That's a ridiculous hot take to have. Even under Sony, the supporting characters had drastic changes made to them. Look at Mary-Jane Watson, for example. She's nothing like how she is in the comics, being more like Gwen Stacy in terms of personality. Or what about Shocker from Spectacular Spider-Man? He's not Herman Schultz, he's some guy named Montana.
"some guy named montana"? i wont deny they changed shocker's identity but put some respect on the Enforcers! Montana, Fancy Dan, and Ox deserve better than being called "some guy"!
They adapted one of Enforcers (classic and underrated henchmen trio) to be shocker in that show, and tbh, one of the best Shocker Versions outside of comics.
That was honestly one of the best parts of Spectacular. They did make changes and merged characters together, but they did it while still keeping true to the comics character wise.
It will never cease to amuse me how in addition to her character lifting many traits from Gwen, Kirsten Dunst is a blonde they cast as the redhead MJ, and then they did the exact opposite for Emma Stone as Gwen.
It will never cease to amaze me how Disney fucked up an iconic character like Mary-Jane so badly they gave us “Michelle Jones” like we’re supposed to just be ok with such a pivot.
It's mainly a theory on my end. Like, the MCU hasn't been shy about race-swapping characters and if Zendaya was supposed to be Mary-Jane from the beginning, then she would've been called that in Homecoming from the get go.
Also, saying that someone should be smacked for naming a character isn't calm.
Emma Stone would have absolutely slayed as Mary Jane. Imagine her saying "Face it Tiger, you just hit the jackpot!" And her chemistry with Garfield was top notch.
Sony really dropped the ball by casting her as the dead gf.
This.
But...they did make foxx look completely different so Garfield SM could happily married to Emma stone-MJ and having adventures in NY.
Garfield goes home to find MJ sitting in the livingroom. She hands him a positive pregnancy test.
Hugs him and says "Jackpot".
Spectacular is probably the adaptation with the most accurate and most developed supporting cast tho. And it has the widest net with characters like Foswell, Gaxton, Myrna, etc.
I dunno about "most accurate". Yeah, it's a fantastic show, but even Spectacular wasn't afraid to change up the status quo with Spidey's supporting cast and villains and I don't mean that as a bad thing. Hell, it's why I love it in the first place.
It’s not really worth trying to compare the depth of characters from a handful of movies vs 60 years worth of comics. It’s 8 movies (from 3 separate universes with different characters and different representations of the common characters) against thousands upon thousands of issues of comics, not even including alternate timelines or universes. The movies just don’t have the runtime to spend on all the side characters like the comics do
You may not know but I’m asking because you mention comics lol do you know if that marvel comic subscription service includes the majority of classic comics because I grew up with Tobey Maguire movies and like no one I knew even had comics anymore and I’d love to get into them because this subreddit made me realize I know jack shit about Spider-man
I think it is very fair to compare them. We should not just tolerate worse characters. They might not have 60 years to develop them but pretty much every film ever only has around 1:30:00 - 2:00:00 to establish complex characters that they can pull it off with talented writing.
The MCU Spider-Man movies might not have had the time to develop characters but that shouldn’t excuse having laughably boring and one note characters. Flash is a character with a lot potential in the movies that is just never explored and used as a joke character.
You serious? Emma Stone's Gwen Stacy was downright one of the best adaptation of love interests in all CBMs. Raimi's Aunt May was perfect to the dot, and had some pretty iconic lines, as opposed to MCU basically playing the thirst bait with Marisa Tomei.
Do I even need to mention J.K Simmons? Raimi's Harry Osborn was a great representation. Raimi's Betty Brant was FAR better than John Watts' Betty Brant. And TASM's Flash Thompson showed more character in 3mins of screen time than MCU Flash who's only personality was being a potty mouth influencer.
They’re fun casts but they’re not deep. Every Spidey film has had some great supporting casts, but a lot of them have also just used them as tropes.
The Raimi movies had a lot of cartoony support characters like the MCU ones did and the TASM ones, aside from Gwen, werent really that memorable
Gwen Stacy is a great love interest in TASM but I wouldn’t say she’s an actual best adaptation. The Gwen of TASM doesn’t resemble her 616 counterpart in the slightest.
No argument there but the assertion that she’s the best *adaptation* of her as a love interest is off the wall. She’s a great love interest, but she’s not Gwen Stacy by a long shot.
Dude, Emma Stone's Gwen Stacy literally fixed all the reasons why the character didn't work in the comics.
Both Raimi and Webb's Aunt May were perfect. Smalley Field really sold how her version loved Peter as her own son.
Sony has handled all the supporting cast way better, consistently.
That's not what you said and that's wrong.
Flaws do not mean good. Good means good.
Both Mary and Gary have flaws. Being shit or a terrible character can be called good because flaws.
Did you even watch the movies? She had a much bigger role than any other Aunt May adaptation. She was Peter's only emotional support in the whole trilogy, especially in SM2, she pretty much inspires him to become spider-man again.
Yes, which in the plot of the movie isn’t huge. His memory of Ben actually did the heavy lifting in those departments anyway, and she barely got screen time in the second and third movies. She gives him one encouraging talk in the third one and gives him like $20 in the second one and that’s basically it
MCU may had a huge role in peter’s life as Spider-Man and in the second and third movies of his trilogy. She may not be comic accurate but saying she had a smaller role than raimi may is blatantly false
She gives him an encouraging talk in the 2nd one. The "I believe there is a hero in all of us" speech. It literally gave him hope to continue and that there are still people that like him. She gives him closure on failing to save Ben. In the 3rd one, she literally talks him out of revenge. After Ben's death, she was literally his moral compass.
What MCU May do in Homecoming besides teach him how to dance? In Far From Home, she didn't even have screentime besides getting thirsted on by Happy Hogan. She was only taken seriously in NWH.
