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

[PeterBenParker]

She does't have to be popular. She can be popular by the end of the movie. Who knows. Before Mary jane was her happy self she was sad and lonely due to abuse at home but began acting out to hide her true feelings.

Idk man, I feel like doing it in the reverse way would just be weird.

IMO, it's better to start off with the facade that she's popular and a bombshell and slowly reveal she's a little bit broken and Peter is there to be her superglue/duct tape/whatever.

 

[ironwez20]

This was a stupid thing to do & most fans agree

What was a stupid thing to do?

 

[ironwez20]

Idk man, I feel like doing it in the reverse way would just be weird.

IMO, it's better to start off with the facade that she's popular and a bombshell and slowly reveal she's a little bit broken and Peter is there to be her superglue/duct tape/whatever.

yea idk how it will play out but I know alot of people won't be happy with either option. If it is just Michelle then people will be upset that they chose some random no name instead of a well known character. if it's mary jane then people will be mad that she is different from what they remember her as.

 

[harryoscop]

Zendaya could be a good MJ. "Michelle", however?

 

[Dark Raven]

She does't have to be popular. She can be popular by the end of the movie. Who knows. Before Mary jane was her happy self she was sad and lonely due to abuse at home but began acting out to hide her true feelings.

So once she becomes the MJ everyone knows and becomes the outgoing popular party girl, is she going to have another arc to show that behind this superficial facade she's not actually like that but a socially awkward and frumpy book worm that no one ever realised before?

 

[TheRandomFanBoy]

So once she becomes the MJ everyone knows and becomes the outgoing popular party girl, is she going to have another arc to show that behind this superficial facade she's not actually like that but a socially awkward and frumpy book worm that no one ever realised before?

That person can always watch She's All That if they want that story line

 

[X Knight]

Idk man, I feel like doing it in the reverse way would just be weird.

IMO, it's better to start off with the facade that she's popular and a bombshell and slowly reveal she's a little bit broken and Peter is there to be her superglue/duct tape/whatever.

exactly.

I've made this analogy before.

but it's like Peter starting out as a jock or non-science guy, who by the end of the film, becomes the nerdy science geek that Peter Parker should be.

that's not the same character, because the journey the character takes is way different.

Or like if Tony Stark starts out as a mousy, frail, meekish weapons engineer who becomes the rich playboy Stark by the end of the film.

it's not the same thing!!

 

[Dark Raven]

That person can always watch She's All That if they want that story line

She's all that is the opposite of that storyline. She's all that is the geeky girl transforming into the beauty, which is what they're doing in homecoming.

 

[X Knight]

She's all that is the opposite of that storyline. She's all that is the geeky girl transforming into the beauty, which is what they're doing in homecoming.

and that arc doesn't fit the character of MJ AT ALL.

 

[PeterBenParker]

exactly.

I've made this analogy before.

but it's like Peter starting out as a jock or non-science guy, who by the end of the film, becomes the nerdy science geek that Peter Parker should be.

that's not the same character, because the journey the character takes is way different.

Or like if Tony Stark starts out as a mousy, frail, meekish weapons engineer who becomes the rich playboy Stark by the end of the film.

it's not the same thing!!

Which is kinda why I dislike how this Spider-Man may go on a journey over the course of the film (or films) to be what Tobey and Andrew's versions accomplished in one film.

I understand the coming-of-age stuff but why couldn't that be based on Peter, already confidently Spider-Man, deciding where he belongs in a world full of a superheroes? Would be a nice contrast to the previous films where he had to be all alone but now he's not because of the larger environment.

 

[ironwez20]

No I think by the end of the film he gets it. Did you catch the times when he says " I got to do this by myself" And "I'm tired of being treated like a kid"

 

[Poppy]

and that arc doesn't fit the character of MJ AT ALL.

Exactly.

And it's not either a new 'take on the story' it's a completely different one. One we don't need and that is direspectful to the source material.

This idea of Zendaya turning into MJ in one night for a party is...Kinda stupid gotta admit. It would reduce MJ to be just pretty and having red hair while completely erasing her party girl persona so no thank you. I haven't saw the new clip but I've seen Zendaya's pic and again she's wearing no make up, her hair isn't done. The completely opposite of MJ. At this rate, if we gonna get MJ I think it will be in the after credit scene or the sequel.

 

[ironwez20]

It's strange. Hmm what if Zendaya is like some Thanos agent or somthing that sets up infinity war? I mean maybe she spies on peter to get close to the avengers. maybe thats why she ask in the clip what are you hiding?

Just throwing in some theories. I'm honestly at a loss on who she could be.

 

[SpideyJJ]

I'm still of the opinion she's the 'Kate Bishop' of the movie to Peter's Miles and Ned's Ganke.


If she does turn out to be MJ, well it won't even matter to me. The information we've gotten concerning the movie is already making his cast, journey & world so unidentifiable that frumpy MJ would just be another liberty taken in the name of being different

 

[guyisnotcool]

I'm still of the opinion she's the 'Kate Bishop' of the movie to Peter's Miles and Ned's Ganke.


