Homecoming The Zendaya is possibly someone, maybe thread - Part 3

[dkamphaus43]

Indeed frustrating, but what if Michelle isn't going to be Mary Jane Watson. What if she's just going to be Michelle and [BLACKOUT]that 'MJ' line was merely an easter egg[/BLACKOUT]. As in, they just mentioned that line as a throwaway for the fans but in future movies she'll just be called Michelle. Maybe, maybe not. We'll have to see. I'm a bit upset that I learned about that spoiler, it was my own fault though. I clicked on something on a different site looking for some more reactions to the movie and saw that info. Oh well.

Anyway, it seems to me that just about every supporting character in this film is some amalgamation of other characters from the mythos. So, Michelle may at times show some traits of the real MJ but this will end up being the MCU's version of Peter's main love interest. And honestly, many of the characters in past Spider-Man movies have also been some type of amalgamation.

The frustrating part for me is that I am a huge MJ fan. She's one of my favorite Marvel characters and it's saddening to think outside of the comic/source, she's only really been portrayed accurately in one adaptation--that's TSSM animated show.

MJ is a wonderful character and imo she is the perfect foil for Peter Parker. I'm not sure what part of her character is so damning that Marvel has to seek out someone else to be that love interest for Peter. As we saw with Gwen in the ASM films, she was 'perfect' for Peter because she's smart, into science, etc. meaning that she's just like him. They've used this tactic before in comics to no avail, i.e. Carlie Cooper. And none of them are nearly as interesting and perfect for Peter as Mary Jane.



To the emboldened...if Marvel really wanted to be different than previous iterations then they should have used the classic elements of what makes Mary Jane be Mary Jane. Aside from one adaptation that I mentioned above, MJ has yet to truly appear and like you say and I agree with, MJ in Raimi's movies was more or less an amalgamation of other characters and ended up being MJ in looks and name only. Yeah, she had the loneliness bits and the abusive father stuff but where was the outgoing persona? That's ultimately where MJ's strength lies--and that's what makes her character so interesting. I just don't understand why Marvel or Disney or whomever would want to shy away from that because it's truly great storytelling and shows great depth of character and in the end shows just how similar her and Peter really are in their attempts to hide their pain. There's a real earnest quality to MJ and how well she compliments Peter--to not use that, since it's really not be done in the movies at least, baffles me.

That said, I've made a point before in the past about Michelle's character and how she could potentially be Mary Jane. One of the great things that TSSM did with regard to certain characters, like Gwen and Harry for example, is they extrapolated backwards and gave us what the creators of the show felt a HS version would be like. Because when we meet Gwen and Harry in the comics, we meet the College-aged version of them. So, in my thinking, what if Feige is ultimately doing the same--extrapolating backwards to what MJ (Michelle) would be like in HS since when we actually meet her in the comics, she's College-aged and already has that 'party girl' guise. IMO, that could actually work--if they were to do that and not just have Michelle give us an easter egg with that line.

I'm still wondering what the chances are that Mary Jane will turn out to be Michelle's cousin. In fact, I think that would be a really cool way to introduce her in either the next sequel or later down the line.

 

[samsnee]

I doubt they will do that. She's this version's MJ.

Your comment reminds me of when people were theorizing that Ledger's Joker wasn't the real Joker, since he wasn't permawhite and the real one was out there.

Of course, we also know there is a real Mandarin out there according to the one-shot so what do I know.

 

[dkamphaus43]

I doubt they will do that. She's this version's MJ.

Well if that's true, then I wonder if the reason for the name change might be due to

1.Mary Jane supposedly not being a very common name anymore

2.The name is slang for weed

I mean I really don't know, I'm probably just grasping here. I still think we deserve some kind of explanation. And even though I haven't seen the movie yet, they supposedly never reveal what her last name is. So I wonder what's up with that? It seems like even after we see the movie, we still won't know what the story is here.

 

[Jedi Arrow]

Well if that's true, then I wonder if the reason for the name change might be due to

1.Mary Jane supposedly not being a very common name anymore

2.The name is slang for weed

I mean I really don't know, I'm probably just grasping here. I still think we deserve some kind of explanation. And even though I haven't seen the movie yet, they supposedly never reveal what her last name is. So I wonder what's up with that? It seems like even after we see the movie, we still won't know what the story is here.

