Homecoming The Zendaya is Mary Jane thread - Part 1

[Oscorp]

The geeky, dry and awkward girl turning into a hot and fun one thing feels like a cliché to me. Certainly doesn't sound like MJ. More like the TSSM version of Gwen.

 

[Havok83]

Emma Stone's actually a natural blonde.

she still dyed it. Her hair in ASM wasnt natural

 

[spideyboy_1111]

So cause I don't care about the hair color dispute that means I don't care about the character? The character is what matters to me the most and the chemistry with Peter. If they get that right then they've already succeeded in my eyes.

Id argue if the only thing about MJ that is left intact is her love interest aspect and the fact she goes by "MJ" and the only thing you care about is them having good chemistry... and that's all that matters regardless of anything else.. then yeah... i don't think you care all that much about Mary Jane Watson as a character.. and think "as long as she has good chemistry" like any random love interest.

Love interests in general all need good chemistry.. but she's playing Mary Jane.. so she needs to you know... act the part, and actually become the character.. otherwise she's just MJ in name only.. and there's no reason she couldn't of been Deb Whitman or Carlie Cooper for that matter.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

Yes, I knew that but I was saying, she went from red to blonde for the role. Sorry, I should've been more specific.

Ah, I see. No worries.

she still dyed it. Her hair in ASM wasnt natural

Prove it?

 

[X Knight]

The geeky, dry and awkward girl turning into a hot and fun one thing feels like a cliché to me. Certainly doesn't sound like MJ. More like the TSSM version of Gwen.

exactly.

Let's say I hadn't been paying attention to any of the casting news and knew nothing about this film, and I saw the character descriptions leak online, with no reference to character, gender, or actor/actress.

if I read "quiet, super dry, awkward, bookish, constantly makes fun of people, zingy one liners," I would never in a million years associate that description with MJ. She would not immediately pop into my mind.

The first part about being quiet, awkward, and bookish would make me think of SSM Gwen, as you said, or even pre-bite Peter. Not MJ.

the second part about making fun of people would throw me off. Making fun of people has somewhat negative connotations to me, it doesn't sound very nice. So, that part of the description might make me think about one of the cliquish cheerleader girls like Liz or Sally. Again, not MJ.

if, however, the description read "lots of fun, playful, and sassy with zingy one liners," I WOULD think of MJ. Because that description DOES fit the character.

Id argue if the only thing about MJ that is left intact is her love interest aspect and the fact she goes by "MJ" and the only thing you care about is them having good chemistry... and that's all that matters regardless of anything else.. then yeah... i don't think you care all that much about Mary Jane Watson as a character.. and think "as long as she has good chemistry" like any random love interest.

Love interests in general all need good chemistry.. but she's playing Mary Jane.. so she needs to you know... act the part, and actually become the character.. otherwise she's just MJ in name only.. and there's no reason she couldn't of been Deb Whitman or Carlie Cooper for that matter.

or, she could have been a brand new character named Michelle.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

exactly.

Let's say I hadn't been paying attention to any of the casting news and knew nothing about this film, and I saw the character descriptions leak online, with no reference to character, gender, or actor/actress.

if I read "quiet, super dry, awkward, bookish, constantly makes fun of people, zingy one liners," I would never in a million years associate that description with MJ. She would not immediately pop into my mind.

The first part about being quiet, awkward, and bookish would make me think of SSM Gwen, as you said, or even pre-bite Peter. Not MJ.

the second part about making fun of people would throw me off. Making fun of people has somewhat negative connotations to me, it doesn't sound very nice. So, that part of the description might make me think about one of the cliquish cheerleader girls like Liz or Sally. Again, not MJ.

if, however, the description read "lots of fun, playful, and sassy with zingy one liners," I WOULD think of MJ. Because that description DOES fit the character.



or, she could have been a brand new character named Michelle.

indeed

 

[sl500jazz]

if anyone really knows the 616 MJ one would know she's quite different than Kirsten dunst's. infact the closest we've ever gotten to Classic MJ is Bryce's Gwen.

Meh. I thought Bryce's Gwen was rather bland. I suppose you could argue her role in the story was more like MJ's than Kirsten Dunst's, but classic MJ has a lot of bite to her and she's a very funny character.

 

[Spider-Gnome]

oh, so you've read reports saying the surprise reveal has indeed been spoiled by the scoop?

