The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Who would be the best MJ?

[blake c]

Nah.

Maybe its just me lmao

 

[MydnightPhoenix]

Just want to say the last crop of pix of Angelique and Anahí would make the girls look like child molesters next to Andrew. He looks 16 and they look like the hott 25yr old teacher he would lust after.

 

[Any Carolina]

Just want to say the last crop of pix of Angelique and Anahí would make the girls look like child molesters next to Andrew. He looks 16 and they look like the hott 25yr old teacher he would lust after.

Ok, u think this girl appears to be older than Andrew?

 

[Super Jim]

Saw Shaelene on the MTV Music Awards last night. Sorry, but all I could think is...

Plain Jane

Which would equate to plain Mary Jane!

 

[JOE]

I see what you did there. ^

 

[DigificWriter]

Saw Shaelene on the MTV Music Awards last night. Sorry, but all I could think is...

Plain Jane

Which would equate to plain Mary Jane!

So? As has been gone over ad nauseam, Mary Jane is not required to be a drop-dead gorgeous bombshell.

 

[Vid Electricz]

So? As has been gone over ad nauseam, Mary Jane is not required to be a drop-dead gorgeous bombshell.

Excuse me. I think you haven't been paying attention to this thread. Every pic posted has been a sexy pin up or glam shot.

Seriously, get with it. This is how REAL women look.

 

[Green Goblin]

#BringBackDunst

 

[DigificWriter]

Excuse me. I think you haven't been paying attention to this thread. Every pic posted has been a sexy pin up or glam shot.

Seriously, get with it. This is how REAL women look.

The sarcasm is obvious, but thank you for enforcing my point.

Just because a bombshell MJ is apparently what everyone wants, that doesn't mean that it's an actual requirement that she be a bombshell. If it were, we wouldn't have Ultimate MJ, Spider-Man Loves Mary Jane MJ, Raimi MJ, or any of the other countless non-bombshell MJs we've had in various mediums.

Mary Jane can be portrayed however a given creative team wants, and people need to accept that and stop whining just because we're not given the bombshell version of the character every single time she shows up in any given medium.

 

[Vid Electricz]

The sarcasm is obvious, but thank you for enforcing my point.

Just because a bombshell MJ is apparently what everyone wants, that doesn't mean that it's an actual requirement that she be a bombshell. If it were, we wouldn't have Ultimate MJ, Spider-Man Loves Mary Jane MJ, Raimi MJ, or any of the other countless non-bombshell MJs we've had in various mediums.

Mary Jane can be portrayed however a given creative team wants, and people need to accept that and stop whining just because we're not given the bombshell version of the character every single time she shows up in any given medium.

Boom. The "bombshell" look (I feel like pathetic even typing that) is absolutely unnecessary for the character. It doesn't bring anything new or interesting to the character aside from a little fanservice for the slobbering adolescent boys.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

Saw Shaelene on the MTV Music Awards last night. Sorry, but all I could think is...

Plain Jane

Which would equate to plain Mary Jane!

She looked pretty good to me:

 

[Super Jim]

^ I was refering to how she came off while speaking!

It was sad how a Miley Cyrus look-a-like took the spotlight away from Shaelene.

Look, no doubt she's cute, but so is Emma, and this is the thing you guys just don't get...

MJ needs to be different than Gwen!

We were given girl next door Gwen, which is the Gwen most of us wanted, and pretty much everyone is happy with that!

But now MJ needs to be different, so no girl next door, no book worm, no hipster MJ... It has to be something that is very different from Gwen, which means...

"bombshell" MJ

and Shaelene just doesn't pull that off, especially once she starts talking! She's a great girl next door, but Emma does that better.

 

[DigificWriter]

We were given girl next door Gwen, which is the Gwen most of us wanted, and pretty much everyone is happy with that!

TASM Gwen isn't the 'girl next door'; she's the 'popular chick who's got beauty and brains' (actually, she's very much like a very good friend of mine from HS who was incredibly beautiful and very popular but who also was one of the smartest people I've ever known).

