[QUOTE=AaronM202;50915014]We'd stop arguing against this opinion you "dont actually hold" if you'd stop arguing this opinion you dont hold.[/QUOTE]
Read the last post I made. It's the same point I've been making this whole time, just spelled out for people with no concept of nuance, or reading comprehension
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50915042]Read the last post I made. It's the same point I've been making this whole time, just spelled out for people with no concept of nuance, or reading comprehension[/QUOTE]
You're saying that it doesnt matter if we throw iconography out the window.
This isnt a novel being adapted, its a visual medium being adapted into a visual medium.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;50915046]You're saying that it doesnt matter if we throw iconography out the window.
This isnt a novel being adapted, its a visual medium being adapted into a visual medium.[/QUOTE]
Iconography does, in fact, mean visual imagery, you're not wrong in that. But it's a word that's usually thrown around in regards to the meaning [I]behind[/I] the visuals. There is no meaning to Mary Jane's red hair, and that's what I'm getting at here.
I'll say it again: Read the post. Some visuals matter, some visuals don't. Let's use Watchmen as an example (yes, I'm taking this from that kaptainkristan video). Would Rorschach lose a layer of characterization (and, arguably, artistic value) if he didn't have his iconic mask? Of course, there's a lot of symbolism there. It represents his unstable, broken nature. In [sp]his final moment in the novel, his dialogue bubbles lose their jagged edges right as he takes off his mask. The uneasiness, the uncertainty, everything that the mask represents, they're all gone. His final request is clear and decisive, and is a beautiful way of punctuating his character arc.[/sp]
Now, tell me: Would any of the value behind this iconography be lost if Rorschach was exactly the same - but with brown hair?
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50915104]Now, tell me: Would any of this iconography be lost if Rorschach was exactly the same - but with brown hair?[/QUOTE]
kind of, since it's there to visualize how he's an 'ugly' outsider. ofc there are other ways to show it, but it's definitely more important than mary jane's appearance, imo.
Remember when Mary Jane constantly wore a mask lol me too
"No meaning behind MJ's red hair"
Get out. It's literally her defining visual trait. There is literally nothing beyond her design of the last 50 years besides the hair.
Also making literally no argument for why it's worth changing?
This is a shit tier Disney TV movie actress. There's no reason at all lol. At least Tony Revolori has achievements in acting. Why don't you argue why it's ok for flash to look like a bitch?
[editline]19th August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Dan2593;50913989]
Fucking Dark Knight Joker looks nothing like Comic Joker. I remember the shit storm when his first images came out.[/QUOTE]
his hair is green his face is white and his mouth is red
just like joker
[editline]19th August 2016[/editline]
hell his suit was even purple and green what are you on
[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;50915587]Why don't you argue why it's ok for flash to look like a bitch?[/QUOTE]
Because I don't think it's ok
I've already made several posts as to why I think that
I can't tell if you just don't understand what I'm saying, or if you're intentionally misrepresenting my arguments, but none of your responses correspond to what I'm actually posting
the shitstorm was over Heath Ledger as an actor iirc
[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;50915587]Remember when Mary Jane constantly wore a mask lol me too[/QUOTE]
do you know what an analogy is, or are you as oblivious to the existence of dictionaries as you are towards this discussion?
Every alternate universe's MJ has had red hair
her alias is fucking "red"
this is like saying Poison Ivy shouldn't be red headed
She's literally THE red head lol
It's not like DD and other characters where it actually doesn't mean anything
If this were to be true, it would be a first and for what? A shitty Disney Channel tv movie "actress"?