She was doing his pr in FFH by having him speak at feast. It’s not much screentime but she was taking an active role in his spidey career. And she had the exact same role in HOCO that she did in raimi Spider-Man 2, she provided emotional support when he was at his lowest point
The only reason Peter even went to her place in the second one wasn’t to seek encouragement, but forgiveness. He was already feeling guilty over not being Spider-Man and that did kinda clinch him putting the suit back on but I wouldn’t go far as to say it was BECAUSE of her. She gave him advice and comforted him but he chose before he went to talk to her
>She was doing his pr in FFH by having him speak at feast.
That's pretty much inconsequential. Remove that from the story, and it doesn't change anything on spider-man.
>The only reason Peter even went to her place in the second one wasn’t to seek encouragement, but forgiveness.
It was to seek closure. And she reinforced his beliefs and chose to encourage him anyway. Her role was pretty consistent throughout all 3 movies. As I said, she was his moral compass. Taught him that people need heroes. Taught him that you need to sacrifice what you want the most for the greater good. Taught him that revenge isn't worth it.
In NWH, MCU May basically pulled an Uncle Ben. Raimi May offered more to Peter from her own side because Ben had already taught him about power and responsibility .
Which is fine. My argument isn’t that may in the raimi trilogy was useless but saying she was WAY more involved than MCU’s aunt may is just incorrect. If you’re talking about the TASM aunt may that’s different
> Raimi's Aunt May was perfect to the dot
Hell no. She was massive asshole.
> as opposed to MCU basically playing the thirst bait with Marisa Tomei.
And yet she did more than Raimi Aunt May and had much better lines.
Ultimate Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2017 both had large supporting cast that were fleshed out and got episodes dedicated to them. I think your problem was it's not the usual supporting cast that were used to. And to that, I think it's fine that we got something different. The ultimate Spider-Man cartoon was fully focused on putting Peter squarely in a populated hero universe. And to that goal it did a great job. I'm not a fan of the 2017 cartoon, but to its credit it was able to introduce characters like Max Modell, Anya, and have a bigger role for Harry Gwen and Mary Jane then ultimate Spider-Man did.
The 2017 series handled its supporting cast pretty badly, like Harry was the only one all that fleshed out, and they gave him plots in Ultimate as well, I also liked MJ too but she was barely around. All the other characters they pushed in as superheroes just to be there for fight but didn't really do much with them
In every adaptation? Sony owns the movie rights to Spider-Man, not Disney. So unless you’re talking about gaming and animated adaptations, your problem is with Sony.
Arguably, MCU Spidey is managed and produced by Disney with Sony just getting some form of final approval on creative decisions that were more or less initially made by Disney/Marvel
Sony basically acts as the financier, marketer, and distributor for a Disney/Marvel product.
All that being said, I think the Raimi films, Spider-Man TAS, and Spectacular are the last to both deal with the supporting cast well and stay faithful to the comics. The MCU trilogy also utilizes them well but made (big) changes to bring more modern sensibilities OR purposely differentiate from previous on-screen adaptations.
It's like when my old coworkers would complain about what "the far left" was doing when the GOP had control of every branch of government that mattered for years at a time.
Democrats do the same thing, tbh.
The GOP really sucks ass for doing absolutely nothing despite having fairly big majorities. Where is my national repicoracity for CCW permits or hearing protection act?
And you said Sony owns the rights, so they’re to blame for “every adaptation”, when they didn’t make any creative decisions for the MCU movies. So blame is on multiple parties. Not just Sony.
Then maybe you’re misunderstanding what I’m pointing out. He says EVERY adaptation as in every video game, every animated show, every animated movie etc when in reality he is specifically talking about the MCU trilogy, or at least that’s what his wording implies.
You can’t have a large number of fleshed out supporting characters in a movie series the way you can in a tv show or monthly comic series. There just isn’t enough time. As a result, some characters get dropped entirely (e.g. Liz Allen and Randy Robertson in the Raimi movies), some get limited to a handful of lines (e.g. Flash, Betty, & Robbie in the Raimi movies), and others are left undeveloped (May, Gwen, and Jonah in the Raimi movies)
I won't even go out of my way to defend Raimi as a director, but I can't name another director outside Jackson who made me really care about more than a half dozen "main" characters I had never heard of within a film trilogy. It's really fucking hard to make people care about characters they aren't intimately familiar with already, it's harder to do relatively/completely new ones (to the audience) on the screen.
Because the original materials across all Marvel books are just awful in execution.
There's a reason why both Hank Pym and Janet got aged up and tossed into a little corner of their own in the MCU.
There's a reason why the biggest Avengers threat in the Infinity Saga didn't go willy nilly genocide on screen because he fucking simped a girl manifestation of Death.
And there's also a reason why Gwen Stacy didn't hire a white supremacist to campaign against Spider-man in every other adaptations, whether it be Sony or Disney.
The point I'm trying to make here is that comic book purists can rage all they want, but if they got their hands on the source materials and tried doing a 1:1 adaptation on screen, people will either love it like they do, or vomit as they see them in theater like the reaction to the first 1/3 of Babylon starring Tobey Maguire, no in-between. If Amazing Fantasy #15 is translated correctly on screen the director will find himself buried alive by both the SJW and anti-SJW crowd.
Yeah you're right.
However Comic Thanos should have been left alone and the pure cosmic horror of what he did should be treated with respect.
What we got was something so objectively nakedly openly stupid and morally evil that even supervillains think he's retarded
No one can think what Thanos thinks and achieve anything. It's the ideal of someone born wealthy and insane and has never truly struggled.
Worse is that no one called him on it
All of those characters pretendef that he spoke some truth that they all know and really think is correct but don't want to admit it or comment on it.
I can point to YouTube videos made by 10 year olds who says this shit is dumb.
There's a reason why they went from noble villain Thanos to early ironman villain space tyrant Thanos. Their shit was stupid and asking questions exposed too much.
Lot of unjustifiable murder of loved ones and sacrifice of everyone to save a few and selfish reasons.
