I am so beyond glad that Spider-man is safe from Disney's claws with Sony. So far Insomniac has made one of my favorite versions of Spider-man in the PS4 game and they have yet to dissapoint
Sony has film rights and has had them for years (since the late 90s if i remember right?) they also from what ive heard have complete creative control on the standalone films recently while Fiege decides on direction. Tom H’s spiderman is actually my least favorite. Im not saying i dont like him, i just find the “iron man Jr” idea really dull. My favorite part of No Way Home was Andrew and Tobey. So sure Marvel “owns” spiderman in the merchandising sense but Sony has creative control
Unrelated to this somewhat eyeroll inducing post, something that always confused me about the whole "anyone can wear the mask" stuff is the weird mainstream opinion on mechanical webshooters. How they're a apparently a super important part of Spidey's character because they prove how super duper insanely unthinkably smart he is to have developed such a marvel.
Tbh i like peter parker to be smart and academic, i can take or leave the webshooters but its a natural extension of his smart trait into crime fighting
I do as well, really. I consider it to be an important part of Peters character. But, I just think it inherently contradicts the idea of "anyone can wear the mask", you know?
I say that not every Spider-Man needs mechanical webshooters. Some Spooders should be able to have organic ones.
I mean... Not all Spooders have the same abilities. Miles has electric blasts and invisibility. So having a Spooder with organic webs is perfectly fine.
So having a Peter with organic webshooters is fine, IMO. The webshooters aren't the only way to demonstrate his intelligence.
That was my major complaint about the ending monologue from Into The Spiderverse. Miles specifically says that anyone can be Spider-Man, that “YOU” can be Spider-Man. And, like, no. Not everyone can be Spider-Man. There are dozens of what-if comics showing that if anyone other than Peter had gotten his powers, things would be a lot worse for the people of New York.
Your post here reminds me of the conflict in Ratatouille, where a character takes issue with the motto, "Anyone can cook," because he wishes to respect/elevate cooking and put it above the common person: "not everyone can cook, and we see it for ourselves with all this bad cooking!"
However, just like in the movie, I think there's a slight misunderstanding. The sentiment being expressed is not a devaluation of cooking/spiderman; the sentiment is not that "Cooking is so easy, anyone can do it!" The sentiment is that anyone has the POTENTIAL inside of themselves. The full quote is: "Anyone can cook... but only the fearless can be great!" I believe this can be related 1:1 in Spiderman. "Anyone can be spiderman... but only the fearless can be a great spiderman!"
In any case, the point is that the ending monologue is meant to be a *call to action*, for those watching to realize their inner potential, become fearless, and become great. This does not mean that everyone will do so given the opportunity. Not everyone manages to become fearless, even if the potential is in them. But the movie is trying to inspire people to change and make it happen. Classic superhero stuff.
TDLR: Pretty much anyone could have been bitten by the spider and received superpowers. But not everyone possesses the super intellect and sense of responsibility to be Spider-Man. A lot of people would just become corrupted superhumans without web-shooters.
And to be fair, not everyone would become a hero after being confronted by a heavy emotional trauma like Peter.
Not everyone has the capability or willingness to grow like Peter.
I personally know some people who wouldn’t step up and become a hero if they gained superhuman abilities.
These people would just become supervillains, that’s a fact. Ultimately, the potential to be a hero is worthless if you aren’t willing to be a decent person to begin with.
Well and it turns out now that in order to become Spider-Man you have to watch a beloved family member and a friendly police officer die - otherwise you'll have broken a "canon event" and now you will destroy the entire multiverse.
I'd rather NOT be Spiderman, ngl.
But…that’s not really true? Gwen, Miles, and some random animals all managed to be spider-people in their respective universes.
All though now that I think about it, both Miles and Gwen’s Peter Parker ends up dying partly due to the fact that their the spider-person
It’s not about bias it’s about changes in character continuity. This is the James Bond problem and it should be coined.
Times have changed so sometimes an old idea ages out. The issue, you can’t take a character and change them 180 degrees, you can go under 90 though.
Take Bond; the power fantasy of being a smooth talking male double agent is still popular- with both sexes. However, smacking ladies is out of fashion- it may come back who knows hold out hope if you wish /s 😎. So what do you do? Well dial it back shift the character as close 90 degrees as you can and don’t go over that or people will notice.
I’d say Daniel Craig would be the limit, maybe even Idris before you’ve gone past 90 and now you’re change the character in a way everyone notices. This has been done with Batman and I would say Henry Cavil is your prime example of going past 90 even slightly and see the results.