[editline]19th August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50915631]do you know what an analogy is, or are you as oblivious to the existence of dictionaries as you are towards this discussion?[/QUOTE]
do you know what a false equivalency is
[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;50915641]Every alternate universe's MJ has had red hair
her alias is fucking "red"[/QUOTE]
yeah i'm sure they thought up the nickname first, and the design second
The first thing they came up with for MJ was red hair and green eyes based off Ann Margaret
[editline]19th August 2016[/editline]
Let's make luke cage Hispanic with long locks and purple shirts
Who cares about consistency lol
[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;50915656]The first thing they came up with for MJ was red hair and green eyes based off Ann Margaret[/QUOTE]
oh snap, how could i be so ignorant of this minor reference? i am defeated, clearly it's a design choice of utmost importance. i'll leave, for i have no hope of debating against such a solid argument
I'm getting real strong "let's make johnny storm black" vibes from this.
and as we all know, the problem with fant4stic wasn't the studio meddling, the newbie director in over his head, or the horribly bland and gritty approach
no, it was the black johnny storm
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50915670]oh snap, how could i be so ignorant of this minor reference? i am defeated, clearly it's a design choice of utmost importance. i'll leave, for i have no hope of debating against such a solid argument[/QUOTE]
You've been given like 20 different solid arguments from several people and your arguments have been childish personal attacks and apathy, and maybe sometimes the odd backpedal/false equivalency, which even those were debunked by others than myself
I for one am excited about Spider-Man: Homecoming and don't give a flying fuck who plays Mary Jane.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50915730]and as we all know, the problem with fant4stic wasn't the studio meddling, the newbie director in over his head, or the horribly bland and gritty approach
no, it was the black johnny storm[/QUOTE]
how do you think that change happened
[editline]19th August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Marlamin;50915749]I for one am excited about Spider-Man: Homecoming and don't give a flying fuck who plays Mary Jane.[/QUOTE]
Luckily there's still a shot she's Michele, seems the news is an anonymous source to some random website
[editline]19th August 2016[/editline]
Then the articles claim Twitter is excited about it
It all just sounds like someone trying to get marvel to consider the change with false announcements
[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;50915587]
his hair is green his face is white and his mouth is red
just like joker
[editline]19th August 2016[/editline]
hell his suit was even purple and green what are you on[/QUOTE]
In the comics and pretty much every other iteration, his skin was bleached by chemicals. In the dark knight it's just a crazy guy in makeup.
Yeah but that's less about looks
Also
[url]http://www.thewrap.com/zendaya-spider-man-homecoming-role-reveal-mary-jane-watson/[/url]
Every retard journalist cited this article in their "ZENDAYA MJ CONFURMED" articles but it literally has no substance to it
It even says in the article she was cast as "Michele" months ago
These guys just decided to ignore there's actually a Michele and guess that she's really MJ
[editline]19th August 2016[/editline]
"two individuals with knowledge of the project told TheWrap."
"At least one recent draft of the script has Zendaya’s character dropping several clues to her identity as Mary Jane"
Yeah sure pal
[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;50915740]You've been given like 20 different solid arguments from several people and your arguments have been childish personal attacks and apathy, and maybe sometimes the odd backpedal/false equivalency, which even those were debunked by others than myself[/QUOTE]
You haven't "debunked" my arguments because you haven't addressed them. All you've addressed is your imaginary version of what you think my point is. Maybe I'm not expressing it well, maybe you're not understanding it well, but I get the feeling you just don't want to accept anything that strays from your one-dimensional narrative. This is really just a case of you being unable to separate the aspects of a character that are integral, and the ones that are superficial.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50915843]You haven't "debunked" my arguments because you haven't addressed them. All you've addressed is your imaginary version of what you think my point is. Maybe I'm not expressing it well, maybe you're not understanding it well, but I get the feeling you just don't want to accept anything that strays from your one-dimensional narrative. This is really just a case of you being unable to separate the aspects of a character that are integral, and the ones that are superficial.[/QUOTE]
Maybe if you have such a hard time expressing yourself you shouldn't tell other people their grasp on English is bad?
I mean I didn't even say that I personally debunked you so, who's really not reading here?
[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;50915888]Maybe if you have such a hard time expressing yourself you shouldn't tell other people their grasp on English is bad?