I mean, it's kind of obvious that it has been spoiled.

but do you have links to those reports? I'd like to read them, too.

Sorry I don't. Read it on this thread or the General thread, shortly after news broke and people like Devin were sort of confirming it. One report said that was a big reveal at the end, and now it was blown. Forgot who said it was a plot twist at the end.

 

[X Knight]

Sorry I don't. Read it on this thread or the General thread, shortly after news broke and people like Devin were sort of confirming it. One report said that was a big reveal at the end, and now it was blown. Forgot who said it was a plot twist at the end.

ah, I see. thanks.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Meh. I thought Bryce's Gwen was rather bland. I suppose you could argue her role in the story was more like MJ's than Kirsten Dunst's, but classic MJ has a lot of bite to her and she's a very funny character.

that's my point... even as bland and small of a part that was.. it was more on par with her character than Gwen-J Dunst was. Which is why its sad we've never gotten a classic MJ

 

[Dark Raven]

you forgot the sexist line about how being wafer thin is apparently a more important characteristic to Gunn than her hair... (which is lunacy).

I personally can't imagine any scenario where an audience enjoys watching a quite "awkward and Dry" girl into a flirty party girl... Sandy from Grease in no way shape or form works in this day in age.

Speaking of Sandy from Grease, imagine if there were a remake of the film version, or a new stage version (or even the recent live version with Julianne Hough) and they made Sandy the outgoing alpha female party girl whom most of the guys pine after, and started off with the leather pants and sexy bold lipstick. And imagine if we later discover by the end of the film there's more to her than this image. That wouldn't be Sandy anymore, even if she looked the same. If Sandy were more like MJ from the start, you know whom she would be? Betty Rizzo.

Sure, a new version of Grease could try to do things differently to what has gone before, but their character would be unrecognisable now. And that wouldn't be the arc that people would want to see for Sandy, even if at the end of the musical/ film she ends up looking like the Sandy we all typically know from the start of the musical.

So imposing Sandy's actual arc onto MJ is also changing MJ into a different character. Just because she has the initials MJ (which might not even stand for Mary Jane) doesn't make her essentially that same character. After all, Michael Jackson had the initials MJ, and he was not Miss Watson from Spider-Man.

Id argue if the only thing about MJ that is left intact is her love interest aspect and the fact she goes by "MJ" and the only thing you care about is them having good chemistry... and that's all that matters regardless of anything else.. then yeah... i don't think you care all that much about Mary Jane Watson as a character.. and think "as long as she has good chemistry" like any random love interest.

Love interests in general all need good chemistry.. but she's playing Mary Jane.. so she needs to you know... act the part, and actually become the character.. otherwise she's just MJ in name only.. and there's no reason she couldn't of been Deb Whitman or Carlie Cooper for that matter.

This is what I've been saying before. People argue that it doesn't matter what her appearance is like as long as her personality is right, and then move the goal posts to say it doesn't matter what her personality is like, doesn't matter that she has a different character arc, doesn't matter that her name isn't even Mary Jane etc as long as she has something else because none of these things define her.

But if she didn't even have the initials MJ in the end, but something completely different, then she could be anyone. Any other love interest can have good chemistry with Peter, so why still call her MJ when there's nothing much left of her?

In that case we could argue that we did in fact get MJ in the ASM films, because Emma Stone had good chemistry with Andrew Garfield, despite her name not being MJ, because those initials don't define the character.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

Meh. I thought Bryce's Gwen was rather bland. I suppose you could argue her role in the story was more like MJ's than Kirsten Dunst's, but classic MJ has a lot of bite to her and she's a very funny character.

It kills me that both Bryce Dallas Howard and Elizabeth Banks wore both wasted on thankless roles in those films, when either actress would have done a much better job in the lead. Banks recently mentioned that she auditioned for MJ but was deemed too old.

 

[PeterBenParker]

It kills me that both Bryce Dallas Howard and Elizabeth Banks wore both wasted on thankless roles in those films, when either actress would have done a much better job in the lead. Banks recently mentioned that she auditioned for MJ but was deemed too old.

Completely agree.

Then again, as much as I liked Tobey in the role of Peter overall, I wouldn't have wanted him either.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

I found this post on another site. I honestly wish I could take credit for it, since it mirrors my own thoughts on the matter, however I am nowhere near as eloquent when making posts. Thus, here you go...

