Homecoming The Zendaya is possibly someone, maybe thread - Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wow, never thought you'd be onboard with this, dude. But I digress. Let her be Mary Jane or an original character. I'm curious to see Feige's official explanation for this character
 
Wow, never thought you'd be onboard with this, dude. But I digress. Let her be Mary Jane or an original character. I'm curious to see Feige's official explanation for this character

Well, I mean, I always wanted them to go with a more Ultimate Mary Jane angle for the MCU MJ anyway. This whole "Michelle" angle is considerably closer to that version of Mary Jane than the classic 616 one we all know and love. Obviously there definitely seems to be key differences between "Michelle" and Ultimate MJ, but the deviation doesn't feel anywhere near as extreme to me as I think it does for most folks here.

But yeah, I do hope they ultimately fix up the name issue. That's the one wrinkle in this that bugs me.
 
Lol you guys do realize that she's supposed to be like 15 in this movie...expecting a bombshell supermodel is ridiculous. Worst case scenario they're going with the ugly duckling idea and I don't see anything wrong with that. And guys, so what if the character is a little different? Like seriously, so what? All that matters is that the movie and characters are good. Open up your minds.

I don't think anyone is expecting a bombshell supermodel at all. But why does she have to be an ugly duckling either? There are girls in their teens who already try to look as attractive as possible and even try to make themselves look as grown up as possible. People use Instagram these days to post all their pictures which often look just like model shoots. They even sometimes get discovered via those means later on and picked up by a professional agency.

As a modern spin, Mary Jane could've been an aspiring model who posts tons of pics on Instagram because she loves the attention and feels that it validates her sense of self worth (because maybe she didn't get that as a child) and makes her feel attractive and wanted.

It's really ignoring what girls are very often like in real life to say you can't expect them to be "bombshell supermodels" at 15 when there's social media like Instagram where many are trying to do that.

And that is MJ's personality where she would want to be on that kind of social media. The Michelle MJ, however, seems like she wouldn't even want to do any of that and would actively shun and mock this kind of thing. How do you expect that later she would want to become the very thing she has ridiculed before after going through a physical transformation? That means for the rest of the new Spider-Man series, if she does physically become MJ, she's never actually being true to who she is at all but living a lie and putting up a front, when her Michelle persona in Homecoming was her true self.

And that's the exact opposite of Mary Jane, who put on a front as a defence mechanism but both we as the readers and also Peter AND Mary Jane herself began to discover her true self as being someone who isn't so flighty and superficial.

So we're going to get an MJ who now lives life as a lie once she physically transforms and become this fake persona? But then what? She's supposed to undergo an arc again to become her true self and turn back into the frumpy bookish and socially awkward Michelle again one day after realising that MJ was just a front for her? And if she doesn't undergo this unnecessary arc again, then that means that Peter himself also looks completely superficial because he only accepts her not as she is but only once she transforms from the ugly duckling into the beautiful swan. :doh:

This just comes across as all wrong and makes everyone look bad. And it doesn't even fit in with the John Hughes themes where it would be more about accepting oneself as they truly are and not putting on a front for others. Mary Jane as the superficial party girl to start with only to later show that she is much deeper would be far more in line with Hughes than this ridiculous journey that Michelle has to go through.
 
"it's just sit a fictional character, let people change them whatever why does it matter" but when andrew garfield played peter in a different way than the awkward nerd everyone wanted peter to be THEN it wasn't cool and everyone and their mother loved to complain about that but we're supposed to just take it with this michelle/mj hybrid? i don't get it.

sure we haven't seen the movie, but not a second of her time in the trailer looks like mj, zendaya has tirelessly described her character as a weirdo, who doesn't have any friends, who thinks she's better than anyone else because she a so smart so she doesn't even want friends to begin with, AND [BLACKOUT]the michelle-but-my-friends-call-me-mj thing was confirmed by a verified critic on twitter. [/BLACKOUT]that's plenty to go off of.

fictional characters MEAN something to people and there's nothing wrong with being upset if they're not done right. especially not in mj's case. this is just the last straw of a trend that's been happening since, what, 2007 in the comics? of trying to undermine her and basically write her out of the comics entirely
 
"it's just sit a fictional character, let people change them whatever why does it matter" but when andrew garfield played peter in a different way than the awkward nerd everyone wanted peter to be THEN it wasn't cool and everyone and their mother loved to complain about that but we're supposed to just take it with this michelle/mj hybrid? i don't get it.

