Why the Marvel Movies Should Ditch Peter Parker

[F-I-D-O]

If they're going to have a male Spider, then I'd be more interested in seeing Miles over Parker.
The issue with Peter is that anyone doing a good Peter Parker (Toby McGuiere's awkwardness) doesn't translate well to being in the suit, and people doing a good job as Spider-Man (Andrew Garfield) have a bad or unstable Peter.

Miles would immediately differentiate the Marvel Spider-Man from Sony's interpretations, giving less baggage to the character, and allowing for new stories to be told over "We have to redo this exact scene, because the old movie did it." Miles is also from the Ultimates line of comics, so he'd be closer to the existing MCU's source material. That said, Marvel phasing out the Ultimates universe might mean they want to tone down instances of those spin off characters.

Plus, I want to see Donald Glover in a superhero movie. Because who else would pull of Miles?

That said, the exact same bonuses that come from changing who Spider-Man is can be done by getting rid of the character. I'd be more interested in seeing Spider-Gwen or Spider-Girl, as those options would also give another main female character to the Marvel MCU. Hell, I'd deal with Spider-Gwen getting tech from her internship at Oscorp to take down street criminals over ANOTHER version of Uncle Ben's death. Because even if Marvel's "stopped doing origin stories," there's going to be an Uncle Ben (at least in flashback) for Spider Man.

[sub]At this point, Uncle Ben should be Sean Bean just for the "wink and nod" joke.
[sub]Aw man, Donald Glover Miles Morales with a Sean Bean Uncle. Now we're approaching Fox's FF level of diversity. No one would argue about that! [/sub][/sub]

 

[nightmare_gorilla]

Calling the MCU "whitewashed" is inaccurate. sure there's plenty of white heroes but that's because those heroes ARE white, don't give me that "coulda made em black" horse shit people want the same heroes they've been reading about for years and yes that includes race. white washing would be if they added luke cage and black panther as middle aged white guys. white washing suggests a concerned effort to turn characters white or exclude intentionally black characters which is bullshit. i'm excited as balls for black panther to show up, luke cage is like my top 5 favorite comic book heroes of all time and he's getting a tv show. I still wish they'd used michal jai white for him but i'm still excited.

Spiderman specifically IS peter parker, miles morales is the new, hip, trendy spiderman to enjoy reading to give you street cred with all your hipster friends and he's a fine hero but to suggest we need to shoehorn in black characters because that means we're being progressive is dumb. miles morales as far as i've heard is a great spiderman and a pretty good read but you wouldn't suggest they make a kamala khan ms. marvel movie BEFORE we get to see carol danvers would you? miles entire story is informed by the standard set by peter parker meaning without parker he has no starting point, no barometer, he gets to do "as good as I can", instead of being held to the standard set by those who came before him, in short he's a legacy and you can't have a legacy if you cut out the legacy....

 

[Risingblade]

How about we focus on making a good Spider-man instead. Hell we don't even have to see the guy under the suit till civil war.

 

[JimB]

How about instead we have Spider-Girl and stop pretending that race is the most important factor in choosing a superhero.

I do not remember the article saying it is. Would you please be so kind as to quote for me the passage that you think says so?

Diversity is a fine thing, and shouldn't be ignored, but it shouldn't be the reason that decisions like this get made.

Why not?

Somebody call the diversity police! There isn't enough black and/or women people in the Marvel movies! Somebody might be alienated and might come out of the theatre butthurt.

Do you genuinely believe what you are saying is representative of reality, or are you just setting up strawmen to knock down?

I just don't like the idea of Miles basically cannibalizing Peter because he has no interesting stories of his own or any sort of importance other than being Black Spider-Man. Now as an ancillary character? Sure, he works fine I suppose. However, he lacks any meaningful history or character to inherit such a lofty and iconic role as Spider-Man.

Dude, did you need read the thing where his uncle was the Prowler and tried to use him as a weapon against Scorpion? Or that his dad used to be an informant for SHIELD? Or the Venom one where his mother got killed? Or pretty much any of his storylines?

I'm just tired of all these legacy characters that have almost no relation to the heroes they replace.

You seem to be dodging the question. Have you read those stories?

Does Black Spider-Man really have to wear a black costume?

He's only half black, so, does that make it better? If not, then what is the percentage of African genetic heritage a person is allowed to wear before a black costume becomes not objectionable?

Ugh! The only reason people have a hard on for having Miles Morales instead of Peter Parker in the new movie is simply because he's black.

Half black.

It's more of the same politically correct bullshit that got us the train wreck that was Avengers NOW! and this god awful lady Thor book and the upcoming mess of a book that's nothing but female heroes.

I am enjoying the current volume of Thor quite a bit. Would you care to expand on what makes it "god-awful," as well as how you can tell a book that hasn't been published is a mess?

The same people who are going elbow deep to pull reasons out of their ass other than "Because he's black" to justify having Miles Morales in the movie would collectively lose their shit if Marvel decided to go with a white guy to fill a traditionally black role.