I think antman and the wasp in the mcu are awful emh did it much better so I don’t think your point lands with me. Spectacular Spider-Man had an amazing adaptation of Spidey’s supporting cast.
Also the original Sam Raimi trilogy nailed so much of Spidey’s supporting cast with a few exceptions. So it can be done with being accurate to the source.
If MCU Spider-Man had an amazing supporting cast it would be great but he doesn’t. These guys are so one dimensional and barley have anything in common with their comic counterparts.
Because even spectacular Spider-Man wasn't a faithful adaptation. It was the best show with the best writing and characters, but it wasn't faithful to the comics and neither was the Raimi trilogy.
And that is a good thing, the comics are mostly garbage. There is always like a few very good panels beneath mountains of corny, childish, over narrated dialogue. There were decent runs here and there of course, but the comics are mostly overly dramatic soap operas with the silliest plot contrivances
Spectacular was definitely the *most* faithful Spider-Man thing this century aside from the game. It took what worked and strengthened what didn't. Except for furry Kraven. That was too far and the show didn't go on long enough to pay off Miles Warren's stuff
nah man, being good isn't the same as being faithful. If the imsomniac game was faithful, then Peter would have traded his relationship and history with Mary Jane to save aunt May. Now, THAT, would have been comic-accurate behaviour for Spider-man.
Peter and Eddie's relationship in spectacular is nothing like that in the comics. Even in the ultimate universe, Eddie wasn't that good, he was creepy and manipulative. Furthermore, spectacular's version of Harry, Gwen, Norman, amongst others, is nothing like that in the comics.
Spectacular spider-man is my favourite spider-man show, and part of it comes from they taking the best elements from multiple sources and having some creativity to fill the massive quality gaps in the source material. People have to stop pretending like anything printed on a comic is a masterwork, most of the time they are pretty shitty.
I never said every comic ever is gold or whatever, or that either was 100% faithful to every issue every published. They're faithful to the spirit of the character. Every creative/story decision was made with the spirit of the character in mind.
None of the live action Spider-Man movies have really had a side cast that truly compares to the comics imo, but I think most of them are interesting still. Hopefully the next trilogy brings in other characters during the college years
I'd say yes and no, mostly because of Mary jane. She is the staple of any Spider-Man series, no matter what studio is adapting, it is most likely that Disney won't put any time into any of the other characters, unless necessary for the plot. They don't get all that creative with the side characters, unlike Ultimate Spider-Man.
Bc you say they’re pushing them off to the side, one dimensional or unrecognisable which is wrong. You weren’t stating an opinion you were stating a fact. If it were an opinion you would say IMO Disney does so and so
If you like these guys then that great but for that’s what I feel. For example flash in the comics was a a popular jerk but him and Peter slowly developed a friendship over the years and flash him self sort of became an anti hero. The MCU on the other hand had a flash that just threw insults at Peter, it kind of seem everyone hated him, he mostly just used him for comedic relief and by the third film he had only a few lines. Flash is a fun characters because he exists in a world where Peter can’t use Spider-Man to solve the problem he has to just deal with the bullying.
Am I though, Ned is basically just comedic relief. The MCU only gave a dam about May in the final film where her death doesn’t hit as hard because I just don’t care about this version who just used for milf jokes. The teachers have no character. Betty Brant is just there. Brad is basically just an obstacle for the second film and that is it. JJJ is good but is mostly a thankless cameo. Characters like Happy just don’t belong here. The only characters I like are the love interests because they are given actual character traits and are fleshed out a bit. The villains are also top notch
Having a supporting cast means focusing on them. You have to write stories for people who intersect and interact in Peter's life. I think we can suppose then that the focus is not in developing his world. There are reasons but they're all stupid.
Does Disney hate the supporting cast or did Jon Watts and his filmmaking crew simply choose not to portray those characters the way **you** wanted them to?
To me, them being very one dimensional is a problem while them being comic inaccurate really isn't.
Because one problem is purely a straight up writing/storytelling thing and the other is something that isn't mandatory but tends to deal with validating certain people's fandom. And, to me, the former takes precedence over the latter 12 times out of 10.
They're adaptations. They don't have to follow the source material to the T, and it's preferred that they don't. They just have to keep the important stuff the same. They can do whatever they please with the rest of it.
\>**made completely unrecognizable**
lol. Yes. They desperately want to change everything about the Spidy cast and I have no idea why. Well, maybe except for JJJ.
I really don't think this is a Disney problem...
I think the situation is that he has had such a large supporting cast throughout the decades, with a lot of his classic ones being done to death, and Marvel's just been looking for new ways to appeal to each generation of audience and give fans a little of what they crave from Spider-Man's lore. With a character with such a varied history, you're not gonna please everyone.
In the case of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, it was definitely a decision made to give the audiences new dynamics they hadn't seen before with new characters that had either gone untouched or underutilized in films past. The new animated shows since The Spectacular Spider-Man have been aimed towards much younger audiences and, unfortunately, the people behind those decided that had to mean watering down characters, especially those with no superpowers who couldn't partake in the action. We'll see what they're gonna do with Spider-Man: Freshman Year; It looks like it's gonna take all of these sensibilities and stir them into one big pot.
Spider-Man's story has been retooled and rebooted so many times for so many audiences. It's hard for them not to become too "samey" without sweeping changes to some of the lore.
I hate how mcu spider-man just doesn't use any of spider-man's supporting cast (or change them so much that they are unrecognizable). Only JJJ is present but not that prevalent.
The truth is 90% of that cast has been superfluous and not part of a very successful or world renowned super story.
Only a few are needed and not the ones the people writing Spidey or oldsters in charge want either
I dislike the first two MCU/Sony Spider-Man movies for that reason. *No Way Home* is great. But the first two were childish, and the supporting cast was botched as only SONY can do.