Personally, I'm a little iffy on that because wanting to be Peter's "Hot date" for the dance is really kind of questionable for me.

It kind of goes back to my issues with characters like Carlie Cooper and Felicity Smoak from Arrow. That they follow this trajectory of being this "nerdy" girl who everyone "ignores" because she wears glasses or has her hair in a bun. And then when it comes time for her "big date," she dresses up for the guy she is with to show off and stun everyone with how amazing she looks.

Now, that may seem alright on paper. But, for me, it kind of dives into this rather questionable notion that "Real Women Don't Wear Dresses," to quote TV Tropes. Essentially that women shouldn't try to look pretty. They shouldn't take pride in their appearance. They shouldn't dress up or look nice. That if they try to look nice at all, that just means that they are vain, shallow, narcissistic and egotistical, and only care about their looks alone.

I mean, that's essentially what people have argued about MJ. That because she's sexually confidant, because she knows she's attractive and she uses that to her advantage, because she is the aggressor rather than the pursued, and because she chose a career in acting and modelling which uses her looks to her advantage, that somehow makes her shallow and vain, and not a good fit for Peter.

Not only that, but despite making the argument that "Real women don't wear dresses" and that such steps such as dressing nice or keeping in shape, or dressing in a way that shows off a woman's body in any way is wrong or reveals a negative aspect about a woman's character, we still expect these women to be pretty on their own. That they have to be "naturally" beautiful. That they have to keep fit, stay in shape, maintain their looks, but not at any point show it off or take pride in it. Unless, of course, they are going to do so for the man's benefit, to be his date to a big dance or a big event. Then and only then is it alright for them to be "pretty."

Essentially, it's saying that women are only allowed to be pretty if it is for the man's benefit and not their own.

The way I look at it is "There are many different ways to be a woman." If a woman doesn't want to dress up, she doesn't have to dress up. But if a woman wants to look nice, then that is her prerogative as well. Just as it is OK for a man to dress in just a t-shirt and jeans if he wants, or walk around in a finely tailored suit, without having to be judged or conform to some larger ideal. A woman can be a tomboy, or a fashionista, or a bookworm, or anything they want to be. And I would like the Marvel films to reflect that, rather than fall back on the tired trope of having MJ dress up so that Peter can look like a stud with a hot babe on his arm.

To make a long story short, I'd prefer it in the film if MJ's character dresses up and looks nice because she wants to dress up and look nice. Not because Peter wants a "Hot date" and she decides to dress up for him to make him look awesome. That MJ wants to look nice for the dance, that she wants to take pride in her looks, so that is why she dresses up.

That, to me, is keeping in line with MJ's character from the books. That she is taking power and ownership over herself and not let others define who she is. And she dresses up not so that she can be defined as the "weird girl" or "brainy jane," but that she can be whatever she wants to be.

But perhaps that might be asking too much of a two hour film that isn't even going to be about her.

 

[KalvinEllis]

Seriously, I'm thinking of ducking out of this thread because this crap is unbearable, but I think these points are as "salient" as you're gonna get. There's no reason to trash someone as a CONFIRMED RACIST PIG because they're unhappy with a character's portrayal in ways that go much deeper than race. Planet of the Apes was clearly an unfortunate, ill-considered comparison to make. I think we can safely stop the accusations there. Especially considering the post in question was targeted far more to the other attributes of the character that we think we know rather than just her race.

This has been a fun and interesting thread to participate in so far, and I'd like to think we could keep it that way. But I'll have to bug out for awhile if we can't come to some kind of sense on this subject. Let's stop bandying the word racist about when we don't know motivations of other posters.

(Apologies if this is out of bounds territory as far as moderators etc. go, just my 2 cents on the issue at hand)

Apologies from me as well for contributing in derailing the thread. I just thought someone was being unjustly labeled and I thought I'd say something, but maybe I shouldn't have. People are divided enough as it is. That doesn't help matters, it only makes it worse. Moving on.

 

[Dark Raven]

exactly.

Let's say I hadn't been paying attention to any of the casting news and knew nothing about this film, and I saw the character descriptions leak online, with no reference to character, gender, or actor/actress.

if I read "quiet, super dry, awkward, bookish, constantly makes fun of people, zingy one liners," I would never in a million years associate that description with MJ. She would not immediately pop into my mind.

