Shitty movie choices..

[Oakshana]

I'll admit I don't know the entire back catalogue of Spiderman, well, at all... but what part EXACTLY about the character requires him to be straight??

Relationship with female partners? Make them dudes... Children? Gay people can have those to...

It might be significant part, but is it really relevant? If it isn't relevant, why would you care?

The fact that the character has been pining over women, dating numerous women, and nervous around women because he's shy since 1963. No Marvel revamp or universe reset has undone this fact. Being awkward around women has been an integrated part of who Peter Parker is this entire time. Now, is there a problem if Peter Parker WERE gay? No... absolutely not. But if after all this time of establishing the character has having had deep, complicated and long term relationships with ladies you suddenly have him come out of the closet like "Nope! I was gay all along!", it's not only poor and shitty writing for the sake of inclusivity of a portion of fans, it's quite honestly just flat out insulting to gay people.

I have a couple of gay friends who are die hard comic fans (one of which ran a comic book shop) and both of them were completely befuddled by Marvel suddenly flipped a 180 and make Ice Man gay in the comics. It came pretty much out of left field, was contrary to who his character was, and both of them felt this was pandering on Marvel's part.

Want to make a character gay? Completely fine. Make a character who has either been gay from the beginning, or has struggled with his sexual identity, or has not had a long stream of pre-existing complex & deep relationships that run contrary to that idea. Gay people don't need straight people making established characters gay to make them feel good. They need representation that matters. Suddenly changing an character against his established type isn't the way to do it.

[Endus]

But he did put foot to mouth by saying that there should be more LGBTQ inclusion to MCU. I have no problem with inclusivity fitting the story of a character arc, but inclusivity just for the sake of inclusivity or checking off a checkbox is dipshittastic stupid.

The reverse, however, where you don't ever include LGBTQ characters, is implicitly homophobic. You don't need a reason for a character to be gay, any more than you need a reason for them to be Japanese. There may be specific roles where those factors are key to the character, but for most characters, they aren't.

I agree that inserting a character just to pop up and go "I'm GAY and that's AWESOME" and then go away, that's shitty writing. But making a core character gay just . . . because, that's not "checking a box", that's just how it is. And that's fine. If Peter Parker decided he was more bisexual than heterosexual at some point, so what? It doesn't change anything that really matters. And the only reason it would be a bit weird to make him gay, at this point, is that in Homecoming, Holland's take seemed pretty into girls. You could add "and also guys" at a later date no problem, but reversing that earlier position, when it seems he's in a supportive family and community to begin with, wouldn't make much sense.

But that's because we've got that first film. If you're starting fresh, you can do whatever you like.

Changing a story or character to fit a politic narrative we have seen for the past 10 years that, this is just not how it should be done. The box office and audiences have even shown such. Now, if they would create a character with a story that fits politic narrative I would be all for watching that movie. But this is going OT.

Insisting on a particular interpretation of a character is just as much a 'political narrative' as anything else. It isn't a neutral position; it's an argument against representation.

- - - Updated - - -

The fact that the character has been pining over women, dating numerous women, and nervous around women because he's shy since 1963. No Marvel revamp or universe reset has undone this fact. Being awkward around women has been an integrated part of who Peter Parker is this entire time. Now, is there a problem if Peter Parker WERE gay? No... absolutely not. But if after all this time of establishing the character has having had deep, complicated and long term relationships with ladies you suddenly have him come out of the closet like "Nope! I was gay all along!", it's not only poor and shitty writing for the sake of inclusivity of a portion of fans, it's quite honestly just flat out insulting to gay people.

Just to make a point, Marvel's put a fair bit of effort into establishing different interpretations of characters as different "universes" in their Multiverse. The MCU is Earth-199999. Standard Marvel is Earth-616. Whatever may have been true in Earth-616 is not automatically true in any other universe. The stories published largely in that universe since 1963 don't speak to Earth-199999's Spider-man. Same reason none of Into the Spider-verse's Spider-folks were Tom Holland's Spider-man. And were all wildly different. Way more wildly than just "being gay".

The reason it would be weird for the MCU's Spider-man to be gay is because we already have Homecoming, where Peter seemed to be really into girls. That's it. That's the only prior context that applies. No prior films or comics have any relevance to where the MCU takes the character; it's a whole different universe. They'll likely borrow liberally, of course, but they're not bound by anything.

[Oakshana]

The reason it would be weird for the MCU's Spider-man to be gay is because we already have Homecoming, where Peter seemed to be really into girls. That's it. That's the only prior context that applies. No prior films or comics have any relevance to where the MCU takes the character; it's a whole different universe. They'll likely borrow liberally, of course, but they're not bound by anything.