I honestly think this is possible, especially #2.

 

[Shikamaru]

In all fairness, Michelle would still be the most accurate 616 MJ from what we've seen of her (Spectacular MJ notwithstanding). It may sound odd to say that, but just take a look at all the other MJs (again, except Spectacular's) and you'll see my point.

Even with her looks, I doubt they wouldn't give her a makeover at some point. You simply don't cast Zendaya as MJ and not eventually make her look like MJ. You just don't.

 

[Jedi Arrow]

Okay, I'm not big into Spider-Man comics like most of y'all are, but what does everyone mean when they say that there's never been a screen-accurate version of the comic version of MJ? I'm genuinely curious what Raimi's version got wrong. And you seem to be implying that none of the comics (except SSM) got her right, either. So what's the difference?

 

[Arachnerd]

The Raimi version basically lacked the party loving, wit and spunk of the character. To his credit, he did address MJ's abusive household in the first movie, but never went anywhere with it after that.

And I don't really dislike Kirsten Dunst in the role. I just think she wasn't given the right material to work with.

 

[AnneFan]

I doubt they will do that. She's this version's MJ.

Yep. Zendaya serves the same role. She has the same initials and the

Spoiler

fact she's not Mary Jane but Michelle gives them wiggle room to do different things.

I think it's a fair balance of old and new.

 

[2kt09]

Okay, I'm not big into Spider-Man comics like most of y'all are, but what does everyone mean when they say that there's never been a screen-accurate version of the comic version of MJ? I'm genuinely curious what Raimi's version got wrong. And you seem to be implying that none of the comics (except SSM) got her right, either. So what's the difference?

Dunno about everybody, but I've since read that Raimi's MJ simply had the wrong personality even though most of the other relevant aspects check out. She's supposed to be more feisty. Also, dunno about "none of the comics" as Shika said "screen-accurate" as in adapted takes, which I would argue TSSM's was not the only one.

 

[Faith_Cassidy]

To the emboldened...if Marvel really wanted to be different than previous iterations then they should have used the classic elements of what makes Mary Jane be Mary Jane. Aside from one adaptation that I mentioned above, MJ has yet to truly appear and like you say and I agree with, MJ in Raimi's movies was more or less an amalgamation of other characters and ended up being MJ in looks and name only. Yeah, she had the loneliness bits and the abusive father stuff but where was the outgoing persona? That's ultimately where MJ's strength lies--and that's what makes her character so interesting. I just don't understand why Marvel or Disney or whomever would want to shy away from that because it's truly great storytelling and shows great depth of character and in the end shows just how similar her and Peter really are in their attempts to hide their pain. There's a real earnest quality to MJ and how well she compliments Peter--to not use that, since it's really not be done in the movies at least, baffles me.

Because again, I don't think they wanted to take a classic or straight-froward approach with the character. It's true that Raimi didn't give us the most comic accurate version of MJ but there were still enough similarities to the extent that I can see Marvel wanting to take a different approach. If we hadn't already seen Mary Jane onscreen, then I think there's a good chance we would have gotten a more classic version of her in the MCU. As it stands, it seems to me that there are enough MJ qualities in "Michelle" to buy her as a character in the process of "becoming" Mary Jane. That's the most obvious setup, imo. I certainly can't fathom why Marvel/Sony would tease the idea of MJ, with a popular young actress in the role, and not follow through with it.

Well if that's true, then I wonder if the reason for the name change might be due to

1.Mary Jane supposedly not being a very common name anymore

2.The name is slang for weed

I mean I really don't know, I'm probably just grasping here. I still think we deserve some kind of explanation. And even though I haven't seen the movie yet, they supposedly never reveal what her last name is. So I wonder what's up with that? It seems like even after we see the movie, we still won't know what the story is here.

Hopefully, someone will ask Feige or Watts about it after the movie opens because I do agree that we deserve some kind of an explanation. If we're just left wondering until the next movie, Marvel/Sony will deserve all the criticism they get.

 

[Dark Raven]

I honestly think this is possible, especially #2.