If you believe that both of those acts are equivalent, then I do not think you understand the cultural context of blackface in Hollywood and racial casting practices.

There is nothing specifically white about the character [of Peter Parker] in any way that matters.

I can agree with that.

Miles is thirteen. Or was, I think there was a timeskip recently so he may be a few years older, but not much.

One. He's fourteen.

Beyond that, a significant chunk of the character, including his origin, revolves around the death of Peter and living up to that legacy as Spider-Man.

A significant portion of Iron Man's origin revolves around Viet Nam. This is the kind of thing script writers are generally allowed to alter to fit the needs of a movie. I freely admit I don't know how to do so, but then, that is why I do not get paid lots and lots of money to write scripts for Marvel movies.

If you want another character, make another superhero! Honestly, how hard is it?

How many completely original characters do you believe succeed in their own comic books? How many completely original superhero characters do you believe succeed in their own movies?

Peter Parker is the only Spider-Man.

The people who own the rights to publish Spider-Man seem to disagree with you. I believe I will take their word over yours.

Miles Morales was only made for "diversity" reasons.

The story I have heard is that Miles Morales was created because Brian Michael Bendis liked the idea of Donald Glover as Spider-Man and decided to make a book about it. What is your offer of proof to back up your assertion?

Changing Peter Parker into a different race is a horrible idea.

Why? What about Peter Parker ceases to be Peter Parker if he is not Caucasian?

If there is a market, then how about making new characters?

How many completely original characters do you believe succeed in their own comic books? How many completely original superhero characters do you believe succeed in their own movies?

We are too lazy/stupid to create another non-white male character, so let's race-swap the existing one.

What is your offer of proof that this is the reasoning behind the creation of Miles Morales?

Sorry, but this is a bullshit argument. Marvel alone has put out something like three or four books with female characters head-lining them in the last year alone.

How many of them are original characters?

Why Marvel should not: They didn't spend time, money and give concessions to Sony in order to bring a "new character" to the screen. They did it to bring Spider-Man.

I obviously don't know this for a fact because I haven't read the contracts myself, but given that Mile Morales is Spider-Man, I have to assume Sony has the rights to make movies of that character too.

No, you shouldn't treat race representation like a checklist, but that's what adding a character for token reasons is.

I think there is a difference between throwing yet another black sidekick into a white character's story and making a movie about a (half-) black hero who is not defined, and indeed even code-named so we never forget it, by his race. I mean, have you ever counted how many black people were even in the streets during the Chitauri invasion during Marvel's Avengers? How many Asian people? How many Hispanics? If I weren't white, I'd have to feel pretty fucking invisible to the creators of the Marvel Universe.

I really don't get this "Race doesn't matter, leave him white" logic. If you truly think race doesn't matter, then you shouldn't give two fucks either way. If you think he should stay white, race obviously does matter in some way. White is still a race as much as black is, it's not a template for a default human.

You are so much better at this kind of thing than I am.

Maybe heroes and movie characters shouldn't be judged by their race, but by their deeds and character.

I direct you to Lilani's post on the topic. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/6.870477.21811604]

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Does Black Spider-Man really have to wear a black costume?

He's only half black, so, does that make it better? If not, then what is the percentage of African genetic heritage a person is allowed to wear before a black costume becomes not objectionable?

He's Black Spider-Man to Parker's White Spider-Man, and I find it hilarious that the cartoonists decided to give Black Spider-Man a nominal Black Spider-Suit.

 

[JimB]

I have read all but Miles Morales (save for a few pages, he just isn't that interesting to me based on the little I've seen and the summaries I've read, plus I've never been the biggest fan of the Ultimate universe to begin with).

Then you will have to forgive me for suggesting you have very little business describing the content of stories you have not read.

 

[Shingeki no Gingerbeard]

First off, Captain America: Civil War is (so far) only borrowing the name. We have no idea how much of the original storyline is being adapted; if any at all. The Russo Brothers previously teased William Burnside, though I could just as easily see John Walker. Everyone assumes "Civil War" has to mean Rogers v Stark. It doesn't have to. The Avengers: Age of Ultron is merely borrowing the name of an unrelated storyline.

Secondly, this isn't the first time Marvel and Sony have collaborated. Does anyone remember how they were in talks to put the Oscorp Tower into the NYC skyline during The Avengers? The only reason it didn't happen was because Marvel was too far into post-production to add it in. This already sets a precident for Garfield's Peter Parker to exist alongside the MCU.

IF we're getting an actual adaptation of the storyline from the books then don't be surprised if Peter is somehow involved with the war breaking out, and don't expect him to survive the film. Not that this is likely to happen. Filming begins in April. If he's not in the script by now, he won't be at all.

Whatever Spider-Man we get (and I hope and pray it's Miles,) he'll make his debut in the post-credits stinger.

I would also accept Takuya Yamashiro. A Japanese hero would certainly appeal to more markets than just here.

 

[The Bucket]

Given that in the Marvel universe the Norse legends are meant to be based upon contact with the Asgard, please explain how casting a black man as 'the whitest of gods' makes any fuckin' sense lore wise.