MJ needs to be different than Gwen!

Who says that MJ and Gwen won't be different in the TASM series with Shailene in the role? Even if Shailene and Gwen are similar in looks, that's not what will define them; what will define them will be the way they're written and the respective roles that they play in the story.

But now MJ needs to be different, so no girl next door, no book worm, no hipster MJ... It has to be something that is very different from Gwen, which means...

"bombshell" MJ

Who says? MJ and Gwen can be vastly different characters without MJ having to be this gorgeous supermodel. It's all going to come down to, as I said, the way they're written and the roles they fill in the story.

 

[sl500jazz]

The sarcasm is obvious, but thank you for enforcing my point.

Just because a bombshell MJ is apparently what everyone wants, that doesn't mean that it's an actual requirement that she be a bombshell. If it were, we wouldn't have Ultimate MJ, Spider-Man Loves Mary Jane MJ, Raimi MJ, or any of the other countless non-bombshell MJs we've had in various mediums.

Mary Jane can be portrayed however a given creative team wants, and people need to accept that and stop whining just because we're not given the bombshell version of the character every single time she shows up in any given medium.

616 MJ and Ultimate MJ (or even the MJ from Spider-man loves Mary Jane ) are completely different characters from different universes with different characteristics, ages, backstories, interests, personalities, and goals . Really the only thing they have in common is the name and hair color. Comparing them is like comparing apples and oranges. Just because being the "bombshell" isn't a requirement for one incarnation of the character, doesn't mean the same for another (particularly the mainstream version of the character). Webb's Gwen is very 616 and TSSM intelligent, sweet, and pretty girl next door (nothing like the punk rock rebel ultimate version). People wanting a 616 MJ (in which being the "bombshell" is an integral part of her characterization among many other things) mostly stems from Web's portrayal of Gwen and Raimi's portrayal of MJ. It also stems from the fact that we have yet to be given the mainstream version of the character in any other medium apart from the original comics. The only thing that came the closest in characterization was TSSM MJ.

If we are going to argue that being a "bombshell" is not a requirement because of the way that MJ was depicted in alternate universes, then one could easily argue that:

MJ doesn't need to be fiesty or vivacious. She could be a pretty, sweet and intelligent girl next door kind of like 616 Gwen Stacy. (ultimate)

Forget about being attracted to Peter Parker- the person. Mary-Jane should be infatuated with Spider-Man from the beginning, (shockingly) unaware of Parker's dual identity. (Spider-Man Loves MJ and Raimi's MJ)

MJ doesn't need to be in a relationship with Peter Parker or Spider-man at all. In fact, she could be a lesbian who is in a romantic relationship with a female version of Sunfire. (Exiles).

MJ doesn't need to be a model/actress (616), a journalist (ultimate), or a civilian at all. She could have spidey powers just like Peter and take up the mantle of Spider-Woman. (Exiles and Marvel Mangaverse).

MJ doesn't need to stay alive. She could be the victim of a tragic death just like Gwen Stacy. After being exposed to Peter's radioactive body fluids, Webb could have her die of cancer (Spider-Man: Reign).

MJ doesn't need to be human. She could be a water buffalo (Peter Porker, the Spectacular Spider-Ham)... or she could be a man (Michael B. Jordan). Lol just kidding.

My point is : basically anything goes. Who is Mary Jane? I'd like to think that she is the troubled feisty and vivacious "bombshell" party animal who is constantly objectified and written off as being shallow and flighty, but really has a heart of gold. This is the character that Stan Lee created (that many others have changed and capitalized off of). The character that I and many others fell in love with. But based on alternate universes, she could essentially be anyone or anything. The original character completely lost.