It's because it's a Marvel Studios film set in the MCU, I've said it before, if this was a Sony Pictures movie they'd rip Sony apart for this change. But make no mistake from what I've seen the majority seem to agree that this is a stupid decision. Especially when she could've looked and acted like MJ, and while I'm not a fan of race changing iconic and established characters like MJ, Jameson and the Osborns, I think if she looked like MJ and acted like her then I'd get over it eventually.
 
Last edited:
We had MJ in the Amazing Spider-Man series. She was played by Emma Stone. Nevermind that she had blonde hair, was named Gwen Stacy, behaved different to MJ etc. At least she was still MJ-in-actress-we-might've-wanted-for-MJ-only. :o
 
Lol or maybe it's not the changes that matter, but how well they're executed?

People didn't give TASM a pass because the movies sucked. People are giving SMH a pass because apparently the movie is great. It's not that hard to understand...unless of course you're ******** :o
 
Lol or maybe it's not the changes that matter, but how well they're executed?

People didn't give TASM a pass because the movies sucked. People are giving SMH a pass because apparently the movie is great. It's not that hard to understand...unless of course you're ******** :o

Very mature....

You can't expect people who have known a character to act a certain way for 50 odd years to suddenly accept that she's a whole new character with a different name now, no matter how well she's executed. That just begs the question why she wasn't made into an original character instead? It's not fair to Zendaya or fans of Mary Jane. Zendaya's Michelle could've become a beloved new Spider-Man character but now she'll have this MJ controversy hanging over her character. I was really digging the rumor of her being Vulture's daughter because to me it made sense, she's a new character after all and Zendaya is half white so I could buy her being Toomes' biological daughter. It would make her character more interesting than just saying "Oh btw I'm MJ!".
 
Last edited:
Very mature....

You can't expect people who have known a character to act a certain way for 50 odd years to suddenly accept that she's a whole new character with a different name now, no matter how well she's executed. That just begs the question why she wasn't made into an original character instead? It's not fair to Zendaya or fans of Mary Jane. Zendaya's Michelle could've become a beloved new Spider-Man character but now she'll have this MJ controversy hanging over her character. I was really digging the rumor of her being Vulture's daughter because to me it made sense, she's a new character after all and Zendaya is half white so I could buy her being Toomes' biological daughter. It would make her character more interesting than just saying "Oh btw I'm MJ!".

Why does her being half white make it more believable that she is Toomes' daughter?
 
I think Feige is banking on general audience's familiarity with the term "MJ" when it comes to Spider-Man. Perhaps he had a vision of this new, quirky and eccentric character that would eventually become Peter's love interest. And to tease the audience of this, he gave her the recognizable initials MJ that would be a surprise moment in the film. Only the initials, because he knew that he had created an original character and it would be more honest to call her Michelle, rather than Mary Jane.

This is what I think that happened. It's obvious that this has caused confusion and discomfort with the fans, but I think that in the end Feige's decision might actually be beneficial for Marvel. The general audience will see the movie, buzz about Zendaya's MJ and in the end be happy that Spider-Man and MJ are in love.
 
Except here's the thing.

Why? Why do it?

Why not just have her be a new character if she doesn't have any of MJ's characteristics? Even the different interpretations of her over the years at least kept the core of the character. 'Michelle' is just 'Mary Jane' In Name Only. There was no point in doing such a radical change.

Heck, you could even make your same argument with Tristar's Zilla and it still wouldn't hold any water because that wasn't Godzilla in any way, shape or form, and Godzilla fans responded in kind.
 
If she is indeed playing MJ or some version of her, Marvel appears to want to keep it a surprise.
It wouldn't be a surprise if Zendaya looked like the photos above in Homecoming.

the notion of it even remotely being a surprise is incredibly the wrong path to go anyway.. especially if you have to disguise her... it's distracting and id say actually working against them.
 