If she does turn out to be MJ, well it won't even matter to me. The information we've gotten concerning the movie is already making his cast, journey & world so unidentifiable that frumpy MJ would just be another liberty taken in the name of being different

MJ or Katie is still hard determine because I'm not sure Katie Bishop is is really needed for a Peter Parker story.
Sure Ned acts like Ganke but if that's Katie she would be shown in the background have a giant crush on Miles.. er Peter instead or repeatly mocking him. Then I have seen the movie

 

[X Knight]

Exactly.

And it's not either a new 'take on the story' it's a completely different one. One we don't need and that is direspectful to the source material.

This idea of Zendaya turning into MJ in one night for a party is...Kinda stupid gotta admit. It would reduce MJ to be just pretty and having red hair while completely erasing her party girl persona so no thank you. I haven't saw the new clip but I've seen Zendaya's pic and again she's wearing no make up, her hair isn't done. The completely opposite of MJ. At this rate, if we gonna get MJ I think it will be in the after credit scene or the sequel.

exactly.

Just because you can come up with a compelling or interesting story arc for a character doesn't mean you can apply it to just any character - especially already existing characters with established history.

Characters have 2 types of identities.

They have character identities - how they act, behavior, motivations, etc.

And they have visual identities - how they look, physical appearance, etc.

If you make changes to the visual identity ( change hair color or race, for example ), then you should try to keep the character identity as intact as possible.

Likewise, if you make changes to the character identity, you should try to keep the visual identity as intact as possible.

Look at Ultimate comic MJ. She was brainy Jane and the childhood friend/confidant of Peter, which was different from her classic 616 version. So, her character identity changed a bit. However, her visual identity was kept intact ( pretty white girl with red hair ) and you could immediately identify her as MJ.

Same with Ultimate cartoon MJ. Her character identity was a bit different in that she was more like Lois Lane reporter and she wanted to work for the Bugle instead of Peter. However, she was similar to Ultimate comic MJ in that she was Peter's childhood friend and confidant. And, of course, she kept her visual identity.

So, even though 616, Ultimate comic, and Ultimate cartoon MJ differed from each other, they all shared certain key traits of the character. They were different takes on the character, yet immediately recognizable as the character of MJ.

That's not what they are doing with "Michelle."

They are changing BOTH the visual identity and character identity of the character to the point where she is totally unrecognizable as the character.

I just watched that new MTV clip, and sure, Michelle finally smiled a bit. But she still looks and acts nothing like MJ.

If I hadn't been following this and had no idea about this casting or character, and I watched that clip for the 1st time, I would NEVER in a million years think that's the new MJ.

Now, if she were pretty, white, and a red head, I'd think she might be the new MJ, even though her character is off, because at least she'd retain her traditional visual identity.

Or, even if they changed her race, but she was pretty and had red hair, and acted like a popular party girl or was Peter's best friend/confidant, I'd think she could be MJ because they would be keeping her character identity.

For the character to be recognizable, you have to maintain at least some degree of familiarity with a character's 2 identities.

Otherwise, you might as well just make up a brand new character like Rachel in the Nolan Bat films. Do that instead of hijacking an existing and iconic character like Mary Jane Watson.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

Now, if she were pretty, white, and a red head, I'd think she might be the new MJ, even though her character is off, because at least she'd retain her traditional visual identity.

Or, even if they changed her race, but she was pretty and had red hair, and acted like a popular party girl or was Peter's best friend/confidant, I'd think she could be MJ because they would be keeping her character identity.

I'd prefer the latter over the former.

Raimi maintained the visual identity--pretty, red hair, etc. but the characterization was off.

That's why when Zendaya was initially cast and speculation was that she would be MJ...I am ok with it. Because she has that 'it' quality to make a good MJ and pull off that 'nothing can hurt me, I'm above the pain' attitude, and party girl persona that made classic MJ. I'd like to have the red hair too but character is more important imo.

Especially if they go this whole 'she's all that' makeover idea...it's just wrong for MJ.

Part of what makes MJ so great is that in the beginning she's judged because of that party-girl persona as being shallow or someone who's too care free to actually care deeply for someone else. It's only when we learn how she's using that persona like a mask, just like Peter, to hide her own pain and hurt, we see just how nuanced and beautiful a person she actually is.

I understand adaptations are supposed to make changes...they all do...it's just part of the game, but this is one of those things you really don't need to. MJ is such a fantastic well-written character and her arc is truly noteworthy and if nothing else, creates such a bond with Peter because of it. Also, aside from one other adaptation, I've yet to see MJ be presented faithfully to her 616 version that it'd be refreshing to see the new movies accomplish that feat.

I swear, I will be so utterly and deeply upset and disappointed if they manage to yet again screw up MJ.

 

[X Knight]

I'd prefer the latter over the former.

Raimi maintained the visual identity--pretty, red hair, etc. but the characterization was off.