I know people named Mary Jane. Are you saying the names Mary and Jane aren't common? Because they are, and could easily be used as her first and middle names if not just a double barrelled first name.

 

[terry78]

Dunst had the look, Zendaya has the personality. Mary Jane Watson has always been deemed the "perfect" girl because she's supermodel hot, has no problem enjoying girly ****, but is still down to earth, has a sarcastic sense of humor, and isn't afraid to call people on their ********.

 

[fuflipflops]

Okay, I'm not big into Spider-Man comics like most of y'all are, but what does everyone mean when they say that there's never been a screen-accurate version of the comic version of MJ? I'm genuinely curious what Raimi's version got wrong. And you seem to be implying that none of the comics (except SSM) got her right, either. So what's the difference?

raimi's mj had the family life, career ambition and the emotional side of her relationship with peter (and harry too) mostly on the nose, but she lacked the vibrancy and the wit. mj is supposed to be the life of the party and just the personification of FUN and i can count on one hand the amount of times mj actually smiled in those movies. she was also used a lot as a plot device for peter by getting kidnapped every five minutes but i don't rly hold that against her character and more against the writing. at least she tried not to be a damsel by trying to hit/hitting ock and venom. but yeah she had a lot of the deep, ugly, not fun emotional side which you need in a character for it to feel real, but it needed to be balanced with her expansive personality, which it wasn't.

it wasn't perfect, but i do think she gets a lot of flack, even these days. which is why it would've meant to much to, this time for the first time in the mcu, to have an mj with the depth AND the fun.

 

[dkamphaus43]

Hopefully, someone will ask Feige or Watts about it after the movie opens because I do agree that we deserve some kind of an explanation.

Yes, absolutely. I couldn't agree more, especially since they both are supposedly big fans of the character.

 

[AnneFan]

I like MJ and the surrounding elements of the Spider-Man world, of course. But the reports that Holland nails both aspects of Peter and Spider-Man is what gets me excited.

 

[dkamphaus43]

I know people named Mary Jane. Are you saying the names Mary and Jane aren't common? Because they are, and could easily be used as her first and middle names if not just a double barrelled first name.

You think it's possible her name might turn out to be Mary Jane Michelle Watson?

 

[Jedi Arrow]

raimi's mj had the family life, career ambition and the emotional side of her relationship with peter (and harry too) mostly on the nose, but she lacked the vibrancy and the wit. mj is supposed to be the life of the party and just the personification of FUN and i can count on one hand the amount of times mj actually smiled in those movies. she was also used a lot as a plot device for peter by getting kidnapped every five minutes but i don't rly hold that against her character and more against the writing. at least she tried not to be a damsel by trying to hit/hitting ock and venom. but yeah she had a lot of the deep, ugly, not fun emotional side which you need in a character for it to feel real, but it needed to be balanced with her expansive personality, which it wasn't.

it wasn't perfect, but i do think she gets a lot of flack, even these days. which is why it would've meant to much to, this time for the first time in the mcu, to have an mj with the depth AND the fun.

Gotcha. I mean, that makes sense. I haven't watched the Raimi movies in...oh, probably four years (definitely due for another viewing), so I'm a bit hazy on her characterization. The scenes I remember most are from the first movie, when she poses for Peter at the beginning while he takes her picture and then the upside-down kiss. Oh, and the swinging scene at the end of Spider-Man 2. But other than that, not a lot.

 

[jaymes_e06]

The posing for him in the the beginning was the most MJ like thing she did in the series imo. That being said she wasn't nearly as bad as some try to deem her. Though I can see somes arguments most don't have coherent onesband merely say she "wasn't hot enough."

 

[Infinity9999x]

raimi's mj had the family life, career ambition and the emotional side of her relationship with peter (and harry too) mostly on the nose, but she lacked the vibrancy and the wit. mj is supposed to be the life of the party and just the personification of FUN and i can count on one hand the amount of times mj actually smiled in those movies. she was also used a lot as a plot device for peter by getting kidnapped every five minutes but i don't rly hold that against her character and more against the writing. at least she tried not to be a damsel by trying to hit/hitting ock and venom. but yeah she had a lot of the deep, ugly, not fun emotional side which you need in a character for it to feel real, but it needed to be balanced with her expansive personality, which it wasn't.

it wasn't perfect, but i do think she gets a lot of flack, even these days. which is why it would've meant to much to, this time for the first time in the mcu, to have an mj with the depth AND the fun.

