Trackbacks

• No trackbacks exist for this post.

Comments

• 9/18/2011 3:50 PM Cameron wrote:
  You guys didn't come off a racists (mostly), just as kind of annoying fanboys.
  
  When it comes to a movie adaptation, they should worry more about getting a GOOD actor, rather than a guy that has the same fucking skin tone.
  
  Just because a character was a certain color in one place doesn't mean they always have to be that way. What makes Spider-Man HAVE to be white? Ignoring the fact that the new Spider-Man isn't Peter Parker and that Spider-Man has been a non-white before in Spider-Man 2099.
  
  And yes, people would get pissed if Kevin James played Mr. Jefferson because Kevin James sucks!
  
  And Nick Fury can be whatever color they want him to be, they can put a pair of tits on him as far as I'm concerned, that's one of the many things an alternate universe is for.
  Reply to this
  1. 9/20/2011 6:04 AM James wrote:
     This is absolutely right. Fanboys never seem to understand that they don't own the characters, the comic book companies do, and they can do whatever they please with them. I really don't understand why everyone hates on Ultimate Spider-Man either, far more stupid changes have happened to the 616 Spider-Man reccently.
     Reply to this
     1. 9/22/2011 4:41 PM Christopher wrote:
        Hey!! You don't own the 616 Spiderman characters, therefore you can't get upset about it! You said so yourself. Teehee.
        Reply to this
        1. 9/23/2011 9:42 AM James wrote:
           Ah! You got me. In my rambling my inner fanboy was released!
           Reply to this
  2. 9/23/2011 7:09 PM UserGoogol wrote:
     Yeah, setting aside all the sociological issues, making Spider-Man black is fundamentally different from making Nick Fury black. "Spider-Man" is not white. Peter Parker is white, Miles Morales is black, and Spider-Man is red and blue.
     
     The idea of multiple characters taking the role of the same superhero has been done since 1956 when they rebooted the Flash comic book with Barry Allen replacing Jay Garrick. Sometimes, (as with John Stewart as the Green Lantern or Jaime Reyes as the Blue Beetles) those alternates are of a different race. This is a very very different thing from simply saying "Uh, Nick Fury's black now." I don't think the latter thing is really that much of a big deal either, but I can understand the logic. But on the other hand, being upset with a black guy becoming the new Spider-Man is just misunderstanding the situation.
     Reply to this
• 9/18/2011 4:59 PM Aaron wrote:
  The new Spider-Man thing takes place in an alternate universe, Peter Parker is still Spider-Man in the Main Marvel Universe. The whole Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury also comes from an alternate univese, look up "The Ultimates" by Mark Millar and Bryan Hitch.
  Reply to this
• 9/18/2011 6:51 PM glenn wrote:
  Vampires
  It;s pretty difficult to make a proper vampire movie these days.
  They've been de-sexualised. Films like Stakeland and 30 days of night are more like cannibal movies. And the Twilight series are chaste romances.
  I like Daybreakers, but it's more like a variation on Larry Cohen's Return to Salem's Lot alternative culture idea. As is True Blood, although that does feature plenty of heaving bosoms, sadly mainly male.
  Really, the Fright Night remake comes closest to a proper blood and cleavage movie. But IMO it features too many young male victims and not enough virgins in nighties.
  Reply to this
• 9/18/2011 11:57 PM Lai-Lai wrote:
  Oh come now...Superman TAS' Lex Luthor was a truly awesome black man, & without an ounce of urban stereotype.
  Reply to this
• 9/19/2011 7:16 AM jaltesorensen wrote:
  I agree with you on the race-thing and the new comic-book movies and comics in general.
  