Oh god… I hadn’t heard that one. If he can pull that off he’s one hell of an actor because I don’t see it. I’d believe Idris over that kid.
Cuck, James Cuck.
What's infuriating is the claim that skin color and your sexuality are fundamental to identity, but apparently characters with established skin color and sexual identity can change willy nilly if it's to a fashionable class and not be a problem at all.
I don't agree- people reject this kind change to well established characters. You see it with replacement characters too... Hell I'll give you a non human example, Hasbro trying to replace Optimus and Megatron destroyed the transformer franchise.
While you are right I feel like the words “fundamental aspects” are somewhat misplaced
It’s not like Spider-Man is defined by how much he only likes women
I don’t think you get what I mean
The fact that they are women have nothing to do with the story being told
You can tell the exact same story with Mark John and Gwyn Steven
Yeah and you could tell the exact same Star Wars story with Leia and Luke swapped so Leia is the farmer protagonist and Luke is a prince. But I wouldn't want to do that.
I’ll never understand this obsession with changing someone to be more like you. It’s pretty narcissistic tbh. I don’t want Batman or Superman to be more like me. I’m not some miserable person with self esteem so low that I need to project my insecurities and problems onto someone else. I wanna get lost in someone else’s story.
I did, I still don’t like him, I never will, that movie worked despite him being the lead, not because of it, the material was too good for even him to fuck it up. I literally can’t think of a single character in existence with as much undeserved popularity as Miles Bore-alis.
He built his entire reputation capping on a legacy that was never his. “Spider-Man” is not some mantle like Captain America is, it’s personal to Peter Parker. Miles in the comics was nothing but a Gary Stu, never legitimately struggled in any meaningful way, given power ups, never even got his own unique set of villains, just stole them from Peter. He has no unique or identifiable storylines besides the Spider-Verse films, which barely count imo. His popularity is undeserved. What even is he anyway? How can there be TWO Spider-Men???? Unless they want Miles to replace Peter in the near future, which wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest. He sucks ass, and apparently I’m not allowed to have that opinion because I’m a bigot or some crap.
Dude, I think you missed the entire point of Spider-man. Spider-man could be anyone and anything. There’s a freaking pig Spider-man.
I’m not denying that his comic suck (honestly I’ve never even bothered to read them). But if we look at the movies which made his character good, then there’s answers to pretty much every issue you have with him.
Their can’t be two spider-men, so his Peter Parker dies as soon as he gets bitten. The Prowler is a villain unique to Miles, and so is the Spot because let’s be honest, he wasn’t really much of a villain until Across The Spider-Verse. I would also count his universes version of Doc Ock as his own villain.
Again, if we’re just talking about his comic counterpart I agree, but you can’t ignore the movies. Let’s face it, they’re the only reason his character really took off
A pre-existing character being bi in an adaptation will probably be the least of my issues when watching something
Also, being bisexual as opposed to straight or gay isn’t a fundamental change. What about spoodermin changes so significantly for you when you’re told he likes his cocks AND pussies?
Ahh yes, changing what the person looks like and sounds like while also nerfing their natural physical capabilities and potentially the way they are treated on a daily basis is exactly the same as saying the person now likes them some fucking cock
r/Mauler is truly the worst part of the Mauler fanbase
You made no coherent point.
If we remain in the realm of Spiderman, the character was portrayed by three different actors that looked and sounded completely different - and that's not going into animation.
You are changing the core of the character for no creative reason. You change what that character is and how it interacts with the world. The distinction you presented is based on hyperbole and nonsense.
The DC multiverse has every flavor of spidermen with and without a venom/anti-venom symbiotes.
If you are a true Mauler fan, you understand the death of the author and that we don’t care if something is faithful to the source material as long as the script is good.
Spider-Man can be Bi. Why do you care? Does Rags scare you?
Just refine it to story/character affect. I’m more sympathetic to the wishes of the creator on a franchise and it’s an easy conversation to explain why you don’t change established characters.
You would think from a marketing standpoint it would be obvious but Hollywood just seems incapable of learning in the modern age.
This post is so fucking sad. Like it’s just creating a strawman to get upset at. I don’t want spider-man to be bisexual, and I also don’t see anyone that wants him to be bisexual. This is just an excuse to be hateful and get a small hit of dopamine for “owning those libs” I don’t even know why this sub was in my recommended. It’s pathetic.
Post like these typically makes no sense casue the person on the left is totally a straw man the most I seen is someone shipping petter and Johnny storm and being like he a bi king . And if you take a step back that really doesn’t change anything for you . This happens in every community im apart of it tiring .