I'm aware they aren't "bound" by anything and yes there are variances in the characters. For instance, the whole of the Avengers origin is really more heavily based on The Ultimates than it is on The Avengers. But that being said, there are still cores to the characters. To stray to far from their established past as that core is not serving anyone.

I know that the Peter Parker in the MCU is technically not the same as the Comic version. But there is a core to the character that if you completely changed it, would do a disservice to fans, the character and whomevers approval you are trying to achieve.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

I'm aware they aren't "bound" by anything and yes there are variances in the characters. For instance, the whole of the Avengers origin is really more heavily based on The Ultimates than it is on The Avengers. But that being said, there are still cores to the characters. To stray to far from their established past as that core is not serving anyone.

I know that the Peter Parker in the MCU is technically not the same as the Comic version. But there is a core to the character that if you completely changed it, would do a disservice to fans, the character and whomevers approval you are trying to achieve.

Again not that I’m disagreeing but the MCU Has already had his core character changed to the point where’s he’s not close to the normal Spider-Man or even ultimate Spider-Man making him gay really wouldn’t be any more of a disservice then what they have already done.

MCU Peter is Proabbly the furtherest from Peter packer as we have ever had excluding the amazing Spider-Man movies. And of course spider verse stuff.

[NihilSustinet]

Well i'm not even sure if i still can trust Disney.

I just heard rumors Tom Holland thinks spiderman should be gay...

what exactly does an actor's personal opinion have to do with disney as a company?

[Endus]

MCU Peter is Proabbly the furtherest from Peter packer as we have ever had excluding the amazing Spider-Man movies. And of course spider verse stuff.

I'd take exception to that, but only because you've got ridiculous alternates out there like Peter Porker the Spider-ham and Spider-man Noir. And that's just sticking to the ones that are ostensibly still Peter Parker, and not characters like Aunt May who got bit instead, or any of the many spider-girls there've been. We could talk about the 6-armed version, the Man-Spider, Spider-Monkey, the one that's a werewolf, the one where he's a sociopathic murderer who never gave up the Venom symbiote, etc. Seriously, the extended Spider-man mythos is crazy as balls, and a gay Tom Holland version wouldn't even hit the top 10 deviations from Earth-616.

The people complaining that "this isn't the Peter I know" are the kinds of people who've never really been into comics.

[Low Hanging Fruit]

Well i'm not even sure if i still can trust Disney.

I just heard rumors Tom Holland thinks spiderman should be gay...

Whats new. This generation of movies is about taking old stories with established roles and rewriting them to force diversity into them instead of just creating new stories with diverse characters. I have no problem with movies with many races, sexuality, or religions being portrayed in them. I just don't see why suddenly you have to be like "in the next Batman movie he will be black because.. diversity!" instead of just making a new super hero that happens to be black. Just as an example. Shows you how creatively spent the whole industry is.

[Jotaux]

Peter in the mcu should have been Miles. That seems like the character they wanted to use.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

I'd take exception to that, but only because you've got ridiculous alternates out there like Peter Porker the Spider-ham and Spider-man Noir. And that's just sticking to the ones that are ostensibly still Peter Parker, and not characters like Aunt May who got bit instead, or any of the many spider-girls there've been. We could talk about the 6-armed version, the Man-Spider, Spider-Monkey, the one that's a werewolf, the one where he's a sociopathic murderer who never gave up the Venom symbiote, etc. Seriously, the extended Spider-man mythos is crazy as balls, and a gay Tom Holland version wouldn't even hit the top 10 deviations from Earth-616.

The people complaining that "this isn't the Peter I know" are the kinds of people who've never really been into comics.

I’d say all of those fall into spider verse stuff. What id count as main Peter Parker stuff would be the the movies animated series and all the different games. There might be one or two that are further from the 616 or ultimate as I won’t say I’ve gone though all the animated stuff and games but for the most part it seems like the MCU is the most stand out.

- - - Updated - - -

Peter in the mcu should have been Miles. That seems like the character they wanted to use.

It really should have been, only reason I can think they didn’t use miles is because of the backlash they would have gotten I mean they stole most of miles life for the mcu.

[Jotaux]

Fair point...I grew up with the first 200 or so comics of Spiderman...and at some point it just got so far off the rails that I stopped bothering. Some of the Marvel Team ups and the "What if" were fun...but really...

My Spiderman Affection died slowly with Gwen Stacy.....

The cartoon in the 90s was my intro to Spider-man so my Spider-man affection died after One More Day

[unholytestament]

Sir Ian McKellan does not play Magneto in the new X-men movies.

Be careful not to eat too much dirt as the joke sails clear over your head.

It really should have been, only reason I can think they didn’t use miles is because of the backlash they would have gotten I mean they stole most of miles life for the mcu.