 

[fuflipflops]

She looked pretty good to me:

her body's bangin'

 

[DigificWriter]

616 MJ and Ultimate MJ (or even the MJ from Spider-man loves Mary Jane ) are completely different characters from different universes with different characteristics, ages, backstories, interests, personalities, and goals . Really the only thing they have in common is the name and hair color. Comparing them is like comparing apples and oranges. Just because being the "bombshell" isn't a requirement for one incarnation of the character, doesn't mean the same for another (particularly the mainstream version of the character). Webb's Gwen is very 616 and TSSM intelligent, sweet, and pretty girl next door (nothing like the punk rock rebel ultimate version). People wanting a 616 MJ (in which being the "bombshell" is an integral part of her characterization among many other things) mostly stems from Web's portrayal of Gwen and Raimi's portrayal of MJ. It also stems from the fact that we have yet to be given the mainstream version of the character in any other medium apart from the original comics. The only thing that came the closest in characterization was TSSM MJ.

If we are going to argue that being a "bombshell" is not a requirement because of the way that MJ was depicted in alternate universes, then one could easily argue that:

MJ doesn't need to be fiesty or vivacious. She could be a pretty, sweet and intelligent girl next door kind of like 616 Gwen Stacy. (ultimate)

Forget about being attracted to Peter Parker- the person. Mary-Jane should be infatuated with Spider-Man from the beginning, (shockingly) unaware of Parker's dual identity. (Spider-Man Loves MJ and Raimi's MJ)

MJ doesn't need to be in a relationship with Peter Parker or Spider-man at all. In fact, she could be a lesbian who is in a romantic relationship with a female version of Sunfire. (Exiles).

MJ doesn't need to be a model/actress (616), a journalist (ultimate), or a civilian at all. She could have spidey powers just like Peter and take up the mantle of Spider-Woman. (Exiles and Marvel Mangaverse).

MJ doesn't need to stay alive. She could be the victim of a tragic death just like Gwen Stacy. After being exposed to Peter's radioactive body fluids, Webb could have her die of cancer (Spider-Man: Reign).

MJ doesn't need to be human. She could be a water buffalo (Peter Porker, the Spectacular Spider-Ham)... or she could be a man (Michael B. Jordan). Lol just kidding.

My point is : basically anything goes. Who is Mary Jane? I'd like to think that she is the troubled feisty and vivacious "bombshell" party animal who is constantly objectified and written off as being shallow and flighty, but really has a heart of gold. This is the character that Stan Lee created (that many others have changed and capitalized off of). The character that I and many others fell in love with. But based on alternate universes, she could essentially be anyone or anything. The original character completely lost.

Thank you for even further encoureging my point, but I'm not sure what you're arguing either for or against because your opinions seem to be very fluid.

 

[sl500jazz]

^
Lol. Didn't realize I was encouraging your point. I'm not a big fan of any of MJ's alternate versions. I know that they are all vastly different from one another, so I understand your argument that Webb could theoretically do whatever he wanted (make her a lesbian Spider-Woman or an intelligent girl next door journalist), but to me (and I'm sure many others) Stan Lee's 616 feisty 'bombshell' party girl facade MJ is the 'real' Mary Jane Watson. It's the mainstream and iconic version of the character, and the version that we have yet to see fully developed in other medium apart from the original comics. Webb changed certain story/plot elements of Spidey and Gwen and added aspects of Ultimate, but for the most part they are very mainstream and iconic 616 in terms of characterization. So I wouldn't really understand the need to overhaul or change MJs character when Raimi did just that.

Then again, I never understood the need for alternate versions of established characters in the first place, If you are going to change an established character so drastically (like what Ultimate, Exiles, etc. did with MJ) why not just create a new character.

 

[DigificWriter]

I never understood the need for alternate versions of established characters in the first place, If you are going to change an established character so drastically (like what Ultimate, Exiles, etc. did with MJ) why not just create a new character.

You clearly understand nothing whatsoever about storytelling.

I hate to break it to you, but even your 'precious' "bombshell" MJ hasn't been portrayed the same way constantly. It's simply the nature of storytelling for different people to approach telling a particular story in many different ways.

If you can't accept that, you really have no business investing yourself in Spider-Man stories (or any other stories of any kind, for that matter).

 

[sl500jazz]

You clearly understand nothing whatsoever about storytelling.

