
I never understood this argument. It's saying a change is only valid if the change was seen previously. It's allowing for deviation only if the deviation exists someplace else to reference. Well, in order for a change to have been seen previously, it needs to have happened, period. So, at some point, Lois wasn't a redhead. I've never seen Lois as a redhead anywhere but the films, but I'll take your word for it. She became a redhead, somehow/some way -- in a comic, or on a show -- and now when we see her as a redhead in a movie, it's okay...because it happened before.to be fair, Lois has been portrayed with various hair colors throughout the years and throughout the various media.
sometimes she has black hair ( which is what I'm most used to ). other times she's a brunette. and there have been some instances where she is a ginger.
MJ, however, has consistently been portrayed with one hair color throughout all these years across different versions of the character and across different media. And that hair color is red.

I never understood this argument. It's saying a change is only valid if the change was seen previously. It's allowing for deviation only if the deviation exists someplace else to reference. Well, in order for a change to have been seen previously, it needs to have happened, period. So, at some point, Lois wasn't a redhead. I've never seen Lois as a redhead anywhere but the films, but I'll take your word for it. She became a redhead, somehow/some way -- in a comic, or on a show -- and now when we see her as a redhead in a movie, it's okay...because it happened before.
Well, this is a deviation being birthed into existence...this is the thing which will make people 10 years from now say, "Well, Mary Jane isn't always portrayed as a redhead in media." Before Nick Fury was Black, he was white for 40 years. Then Millar made him Black in Ultimates (His "MJ-ification" moment), the movies made him Black, and people don't care anymore...hopefully.
That was stating the obvious so I just wanted to make sure I was following as to why anyone would need to know that. The fact of the matter is MJ looks visually different than any other live action adaption or any other multimedia if Zendaya really is playing her.
Regardless of your opinions on race bending it it what it is but the vast majority know it to have changed from what they are used to. It is to be expected that some will not like this as humans generally dislike change.
Yeah I know what he/she is talking about I'm just trying to understand why it needed to be explained.
https://***********/AtlantaFilming/status/772409543854882816
I'm more interested if that AtlantaFilm guy actually HEARD other characters call Z's character Michelle during the filming.

What if MJ's name turns out to be Michelle Jessica Drew?
And there would be an example of killing two birds with one stone.

It's funny, just yesterday I was reading a comic in which Spider-Woman was drawn to look somewhat... um, non-white, and I started wondering if casting a woman of color to play Jessica would unleash another ****storm or if most people just wouldn't care.Funnily enough, I was actually thinking that Asian actress Jona Xiao who was recently cast could be Jessica Drew ...or maybe that's not funny at all to some of you guys.
Zendaya is playing Mary Jane Watson. Not Michelle Gonzales, not Michelle Jane, not Michelle "MJ" Johnson... she's 100% playing Mary Jane Watson, mark my words. Or don't, because what if I'm wrong.
It's funny, just yesterday I was reading a comic in which Spider-Woman was drawn to look somewhat... um, non-white, and I started wondering if casting a woman of color to play Jessica would unleash another ****storm or if most people just wouldn't care.
Personally I'd be fine with it, but I feel MS would probably want to hire someone a little more well-known than this Xiao lady. She did say on her twitter that she's excited to be part of her "first Marvel project" though, so who knows.

