As I recall, Marvel had to follow guidelines from FOX or whoever it is that owns the Spiderman rights to use Spiderman in their films. If they aren't doing Miles Morales, it's probably because they were told "You can use Spiderman on the condition that it's Peter Parker", or something.
Captain America: Civil War
- Thread starter Renewal
- Start date
- Movies
Claudette Savagely
Ball of flies
- Location
- (and made of) Parts Unknown
I'll look into that, the rights and usage agreement stuff sounds interesting.
Or it could be because as far as most people are concerned, Miles Morales may be a version of Spider-Man, but Peter Parker is the Spider-Man. You can't just go ahead and risk Spider-Man's existence in the MCU on the idea that people are just going to go ahead and accept that "Miles Morales is our Spider-Man now" any more than Batman vs Superman, however good or bad it may wind up being, could go risk replacing Bruce Wayne as Batman out of the blue.
This isn't the same as making a movie about a tree and a talking raccoon - the Guardians of the Galaxy were relative unknowns in the grand scheme of things. They hadn't made their mark yet. Spider-Man, on the other hand, is one of the biggest names in Comic Books - people have expectations of what they're going to get when they see Spider-Man on film.
Nor is it the same as changing actors in a given role. There is a significant difference between switching the actor for a character and changing the character itself. When they switched the actors for James Rhodes and Bruce Banner, the characters were still for all intents and purposes James Rhodes and Bruce Banner - even if they didn't look exactly the same, the continuity of the character is still there. It would be a much different story if they'd changed the characters of Rhodes and Banner alongside changing their actors.
And for however okay you may be with Miles Morales being Spider-Man in Civil War as an individual, what about those who aren't okay with it? What about the people who want them to use Peter Parker as Spider-Man now that he's officially allowed to be on the big screen alongside Captain America and Iron Man?
This isn't the same as making a movie about a tree and a talking raccoon - the Guardians of the Galaxy were relative unknowns in the grand scheme of things. They hadn't made their mark yet. Spider-Man, on the other hand, is one of the biggest names in Comic Books - people have expectations of what they're going to get when they see Spider-Man on film.
Nor is it the same as changing actors in a given role. There is a significant difference between switching the actor for a character and changing the character itself. When they switched the actors for James Rhodes and Bruce Banner, the characters were still for all intents and purposes James Rhodes and Bruce Banner - even if they didn't look exactly the same, the continuity of the character is still there. It would be a much different story if they'd changed the characters of Rhodes and Banner alongside changing their actors.
And for however okay you may be with Miles Morales being Spider-Man in Civil War as an individual, what about those who aren't okay with it? What about the people who want them to use Peter Parker as Spider-Man now that he's officially allowed to be on the big screen alongside Captain America and Iron Man?
Claudette Savagely
Ball of flies
- Location
- (and made of) Parts Unknown
Given that spidey's character doesn't yet exist in the MCU (as far as the public is concerned), your third paragraph doesn't refer to anything that's happened yet.
As for your second paragraph, Spiderman has been protrayed by two different actors in two series of big ol' blockbuster films, so I'm confident that the movie going public can actually understand that it's still him, on account of not being simpletons.
As regards the first, okay? There have been goodness knows how many versions of 'Bruce Wayne' that differ pretty significantly in how they are as people, and yet people's heads have not exploded. I have faith that fans and non-fans can actually understand the idea of a guy being Spiderman who isn't Peter Parker without quitting the franchise in droves. If you perceive it to be too huge a risk to surmount, fair enough.
As for your last paragraph, I'm not holding a gun to Kevin Fiege's head and forcing him to erase Parker's existence so like, relax bro
I fail to see the connection between "Spidey doesn't exist in the MCU yet" and whatever it is you're trying to refer to in the third paragraph.
Two different actors, yes, and yet, at their core, they were both still playing the same character. They didn't use Peter Parker for the first series and then switch to someone like Ben Riley or Miguel O'Hera for the second series, or for that matter they didn't make that huge a change to who the character was.
The biggest arguable change was the whole situation surrounding his parents, and if I'm not mistaken, people didn't exactly embrace that whole plot thread with open arms.
And yet, they are all still 'Bruce Wayne'. At their core, they are all the same character - they are Bruce Wayne, Billionaire Playboy CEO of Wayne Industries who lost his parent when he was a young boy, then 'became a Bat' in order to fight crime and clean up Gotham City. They operate out of the Batcave, with the help of his loyal butler Alfred, drives around in the Batmobile and an array of other bat-themed vehicles, and use their amazing detective skills and honed fighting abilities to 'be the night' in order to fight a never-ending crusade against crime.
I would certainly hope not. That would be an extreme reaction.
Not to mention it's kind of an extreme response to go from "what about those people who want Peter Parker to be Spider-Man in the MCU" to "Hey, I'm not holding a gun to someone's head and forcing him to be erased from existence".
If you're trying to make it as a joke with the '
' in there, it really just falls flat on it's face.
- Location
- The Hague
- Pronouns
- He/Him
The Marvel films are halfway to being the Ultimates universe so Miles makes sense to me. He'll still probably be Peter though. I think that's a pity - we've had five films of Peter Parker, after all.
- Location
- Mons Regius
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I love Miles (he has grown on me after I hated the death of Ultimate Spiderman), but yeah, I very much doubt he is going to get a movie.
But we've had 0 films where Peter Parker has been on the screen at the same time as the rest of the Marvel Universe - that's basically the key here. Those past movies? They didn't exist in the same universe as Captain America and Iron Man and the Hulk and any other number of characters that he's been able to interact with in the comics over the years.