Wow...It's incredible how some people can go from 0 to 60 on these threads for no reason whatsoever and over something so trivial. Really? You are certainly open to saying that you disagree, but was that comment really warranted? I hope you realize,that it ultimately doesn't help your argument or prove anything by saying that.

I hate to break it to you, but even your 'precious' "bombshell" MJ hasn't been portrayed the same way constantly. It's simply the nature of storytelling for different people to approach telling a particular story in many different ways.

You broke it to me??? If anything I had very nicely illustrated that Mary Jane has been portrayed in very different ways within alternate universes. If we are judging this character based on her appearances in alternate universes, the poor girl doesn't have any identity whatsoever because she has been portrayed as being anything and everything.

As I've said before, I believe that the characterization and identity of 616 MJ (the mainstream and iconic version of the character) will forever be the 'real' portrayal of Mary Jane Watson. It's the one that came first. It's the one that has 40+ years of backstory and character development. Webb can choose to completely change the character's identity (just like he could have chosen to completely change Gwen and Peter's characterization, which he didn't) , but that doesn't change the fact that I (and I'm sure many others) wouldn't see that character as being MJ (despite the name and hair color). That's the way that I felt about Raimi's MJ (and maybe even Raimi's Spider-Man/ Peter Parker).

And I never realized that capitalizing off of someone else's ideas and intellectual property was the 'nature' of storytelling. Certainly it's prevalent in society, but the 'nature' of storytelling? If that was the case, than there would be no need to create new stories and characters when writers could just rewrite stories like Huckleberry Finn, Jane Eyre, Oliver Twist, the Great Gatsby, etc. over and over again.

I'm not even against alternate universes. I like the idea of small adjustments, alternate timelines, and 'what if...' universes, but to completely change a character's identity, appearance, backstory, interests, personality, occupation, and goals makes no sense to me. At that point, you might as well create a new character. Are the characters that we know and love just a name- the character's identity completely expendable?

Oh wait... this is the comic book industry we are talking about. So, of course, adding an established name (like "Spider-Man" and "Mary Jane") to an otherwise completely different character will help boost sales and cultivate interest, then to create completely new characters.

If you can't accept that, you really have no business investing yourself in Spider-Man stories (or any other stories of any kind, for that matter).

Once again, a comment that doesn't add to your argument in any way.

 

[DigificWriter]

Wow...It's incredible how some people can go from 0 to 60 on these threads for no reason whatsoever and over something so trivial. Really? You are certainly open to saying that you disagree, but was that comment really warranted? I hope you realize,that it ultimately doesn't help your argument or prove anything by saying that.

Your attitude makes the comments you're objecting to entirely relevant because those comments are designed to point out how ridiculous your attitude is, which I will further demonstrate in a second.

You broke it to me??? If anything I had very nicely illustrated that Mary Jane has been portrayed in very different ways within alternate universes. If we are judging this character based on her appearances in alternate universes, the poor girl doesn't have any identity whatsoever because she has been portrayed as being anything and everything.

That comment wasn't referring to alternate versions of the character; it was referring to your 'precious' '616 MJ'.

As I've said before, I believe that the characterization and identity of 616 MJ (the mainstream and iconic version of the character) will forever be the 'real' portrayal of Mary Jane Watson. It's the one that came first. It's the one that has 40+ years of backstory and character development. Webb can choose to completely change the character's identity (just like he could have chosen to completely change Gwen and Peter's characterization, which he didn't) , but that doesn't change the fact that I (and I'm sure many others) wouldn't see that character as being MJ (despite the name and hair color). That's the way that I felt about Raimi's MJ (and maybe even Raimi's Spider-Man/ Peter Parker).

I understand that. What you ought to understand is that your attitude in this regard demonstrates that you have zero understanding of how storytelling works, and is therefore ridiculous because it is entirely subjective, particularly when, as I noted, the very character you're trying to tout as being the 'true MJ' has not been constantly portrayed the same. Every person who has written or illustrated any of the 'mainstream' Spider-Man books has brought new things to the portrayal of the character.