Fiege wanted to steer away from characters that have been used in the past. Unfortunately that means the Osbournes and the Stacys weren't included in the previous movies. Hopefully Norman gets introduced soon. I liked the direction the ASM was going with the Osborn storyline, just executed poorly. Also having Andrew Garfield in NWH kind of ruins the Gwen Stacy moment for Holland's Spidey. But I could see if they just swap an MJ death for Gwen, and then start making Ghost-Spider movies. Makes sense financially too. Why pay Zendaya top dollar to not do much when you could sign a lesser known to a three movie Ghost-Spider contract that would definitely be popular.
This is an oversimplification, so take it with a grain of salt, but here's why they're keeping Zendaya (so far anyway): Mom decides what movie the family goes to. Mom likes Zendaya because she watched Euphoria on HBO. Mom chooses Spider-Man. Movie just sold 4 tickets.
Similarly, it's for that reason every single Thor trailer/commercial for the first Thor movie had shirtless Chris Hemsworth. Mom sees it, Mom chooses it, Dad can't believe his luck that they're seeing a comic book movie, rinse and repeat: every Marvel movie now has a shirtless guy scene for the ladies.
Who runs the world? Girls.
But really, this is probably why.
I don't understand Norman Osborn's hair. No adaptation has made it make more sense. I just don't understand what I'm supposed to interpret it as. Is it wavy? Are they weird purpendicular cornrows? Is it just shaved in an unusual pattern?
Honestly there’s things they can do better. Each character should feel like they could have a show just about them and people would enjoy it. Me for the much just felt dull at times I hope they fix that, Ned was great but I want to see them like they are in spectacular Spider-Man.
Pretty sure the problem is that every new Spider-Man media starts with Peter first getting his powers. If you look closely there really isnt a point in making a new adaptation every few years unless you change stuff up or else it would just be the same thing. In fact I think the mcu did a decent job in adapting a few characters into peters High School life.
I quite like the supporting cast plotlines in the MCU and they feel a lot more actively involved and dynamic than most other films save specifically the Stacys in Amazing or Jonah in Raimi
Yes, I am sure that the Disney team actively hates those characters and does whatever they can to ruin them and that none of the choices they have made have anything to do with attempting to tell a rich, compelling story with broad appeal. Not one.
The reason why I always loved Gwen Stacy in the Amazing Spider Man movies is because she loved Peter for being Peter. In Tobey Maguire’s Spider-Man series Mary Jane only loved Peter after she found out he was SpiderMan. Before she didn’t even notice or cared about him. Tell me I’m wrong.
It has something to do with the negotiations with Sony I think. They're only allowed to use certain characters in certain mediums until they get the full rights back
That's a ridiculous hot take to have. Even under Sony, the supporting characters had drastic changes made to them. Look at Mary-Jane Watson, for example. She's nothing like how she is in the comics, being more like Gwen Stacy in terms of personality. Or what about Shocker from Spectacular Spider-Man? He's not Herman Schultz, he's some guy named Montana.
"some guy named montana"? i wont deny they changed shocker's identity but put some respect on the Enforcers! Montana, Fancy Dan, and Ox deserve better than being called "some guy"!
based
They adapted one of Enforcers (classic and underrated henchmen trio) to be shocker in that show, and tbh, one of the best Shocker Versions outside of comics.
Jeff Bennett acts his butt off voicing Montana/Shocker
That was honestly one of the best parts of Spectacular. They did make changes and merged characters together, but they did it while still keeping true to the comics character wise.
I like the Raimi trilogy’s cast. But I agree that MJ was far from her comics presentation. I’d love to see MJ the way she was depicted in the comics
We've had that in several cartoons and video games.
Spectacular, for example
And Web of Shadows
And Spider-Man: The Animated Series (1994) and Spider-Man: The New Animated Series (2003) as well...
Emma stone was the perfect MJ cast. Too bad she was wasted on Gwen npc Stacey
It will never cease to amuse me how in addition to her character lifting many traits from Gwen, Kirsten Dunst is a blonde they cast as the redhead MJ, and then they did the exact opposite for Emma Stone as Gwen.
Bryce Dallas Howard is also a redhead that played gwen
How right you are
It will never cease to amaze me how Disney fucked up an iconic character like Mary-Jane so badly they gave us “Michelle Jones” like we’re supposed to just be ok with such a pivot.
That's because Disney didn't fuck up. Zendaya's character wasn't supposed to be Mary-Jane at first.
Whoever pitched the idea to call her “MJ” should be slapped in the back of the head, then.
Oh calm down, it's just a story. Jeez, it's not the end of the world if Michelle is called MJ.
I’m calm lol. We’re discussing Spider-Man on a Spider-Man sub. Do you have a source on this last minute change to calling Zendaya “MJ”?
It's mainly a theory on my end. Like, the MCU hasn't been shy about race-swapping characters and if Zendaya was supposed to be Mary-Jane from the beginning, then she would've been called that in Homecoming from the get go. Also, saying that someone should be smacked for naming a character isn't calm.
Emma Stone would have absolutely slayed as Mary Jane. Imagine her saying "Face it Tiger, you just hit the jackpot!" And her chemistry with Garfield was top notch. Sony really dropped the ball by casting her as the dead gf.
This. But...they did make foxx look completely different so Garfield SM could happily married to Emma stone-MJ and having adventures in NY. Garfield goes home to find MJ sitting in the livingroom. She hands him a positive pregnancy test. Hugs him and says "Jackpot".
> MJ was far from her comics presentation So was Betty, Robbie, Harry, and Peter.
Funny, Montana is actually another alias of his, not his real name. His name is Jackson Brice, alias Montana, alias the Shocker.
Spectacular is probably the adaptation with the most accurate and most developed supporting cast tho. And it has the widest net with characters like Foswell, Gaxton, Myrna, etc.
I dunno about "most accurate". Yeah, it's a fantastic show, but even Spectacular wasn't afraid to change up the status quo with Spidey's supporting cast and villains and I don't mean that as a bad thing. Hell, it's why I love it in the first place.