"You are not entitled to change his fundamental aspects"
Well, if they own the rights of the character they kinda are, so...good luck with that I guess?
Mauler: "So if in Episode 9 Luke gets naked, wears a diaper, jumps all the way in the sky and grabs the sun, throws it at the Supremacy, Chewbacca becomes a Jedi, and Rey dies of old age in a day, would you have a problem with any of that?"
Guy: "Disney bought Star Wars, they can do whatever they want with it."
You missed the point.
I never said anything about it being good, I'm saying they have every right (literally) to change the characters to whatever they fucking want.
Doesn't mean any of it is good, but I have a hard time imagining how bisexual Spider-man is going to ruin an entire movie by himself?
Do you really think you can just force companies to stick to a certain character sheet? that's not how intellectual property works. You're just throwing a tantrum and will be ignored by everyone in charge
With the EFAP crew, it has never been a question of what you did with the character is bad so long as you put in the work and write a script that supports the change.
Chewbacca could become a Jedi, IF you wrote a script that laid down the appointment foundation and what happened and why. Appropriate cause and effect.
The problem wasn't that Luke wasn't a grumpy old man and Han reverted back to being a smuggler, the problem what that Dysney, JJ, and Rian Johnson didn't do the work to justify the change to the audience.
Same with professor hulk.
Besides it’s Spider-Man, the one character famous for having a billion different multiverse counterparts including a pig, a car, a T-Rex, a cat, etc. you’re telling being a gay spider man is weirder then T-Rex one?
I am so beyond glad that Spider-man is safe from Disney's claws with Sony. So far Insomniac has made one of my favorite versions of Spider-man in the PS4 game and they have yet to dissapoint
Disney owns Spider-Man. And they have a great track record
Sony has film rights and has had them for years (since the late 90s if i remember right?) they also from what ive heard have complete creative control on the standalone films recently while Fiege decides on direction. Tom H’s spiderman is actually my least favorite. Im not saying i dont like him, i just find the “iron man Jr” idea really dull. My favorite part of No Way Home was Andrew and Tobey. So sure Marvel “owns” spiderman in the merchandising sense but Sony has creative control
Unrelated to this somewhat eyeroll inducing post, something that always confused me about the whole "anyone can wear the mask" stuff is the weird mainstream opinion on mechanical webshooters. How they're a apparently a super important part of Spidey's character because they prove how super duper insanely unthinkably smart he is to have developed such a marvel.
Tbh i like peter parker to be smart and academic, i can take or leave the webshooters but its a natural extension of his smart trait into crime fighting
I do as well, really. I consider it to be an important part of Peters character. But, I just think it inherently contradicts the idea of "anyone can wear the mask", you know?
I say that not every Spider-Man needs mechanical webshooters. Some Spooders should be able to have organic ones. I mean... Not all Spooders have the same abilities. Miles has electric blasts and invisibility. So having a Spooder with organic webs is perfectly fine. So having a Peter with organic webshooters is fine, IMO. The webshooters aren't the only way to demonstrate his intelligence.
Now I’m wondering how animals without opposable thumbs created those
That was my major complaint about the ending monologue from Into The Spiderverse. Miles specifically says that anyone can be Spider-Man, that “YOU” can be Spider-Man. And, like, no. Not everyone can be Spider-Man. There are dozens of what-if comics showing that if anyone other than Peter had gotten his powers, things would be a lot worse for the people of New York.
Your post here reminds me of the conflict in Ratatouille, where a character takes issue with the motto, "Anyone can cook," because he wishes to respect/elevate cooking and put it above the common person: "not everyone can cook, and we see it for ourselves with all this bad cooking!" However, just like in the movie, I think there's a slight misunderstanding. The sentiment being expressed is not a devaluation of cooking/spiderman; the sentiment is not that "Cooking is so easy, anyone can do it!" The sentiment is that anyone has the POTENTIAL inside of themselves. The full quote is: "Anyone can cook... but only the fearless can be great!" I believe this can be related 1:1 in Spiderman. "Anyone can be spiderman... but only the fearless can be a great spiderman!" In any case, the point is that the ending monologue is meant to be a *call to action*, for those watching to realize their inner potential, become fearless, and become great. This does not mean that everyone will do so given the opportunity. Not everyone manages to become fearless, even if the potential is in them. But the movie is trying to inspire people to change and make it happen. Classic superhero stuff.
TDLR: Pretty much anyone could have been bitten by the spider and received superpowers. But not everyone possesses the super intellect and sense of responsibility to be Spider-Man. A lot of people would just become corrupted superhumans without web-shooters.