And I never realized that capitalizing off of someone else's ideas and intellectual property was the 'nature' of storytelling. Certainly it's prevalent in society, but the 'nature' of storytelling? If that was the case, than there would be no need to create new stories and characters when writers could just rewrite stories like Huckleberry Finn, Jane Eyre, Oliver Twist, the Great Gatsby, etc. over and over again.

I'm not even against alternate universes. I like the idea of small adjustments, alternate timelines, and 'what if...' universes, but to completely change a character's identity, appearance, backstory, interests, personality, occupation, and goals makes no sense to me. At that point, you might as well create a new character. Are the characters that we know and love just a name- the character's identity completely expendable?

Oh wait... this is the comic book industry we are talking about. So, of course, adding an established name (like "Spider-Man" and "Mary Jane") to an otherwise completely different character will help boost sales and cultivate interest, then to create completely new characters.

 

[Super Jim]

616 MJ and Ultimate MJ (or even the MJ from Spider-man loves Mary Jane ) are completely different characters from different universes with different characteristics, ages, backstories, interests, personalities, and goals . Really the only thing they have in common is the name and hair color. Comparing them is like comparing apples and oranges. Just because being the "bombshell" isn't a requirement for one incarnation of the character, doesn't mean the same for another (particularly the mainstream version of the character). Webb's Gwen is very 616 and TSSM intelligent, sweet, and pretty girl next door (nothing like the punk rock rebel ultimate version). People wanting a 616 MJ (in which being the "bombshell" is an integral part of her characterization among many other things) mostly stems from Web's portrayal of Gwen and Raimi's portrayal of MJ. It also stems from the fact that we have yet to be given the mainstream version of the character in any other medium apart from the original comics. The only thing that came the closest in characterization was TSSM MJ.

If we are going to argue that being a "bombshell" is not a requirement because of the way that MJ was depicted in alternate universes, then one could easily argue that:

MJ doesn't need to be fiesty or vivacious. She could be a pretty, sweet and intelligent girl next door kind of like 616 Gwen Stacy. (ultimate)

Forget about being attracted to Peter Parker- the person. Mary-Jane should be infatuated with Spider-Man from the beginning, (shockingly) unaware of Parker's dual identity. (Spider-Man Loves MJ and Raimi's MJ)

MJ doesn't need to be in a relationship with Peter Parker or Spider-man at all. In fact, she could be a lesbian who is in a romantic relationship with a female version of Sunfire. (Exiles).

MJ doesn't need to be a model/actress (616), a journalist (ultimate), or a civilian at all. She could have spidey powers just like Peter and take up the mantle of Spider-Woman. (Exiles and Marvel Mangaverse).

MJ doesn't need to stay alive. She could be the victim of a tragic death just like Gwen Stacy. After being exposed to Peter's radioactive body fluids, Webb could have her die of cancer (Spider-Man: Reign).

MJ doesn't need to be human. She could be a water buffalo (Peter Porker, the Spectacular Spider-Ham)... or she could be a man (Michael B. Jordan). Lol just kidding.

My point is : basically anything goes. Who is Mary Jane? I'd like to think that she is the troubled feisty and vivacious "bombshell" party animal who is constantly objectified and written off as being shallow and flighty, but really has a heart of gold. This is the character that Stan Lee created (that many others have changed and capitalized off of). The character that I and many others fell in love with. But based on alternate universes, she could essentially be anyone or anything. The original character completely lost.

^

Someone gets it!!!!!

As much as I went through the whole "Gwen and MJ have to be different" argument, it really comes down to this...

Webb gave us 616 Gwen. Does anyone disagree?

Then he should give us 616 MJ!

 

[sl500jazz]

Your attitude makes the comments you're objecting to entirely relevant because those comments are designed to point out how ridiculous your attitude is, which I will further demonstrate in a second.

That really doesn't excuse the brazen or rude quality of the comments themselves, which are completely unwarranted. And honestly, I could have said the same things about you. You've offered no proof or evidence to back up the kind of assertions that you've been making.

