Marvel Cinematic Universe

No but it is kinda annoying especially if they are dramatic about it.

There is also Ghost is barely like her comic-self.

It is a little weird to have a character who is...

Uh...

What's the opposite of In Name Only?

I don’t care what she’s called, I like her as a character and find her vastly preferable to the continual damself-in-distress character of MJ in the Raimi films.

I still dislike the way some people (mainly on youtube) would be reductive towards the comics when putting over the MCU.

Like, with Vulture they would go on about him being an "old, goofy ass man in green spandex" and how that's much less interesting than the devoted father we got in Homecoming.

I love Vulture in Homecoming, but wasn't Vulture's original gimmick that he was an old, dying man who wanted to stave off his inevitable death by becoming young again? That sounds plenty compelling in it's own way.

In Everything But Name?

Well the point was don’t get so hung up on the names.

I mean I don’t like MCU Ghost that much but I’ll still call her Ghost regardless.

If Michelle’s MJ then she’s MJ as much as she is Michelle.

x3 Not really. The "become young again" wasn't really a thing until the Tablet story arc in the later Lee/Romita issues (iirc), and only really revisited once or twice. You might be thinking of that story arc's adaptation in the 90's show.

Vulture is just usually someone to provide fights for Peter. No more, no less.

Edited by Aleistar on Jun 18th 2019 at 11:22:48 AM

With Michelle/MJ I think this is an odd situation where it feels like the franchise itself can't seem to decide if she's an original character or an unusual adaptation of MJ.

If she's an original character, then great, let her be an original character. Plenty of superhero movies have used original characters to great effect and she can be one more.

If she's an unusual adaptation of Mary-Jane, then I don't think it's unreasonable for people to want to see the similarities to the source material go beyond just being Peter Parker's love interest and basically nothing else. Especially for a character so central to the Spider-Man franchise.

Vulture was still Adrian Toomes and wore a flight suit. And Vulture does have family, including a daughter.

Yes, his daughter in the comics is not Liz Allan, but that doesn't bother me.

I can deal with an adaptation drastically changing a character.

My problem with this whole MJ nonsense they keep pulling is that this isn't a new interpretation of Mary Jane Watson.

She is an entirely different character that is only connected to Mary Jane because she is the love interest and was shoehorned MJ as a nickname as some kind of twisted nod to fans.

I've been thinking of ways you could fix the issue.

Have a scene where she talks about her past and reveals she goes by Michelle because of witness protection from her abusive father.

You could even throw in a reference to MJ's long forgotten younger sister.

Do something to connect the character to Mary Jane beyond shallow nods and references.

Or you could have Peter dump her in this movie and introduce a proper Mary Jane and/or Gwen.

Actually that would really complicate things.

More to the point, it seems really mean to have a protagonist break a relationship with a character for the sole sake of hooking them with the "true romantic interest".

Mean and ludicrous.

So, what exactly is the problem?

Edited by fredhot16 on Jun 18th 2019 at 8:44:13 AM

Homecoming already did it when they put Liz on a Bus to pave the way for NotMJ, so that boat has already sailed.

I would've been 100% on board with Liz Allan Toomes being the love interest in the MCU.

Edited by MrSeyker on Jun 18th 2019 at 8:47:47 AM

Liz wasn't put on a bus to pave the way for MJ.

Liz was put on a bus as fallout of Peter's decisions to fight Vulture.

Its one of those classic Spider-Man things where his personal life gets screwed over because of him doing the Right Thing as Spider-Man.

Edited by Bocaj on Jun 18th 2019 at 11:50:02 AM

Parker Luck at its finest.

It's more like a "we have to make him be eternally miserable so that he's always relateable to the audience" sort of hell.

I don't know how I feel. If this means her personality is also Truer to the Text then that's fine, as MJ's red hair is a huge aspect of her design, but after seeing Homecoming I was actually hoping for Michelle to be more of her own thing separate from the original Mary Jane. Ghost was so radically different from her inspiration that the fact that she was In Name Only was no longer a problem, whereas this adaptation of MJ hits an unfortunate in-between of noncommittally trying to be eat have their cake and eat it too in terms of accuracy to the spirit of the character.

Edited by AlleyOop on Jun 18th 2019 at 12:01:42 PM

x4

The in-universe reason doesn't really matter.

My point is that they already had a love interest in one movie that was written off to then bring in the "true romantic interest" to the forefront.

I don't think this means anything. Its just Zendaya doing something personal that happens to count as throwing some fans a bone.

The character in the movie is still not redheaded, I very much doubt they'll pull a Sudden Name Change in-universe, and according to the previews, yet another Mary Jane trait got removed from the character (Mary Jane likes web-swining).

Edited by MrSeyker on Jun 18th 2019 at 9:14:08 AM

At least it was done relatively believably.

Peter dumping with her would be as bad as like in Ben 10 Omniverse where Ben accidentally dumps his girlfriend by not stopping the game he was playing while on he phone with her.

Dumping Michelle to pave the way for the real (read: white) MJ to show up can have some bad optics. Especially in light of what the usual suspects put Zendaya through.

I'll give them that. Peter and Liz fell apart reasonably in the movies. A step up from how that relationship fell apart in Spectacular Spider-Man (still salty about that one).

Yeah, as salty as I am about the current situation and as much ad I want a proper adaptation of Mary Jane, that would be the absolute worse way to deal with this mess at this point.

Edited by MrSeyker on Jun 18th 2019 at 9:19:32 AM

Yeah I'd rather they not get rid of MJ.

I wouldn't mind if they introduced Gwen but like, Spider-Gwen. Not as a love interest.

This has been the third time this month a woman of color gets pushed for a prominent position in the MCU and certain folks here immediately demand she be dumped out and humiliated.

It’s not subtle.

...No. No, that is not it.

A. You say as though the reason given ("Liz wasn't put on a bus to pave the way for MJ. Liz was put on a bus as fallout of Peter's decisions to fight Vulture") is not a narrative reason as well.

B. What was in the film is not the same thing as "Or you could have Peter dump her in this movie and introduce a proper Mary Jane and/or Gwen".

Seriously, we already have a character who nobody really seems to despise because of her behavior and already has a bond with the protagonist. Getting rid of what you consider a faux version of a character for a "proper" version of a character for the sole reason of having a "proper" version of a character...can not bode anything except ill.

You say that as though any version of Watson has to have all of her traits. As though there can be no changes in the slightest.

Or that she will not grow fond of web-swinging later.

Edited by fredhot16 on Jun 18th 2019 at 9:34:44 AM

You can do anything with her. She could grow to love web-swinging, she could not. As I already said, I'm not bothered that the adaptations are changed (some MJs are into acting, some are into joutnalism, some MJs become heroes, some MJs don't want to get too involved in Peter's heroics).

The point is that she is not Mary jane, and the only thing that connects the two so far is a nickname and being the love interest.

They have two choices as far as I'm concerned. Completely divorce her from the Mary Jane connecton and go wild with the chaeacter, or contrive a way to make her actually Mary Jane.

I will not accept this half measure they reached.

Edited by MrSeyker on Jun 18th 2019 at 9:34:58 AM

@tuckerscreator Who are the other two?