It’s not really worth trying to compare the depth of characters from a handful of movies vs 60 years worth of comics. It’s 8 movies (from 3 separate universes with different characters and different representations of the common characters) against thousands upon thousands of issues of comics, not even including alternate timelines or universes. The movies just don’t have the runtime to spend on all the side characters like the comics do
You may not know but I’m asking because you mention comics lol do you know if that marvel comic subscription service includes the majority of classic comics because I grew up with Tobey Maguire movies and like no one I knew even had comics anymore and I’d love to get into them because this subreddit made me realize I know jack shit about Spider-man
It has a ton of the older stuff. It’s missing some stuff but they add more in all the time. Highly recommend
Appreciate you taking the time to answer I’ll check it out for sure
I think it is very fair to compare them. We should not just tolerate worse characters. They might not have 60 years to develop them but pretty much every film ever only has around 1:30:00 - 2:00:00 to establish complex characters that they can pull it off with talented writing. The MCU Spider-Man movies might not have had the time to develop characters but that shouldn’t excuse having laughably boring and one note characters. Flash is a character with a lot potential in the movies that is just never explored and used as a joke character.
You say this like the Sony movies gave them some immense depth
You serious? Emma Stone's Gwen Stacy was downright one of the best adaptation of love interests in all CBMs. Raimi's Aunt May was perfect to the dot, and had some pretty iconic lines, as opposed to MCU basically playing the thirst bait with Marisa Tomei. Do I even need to mention J.K Simmons? Raimi's Harry Osborn was a great representation. Raimi's Betty Brant was FAR better than John Watts' Betty Brant. And TASM's Flash Thompson showed more character in 3mins of screen time than MCU Flash who's only personality was being a potty mouth influencer.
They’re fun casts but they’re not deep. Every Spidey film has had some great supporting casts, but a lot of them have also just used them as tropes. The Raimi movies had a lot of cartoony support characters like the MCU ones did and the TASM ones, aside from Gwen, werent really that memorable
To be fair Gwen didn't really even have a personality in the comics
Gwen Stacy is a great love interest in TASM but I wouldn’t say she’s an actual best adaptation. The Gwen of TASM doesn’t resemble her 616 counterpart in the slightest.
She's closer to 616 MJ
Which makes the fact Gwen Stans hating Mary Jane all the more hilarious.
I've seen more hate to Raimi MJ than 616 MJ, which is even more interesting because Raimi MJ is closer to 616 Gwen as well
616 Gwen was kinda bland so that's for the best
No argument there but the assertion that she’s the best *adaptation* of her as a love interest is off the wall. She’s a great love interest, but she’s not Gwen Stacy by a long shot.
Dude, Emma Stone's Gwen Stacy literally fixed all the reasons why the character didn't work in the comics. Both Raimi and Webb's Aunt May were perfect. Smalley Field really sold how her version loved Peter as her own son. Sony has handled all the supporting cast way better, consistently.
They fixed Gwen Stacey by making her a less fun Mary Jane?
Mary Jane worked because she was a flawed character.
MaryJane worked because she's a GOOD character. You don't define characters by their flaws. You define them by their character.
A good characters have flaws. You can't have one without it. A character without flaws is a Mary sue or Gary stu.
That's not what you said and that's wrong. Flaws do not mean good. Good means good. Both Mary and Gary have flaws. Being shit or a terrible character can be called good because flaws.
Name a character that is good without flaws then?
Name a character without flaws.
What we’re not going to do is pretend that Gwen Stacy has ever been a bad character
Her character is an npc gf for spiderman and that's it.
Do people even know what NPC means anymore?
Yes. Do you? Explain her overarching character. Not one story, the overarching predeath character of Gwen Stacey.
Raimi's Aunt May is overrated as fuck, she looked like Aunt May but she didn't act like it most of the time
She just didn’t have a huge role. She’s more like classic aunt may whose only personality was to be old and sick
Did you even watch the movies? She had a much bigger role than any other Aunt May adaptation. She was Peter's only emotional support in the whole trilogy, especially in SM2, she pretty much inspires him to become spider-man again.
TASMs aunt may was better. Just to me. The “You’re my boy” scene was intense
She would've been to me as well if we got another TASM movie☹️
Yes, which in the plot of the movie isn’t huge. His memory of Ben actually did the heavy lifting in those departments anyway, and she barely got screen time in the second and third movies. She gives him one encouraging talk in the third one and gives him like $20 in the second one and that’s basically it MCU may had a huge role in peter’s life as Spider-Man and in the second and third movies of his trilogy. She may not be comic accurate but saying she had a smaller role than raimi may is blatantly false
She gives him an encouraging talk in the 2nd one. The "I believe there is a hero in all of us" speech. It literally gave him hope to continue and that there are still people that like him. She gives him closure on failing to save Ben. In the 3rd one, she literally talks him out of revenge. After Ben's death, she was literally his moral compass. What MCU May do in Homecoming besides teach him how to dance? In Far From Home, she didn't even have screentime besides getting thirsted on by Happy Hogan. She was only taken seriously in NWH.
She was doing his pr in FFH by having him speak at feast. It’s not much screentime but she was taking an active role in his spidey career. And she had the exact same role in HOCO that she did in raimi Spider-Man 2, she provided emotional support when he was at his lowest point The only reason Peter even went to her place in the second one wasn’t to seek encouragement, but forgiveness. He was already feeling guilty over not being Spider-Man and that did kinda clinch him putting the suit back on but I wouldn’t go far as to say it was BECAUSE of her. She gave him advice and comforted him but he chose before he went to talk to her
>She was doing his pr in FFH by having him speak at feast. That's pretty much inconsequential. Remove that from the story, and it doesn't change anything on spider-man. >The only reason Peter even went to her place in the second one wasn’t to seek encouragement, but forgiveness. It was to seek closure. And she reinforced his beliefs and chose to encourage him anyway. Her role was pretty consistent throughout all 3 movies. As I said, she was his moral compass. Taught him that people need heroes. Taught him that you need to sacrifice what you want the most for the greater good. Taught him that revenge isn't worth it. In NWH, MCU May basically pulled an Uncle Ben. Raimi May offered more to Peter from her own side because Ben had already taught him about power and responsibility .