That comment wasn't referring to alternate versions of the character; it was referring to your 'precious' '616 MJ'.

Every person who has written or illustrated any of the 'mainstream' Spider-Man books has brought new things to the portrayal of the character

OK, Now I completely understand what it is that you are trying to argue. You are absolutely correct in saying that every writer/artist who has ever worked on the character has contributed something stylistically to MJ's character development, but for the most part, MJ's characterization and depiction has been very consistent within the 616 universe. It's not like one moment she's feisty, flirtatious, and wild and the next she's shy, demure, and wholesome. It's not like one moment she's a model/actress party-girl and the next she's a journalist bookworm or a hipster. It's not like one moment she's the "bombshell" and the next she's "the girl next door". In the 616 universe each new writer (for better or worse) has added an element to the plot or the character's development, but none have changed the character's identity.

But please, if you have any evidence to prove the contrary, then feel free to post it.

 

[Vid Electricz]

^

Someone gets it!!!!!

As much as I went through the whole "Gwen and MJ have to be different" argument, it really comes down to this...

Webb gave us 616 Gwen. Does anyone disagree?

Then he should give us 616 MJ!

Yes. absolutely disagree. The Gwen in TASM was nothing like Gwen in the 616 comics.

In the comics, Gwen was passive, jealous, insecure and pretty "vanilla".

In TASM she was bold, sassy, assertive, understanding, etc...pretty much everything that 616 Gwen wasn't...

But you mean appearance though, right? Because that's what matters. Not the character. Yeah, she had blonde hair and wore skirts. Just like Gwen

Did she look like this though (gotta love comparing a human being to a cartoon drawing!)?

No (thank god).

Say...if you were to change the hair color from blonde to red she'd look JUST like...

 

[DigificWriter]

That really doesn't excuse the brazen or rude quality of the comments themselves, which are completely unwarranted. And honestly, I could have said the same things about you. You've offered no proof or evidence to back up the kind of assertions that you've been making.





OK, Now I completely understand what it is that you are trying to argue. You are absolutely correct in saying that every writer/artist who has ever worked on the character has contributed something stylistically to MJ's character development, but for the most part, MJ's characterization and depiction has been very consistent within the 616 universe. It's not like one moment she's feisty, flirtatious, and wild and the next she's shy, demure, and wholesome. It's not like one moment she's a model/actress party-girl and the next she's a journalist bookworm or a hipster. It's not like one moment she's the "bombshell" and the next she's "the girl next door". In the 616 universe each new writer (for better or worse) has added an element to the plot or the character's development, but none have changed the character's identity.

But please, if you have any evidence to prove the contrary, then feel free to post it.

There are a number of ways I could respond to your comments, but they're even more 'brazen and rude' than my other comments (which actually aren't that rude, although they ARE accurate based on your own statements and demonstrated attitude), so I'm going to hold my tongue and move on.

At any rate, Shailene still has the role, and, if we want to get right down to brass tacks, is therefore the 'best MJ' for this franchise as determined by those involved directly in it.

 

[Vid Electricz]

Who says that MJ and Gwen won't be different in the TASM series with Shailene in the role? Even if Shailene and Gwen are similar in looks, that's not what will define them; what will define them will be the way they're written and the respective roles that they play in the story.

Who says? MJ and Gwen can be vastly different characters without MJ having to be this gorgeous supermodel. It's all going to come down to, as I said, the way they're written and the roles they fill in the story.

You clearly understand nothing whatsoever about storytelling.

I hate to break it to you, but even your 'precious' "bombshell" MJ hasn't been portrayed the same way constantly. It's simply the nature of storytelling for different people to approach telling a particular story in many different ways.

If you can't accept that, you really have no business investing yourself in Spider-Man stories (or any other stories of any kind, for that matter).

Harsh words, but true.

Reading this thread and others like it have shown me that a lot of people, as you said, really don't understand anything about storytelling or characters. They recognize the most basic aesthetic similarities and outward fidelity to the source material, but beyond that, not much else. When an adaptation doesn't align with this very specific and narrow view, they become upset.