Lol you guys do realize that she's supposed to be like 15 in this movie...expecting a bombshell supermodel is ridiculous. Worst case scenario they're going with the ugly duckling idea and I don't see anything wrong with that. And guys, so what if the character is a little different? Like seriously, so what? All that matters is that the movie and characters are good. Open up your minds.

clearly you don't realize people arn't even expecting a "super model" or a MJ to even necessarily take that profession. but compare to the other girls in the film.. she's the ugly duckling. And that's something most of us do not want... it's incredibly cliche
 
Ultimtately here's my issue with some of these changes.. such as Ned being Ganke but not being called Ganke... , flash being an intellectual rival, a Gwen look-alike betty, and a frumpy ally sheedy stand in initials only MJ...

I don't really care how well it's all pulled off, they could be amazing characters.. but no matter how great they're pulled off.. i'm still going to be pinning for a spider-man film that translates these characters better from page to real life... I love the characters in the books, and while i might love new versions of them.. i still want to see my old friends brought to life.. especially since most of them have been pooed on in their other live action iterations.
 
It's because it's a Marvel Studios film set in the MCU, I've said it before, if this was a Sony Pictures movie they'd rip Sony apart for this change. But make no mistake from what I've seen the majority seem to agree that this is a stupid decision. Especially when she could've looked and acted like MJ, and while I'm not a fan of race changing iconic and established characters like MJ, Jameson and the Osborns, I think if she looked like MJ and acted like her then I'd get over it eventually.

what's amusing is this...

https://www.**************.com/spid...ge-about-the-sony-marvel-studios-deal-a152043 (site that shall not be named) article

it details that Amy Pascal actually had alot of say with homecoming... from the casting of Tom Holland in civil war down to a few other things... So if people are wondering why this may break with the way marvel does things.. look know further... Marvel didn't have "as" complete control as we thought or hoped for.. Sony still had complete control
 
Except here's the thing.

Why? Why do it?

Why not just have her be a new character if she doesn't have any of MJ's characteristics? Even the different interpretations of her over the years at least kept the core of the character. 'Michelle' is just 'Mary Jane' In Name Only. There was no point in doing such a radical change.

Heck, you could even make your same argument with Tristar's Zilla and it still wouldn't hold any water because that wasn't Godzilla in any way, shape or form, and Godzilla fans responded in kind.

Maybe the general audience will respond better to a familiar nickname that also teases future relationship for the characters? Which means that Marvel will make more money? I don't know. I'm trying to make sense of this and I think that this theory is believable.

I'm not very familiar with Zilla/Godzilla thing, but I do believe that naming the movie Godzilla did get people to the theater, because they recognized it.

I'm not sure if the fans of the source material make a huge difference in box office when it comes to movie adaptations or certain remakes.

Edit: Spideyboy_1111 below is correct. I forgot that financially this is Sony's movie.
 
Last edited:
Maybe the general audience will respond better to a familiar nickname that also teases future relationship for the characters? Which means that Marvel will make more money? I don't know. I'm trying to make sense of this and I think that this theory is believable.

I'm not very familiar with Zilla/Godzilla thing, but I do believe that naming the movie Godzilla did get people to the theater, because they recognized it.

I'm not sure if the fans of the source material make a huge difference in box office when it comes to movie adaptations or certain remakes.

the only thing marvel is actually profiting from with this film.. is merchandise. there's no Zendaya MJ doll/actionfigures.. so no.. marvel isn't making money off Z... Sony is
 
Ultimtately here's my issue with some of these changes.. such as Ned being Ganke but not being called Ganke... , flash being an intellectual rival, a Gwen look-alike betty, and a frumpy ally sheedy stand in initials only MJ...

I don't really care how well it's all pulled off, they could be amazing characters.. but no matter how great they're pulled off.. i'm still going to be pinning for a spider-man film that translates these characters better from page to real life... I love the characters in the books, and while i might love new versions of them.. i still want to see my old friends brought to life.. especially since most of them have been pooed on in their other live action iterations.

exactly.

I want to see the characters I'm familiar with. the characters I grew up reading or watching on tv or playing in games.

my problem with Homecoming, and why I have practically non-existent hype for it a mere week from release, is because nothing about it looks familiar aside from Peter/Spidey ( and even that is somewhat shaky with the tech suit and Stark influence ).