About as much sense as casting a blond Australian to be what in myth is a hairy ginger. And not making Thor and Sif married. And all the other dozens of lore changes the comics have always made, they've always just vaguely resembled the source material.

The comparison to what they are doing with Ant-man is not particularly apt as they are doing that primarily to get around the fact that Ant-man is a wife abusing son of a ***** without actually ignoring his back story.

The situation is a whole lot more complicated than him being a malicious wife beater (and unlike everyone else who makes mistakes in the Marvel universe that get people hurt or killed, he isnt allowed to forget it). Assuming we aren't talking about the Ultimate version of course.

 

[Saetha]

I imagine it would be difficult in terms of roster packing, but if I were allowed to be an idealist:

I actually kinda agree with this. Want more of Peter Parker? Afraid that Morales is too unrecognizable to be Spiderman? Well, why not make the next movie (Assuming there is one) about Peter Parker and Miles Morales. It could be a retirement story for Parker, an origin for Morales. Passing the torch, you know? You have Parker's iconic image, but still a fresh spin on the character in Morales taking over, and you won't have comic book outsiders going "Who's this kid? Where's Peter?"

Seems like the best of both worlds to me.

 

[SuperFlik]

To anyone who says that Miles (or Ben Reilly, or Kaine Parker, or Miguel O'hara [a stretch, I know]) would be too unknown a character for the uninitiated...

Marvel made a Guardians of the Galaxy movie. They're GOING to make an Inhumans movie. At this point they could include Spider-Ham just for the hell of it and still make millions.

 

[The Bucket]

Given that in the Marvel universe the Norse legends are meant to be based upon contact with the Asgard, please explain how casting a black man as 'the whitest of gods' makes any fuckin' sense lore wise.

About as much sense as casting a blond Australian to be what in myth is a hairy ginger. And not making Thor and Sif married. And all the other dozens of lore changes the comics have always made, they've always just vaguely resembled the source material.

The comparison to what they are doing with Ant-man is not particularly apt as they are doing that primarily to get around the fact that Ant-man is a wife abusing son of a ***** without actually ignoring his back story.

The situation is a whole lot more complicated than him being a malicious wife beater (and unlike everyone else who makes mistakes in the Marvel universe that get people hurt or killed, he isnt allowed to forget it). Assuming we aren't talking about the Ultimate version of course.

Hair color and relatinship misunderstandings are not a particularly egregious differences. Going from the whitest of gods with teeth of gold to Idris Elba is pretty different. They did the same thing in GotG. Rather than have a blue or white Kree played by a black guy, they had to make sure their token black guy for GotG was black. It has jack all to do with what's right for the character and everything to do with politically correct bullshit.


As for no longer being a wife abusing son of a *****, to be willing to beat the shit out of the person closest to your heart for nothing is not something you just wake up and decide to change one day.

Why does hair colour matter less than skin tone when it comes to authenticity? Asgardians are immortal space aliens, race has never been shown to be a thing that matters to them. And surely relationship status would matter more than either of them, with Thor being long term married informing many of the myths. It seems really arbitrary to say those are inconsequential but skin color is vitally important. As for GOTG, do you mean Drax? Because he's more dark green with red than black, very consistent with his look in comics.

And Hank Pym is a really long affair, but basically he was never intended to have intentionally hit Janet. The script called for him to be shut off in his lab in a completely unhinged mental state tinkering away at a robot and for Janet to confront him, which he'd respond to by throwing up his hands in a "get away from me" gesture, which would accidentally strike her. However, due to miscommunication, the artist interpreted this as him striking her, and he was stuck with the stigma from then on. In the decades of comics since then, he's made numerous moves to atone for this, far more than most other capes who take actions that (knowingly or accidentally) cause the death or injury of loved ones or civilians.

 

[JimB]

Going from the whitest of gods with teeth of gold to Idris Elba is pretty different.

I will never stop questioning why of all the changes from the so-vaunted "lore" of Norse mythology--why is Odin riding a horse instead of a goat? Where are his ravens? Why are the Asgardians aliens who're into Tolkien cosplay instead of gods? Why is Loki Odin's son instead of his blood brother? Why did Odin lose his eye in battle instead of trading it for knowledge and power?--the one thing, the one goddamned thing people can't let go is casting a black guy to play someone who is not real, and never was real, and never will be real, but whose Caucasian-ness is apparently so immense it warps reality to make any attempt to portray this completely fictional being as anything other than white somehow a moral wrong.

It has jack all to do with what's right for the character and everything to do with politically correct bullshit.

Would you please explain what exactly is wrong with casting Djimon Hounsou as Korath instead of condemning the impossible-to-defend bogeyman of political correctness? I understand that the problem with this casting is self-evident to you, but it is not to me.

 

[Hebby]

How many spiders are there around with transferable super powers I wonder.

 

[Quantum Glass]

I mostly just don't want Spiderman to be a kid.

Adding teenagers is kind of hit and miss, and while I don't abhor risks, it seems an unnecessary one.

Age Morales up and I'm happy.