Homecoming Spider-Man Homecoming (2017) General Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 90

Status
Not open for further replies.
Has anybody asked why in heavens would the producers keep MJ casting a secret and code name her character Michelle? It would be so weird, I would think casting MJ would be something of an event...

easy... they didn't want backlash


they didn't want the anger that Woodley and Micheal B Jordan got and figured if they went ahead and did it and kept it hush hush we'd respond better to it
 
If Goku/Bulma/Major Motoko Kusanag/The Ancient One/Tonto/All of Exodus & Gods of Egypt can be white then they can change freaking Mary Jane.

Boo Hoo a black girl gets kidnapped by the super villain instead of a white one the plot is ruined forever
Dragon Ball's character shouldn't be white (except some .)
And the movie was hated by everyone, including me.

And I didn't see God of Egypt, but there's was a lot of hate for the whitewashing.

And I don't care about Ghost in the shell but there's already plenty of hate for Ghost in the Shell's casting.
 
Last edited:
^ That's probably the route they're going with it.

I mean, both of my parents went by their middle names so it's not an uncommon thing at all.

problem lies there though that why would she suddenly want to go by a name she didn't like and chose to go by her middle name instead.. is MJ still MJ if she wants to be called Michelle?
 
Great post by James Gunn:

https://www.facebook.com/jgunn/posts/10153548508766157

Especially this...

For me, if a character's primary attribute - the thing that makes them iconic - is the color of their skin, or their hair color, frankly, that character is shallow and sucks. For me, what makes MJ MJ is her alpha female playfulness, and if the actress captures that, then she'll work. And, for the record, I think Zendaya even matches what I think of as MJ's primary physical characteristics - she's a tall, thin model - much more so than actresses have in the past.

Nailed it.

except.......the set pic vibe does NOT match that.

that's the issue.
 
^ Right, Pokkie. All of their box-offices suffered; the reviews sucked. Audiences didn't like any of them either. And they faced a backlash. Heck, "The Great Wall" is facing a backlash right now.
 
except.......the set pic vibe does NOT match that.

that's the issue.

This is what I've said basically in the other thread. If MJ does turn out to be awkward and dry and mousey, then in what sense has she captured that alpha female playfulness?

But we'll probably hear something similar for MJ that we did from FFINO defenders about Michael B Jordan's portrayal of Johnny Storm, that she was giving a different portrayal of MJ that WAS meant to be awkward and non-alpha female or playful, so she DID capture that version she was going for.

But you can nail your own version you're going for, but in what sense is it like traditional MJ at all?

If they played Peter as an autistic science geek with absolutely no social skills who was very withdrawn and weird, well would people say he nailed the essence of Peter Parker at all? Or would we get arguments that he nailed the essence of THAT Peter Parker? :o
 
except.......the set pic vibe does NOT match that.

that's the issue.

Well, that wasn't the point of Gunn's post though. LOL. We know what the issue is/will be for a lot of people.

If they botch the characterization, that's on Marvel Studios. Nothing to do with the casting.
 
Not just the set pics, but also the character descriptions from SDCC attendees as well as Zendaya herself

This is what I've said basically in the other thread. If MJ does turn out to be awkward and dry and mousey, then in what sense has she captured that alpha female playfulness?

But we'll probably hear something similar for MJ that we did from FFINO defenders about Michael B Jordan's portrayal of Johnny Storm, that she was giving a different portrayal of MJ that WAS meant to be awkward and non-alpha female or playful, so she DID capture that version she was going for.

But you can nail your own version you're going for, but in what sense is it like traditional MJ at all?

If they played Peter as an autistic science geek with absolutely no social skills who was very withdrawn and weird, well would people say he nailed the essence of Peter Parker at all? Or would we get arguments that he nailed the essence of THAT Peter Parker? :o


exactly.

Zendaya herself said she can relate to the character because she is "super dry and awkward."

well, super dry and awkward sound contradictory to "alpha female playfulness" to me. like opposite ends of the personality spectrum.

it's not just about the race, or the hair, it's about the personality of the character and how she acts and behaves.
 
Not just the set pics, but also the character descriptions from SDCC attendees as well as Zendaya herself

except.......the set pic vibe does NOT match that.

that's the issue.