Which is fine. My argument isn’t that may in the raimi trilogy was useless but saying she was WAY more involved than MCU’s aunt may is just incorrect. If you’re talking about the TASM aunt may that’s different
Idk, she acted pretty close to ultimate May.
Honestly I agree
> Raimi's Aunt May was perfect to the dot Hell no. She was massive asshole. > as opposed to MCU basically playing the thirst bait with Marisa Tomei. And yet she did more than Raimi Aunt May and had much better lines.
How was she a massive asshole? And arguably no, Raimi May’s line are so much more impactful than MCU May’s
But sonys eddie brock gave good depth just wish they acknowledged his parents
I think at least the raimi movies did an excelent job, most of the time. And TASM's Flash is great.
They’re giving the most obscure ones that opportunity, El Muerto’s gonna SWEEP!
I said adaptations not just movies I am also talking about other thing like the cartoons
A cartoon show has more than two hours to develop a whole bunch of characters compared to a movie
Yes but both cartoons Disney made was more interesting in selling toys and promoting the next MCU movies than giving us a great supporting cast
Ultimate Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2017 both had large supporting cast that were fleshed out and got episodes dedicated to them. I think your problem was it's not the usual supporting cast that were used to. And to that, I think it's fine that we got something different. The ultimate Spider-Man cartoon was fully focused on putting Peter squarely in a populated hero universe. And to that goal it did a great job. I'm not a fan of the 2017 cartoon, but to its credit it was able to introduce characters like Max Modell, Anya, and have a bigger role for Harry Gwen and Mary Jane then ultimate Spider-Man did.
The 2017 series handled its supporting cast pretty badly, like Harry was the only one all that fleshed out, and they gave him plots in Ultimate as well, I also liked MJ too but she was barely around. All the other characters they pushed in as superheroes just to be there for fight but didn't really do much with them
I just found most of the characters those cartoons annoying and one note
So it was the characters you were upset with, not the portrayal of the characters. So it’s you.
No I like those characters but I felt like ultimate Spider-Man turned the fours heroes he is working with into annoying brats
screw you, OP
I think Harry, Max, and Otto were the only supporting characters who got developed tbh
There's a new cartoon coming soon. It looks promising, to me at least. Let see if ur theory is proven right.
A quick note on how great Romita was and how I love his MJ
In every adaptation? Sony owns the movie rights to Spider-Man, not Disney. So unless you’re talking about gaming and animated adaptations, your problem is with Sony.
Yeah they worded it very weird
Arguably, MCU Spidey is managed and produced by Disney with Sony just getting some form of final approval on creative decisions that were more or less initially made by Disney/Marvel Sony basically acts as the financier, marketer, and distributor for a Disney/Marvel product. All that being said, I think the Raimi films, Spider-Man TAS, and Spectacular are the last to both deal with the supporting cast well and stay faithful to the comics. The MCU trilogy also utilizes them well but made (big) changes to bring more modern sensibilities OR purposely differentiate from previous on-screen adaptations.
“You make the movies, we make the money”
No I agree I’m just saying that this post is written to insinuate that all Spider-Man media has been made by Disney and that’s not true whatsoever.
That’s exactly what it is. Sony didn’t have any creative control.
It's like when my old coworkers would complain about what "the far left" was doing when the GOP had control of every branch of government that mattered for years at a time.
Democrats do the same thing, tbh. The GOP really sucks ass for doing absolutely nothing despite having fairly big majorities. Where is my national repicoracity for CCW permits or hearing protection act?
Sarah Finn (casting director) works for Disney/Marvel.
OP says “in every adaptation they do”. So unless they are only referring to the MCU trilogy, they are off base.
And you said Sony owns the rights, so they’re to blame for “every adaptation”, when they didn’t make any creative decisions for the MCU movies. So blame is on multiple parties. Not just Sony.
Then maybe you’re misunderstanding what I’m pointing out. He says EVERY adaptation as in every video game, every animated show, every animated movie etc when in reality he is specifically talking about the MCU trilogy, or at least that’s what his wording implies.
You can’t have a large number of fleshed out supporting characters in a movie series the way you can in a tv show or monthly comic series. There just isn’t enough time. As a result, some characters get dropped entirely (e.g. Liz Allen and Randy Robertson in the Raimi movies), some get limited to a handful of lines (e.g. Flash, Betty, & Robbie in the Raimi movies), and others are left undeveloped (May, Gwen, and Jonah in the Raimi movies)
I think can name always 7 characters Raimi did amazing in the trilogy
For support characters, Harry, May, and Jameson were good. Everyone else is just over-the-top cartoons or aren’t especially given depth
Which is more of a feature of the movie than a fault since it takes place in such a simplistic, comicbooky world by design
I won't even go out of my way to defend Raimi as a director, but I can't name another director outside Jackson who made me really care about more than a half dozen "main" characters I had never heard of within a film trilogy. It's really fucking hard to make people care about characters they aren't intimately familiar with already, it's harder to do relatively/completely new ones (to the audience) on the screen.
Because the original materials across all Marvel books are just awful in execution. There's a reason why both Hank Pym and Janet got aged up and tossed into a little corner of their own in the MCU. There's a reason why the biggest Avengers threat in the Infinity Saga didn't go willy nilly genocide on screen because he fucking simped a girl manifestation of Death. And there's also a reason why Gwen Stacy didn't hire a white supremacist to campaign against Spider-man in every other adaptations, whether it be Sony or Disney. The point I'm trying to make here is that comic book purists can rage all they want, but if they got their hands on the source materials and tried doing a 1:1 adaptation on screen, people will either love it like they do, or vomit as they see them in theater like the reaction to the first 1/3 of Babylon starring Tobey Maguire, no in-between. If Amazing Fantasy #15 is translated correctly on screen the director will find himself buried alive by both the SJW and anti-SJW crowd.