I haven't read her older comics, but IIRC the hair-dying was a thing in the Spider-Woman: Origin mini-run too. Let's be real though, such a small and random detail of her backstory is not gonna stop Marvel Studios from casting whoever they want for the role.![]()
Yeah, I don't get why they think we'd need this either. It was already silly when Singer did it with Rogue 16 years ago, and this year we saw it happen again with Luthor's baldness... I dunno, I guess they think it's clever or something.Fans don't need to feel that she's earned that red hair or that we need to see some kind of progression towards it, otherwise it won't feel natural.
Yeah, it does seem like they're only peddling these stories to make **** happen the same as the "Idris Elba for Bond" camp.
Personally, I don't want to see Idris as Bond. A villain is fine or get his own secret agent character franchise but this goes back to what's been discussed on here ad nauseum. Ian Fleming wrote Bond to be a Caucasian womanizing, alcohol-drinking, dashing and debonair man based off of him. Yes, many different actors have come in and done their spin and some have only come close to Fleming's sketch or summary of what the character is in looks and personality, but if Idris came in then you would have to say that Bond is no longer a person or what Fleming intended him to be but a number or codename. Bond would then become like Jason Bourne: a name anyone could be assigned.
Hence why "Michelle/Mary Jane Watson" is feeling like that. I, as a fan, wanted a traditional Mary Jane Watson right down to casting a real life redheaded actress or someone who has been redhead for quite some time to portray the character. No skulduggery behind it; no playing games with public and audience of "Is she or not MJ?" B.S. but genuinely going forth to the public and announcing, "Yes, this is your new Mary Jane Watson."
All these "Is she Michelle or Mary Jane Watson" stories do is just create further confusion, hostility, frustration, and click-baiting for these sites. Not to mention I am fine with speculating but I've been saying for quite some time, it's time they release a press release or a complete cast announcement especially when "Dr. Strange", "Thor: Ragnarok" and "Black Panther" all have done that. This is the only Marvel film where we don't have full confirmation of who is playing who or even if they'll end up playing that same person. There's also been a lot of talk online that some of the cast read for multiple parts so they may end up actually being someone else entirely then who they read originally for. Also, to add much fiery debate is, again, Zendaya was named by the director (Jon Watts) as Michelle. Stan Lee and James Gunn both only picked up on these tabloid articles and rumor mill website news, but they failed to mention that Watts named Zendaya "Michelle" in interviews. As I've said in the past, until Watts or Marvel themselves will refer to her as Mary Jane Watson and I see her hair completely red, she will not be Mary Jane Watson to me. I haven't seen either or happen.
All I've seen is this:
![]()
![]()
![]()
So, if she is going to be or is Mary Jane Watson and they're throwing out her personality and the classic red hair then this a completely revamped and different version of the character entirely.
And as others discussed, if she decides to go red later or towards the end of the film as a complete makeover then that's not really MJ to me either. Or this creating a persona or "new life." If she was playing a "Michelle" for a film role, I could see that for MJ or a character in a play and she was method acting, but nowhere do I like the idea of a "Hannah Montana"-multiple identities shtick scenario for MJ.
So, maybe this is going to be like Ned and Flash (if Zendaya does become or is MJ) something I am going to have to just bite my tongue and get used to or try to accept, but right now... I'm going to keep calling her Michelle. Until we get an exact quote from Watts, Sony, Marvel Studios, or Zendaya herself or a script leaks, she's going to remain Michelle to me and I think this thread should be titled going forward:
"The Zendaya is Michelle Possibly Mary Jane Thread."
It would only be fair. When you read "is Mary Jane Thread", I am glad the "is" is not capitalized like IS as if it is confirmed, but I think it's quite premature to call her or make a thread stating she is Mary Jane or people keep referring to her as indeed being Mary Jane when we still have no confirmation saying otherwise by the big people in charge.
But the relevance for this thread is whether MJ's hair dyeing is going to be a small and random detail of her backstory too. And I don't think it would be, since she's always been known as a redhead. Fans don't need to feel that she's earned that red hair or that we need to see some kind of progression towards it, otherwise it won't feel natural.
It's something she could easily have had from the beginning, and is in fact something she's always had. It's not part of a makeover and transformation process from awkward ugly duckling to gregarious hottie and party girl.
Yeah, I don't get why they think we'd need this either. It was already silly when Singer did it with Rogue 16 years ago, and this year we saw it happen again with Luthor's baldness... I dunno, I guess they think it's clever or something.
I still don't understand why would they deliberately hide that Z playing Mary Jane to make it a surprise. I guess not initially confirming that Tony and Laura were Flash and Liz was one thing, but Mary Jane? Why hide a coveted role like this, when every "scooper" under the sun would've done anything in their power to dig out what the deal with the Michelle character was. It's 2016, Marvel can't possibly be stupid enough to think they could keep something like this a secret.
I'm glad I took a bit of a break from the MJ/Michelle fiasco. Let's see what's new.
"- She is Mary Jane. Here's why...
- No, she is Michelle, here's why..."
Okay, back to the Justice League boards.
I still don't understand why would they deliberately hide that Z playing Mary Jane to make it a surprise. I guess not initially confirming that Tony and Laura were Flash and Liz was one thing, but Mary Jane? Why hide a coveted role like this, when every "scooper" under the sun would've done anything in their power to dig out what the deal with the Michelle character was. It's 2016, Marvel can't possibly be stupid enough to think they could keep something like this a secret.
Yeah, I don't get why they think we'd need this either. It was already silly when Singer did it with Rogue 16 years ago, and this year we saw it happen again with Luthor's baldness... I dunno, I guess they think it's clever or something.