Yep. Maybe if she looked like this in the set photos:

zendaya-will-be-mary-jane-in-new-spider-man-ftr.jpg


and not this:
357E113C00000578-3651278-No_glam_squad_needed_The_Disney_starlet_appeared_to_have_taken_t-m-109_1466457148710.jpg


35932E8500000578-3655784-image-a-98_1466664117519.jpg


I'd be able to buy that more.
 
Well, that wasn't the point of Gunn's post though. LOL. We know what the issue is/will be for a lot of people.

If they botch the characterization, that's on Marvel Studios. Nothing to do with the casting.

But people take posts like the one from Gunn and then will say that they don't care at all what the actress looks like, as long as her characterisation is correct. But then what happens if it isn't correct? Do they move the goal posts and just argue as I've suggested some do in my post above that the characterisation is correct for that version they're going for?
 
Well, that wasn't the point of Gunn's post though. LOL. We know what the issue is/will be for a lot of people.

If they botch the characterization, that's on Marvel Studios. Nothing to do with the casting.

what do you mean that wasn't the point of his post?

he said as long as the actress captures the spirit/essence of the character, which to him is alpha female playfulness, then it doesn't matter about the race or character.

Gunn nailed what MJ character's should be.

except, that doesn't seem to be what we're getting with Zendaya's take.

they could have cast a white actress with red hair, but then made her all frumpy and conservative looking and "super dry and awkward" and I'll still call into question that choice.
 
Also, people were against Zendaya playing MJ, way before any of the set pics leaked.
 
Maybe she's telling the truth, or maybe not. It's not like actors haven't lied about roles in order to try and protect spoilers before.
 
Also, people were against Zendaya playing MJ, way before any of the set pics leaked.

I didn't like it. but I was willing to give her a chance if she really nailed the spirit/essence of classic MJ that I want.

but based on the set pics and comments about the character's personality, I have lost confidence.
 
They did. And all of their box-office numbers suffered.

Their crappy BO was because they were garbage movies first and foremost. I'm glad those films were whitewashed and did poorly because any how the films cast the characters with racial accuracy they'd be pushing harder than ever the agenda of movies predominantly consisting of poc don't sell.
 
Mary Jane/Gamora/Valkyrie 2017 is the year of the Black Love Interest.


I'm ready!
 
But people take posts like the one from Gunn and then will say that they don't care at all what the actress looks like, as long as her characterisation is correct. But then what happens if it isn't correct? Do they move the goal posts and just argue as I've suggested some do in my post above that the characterisation is correct for that version they're going for?

If it isn't correct and they botch the characterization, than It'll just be another Kirsten Dunst situation, where they completely dropped the ball again. This character is near and dear to my heart and I've been EXTREMELY outspoken on how badly she's been depicted in live action so far.

Par for the course.

what do you mean that wasn't the point of his post?

he said as long as the actress captures the spirit/essence of the character, which to him is alpha female playfulness, then it doesn't matter about the race or character.

Gunn wasn't commenting on set pics, just on the topic of changing the race of a charcater. Your issues (although very legit), have absolutely nothing to do with casting. They could have cast a pretty caucasian redhead and the same issues you currently have, would still be present.
 
Maybe she's telling the truth, or maybe not. It's not like actors haven't lied about roles in order to try and protect spoilers before.

Yeah but, keeping MJ a secret seems really odd. I'd understand if it was a villain like Talia Al Ghul in TDKR. But just come out and tell us like you did with Liz, Flash and Ned.
 
If James Gunn and Dan Slott can make comments like these, I fail to see the overall issue. I'm sure Sam Raimi and Marc Webb would state the same, too. :oldrazz:

Dan Slott and the current house of Marvel arn't super fan's of MJ anyway... and all supported the marriage ending with Joey Q's plans... :whatever:
 
Yep. Maybe if she looked like this in the set photos:

zendaya-will-be-mary-jane-in-new-spider-man-ftr.jpg


and not this:
357E113C00000578-3651278-No_glam_squad_needed_The_Disney_starlet_appeared_to_have_taken_t-m-109_1466457148710.jpg


35932E8500000578-3655784-image-a-98_1466664117519.jpg


I'd be able to buy that more.

right.

nothing about those set pics screams MJ.

even her fashion sense sucks, and MJ is supposed to be fashionable!

a girl who is "alpha female playful" would not wear something like that. She would wear hot, fashionable clothes to flaunt her beauty. She'd want to show off her hotness and be playful and flirty.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"