The first part about being quiet, awkward, and bookish would make me think of SSM Gwen, as you said, or even pre-bite Peter. Not MJ.

the second part about making fun of people would throw me off. Making fun of people has somewhat negative connotations to me, it doesn't sound very nice. So, that part of the description might make me think about one of the cliquish cheerleader girls like Liz or Sally. Again, not MJ.

if, however, the description read "lots of fun, playful, and sassy with zingy one liners," I WOULD think of MJ. Because that description DOES fit the character.



or, she could have been a brand new character named Michelle.

I think one of the legacy problems with Batman Begins is that now everyone seems to suddenly require their own "Begins" story where every little aspect now has to be justified or rationalised instead of just accepting that it is that way.

So now we have MJ Begins where her party girl alpha female personality has to be justified and explained away, and her red hair too, which will probably be shown as part of a makeover. And even the initials "MJ" will be attributed to some major backstory. We'll probably even get some long, convoluted explanation for why she says "tiger" and how she went through a whole series of different test runs with other animals before settling on that.

 

[Oscorp]

I think one of the legacy problems with Batman Begins is that now everyone seems to suddenly require their own "Begins" story where every little aspect now has to be justified or rationalised instead of just accepting that it is that way.

So now we have MJ Begins where her party girl alpha female personality has to be justified and explained away, and her red hair too, which will probably be shown as part of a makeover. And even the initials "MJ" will be attributed to some major backstory. We'll probably even get some long, convoluted explanation for why she says "tiger" and how she went through a whole series of different test runs with other animals before settling on that.

Reminds me of Professor X's Baldness Begins released this year.

 

[sl500jazz]

that's my point... even as bland and small of a part that was.. it was more on par with her character than Gwen-J Dunst was. Which is why its sad we've never gotten a classic MJ

it's true that classic MJ wasn't Petet's first love and was more like Bryce's Gwen in the sense that she played distraction/foil to the main love interest, but the role of Kirsten's Mary Jane never really bothered me (or bothered me quite as much) as the character's essence.They didn't capture MJ's toughness, her sharp tongue, and her fiery personality. Like Bryce's Gwen she was too vanilla.

Which is why I'm generally optimistic about the Zendaya casting (especially after James Gunn described the character as being alpha female playful and Zendaya saying her character had zingy one-liners).

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Speaking of Sandy from Grease, imagine if there were a remake of the film version, or a new stage version (or even the recent live version with Julianne Hough) and they made Sandy the outgoing alpha female party girl whom most of the guys pine after, and started off with the leather pants and sexy bold lipstick. And imagine if we later discover by the end of the film there's more to her than this image. That wouldn't be Sandy anymore, even if she looked the same. If Sandy were more like MJ from the start, you know whom she would be? Betty Rizzo.

Sure, a new version of Grease could try to do things differently to what has gone before, but their character would be unrecognisable now. And that wouldn't be the arc that people would want to see for Sandy, even if at the end of the musical/ film she ends up looking like the Sandy we all typically know from the start of the musical.

So imposing Sandy's actual arc onto MJ is also changing MJ into a different character. Just because she has the initials MJ (which might not even stand for Mary Jane) doesn't make her essentially that same character. After all, Michael Jackson had the initials MJ, and he was not Miss Watson from Spider-Man.



This is what I've been saying before. People argue that it doesn't matter what her appearance is like as long as her personality is right, and then move the goal posts to say it doesn't matter what her personality is like, doesn't matter that she has a different character arc, doesn't matter that her name isn't even Mary Jane etc as long as she has something else because none of these things define her.

But if she didn't even have the initials MJ in the end, but something completely different, then she could be anyone. Any other love interest can have good chemistry with Peter, so why still call her MJ when there's nothing much left of her?

In that case we could argue that we did in fact get MJ in the ASM films, because Emma Stone had good chemistry with Andrew Garfield, despite her name not being MJ, because those initials don't define the character.

Bingo... All of this.

and that's why i have a hard time believing anyone who thinks this way is really invested or actually cares about "Mary Jane Watson, the character and pop icon" The sad thing is... Mj's representation in the Ultimate Books, post OMD books and Movie have been pretty awful.. so if that's the way they know her.. then it's really no wonder they feel the way they do..