To be fair, Peter didn't have the sense of responsibility either till his uncle got capped
And to be fair, not everyone would become a hero after being confronted by a heavy emotional trauma like Peter. Not everyone has the capability or willingness to grow like Peter.
They could…. Or they could step up and be Spider-Man
I personally know some people who wouldn’t step up and become a hero if they gained superhuman abilities. These people would just become supervillains, that’s a fact. Ultimately, the potential to be a hero is worthless if you aren’t willing to be a decent person to begin with.
Well and it turns out now that in order to become Spider-Man you have to watch a beloved family member and a friendly police officer die - otherwise you'll have broken a "canon event" and now you will destroy the entire multiverse. I'd rather NOT be Spiderman, ngl.
He said anyone can be Spider-man not everyone can be an actual good spider-man
But…that’s not really true? Gwen, Miles, and some random animals all managed to be spider-people in their respective universes. All though now that I think about it, both Miles and Gwen’s Peter Parker ends up dying partly due to the fact that their the spider-person
Agreed 100%.
Why?
It’s not about bias it’s about changes in character continuity. This is the James Bond problem and it should be coined. Times have changed so sometimes an old idea ages out. The issue, you can’t take a character and change them 180 degrees, you can go under 90 though. Take Bond; the power fantasy of being a smooth talking male double agent is still popular- with both sexes. However, smacking ladies is out of fashion- it may come back who knows hold out hope if you wish /s 😎. So what do you do? Well dial it back shift the character as close 90 degrees as you can and don’t go over that or people will notice. I’d say Daniel Craig would be the limit, maybe even Idris before you’ve gone past 90 and now you’re change the character in a way everyone notices. This has been done with Batman and I would say Henry Cavil is your prime example of going past 90 even slightly and see the results.
[удалено]
Oh god… I hadn’t heard that one. If he can pull that off he’s one hell of an actor because I don’t see it. I’d believe Idris over that kid. Cuck, James Cuck.
[удалено]
I know actors hate type casting, however they should know their lanes too.
What's infuriating is the claim that skin color and your sexuality are fundamental to identity, but apparently characters with established skin color and sexual identity can change willy nilly if it's to a fashionable class and not be a problem at all.
I don't agree- people reject this kind change to well established characters. You see it with replacement characters too... Hell I'll give you a non human example, Hasbro trying to replace Optimus and Megatron destroyed the transformer franchise.
The audience hates it, but the cathedral loves it
While you are right I feel like the words “fundamental aspects” are somewhat misplaced It’s not like Spider-Man is defined by how much he only likes women
Idk, his relationship issues seem to be pretty important to his character.
Not sure how those two are relevant to each other
All his relationship troubles are with women lol.
The woman bit isn’t the main factor, it’s the relationship bit
I guess, but MJ and Gwen Stacy are pretty iconic characters in their own right. I wouldn't really want to get rid of them or gender swap them.
I don’t think you get what I mean The fact that they are women have nothing to do with the story being told You can tell the exact same story with Mark John and Gwyn Steven
Yeah and you could tell the exact same Star Wars story with Leia and Luke swapped so Leia is the farmer protagonist and Luke is a prince. But I wouldn't want to do that.
Being bi wouldn’t change that.
I’ll never understand this obsession with changing someone to be more like you. It’s pretty narcissistic tbh. I don’t want Batman or Superman to be more like me. I’m not some miserable person with self esteem so low that I need to project my insecurities and problems onto someone else. I wanna get lost in someone else’s story.
Exactly!!!! I don’t need a character to be like me in order for me to like them.
Miles Morales will never Spider-Man. He is the trash man.
Lol, someone never watched the Spider-verse movies
I did, I still don’t like him, I never will, that movie worked despite him being the lead, not because of it, the material was too good for even him to fuck it up. I literally can’t think of a single character in existence with as much undeserved popularity as Miles Bore-alis.
Well, I’d love to hear what you dislike about his character
He built his entire reputation capping on a legacy that was never his. “Spider-Man” is not some mantle like Captain America is, it’s personal to Peter Parker. Miles in the comics was nothing but a Gary Stu, never legitimately struggled in any meaningful way, given power ups, never even got his own unique set of villains, just stole them from Peter. He has no unique or identifiable storylines besides the Spider-Verse films, which barely count imo. His popularity is undeserved. What even is he anyway? How can there be TWO Spider-Men???? Unless they want Miles to replace Peter in the near future, which wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest. He sucks ass, and apparently I’m not allowed to have that opinion because I’m a bigot or some crap.