You do realize that Miles' story involves taking up the mantle after Peter Parker dies, right? A large part of his character involved being inspired by him and agonizing over whether or not he was doing a good job of living up to his legacy. Excising that from his story would change too much about him.

[Halicia]

I just heard rumors Tom Holland thinks spiderman should be gay...

Sounds like a great idea for a Spidergwen movie...

[cubby]

So I was checking out Dark phoenix and noticed that the Mystique on there and the other X-men movies are completely different. Dark phoenix version looks like the studio didn't even TRY to make her look like the other one. Unless there was a huge age gap, the costume design is outright shitty. T.T
All but dark phoenix, she was sexy af. Dark phoenix makes her look like a kid or some anime character turned into a movie character.

It was my understanding from Lawrence's previous stints that she hated the makeup for the character - that it drove her nuts and took forever. So this change was driven more by her needs than what the movie producers wanted. And JLaw can command stuff like that because she's A-list.

I agree though - it looks terrible.

[Ivanstone]

The fact that the character has been pining over women, dating numerous women, and nervous around women because he's shy since 1963. No Marvel revamp or universe reset has undone this fact. Being awkward around women has been an integrated part of who Peter Parker is this entire time. Now, is there a problem if Peter Parker WERE gay? No... absolutely not.

I have decided that Peter Parker is secretly gay. He's awkward around women because he's gay. Flash Thompson bullied Peter Parker because he could sense that he was gay. That's why Peter is deep, deep in the closet. Also because its the '60's.

Now Flash Thompson is also gay but doesn't want to admit it because he's a tough guy alpha male. Eventually Peter and Flash admit to each other their true selves and run off into the sunset to get married. Or Thelma and Louise off a cliff.

That's how we ship things.

All things seriously there's nothing particularly gay or straight about Spider-man. There is something definitely kinky about him. He runs around in a skin-tight fetish suit and forces bondage onto people. He's likely a dominant and gets off by "webbing" people. I'm sure Bill Marston would approve.

[Oakshana]

I have decided that Peter Parker is secretly gay. He's awkward around women because he's gay. Flash Thompson bullied Peter Parker because he could sense that he was gay. That's why Peter is deep, deep in the closet. Also because its the '60's.

Now Flash Thompson is also gay but doesn't want to admit it because he's a tough guy alpha male. Eventually Peter and Flash admit to each other their true selves and run off into the sunset to get married. Or Thelma and Louise off a cliff.

That's how we ship things.

All things seriously there's nothing particularly gay or straight about Spider-man. There is something definitely kinky about him. He runs around in a skin-tight fetish suit and forces bondage onto people. He's likely a dominant and gets off by "webbing" people. I'm sure Bill Marston would approve.

Can't say I didn't see this counter-argument coming.

Right down to Flash pining for Peter secretly.

- - - Updated - - -

Sir Ian McKellan does not play Magneto in the new X-men movies.

X-Men: Days of Future Past would like a word with you sir.

[Dervrak]

The reverse, however, where you don't ever include LGBTQ characters, is implicitly homophobic. You don't need a reason for a character to be gay, any more than you need a reason for them to be Japanese. There may be specific roles where those factors are key to the character, but for most characters, they aren't.

I agree that inserting a character just to pop up and go "I'm GAY and that's AWESOME" and then go away, that's shitty writing. But making a core character gay just . . . because, that's not "checking a box", that's just how it is. And that's fine. If Peter Parker decided he was more bisexual than heterosexual at some point, so what? It doesn't change anything that really matters. And the only reason it would be a bit weird to make him gay, at this point, is that in Homecoming, Holland's take seemed pretty into girls. You could add "and also guys" at a later date no problem, but reversing that earlier position, when it seems he's in a supportive family and community to begin with, wouldn't make much sense.

A pet peeve of mine is when you see some oblique reference to some character being gay slipped into a conversation then it is never mentioned again. I can almost picture the studio head telling the writers, "We are getting heat from the LGBTQ crowd for no gay characters, so...ahh...toss some line in about one of the characters being gay....but not too much gay, mind you. We don't want to turn off the midwestern bible belt audience." (see Dumbledore in the new Harry Potter movies) That's not to say I want to see some stereotypical gay character who acts like Big Gay Al off Southpark and who's every line is something about how he or she LOVES being gay. I think the 2nd Deadpool movie did it right with Negasonic Teenage Warhead and Yukio. Their relationship was mentioned several times over the course of the movie, but they were never reduced to the "gay couple". They were superhero's first, who just happened to be in a relationship.