That's why when Zendaya was initially cast and speculation was that she would be MJ...I am ok with it. Because she has that 'it' quality to make a good MJ and pull off that 'nothing can hurt me, I'm above the pain' attitude, and party girl persona that made classic MJ. I'd like to have the red hair too but character is more important imo.

Especially if they go this whole 'she's all that' makeover idea...it's just wrong for MJ.

Part of what makes MJ so great is that in the beginning she's judged because of that party-girl persona as being shallow or someone who's too care free to actually care deeply for someone else. It's only when we learn how she's using that persona like a mask, just like Peter, to hide her own pain and hurt, we see just how nuanced and beautiful a person she actually is.

I understand adaptations are supposed to make changes...they all do...it's just part of the game, but this is one of those things you really don't need to. MJ is such a fantastic well-written character and her arc is truly noteworthy and if nothing else, creates such a bond with Peter because of it. Also, aside from one other adaptation, I've yet to see MJ be presented faithfully to her 616 version that it'd be refreshing to see the new movies accomplish that feat.

I swear, I will be so utterly and deeply upset and disappointed if they manage to yet again screw up MJ.

I agree - though I disagree about the red hair part. I think it's so associated with the character that you have to have it, imo.

we have to see a truly faithful adaptation of 616 MJ on film.

Raimi MJ came close, with the hint towards hiding an abusive home life.

but there were other problems with Raimi MJ.

and then she was absent from the TASM films.

so now, with the new franchise, I was hoping they'd give us a more faithful adaptation of 616 MJ.

as you said, there's a lot of material to mine from without having to give her unneeded character arcs that totally run counter to her character ( ugly duckling transformation ).

 

[UltimateWebhead]

I agree - though I disagree about the red hair part. I think it's so associated with the character that you have to have it, imo.

we have to see a truly faithful adaptation of 616 MJ on film.

Raimi MJ came close, with the hint towards hiding an abusive home life.

but there were other problems with Raimi MJ.

and then she was absent from the TASM films.

so now, with the new franchise, I was hoping they'd give us a more faithful adaptation of 616 MJ.

as you said, there's a lot of material to mine from without having to give her unneeded character arcs that totally run counter to her character ( ugly duckling transformation ).

Yes, imo, visual authenticity is desirable. Especially with such an important and easily recognizable character like MJ.

However, being given an either/or type of choice to be made, I'd go for characterization over visual. I'd rather have both and I see no reason why it can't be both. Change in this regard is something that just seems like change for the sake of it and imo that is wrong.

Raimi had the visual and got at least part of the background, i.e. abusive father, however his characterization left much to be desired. His MJ was a downer and that is not in line with her at all. In 616, even after we learn of her background and the 'mask' that she wore, MJ never turned into this drab, negative-nancy bringing others down. She maintained her strength and in fact, the revelation only served to make her character even better. She evolved.

I too wish to see a more faithful adaptation. It'll be an outright shame if they mess it up again.

 

[X Knight]

Yes, imo, visual authenticity is desirable. Especially with such an important and easily recognizable character like MJ.

However, being given an either/or type of choice to be made, I'd go for characterization over visual. I'd rather have both and I see no reason why it can't be both. Change in this regard is something that just seems like change for the sake of it and imo that is wrong.

Raimi had the visual and got at least part of the background, i.e. abusive father, however his characterization left much to be desired. His MJ was a downer and that is not in line with her at all. In 616, even after we learn of her background and the 'mask' that she wore, MJ never turned into this drab, negative-nancy bringing others down. She maintained her strength and in fact, the revelation only served to make her character even better. She evolved.

I too wish to see a more faithful adaptation. It'll be an outright shame if they mess it up again.

agreed.

 

[harryoscop]

What drugs are you on, son? Gwen has always been depicted as popular in comics. The deviation of the norm is the Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon and before that, the one from the Ultimate Universe.

PS: It's getting hotter in here, isn't it?

PS2: I love Liz

Are you hinting she is indeed Gwen?

 

[Talion]

Are you hinting she is indeed Gwen?

What's the jump of logic you have to make after I've just told you that Gwen has always been characterized as popular in comics to say that I'm hinting that Zendaya is playing Gwen?

Let me drop some affirmations here:

Zendaya isn't playing MJ / Mary Jane.
Zendaya isn't playing Gwen.

Is Zendaya playing Michelle?

 

[harryoscop]

What's the jump of logic you have to make after I've just told you that Gwen has always been characterized as popular in comics to say that I'm hinting that Zendaya is playing Gwen?

Let me drop some affirmations here:

Zendaya isn't playing MJ / Mary Jane.
Zendaya isn't playing Gwen.

Is Zendaya playing Michelle?

No i was talking about Angourie Rice

 

[Talion]

No i was talking about Angourie Rice

 

[Spider-man95]

What's the jump of logic you have to make after I've just told you that Gwen has always been characterized as popular in comics to say that I'm hinting that Zendaya is playing Gwen?

Let me drop some affirmations here:

Zendaya isn't playing MJ / Mary Jane.
Zendaya isn't playing Gwen.

Is Zendaya playing Michelle?

Still going with an adaptation of Kate Bishop.