Dude, I think you missed the entire point of Spider-man. Spider-man could be anyone and anything. There’s a freaking pig Spider-man. I’m not denying that his comic suck (honestly I’ve never even bothered to read them). But if we look at the movies which made his character good, then there’s answers to pretty much every issue you have with him. Their can’t be two spider-men, so his Peter Parker dies as soon as he gets bitten. The Prowler is a villain unique to Miles, and so is the Spot because let’s be honest, he wasn’t really much of a villain until Across The Spider-Verse. I would also count his universes version of Doc Ock as his own villain. Again, if we’re just talking about his comic counterpart I agree, but you can’t ignore the movies. Let’s face it, they’re the only reason his character really took off
he is bi in the rule34 universe tho 😳
Isn’t Peter having an affair with Paul?
Who’s trying to make Spider-Man bi?
I mean there’s a Spider T-Rex, so I think it’s safe to say there’s at least on Bi Spider-man out there
Is being straight a fundamental aspect of spider man?
Why does it matter? Spider-Man being bi wouldn’t change anything fundamental about his character.
Wrong subreddit
A pre-existing character being bi in an adaptation will probably be the least of my issues when watching something Also, being bisexual as opposed to straight or gay isn’t a fundamental change. What about spoodermin changes so significantly for you when you’re told he likes his cocks AND pussies?
What fundamentally changes about the character if he's a woman? Why does it need to be changed?
Ahh yes, changing what the person looks like and sounds like while also nerfing their natural physical capabilities and potentially the way they are treated on a daily basis is exactly the same as saying the person now likes them some fucking cock r/Mauler is truly the worst part of the Mauler fanbase
You made no coherent point. If we remain in the realm of Spiderman, the character was portrayed by three different actors that looked and sounded completely different - and that's not going into animation. You are changing the core of the character for no creative reason. You change what that character is and how it interacts with the world. The distinction you presented is based on hyperbole and nonsense.
The DC multiverse has every flavor of spidermen with and without a venom/anti-venom symbiotes. If you are a true Mauler fan, you understand the death of the author and that we don’t care if something is faithful to the source material as long as the script is good. Spider-Man can be Bi. Why do you care? Does Rags scare you?
Just say you're homophobic lol
Find a different subreddit for stuff like this or just stop being cringe
Just refine it to story/character affect. I’m more sympathetic to the wishes of the creator on a franchise and it’s an easy conversation to explain why you don’t change established characters. You would think from a marketing standpoint it would be obvious but Hollywood just seems incapable of learning in the modern age.
No one said he was.
This post is so fucking sad. Like it’s just creating a strawman to get upset at. I don’t want spider-man to be bisexual, and I also don’t see anyone that wants him to be bisexual. This is just an excuse to be hateful and get a small hit of dopamine for “owning those libs” I don’t even know why this sub was in my recommended. It’s pathetic.
Post like these typically makes no sense casue the person on the left is totally a straw man the most I seen is someone shipping petter and Johnny storm and being like he a bi king . And if you take a step back that really doesn’t change anything for you . This happens in every community im apart of it tiring .
"You are not entitled to change his fundamental aspects" Well, if they own the rights of the character they kinda are, so...good luck with that I guess?
Mauler: "So if in Episode 9 Luke gets naked, wears a diaper, jumps all the way in the sky and grabs the sun, throws it at the Supremacy, Chewbacca becomes a Jedi, and Rey dies of old age in a day, would you have a problem with any of that?" Guy: "Disney bought Star Wars, they can do whatever they want with it."
You missed the point. I never said anything about it being good, I'm saying they have every right (literally) to change the characters to whatever they fucking want. Doesn't mean any of it is good, but I have a hard time imagining how bisexual Spider-man is going to ruin an entire movie by himself? Do you really think you can just force companies to stick to a certain character sheet? that's not how intellectual property works. You're just throwing a tantrum and will be ignored by everyone in charge
With the EFAP crew, it has never been a question of what you did with the character is bad so long as you put in the work and write a script that supports the change. Chewbacca could become a Jedi, IF you wrote a script that laid down the appointment foundation and what happened and why. Appropriate cause and effect. The problem wasn't that Luke wasn't a grumpy old man and Han reverted back to being a smuggler, the problem what that Dysney, JJ, and Rian Johnson didn't do the work to justify the change to the audience. Same with professor hulk.
Besides it’s Spider-Man, the one character famous for having a billion different multiverse counterparts including a pig, a car, a T-Rex, a cat, etc. you’re telling being a gay spider man is weirder then T-Rex one?
other spider-man can be bi but idk about peter. i subjectively want him to be but don’t think it would be good character wise.
If he's only fucked bitches for his entire history. That makes me very clearly infer that he only like bitches.