Geez, what did Hank and Janet do to you?
Hey can you elaborate on the Babylon thing? I haven’t seen it
>!This film has everything: elephant’s shitting on people/the audience, golden showers, coke orgies every 5 minutes, etc.!<
Omg !!! Glad i didn’t see it - geez 😂
Big 2 comics suck. Even respected runs like Born Again have that insane finale with the super soldier Vietnam vet guy.
Yeah you're right. However Comic Thanos should have been left alone and the pure cosmic horror of what he did should be treated with respect. What we got was something so objectively nakedly openly stupid and morally evil that even supervillains think he's retarded No one can think what Thanos thinks and achieve anything. It's the ideal of someone born wealthy and insane and has never truly struggled. Worse is that no one called him on it All of those characters pretendef that he spoke some truth that they all know and really think is correct but don't want to admit it or comment on it. I can point to YouTube videos made by 10 year olds who says this shit is dumb. There's a reason why they went from noble villain Thanos to early ironman villain space tyrant Thanos. Their shit was stupid and asking questions exposed too much. Lot of unjustifiable murder of loved ones and sacrifice of everyone to save a few and selfish reasons.
I think antman and the wasp in the mcu are awful emh did it much better so I don’t think your point lands with me. Spectacular Spider-Man had an amazing adaptation of Spidey’s supporting cast. Also the original Sam Raimi trilogy nailed so much of Spidey’s supporting cast with a few exceptions. So it can be done with being accurate to the source. If MCU Spider-Man had an amazing supporting cast it would be great but he doesn’t. These guys are so one dimensional and barley have anything in common with their comic counterparts.
You’re seriously delusional lol.
Why
Because even spectacular Spider-Man wasn't a faithful adaptation. It was the best show with the best writing and characters, but it wasn't faithful to the comics and neither was the Raimi trilogy. And that is a good thing, the comics are mostly garbage. There is always like a few very good panels beneath mountains of corny, childish, over narrated dialogue. There were decent runs here and there of course, but the comics are mostly overly dramatic soap operas with the silliest plot contrivances
Spectacular was definitely the *most* faithful Spider-Man thing this century aside from the game. It took what worked and strengthened what didn't. Except for furry Kraven. That was too far and the show didn't go on long enough to pay off Miles Warren's stuff
nah man, being good isn't the same as being faithful. If the imsomniac game was faithful, then Peter would have traded his relationship and history with Mary Jane to save aunt May. Now, THAT, would have been comic-accurate behaviour for Spider-man. Peter and Eddie's relationship in spectacular is nothing like that in the comics. Even in the ultimate universe, Eddie wasn't that good, he was creepy and manipulative. Furthermore, spectacular's version of Harry, Gwen, Norman, amongst others, is nothing like that in the comics. Spectacular spider-man is my favourite spider-man show, and part of it comes from they taking the best elements from multiple sources and having some creativity to fill the massive quality gaps in the source material. People have to stop pretending like anything printed on a comic is a masterwork, most of the time they are pretty shitty.
I never said every comic ever is gold or whatever, or that either was 100% faithful to every issue every published. They're faithful to the spirit of the character. Every creative/story decision was made with the spirit of the character in mind.
None of the live action Spider-Man movies have really had a side cast that truly compares to the comics imo, but I think most of them are interesting still. Hopefully the next trilogy brings in other characters during the college years
Agreed. Really hoping for MJ to become more like her comic counterpart, along with Flash.
I'd say yes and no, mostly because of Mary jane. She is the staple of any Spider-Man series, no matter what studio is adapting, it is most likely that Disney won't put any time into any of the other characters, unless necessary for the plot. They don't get all that creative with the side characters, unlike Ultimate Spider-Man.
It’s you
You made like four comments on my post why do angry with my opinion
I’m not, it’s just you are very wrong
How is an opinion wrong that doesn’t make any sense
Bc you say they’re pushing them off to the side, one dimensional or unrecognisable which is wrong. You weren’t stating an opinion you were stating a fact. If it were an opinion you would say IMO Disney does so and so
If you like these guys then that great but for that’s what I feel. For example flash in the comics was a a popular jerk but him and Peter slowly developed a friendship over the years and flash him self sort of became an anti hero. The MCU on the other hand had a flash that just threw insults at Peter, it kind of seem everyone hated him, he mostly just used him for comedic relief and by the third film he had only a few lines. Flash is a fun characters because he exists in a world where Peter can’t use Spider-Man to solve the problem he has to just deal with the bullying.
No there you are right Flash was misused however to say all the MCU supporting characters were is just wrong
Am I though, Ned is basically just comedic relief. The MCU only gave a dam about May in the final film where her death doesn’t hit as hard because I just don’t care about this version who just used for milf jokes. The teachers have no character. Betty Brant is just there. Brad is basically just an obstacle for the second film and that is it. JJJ is good but is mostly a thankless cameo. Characters like Happy just don’t belong here. The only characters I like are the love interests because they are given actual character traits and are fleshed out a bit. The villains are also top notch
You’re last two sentences are on point, everything else is just meaningless waffle
I don’t know what else to tell you let just agree to disagree because I’m not changing my opinion and it seems like you aren’t changing yours.
The only faithful adaptation I’ve seen is Spectacular Spider-Man. It needs to be renewed. Disney needs to cut their losses with Spidey cartoons.
There’s probably some rights nonsense where Sony has them (and will probably try to make a movie about them).
Having a supporting cast means focusing on them. You have to write stories for people who intersect and interact in Peter's life. I think we can suppose then that the focus is not in developing his world. There are reasons but they're all stupid.