I mean I didn't even say that I personally debunked you so, who's really not reading here?[/QUOTE]
This is exactly what I'm talking about. Listen to yourself, there's no room for reasonable discourse when you're this pedantic about everything. The disagreement here is clear: I think some things about character design are important, and some aren't. Yet so far I've been told that I think Mary Jane is just an object. That I think physical traits are always irrelevant. That I liked Origins Deadpool (really the most offensive thing I've ever been accused of tbh)
I literally never accused you of liking origins deadpool but ok
[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;50915971]I literally never accused you of liking origins deadpool but ok[/QUOTE]
yes it's called a joke
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50915981]yes it's called a joke[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50913903]
I mean look at this
You have no fucking clue what I'm talking about if what you took from my posts is that I liked Origins Deadpool[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50915948]That I liked Origins Deadpool (really the most offensive thing I've ever been accused of tbh)[/QUOTE]
So are you trolling or what
If what I've read is accurate:
-The whole MJ """leak""" was started from some rando on Twitter who claims to be super legit you guys
-This conflicts not only with the current information we have (that she's playing a character named Michelle), but also with an earlier leak that claims Michelle is a secondary character and MJ [sp]shows up for a second at the very end when Aunt May introduces her to Peter.[/sp]
-Michelle is described as very smart and bookish, honestly coming off as more of a Gwen Stacy type
-Liz Allen is described as Peter's love interest (I'm willing to bet money she's the "goal" but Zendaya is the "you were in front of me all along" character, since this is supposedly taking influence from John Hughes movies)
I'm not believing a word of this until Marvel confirms it in a press release.
Flash Thompson I can understand, he's a minor character, but I really have a hard time believing a main love interest in a genre that's all about recognizable iconography would go through a change like this.
Not necessarily against it, but it'd be like if the main suit of the first Iron Man movie was black and blue instead of red and gold, or if the Hulk was purple instead of green; wouldn't change much from a characterization standpoint, but it'd be that much less recognizable to the toy-buying consumer.
speaking of toys
[img]http://marveltoynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Marvel-Legends-X-Men-Series-Figures-Packaged.jpg[/img]
these look sick
[QUOTE=BanthaFodder;50916327]since this is supposedly taking influence from John Hughes movies[/QUOTE]
most notably, baby's day out
[QUOTE=BanthaFodder;50916327]If what I've read is accurate:
-The whole MJ """leak""" was started from some rando on Twitter who claims to be super legit you guys
-This conflicts not only with the current information we have (that she's playing a character named Michelle), but also with an earlier leak that claims Michelle is a secondary character and MJ [sp]shows up for a second at the very end when Aunt May introduces her to Peter.[/sp]
-Michelle is described as very smart and bookish, honestly coming off as more of a Gwen Stacy type
-Liz Allen is described as Peter's love interest (I'm willing to bet money she's the "goal" but Zendaya is the "you were in front of me all along" character, since this is supposedly taking influence from John Hughes movies)
I'm not believing a word of this until Marvel confirms it in a press release.
Flash Thompson I can understand, he's a minor character, but I really have a hard time believing a main love interest in a genre that's all about recognizable iconography would go through a change like this.
Not necessarily against it, but it'd be like if the main suit of the first Iron Man movie was black and blue instead of red and gold, or if the Hulk was purple instead of green; wouldn't change much from a characterization standpoint, but it'd be that much less recognizable to the toy-buying consumer.[/QUOTE]
If Flash becomes Venom instead of Eddie, that's not really minor since Sony expect him to carry a trilogy of his own.
Yeah we gotta hope we get Eddie Venom. Then again they say Dr. Strange is gonna introduce the multiverse. Wonder if they'll use it as a tool to justify recasts?
[editline]19th August 2016[/editline]
Plus Eddie venom and Flash venom are totally different
[editline]19th August 2016[/editline]
Eddie Venom is like a monster whereas Flash venom is an enhanced soldier pretty much
[editline]19th August 2016[/editline]
I'd love to see a take on the Venom: Lethal Protector concept
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