Like I've said before, if I knew nothing at all about this, and I looked at the set pics, that pic of the hs kids in front of the locker, or watched any of the trailers, I would be asking "Who the heck are these people?" "Where's Flash and the gang?" "Where's MJ? Where's Harry or Gwen?"

Now, with Gwen, I'd think the blonde girl is Gwen, because y'know she looks like her. But then if I do some digging and find she's actually BETTY, I'd be like wtf??!!

and that's my reaction in general. wtf??!!

I don't recognize anything or anyone.

I get they have to do something different. I get they have to make changes. I get they may not want to do a retread of a linear origin story.

I get all that. and I'm fine with it. I ( and I'm sure the other "critics" here ) don't expect 100% faithfulness and accuracy. I expect changes, though I'd like it to be as faithful and accurate as possible.

But, I also expect a degree of familiarity. There are certain core, basic tenets and principles that I expect these characters to adhere to. Otherwise, they might as well be different characters.

When I see a Superman movie or read a Superman story, I expect certain elements to be present and I expect Clark/Superman ( and his supporting cast and world ) to act and look a certain way. Sure, a writer could make Superman a degenerate, womanizing alcoholic who wears a wifebeater and jeans for a costume and swears like a drunken sailor. Heck, it may even be a compelling story. But, that's not any kind of Superman story I'd be interested in, cuz that character isn't Clark/Superman.

Sure, Peter Parker could be a hs jock who's dumb as a ******* brick and then gets his spider powers and becomes a star professional athlete. Oh sure, he's still called Peter Parker and he has all the spider powers. But, is that Peter Parker/Spider-Man? No, it isn't.

Just like a Tony Stark who's a lowly janitor who stumbles upon a secret lab with the Iron Man armor and tech isn't Tony Stark/Iron Man. That's just not who he is and that's not his story.

Or a Wolverine who's some charming, suave, dashing Robin Hood like rogue who's polite, refined, enjoys opera, and never drinks or smokes. Is that Wolverine even though he's still called Logan/Wolverine and has metal claws? No, it isn't.

Sure, you can write these characters any way you want. But if you make so many changes that they become unrecognizable and unfamiliar, then you've crossed the line and essentially made an original character.

Which brings us back to Michelle/MJ.

Michelle's situation is different from the changes they've made to Flash, Gwetty, Ned/Ganke, May, etc., because she IS an original character. She looks nothing like Mary Jane Watson; she acts nothing like Mary Jane Watson. And here's the real kicker, she doesn't even have the right name. She's not even Mary Jane Watson. She's Michelle.

And that's fine, if they just kept her as Michelle the original character.

But no, for some unfathomable reason, they decide to give her the iconic nickname/initials of Mary Jane Watson and make Michelle "MJ." Which in turn, lessens the chance that the real Mary Jane Watson will be used in this franchise.

so, not only has this original character Michelle "robbed" Mary Jane Watson of her nickname/initials, she's also most likely robbed Mary Jane Watson of her appearance in these films.

and that's a double slap, a double insult to all of us Mary Jane Watson fans who HAVE been wanting a more faithful adaptation of the character.

Michelle is basically an impostor, a usurper.
 
Last edited:
giphy.gif
 
I'm just curious...how would you guys feel if Marvel made Miles Morales Spider-Man instead of Peter Parker? Let's just say a completely comic accurate Miles.

Would you hate it because it's not Peter Parker, or would you be totally okay with it because you're familiar with Miles already and Marvel made him exactly like the comics?
 
what's amusing is this...

https://www.**************.com/spid...ge-about-the-sony-marvel-studios-deal-a152043 (site that shall not be named) article

it details that Amy Pascal actually had alot of say with homecoming... from the casting of Tom Holland in civil war down to a few other things... So if people are wondering why this may break with the way marvel does things.. look know further... Marvel didn't have "as" complete control as we thought or hoped for.. Sony still had complete control
The article doesn't say Sony had complete creative control, .
It says Pascal was instrumental in key decisions such as the casting of Tom Holland.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"