- Location
- The Hague
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Yeah, but I don't care about that. I know that some people do because of the basic gratification element in these films. This thing from this comic interacting with this other thing from this other comic doesn't do anything for me. I've seen Peter Parker fifteen trillion times, seeing him in the same film as Steve Rogers or Tony Stark doesn't make the character seem fresh or exciting.
- Location
- La Ballena City Raft
- Pronouns
- He/Him
That.... doesn't really address his problem, though. Spiderman will probably still be Peter Parker and we've seen the 'nerdy white guy who gets super powers' like, 5 times already.
Derek58
Rocket Punch is Best Punch
- Location
- Getter Valhalla
Which is why Marvel's not doing another origin movie. Peter's showing up after having become Spider Man.
- Location
- La Ballena City Raft
- Pronouns
- He/Him
'Nerdy white guy with superpowers' then.
Still broadly the same character we've seen before and just as boring.
Derek58
Rocket Punch is Best Punch
- Location
- Getter Valhalla
Too bad. Peter's the iconic character that pretty much everyone thinks of when they hear Spider Man.
Marvel's well aware of this, which is why they're going with Peter.
Last edited:
- Location
- La Ballena City Raft
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I was unaware that I'm not allowed to complain that boring characters are boring due to their omnipresence. How ashamed I am!
Edit: We should probably drop this.
Claudette Savagely
Ball of flies
- Location
- (and made of) Parts Unknown
I fail to see the connection between "Spidey doesn't exist in the MCU yet" and whatever it is you're trying to refer to in the third paragraph.
Two different actors, yes, and yet, at their core, they were both still playing the same character. They didn't use Peter Parker for the first series and then switch to someone like Ben Riley or Miguel O'Hera for the second series, or for that matter they didn't make that huge a change to who the character was.
The biggest arguable change was the whole situation surrounding his parents, and if I'm not mistaken, people didn't exactly embrace that whole plot thread with open arms.
And yet, they are all still 'Bruce Wayne'. At their core, they are all the same character - they are Bruce Wayne, Billionaire Playboy CEO of Wayne Industries who lost his parent when he was a young boy, then 'became a Bat' in order to fight crime and clean up Gotham City. They operate out of the Batcave, with the help of his loyal butler Alfred, drives around in the Batmobile and an array of other bat-themed vehicles, and use their amazing detective skills and honed fighting abilities to 'be the night' in order to fight a never-ending crusade against crime.
I would certainly hope not. That would be an extreme reaction.
Not to mention it's kind of an extreme response to go from "what about those people who want Peter Parker to be Spider-Man in the MCU" to "Hey, I'm not holding a gun to someone's head and forcing him to be erased from existence".
If you're trying to make it as a joke with the '
In the third paragraph of the post I quoted, you spoke about how changing actors and characters in a cinematic continuity is bad. I pointed out that as the MCU hasn't actually established a Spiderman of any stripe yet, introducing Miles would not constitute such a change and therefore would not be the dire thing you fear it to be.
As regards Batmen: sure, they were the same batman if you reduce it to the very basics of the character, but tell me with a straight face that Michael Keaton's portrayal is identical to Bales which is in turn a facsimilie of Clooney's. You could, and you'd be silly for doing so. At any rate, in the same vein as Batman and his endless outings on the silver screen, we've had five films of Peter Parker and it's beyond dull.
The last past confuses me somewhat because you act like me making a patently absurd joke on the internet is extreme, in response to your attempt at painting me as a meanie who's taking fan's toys away somehow by having an opinion. Please, stop. I am not actually holding a gun to Kevin Feige's head, nor am I capable of doing so. That I even have to clarify this for you is saddening, to say the least. Also, seeing as how Miles Morales is Spiderman, those fans would be getting Spiderman alongside Cap and Tony and Natasha just like they wanted, arguably.
I mean this is all academic; they and you will get yet more Parker played by yet another young white dude who'll probably be forgettably funny just like the first two, and everything will be fine. No one will be challenged in any way, and you can now relax.
Edit: anyway...
On the actual subject of the film, I spy Thunderbolt Ross reading our heroes the riot act. How's he going to play into all of this? He comes with narrative baggage from the Hulk's film with Eric Bana, so it'll be interesting to see if his change in attitude toward Banner carries over or not.
Last edited:
Claudette Savagely
Ball of flies
- Location
- (and made of) Parts Unknown
Please see the end of my last post. What do you think Gen. Ross will be up to with no Banner to catch?
You mean Edward Norton. Eric Bana is from the terrible Hulk, directed by Ang Lee. Norton is from the MCU-canon Incredible Hulk.
I hope Ross is called out on his Hulk triggering. Though I won't hold my breath; it looks like they're going to ignore that.
Could somebody tell me why using Peter Parker is bad again?
Claudette Savagely
Ball of flies
- Location
- (and made of) Parts Unknown
Duh, yes. Thank you. Incidentally I actually liked Norton in the role, even if Ruffalo does a good job with limited material.
I hope so too, doubly so with the apparent being angry at people because they did well thing he seems to have going on in the trailer. Not betting on it, mind.
Didn't say it was, just bored of him after a bunch of samey big screen outings and disappointed that Marvel aren't using the rich seam of material they have to do something a little interesting, like Miles Morales.
Last edited:
Okay, so how is Miles Morales magically more interesting than Peter Parker? They're both teens with vaguely spider-related powers.
Claudette Savagely
Ball of flies
- Location
- (and made of) Parts Unknown
He's not the same guy we've had for five movies in a row.
Neither is this one. C'mon, nobody whines that we've had Bruce Wayne for seven movies or Clark Kent for six, what makes Miles so super-exciting that Peter's got to go?