  Its fine that we show that it is a less racist world we live in through movies. But Spider man is peter parker, and he is a skinny insecure white guy. The kingpin was a white greedy tycoon, not a cool black guy. Nick Fury was a white vietnam-veteran kind a guy, and not samuel l jackson. Changing the skin color is stupid. And it only goes one way, because as you said, you could not change Shaft or the black panther into skinny white guys without being called the biggest racists in all of human history.
  Reply to this
  1. 9/19/2011 9:56 AM Anonymous wrote:
     Nick Fury and Spiderman on the comics are both from ALTERNATE UNIVERSES, meaning that they won't eat or destroy white nick fury and white spiderman.
     Reply to this
  2. 9/20/2011 4:06 PM pablo wrote:
     nop, spiderman is a superhero who dresses up like a spider.
     Peter Parker is the first spiderman. my personal favourite.
     Dick Grayson WAS batman.
     first of all. hollywood makes that shit all the time, just that when that happens nobody gives a shit..Last airbender anyone?
     pop mediums are PLAGUE with WHITNESS, thats why is not the same when in an adaptation or else, change a white character for a black actor but its not the same the other way around. numbers are just TOO different. if you want to change things that big...well you have to cheate a little.
     pd: check the history of the legion of superheros and their first black character, then talk about diversity for diversity´s sake
     Reply to this
• 9/19/2011 8:00 AM BloodiRose wrote:
  Interview with the Vampire <3 <3 <3 LOL
  Queen of the Damned sucked though. D:< Changed so much from the book. Though I didn't mind it too much the first time I saw it, before I read the books. Hmm...
  Anyway.... >.> <..>
  Reply to this
• 9/19/2011 11:32 AM Sigur wrote:
  @glenn and vampires: I wholeheartedly disagree about the desexualized vampires. Or more, I think I agree with you but in a way different manner: Like most things nowadays, they are unnecessarily sexualized and mostly in a shallow fashion model sense i.e. the LOOK like the "sexy" template Hollywood and magazines built for themselves and wear little clothes and have sex all the time. This isn't sexy, that is slutty. But anyway, this is the way "sexy" is being made for mass media nowadays. It's not that vampires have been desexualized but sexy/erotic has been replaced with the commodity "sex".
  
  Personally, I prefer the animalistic, inhuman and monsterous vampire (John Carpenter's vampires, 30 days of night and so on) over the seductive one but I think we can agree that vampire movies haven't not gone in a good direction. I think that vampires in the "smart&sexy beast within" way work best with tighter moral and social boundaries and any characters between the ages of 10 to 30 should be banned from vampire movie scripts for the next 15 years for our own good.
  
  P.S.: On the topic of too many male victims in the new Fright Night: Today's target demographic for vampire movies is female.
  Reply to this
  1. 9/20/2011 4:04 AM glenn wrote:
     I wasn't being entirely serious. But I take your point.
     I think the Fright Night remake would have been a bigger hit if the victims were female, precisely because that's the target audience. As it is, Fright Night 2011 actually verged on the homoerotic. It's sort of interesting that Colin Farrel's vampire seems to be collecting young male "brides" and using girls for food. But, personally, if you're going to do an old school vampire as "sexy" stranger movie, I want to see saucy strumpets! I watch way too many old Hammer films.
     On a more serious level, if you want to update the essence of what makes a vampire different to a zombie or cannibal the way to go is Cronenberg's Rabid. The icky sexuality has to be up front.
     Reply to this
• 9/20/2011 1:10 AM Jason wrote:
  My Best Friend is A Vampire is probably my favorite vampire comedy. Well that and Rockula.
  Reply to this
• 9/20/2011 5:28 PM Wulfe wrote:
  I don't think you guess came off as Racist as a Spanish/Italian guy..I always feel the Ultimate universe panders to non comic fans and tries to get them in the universe so in most respects it's non cannon..so a spanish/Black kid as spiderman doesn't bother me as they are pandering to a minority audience. Avengers and Xmen are consider ultimate universe as I consider the new superman as universe or a new 52 production.Personally I don't consider a giant affront had it been in the main universe it might have been more of an issue.
  Reply to this
• 9/20/2011 8:45 PM angelique_sp wrote:
  In our family its def. Love at First Bite; we still quote from it all the time. Speaking of family, my mother is a HUGE fan of Dark Shadows...to the point where she named me after the Witch (Thanks Mom, ya 'yenta with skinny legs' )
  Reply to this
• 9/22/2011 4:35 PM James wrote:
  http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/3183-Skin-Deep
  
  Guys, having people change race isn't a big deal...it's fair play
  Reply to this
• 9/25/2011 2:17 AM Karsten wrote:
  Without going into a discussion of which characters are defined by their race/religion/sexual orientation/whatever and which characters aren't, I'm just going to make a few quick points.
  
  - The ultimate Spider-Man is a) and alternate reality character and b) no longer Peter Parker. It's a different person under the mask.
  
  - There's a long history of new characters of different races taking up the mantle of a fallen hero- notably Jim Rhodes as Iron Man (later War Machine), John Henry Irons as Superman (later Steel), Ryan Choi as the third Atom, Kyle Rayner (who is half Asian, though no one remembers that but me) as the fifth Green Lantern etc.
  
  - The comic Green Goblin never changed his look to match the movie costume. Oh, and the Kingpin isn't Italian- in fact, the one time I remember his nationality being mentioned, he was referred to as being Irish.
  
  -Finally, iconic or not, there have been at least six Spider-Men other than Peter Parker, as well as at least a half dozen Supermen other than Clark Kent, and at least ten Batmen other than Bruce Wayne.
  
  With much respect, because I'm a huge fan- Stick to talking about films, guys.
  Reply to this

Leave a comment