Which is all the more reason MJ needs done right.

As i've said before... it's like Crystal Pepsi and Purple Heinz Ketchup.. it may taste basically the same.. but is it? nope.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

It kills me that both Bryce Dallas Howard and Elizabeth Banks wore both wasted on thankless roles in those films, when either actress would have done a much better job in the lead. Banks recently mentioned that she auditioned for MJ but was deemed too old.

i saw that.. and that was complete garbage

 

[spideyboy_1111]

I found this post on another site. I honestly wish I could take credit for it, since it mirrors my own thoughts on the matter, however I am nowhere near as eloquent when making posts. Thus, here you go...

very well said.. I love it! that right there is true feminism and what feminism is suppose to be about.

 

[Dark Raven]

Bingo... All of this.

and that's why i have a hard time believing anyone who thinks this way is really invested or actually cares about "Mary Jane Watson, the character and pop icon" The sad thing is... Mj's representation in the Ultimate Books, post OMD books and Movie have been pretty awful.. so if that's the way they know her.. then it's really no wonder they feel the way they do..

Which is all the more reason MJ needs done right.

As i've said before... it's like Crystal Pepsi and Purple Heinz Ketchup.. it may taste basically the same.. but is it? nope.

And that's the thing about Mary Jane Watson. She is a pop icon with a very iconic image.

You wouldn't think to change Marilyn Monroe's image to some black-haired biker goth chick, or Elvis Presley into a monocled man with a pin-striped suit and a bowler hat. Could you argue that their image isn't what defines them? Sure. But would Elvis really be quite the same character doing these pelvic gyrations on stage looking like a businessman who works in the city? And maybe he wouldn't even do those actions but instead would have some dance routine with an umbrella and briefcase while twirling his mustache.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

it's true that classic MJ wasn't Petet's first love and was more like Bryce's Gwen in the sense that she played distraction/foil to the main love interest, but the role of Kirsten's Mary Jane never really bothered me (or bothered me quite as much) as the character's essence.They didn't capture MJ's toughness, her sharp tongue, and her fiery personality. Like Bryce's Gwen she was too vanilla.

Which is why I'm generally optimistic about the Zendaya casting (especially after James Gunn described the character as being alpha female playful and Zendaya saying her character had zingy one-liners).

that's just it.. he described that's 616 mj's characteristics.. he didn't necessarily say that's how Z's actually going to be in the film


I'm not super keen on Z anyway.. i don't care for her acting nor line delivery based on the disney shows i've seen her in. But she's got great beauty.. so at the very least i'm hoping they're just trolling us hard.. and The wardrobe and hair is just redherrings ... we've not actually seen footage of them on set.. just walking from trailers to the Set "in costume"

so part of me hopes they're really changing her wardrobe, and giving her a red wig while on set.. (at the very least) and Z's remarks were just further red-herrings. playing up the breakfast club angle.

 

[X Knight]

I think one of the legacy problems with Batman Begins is that now everyone seems to suddenly require their own "Begins" story where every little aspect now has to be justified or rationalised instead of just accepting that it is that way.

So now we have MJ Begins where her party girl alpha female personality has to be justified and explained away, and her red hair too, which will probably be shown as part of a makeover. And even the initials "MJ" will be attributed to some major backstory. We'll probably even get some long, convoluted explanation for why she says "tiger" and how she went through a whole series of different test runs with other animals before settling on that.

right on.

and not every character needs a Begins story arc.

let characters have other, different kinds of arcs.

not every character needs to go through a transformation arc or have their backstory mapped out. Some characters just "start" where they are at the beginning of the story.

do we really need to see how Flash became a bully ( or in Homecoming's case an "intellectual rival" )? No. Not really. He just starts out that way.

Now, maybe in the future, we will learn Flash became a bully cuz he was bullied himself or because he's insecure about something or whatever. and that's fine.

but that doesn't mean we need to actually see how Flash went from insecure, picked on kid to becoming a bully himself.

 

[sl500jazz]

I found this post on another site. I honestly wish I could take credit for it, since it mirrors my own thoughts on the matter, however I am nowhere near as eloquent when making posts. Thus, here you go...

I can agree with this. It'll be interesting to see how all of this plays out, and what about the character would lead to her suddenly dressing differently (if they do, in fact, go that route).