[Endus]

A pet peeve of mine is when you see some oblique reference to some character being gay slipped into a conversation then it is never mentioned again. I can almost picture the studio head telling the writers, "We are getting heat from the LGBTQ crowd for no gay characters, so...ahh...toss some line in about one of the characters being gay....but not too much gay, mind you. We don't want to turn off the midwestern bible belt audience." (see Dumbledore in the new Harry Potter movies) That's not to say I want to see some stereotypical gay character who acts like Big Gay Al off Southpark and who's every line is something about how he or she LOVES being gay. I think the 2nd Deadpool movie did it right with Negasonic Teenage Warhead and Yukio. Their relationship was mentioned several times over the course of the movie, but they were never reduced to the "gay couple". They were superhero's first, who just happened to be in a relationship.

Ideally, you should be able to take a romantic couple in a script, say they're Michael and Patricia, and just . . . flip a coin. Maybe it's Michelle and Patricia. Maybe it's Michael and Patrick. Maybe Michelle and Patrick, though that doesn't really change much. If you're writing decent characters, this shouldn't actually change much about the story. They're just . . . who they are, and they're attracted to who they're attracted to. The only reason to make it any more than that is if homophobic opposition to their relationship is a "thing".

Look at how interracial couples are treated these days; barely a whisper. Nobody really cares (except racists).

But we need to stop treating it as "politics" when we see a gay couple in a film. It's no more "politics" than if they were straight. It's just who they are, as characters. If that bothers you, you're the one with an issue, not the writers or the film.

One of my core touchstones for writing is films like Alien, where the characters were originally written without gender at all, and then cast based on whoever was a good fit. Ripley wasn't written for a woman; they could've cast a man in that role, hypothetically.

[Bling]

I'm one of the biggest X-Men fans you'll ever meet. I've read nearly every single X-Men comic ever wrote.

I knew Dark Phoenix was going to suck as soon as it was announced. Mostly because the Fox Creative team has shown they don't really get the X-Men, they are just trying to make money off the movies. You could tell this was the case from the beginning of First Class on. The Fox producers and directors told the actors not to do any research on the characters or X-Men. This just cries we are going to fuck up this franchise. Hell I've seen interviews where the actors can't even recognize pictures of the characters they are playing. The whole franchise feels like it was written by some kid in school who has to write a last minute story for a class or they fail the class. I saw one interview where the franchises top director and producer said they watched a few episodes of the 90s TAS to learn more about the characters, and neither had touched the comics. The fact they kept wanting to do the Phoenix saga showed how little they knew about the story. The story arc LASTED YEARS in the comics, and would literally take several films to tell properly. Hell the 90s Animated Series TOOK TWO SEASONS to tell the story. With over a dozen episodes out of the 76 produced being part of the saga. There are dozens of great stories that would be BADASS and easy to put to film, but when the people making the films won't even open a comic book....

They messed up when they made Xavier/Magneto/Beast/Mystique the main characters, when they were never the main characters in X-Men, more like leading support. Characters like Cyclops/Jean/Wolverine/Storm should be at the center of the cast, at least the original 3 movies realized that. Its like making a Ninja Turtles movie were Splinter, Shredder and April are the main characters and the Ninja Turtles are side characters that barely get lines. Not to mention the pure bastardization of the source material. Like Alex Summers(Havok) is Scott Summers(Cyclops) little brother, yet in first class they make Alex a founding member, and like 20 years older than Cyclops. Doesn't matter than Scott saved his brothers life jumping out of his parents crashing airplane with him when they were little kids with the only parachute, while their parents died(I know they didn't but it was decades before the Summers brothers learned that themselves). Yet in the movies, Alex is like 20 something years older than Scott. WTF?


I also think making characters gay just because someone feels you need a gay guy on the team is fucking bullshit. What they did to Iceman was fucking bullshit. He was my favorite X-man for almost 30 years, and until recently the member I identified the most with. Then they fucking destroyed him, he's not even a shadow of the character he once was. Iceman was the player of the team. He was the "Gambit" before Gambit was introduced. No one seems to remember that Iceman broke up the biggest wedding in X-Men history pre-90s(I know Scott and Jean was bigger) because he was in love with the bride. Or the many times Iceman got the team into trouble over some girl he was in love with. Or the fact that nearly every time Iceman left the team it was to settle down with the love of his life, all women. In fact Iceman left the team more over love with women than any other X-man in team history.

Honestly making Iceman gay made as much sense as making Tony Stark gay would make. Especially when all they had to do was make a new badass gay character. Funny thing is Beast has been teased as gay countless times over the last few decades, yet they kept him straight?!?!

[IIamaKing]

I dont think J-Law wanted to have a bunch of makeup caked on. There is/was also speculation that some scenes just used CGI masking.

[Belloc]

Be careful not to eat too much dirt as the joke sails clear over your head.

Bad jokes don't always come off as jokes.