.
 
Aside from what others have said, Scarlet Witch is right there to be the first MCU mutant.
 
Got to thinking about this the other night... We know from an outside view point why Spider-Man's MCU origins have yet to be explained.. Why explain what we already know?.....
That is unless we were wrong all along. What if, in naive teenage thinking peter was bitten by a spider he thought was radioactive but his superhuman reflexes, enhanced strength and wall crawling abilities were naturally dormant all along?

It just might be ( by too giant a leap) changing too much but what an interesting change up that would be...

Indominus theory 1

Marvel Comics did try to go there not to long ago trying to layer in a reasoning behind radioactivity giving superheroes superpowers.

I made a thread about it here if wish to check it out: Why Radiation Gives SuperPowers

I don't think Marvel really needs to explain things so much as tying things together movie wise to inter-relate franchises somewhat more so story logic wise being in a larger medium with films crossing over regularly at some point I think.
 
Superhero universes are, once more everybody, gestalt creations combining in a linked fantasy narrative a myriad of genres. Thus whether DC or Marvel you can have on their all star teams characters whose origins are drawn from all over fantasy, up to and including genres that may well seem antithetical to one another.

The alien from another world, the mythological god/goddess brought to life, the swashbuckling "human" hero in the peak of mind and body, the character empowered through some "scientific" accident, the person born with some ability drawn from a quirk in their genetic code, the powerful sorceress or wizard, the hero who is a product of some sort of experiment or one enhanced by cybernetic technology, the fantasy based genius character that can create weapons and other devices that go beyond any known real world technology... It's all a go. All of it exists side by side and has done so for 8 decades.

There is honestly zero reason to have to have a unified field theory of super heroes for the big two purveyors of spandex clad champions. Some creations obviously aping DC/Marvel characters and settings find that "one explanation for all fantasy/ sci fi elements" in the narrative to be a useful aspect in the storytelling. But most of those are acting as commentary on the Marvel and DC characters and universes. The others are just outright attempting to copy the all things fictional/fantasy are a go approach of the big two.

Because ultimately I think no one but the most persnikety and ssomewhat oblivious fans of the big two are at all asking for the all consuming rationale to hang their suspension of disbelief upon. Yes, there is no denying that even fantasy needs some rules and structure and in universe rationales to stop things from spiraling into a chaotic mess or devolving into some rule free stream of consciousness nonsense. That's not what any super hero fan is looking for... At the same time among both the dedicated fanbase and now the general audience there is this misunderstanding by some fans thinking the rest of the consumers absolutely need some air tight rationale or that somehow it's a complete narrative failure if not every single detail can be expounded upon with the absolute precision required of say, a book about math, technology or science in general.

The answer is always in my mind... It really doesn't. It didn't need it before in the previous 80 years and it's not necessary going forward for the next 80 years.
 
There's certain quaint connections due to limited runtime such as those made linking Peter Parker to the villains in the Raimi movies or Tony Stark to Ultron in the MCU or many more decisions made due to limited runtime or other characters not introduced yet that I'd rather see avoided if possible.

I think there are so many connective fibers the Eternals franchise can present not to mention so many films that have come before it's almost too easy to simply connect things together to provide a narrative framework that isn't quaint or superficial at all but can provide a lot of depth and added layers to everything without being too complicated nor superficially trying to simplify things for a mass audience.

As far as the whole explaining radioactivity behind the heroes like the comics recently tried to do I don't really like as it's deviating from past stories too much while getting too convoluted but there were a few interesting notions that can perhaps make story based sense moreso than others. As long as core aspects of past stories are maintained it's a delicate process to layer things in to further connect things but I think this can be done to some extent if examining the history of the 616 universe and trying to put it in a more time based continuity where characters keep progressing and there's a cause and effect to the past creating the present.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"