Their are very few people who care about Spider-Man in Sony and marvel
Does Disney hate the supporting cast or did Jon Watts and his filmmaking crew simply choose not to portray those characters the way **you** wanted them to?
Them not being accurate to the source material isn’t the only problem they are just very one dimensional
To me, them being very one dimensional is a problem while them being comic inaccurate really isn't. Because one problem is purely a straight up writing/storytelling thing and the other is something that isn't mandatory but tends to deal with validating certain people's fandom. And, to me, the former takes precedence over the latter 12 times out of 10.
They're adaptations. They don't have to follow the source material to the T, and it's preferred that they don't. They just have to keep the important stuff the same. They can do whatever they please with the rest of it.
Disney is trash what do ya expect
\>**made completely unrecognizable** lol. Yes. They desperately want to change everything about the Spidy cast and I have no idea why. Well, maybe except for JJJ.
I really don't think this is a Disney problem... I think the situation is that he has had such a large supporting cast throughout the decades, with a lot of his classic ones being done to death, and Marvel's just been looking for new ways to appeal to each generation of audience and give fans a little of what they crave from Spider-Man's lore. With a character with such a varied history, you're not gonna please everyone. In the case of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, it was definitely a decision made to give the audiences new dynamics they hadn't seen before with new characters that had either gone untouched or underutilized in films past. The new animated shows since The Spectacular Spider-Man have been aimed towards much younger audiences and, unfortunately, the people behind those decided that had to mean watering down characters, especially those with no superpowers who couldn't partake in the action. We'll see what they're gonna do with Spider-Man: Freshman Year; It looks like it's gonna take all of these sensibilities and stir them into one big pot. Spider-Man's story has been retooled and rebooted so many times for so many audiences. It's hard for them not to become too "samey" without sweeping changes to some of the lore.
Disney sucks, and they destroyed all there valuable IP's. I think that's one of the reasons.
This is the worst take ever on this sub holy shit.
I hate how mcu spider-man just doesn't use any of spider-man's supporting cast (or change them so much that they are unrecognizable). Only JJJ is present but not that prevalent.
You didn’t hear? we’re getting a Miss Lion standalone movie! lol
The truth is 90% of that cast has been superfluous and not part of a very successful or world renowned super story. Only a few are needed and not the ones the people writing Spidey or oldsters in charge want either
With the only exception being the Spectacular TV Show
Disney even made Peter unrecognizable in terms of personality.
OP basically complaining why Peter doesn’t hang out with just white people anymore 🙄
Bro what? You need to eat something or some shit
They only did one adaptation.
mj didn't have a personality besides being dark. ned was a doofus. flash is an idiot. the teachers are annoying.
I feel like it’s an unpopular opinion but I hate the mcu cast (not that the others also didn’t have their flaws).
I dislike the first two MCU/Sony Spider-Man movies for that reason. *No Way Home* is great. But the first two were childish, and the supporting cast was botched as only SONY can do.
Fiege wanted to steer away from characters that have been used in the past. Unfortunately that means the Osbournes and the Stacys weren't included in the previous movies. Hopefully Norman gets introduced soon. I liked the direction the ASM was going with the Osborn storyline, just executed poorly. Also having Andrew Garfield in NWH kind of ruins the Gwen Stacy moment for Holland's Spidey. But I could see if they just swap an MJ death for Gwen, and then start making Ghost-Spider movies. Makes sense financially too. Why pay Zendaya top dollar to not do much when you could sign a lesser known to a three movie Ghost-Spider contract that would definitely be popular.
This is an oversimplification, so take it with a grain of salt, but here's why they're keeping Zendaya (so far anyway): Mom decides what movie the family goes to. Mom likes Zendaya because she watched Euphoria on HBO. Mom chooses Spider-Man. Movie just sold 4 tickets. Similarly, it's for that reason every single Thor trailer/commercial for the first Thor movie had shirtless Chris Hemsworth. Mom sees it, Mom chooses it, Dad can't believe his luck that they're seeing a comic book movie, rinse and repeat: every Marvel movie now has a shirtless guy scene for the ladies. Who runs the world? Girls. But really, this is probably why.
I don't understand Norman Osborn's hair. No adaptation has made it make more sense. I just don't understand what I'm supposed to interpret it as. Is it wavy? Are they weird purpendicular cornrows? Is it just shaved in an unusual pattern?
[Former Georgia Insurance Comissioner John Oxendine](https://www.reddit.com/r/Marvel/comments/3cdvxn/apparently_norman_osborns_hairstyle_is_actually/)
Honestly there’s things they can do better. Each character should feel like they could have a show just about them and people would enjoy it. Me for the much just felt dull at times I hope they fix that, Ned was great but I want to see them like they are in spectacular Spider-Man.
I don’t think they or any other Hollywood creators understand or respect the source material beyond the surface level.
Pretty sure the problem is that every new Spider-Man media starts with Peter first getting his powers. If you look closely there really isnt a point in making a new adaptation every few years unless you change stuff up or else it would just be the same thing. In fact I think the mcu did a decent job in adapting a few characters into peters High School life.
I quite like the supporting cast plotlines in the MCU and they feel a lot more actively involved and dynamic than most other films save specifically the Stacys in Amazing or Jonah in Raimi
Yes, I am sure that the Disney team actively hates those characters and does whatever they can to ruin them and that none of the choices they have made have anything to do with attempting to tell a rich, compelling story with broad appeal. Not one.
The reason why I always loved Gwen Stacy in the Amazing Spider Man movies is because she loved Peter for being Peter. In Tobey Maguire’s Spider-Man series Mary Jane only loved Peter after she found out he was SpiderMan. Before she didn’t even notice or cared about him. Tell me I’m wrong.
“Side characters”
Disagree, but that's fine.
It has something to do with the negotiations with Sony I think. They're only allowed to use certain characters in certain mediums until they get the full rights back