I mean....I would argue he completely missed the point of the MJ/Peter relationship. MJ was more than just fun and spunky. Her confidence and "I don't care" attitude was how she dealt with her insecurities and home issues. She also was a friend of Peter, but far from being in constant strife over his apparent wishy-washy nature, didn't put up with it. She called him on his crap. But when Pete was really suffering, she got real and was there for him. The moment Pete snaps at her after the death of Gwen is a perfect example of this. He accuses her of being nothing but a shallow party girl and she doesn't storm off in a huff. She stays. She reams him a bit, but she stayed and supported him.

We got none of that in the Raimi films. She was essentially a different character, and a much duller one at that.

 

[fuflipflops]

I mean....I would argue he completely missed the point of the MJ/Peter relationship. MJ was more than just fun and spunky. Her confidence and "I don't care" attitude was how she dealt with her insecurities and home issues. She also was a friend of Peter, but far from being in constant strife over his apparent wishy-washy nature, didn't put up with it. She called him on his crap. But when Pete was really suffering, she got real and was there for him. The moment Pete snaps at her after the death of Gwen is a perfect example of this. He accuses her of being nothing but a shallow party girl and she doesn't storm off in a huff. She stays. She reams him a bit, but she stayed and supported him.

We got none of that in the Raimi films. She was essentially a different character, and a much duller one at that.

fair enough, though i do think they made their relationship realistic and close to the comics in terms of the not so pretty parts of their relationship (the strain him being spider-man put on her/them, her issues with abandonment etc).

but anyway, that's just another thing in favor of having an ACTUAL accurate mj in the movies instead of new, different versions

 

[Shikamaru]

To be fair to Marvel, Zendaya already seems more like MJ than Raimi's version did. At least as far as personality goes.

 

[fuflipflops]

To be fair to Marvel, Zendaya already seems more like MJ than Raimi's version did. At least as far as personality goes.

i rly don't see it :/ i get a different vibe from "michelle." yes she seems sassy and all, but it's a different type than mj.

 

[Shikamaru]

i rly don't see it :/ i get a different vibe from "michelle." yes she seems sassy and all, but it's a different type than mj.

The "What are you hiding, Peter?" scene is MJ 101. Well, at least the version where she says she's kidding in. There's two different versions of that scene floating around in the Sony marketing. That and the way Zendaya talks about her clever remarks towards Peter implies 616 MJ.

Also I already buy Zendaya as a charming model and actress more than I did Kursten Dunst. She may not look the part yet, but there's no way you'd cast Zendaya as MJ and not give her a makeover eventually. That's the one thing I don't buy they'd not do with MJ.

I'm not saying she's comic book MJ. But compared with the Raimi and 90s show versions, she's a step up (I don't remember the MTV show's version that well).

 

[Faith_Cassidy]

i rly don't see it :/ i get a different vibe from "michelle." yes she seems sassy and all, but it's a different type than mj.

I see it. Just from the little we've seen, I can tell that she's not gonna be afraid to challenge Peter, to say what's her mind...even the confidence she has in seemingly not caring about her appearance. I'm betting it's a facade to mask some insecurity/vulnerability she has, which will help set up a dynamic with Peter that is more similar to the comic version of Peter/MJ than what with saw with Raimi's version of the couple. There were moments where I found his MJ likable/sympathetic but overall, I don't think she had a distinct personality, let alone one similar to any version of comic MJ.

 

[Fondue]

So... Am I getting this right?

Spoiler

Z's character is not referred to as "Michelle" throughout the movie,
and when her name is addressed, she says her friends call her MJ. So the audience knows her as MJ, not as Michelle.

Then I don't really get the dissatisfaction. At this point in the story MJ is supposed to be sassy, opinionated, and determined, so what if she's awkward and not a bombshell yet at what, 15? 16?
And it really looks like she [BLACKOUT]knows Peter's secret here[/BLACKOUT], which is everything I wanted.