LurkerJ said:
To summarize:
1.Movies don't always stick to the source material. Please don't act like this would be a first. Some changes killed characters off before their time and we were ok with that. Changes are applauded or criticized negatively after we watch the movie and learn about how they incorporate these changes. A new twist about someone's sexuality isn't going to be as impactful as a premature death of one of your beloved characters. Yet, you are already objecting.
They don't, but they should. Because when I go to see a Spider-man movie, I want to see the stories I read adapted to the big screen. That's the whole point of using the license. Changes HAVE to be made to source material, cause you're adapting years of comics to a movie, and certain things make sense in one that don't make sense in the other. But, any change should have a purpose to it, and nobody has explained why this change would be beneficial to the actual story.
it doesn't have to be beneficial. It doesn't have to affect it negatively. You insist it would and your reasoning? the source material. Which we already established no one gives a shit about as proven by the movies that generate billions of dollars despite beind different. You care? don't watch, simple.
2.What's wrong with pushing a noble agenda using a popular character to promote acceptance world-wide? Lots and lots of movies do that, at least it's not agenda about going to war or sleeping with your pets.
What's wrong is that it's changing the character. It's not objectively or morally wrong, it's just going to make me less interested as a fan.
Tough. He will gain few more fans and he will lose some. No biggie.
3.Spider-man is not Stan's Lee property. I am pretty sure he didn't like all of the changes that were inflicted to his characters even if they were received warmly by the critics.
I agree that Stan Lee's opinion doesn't matter. But, there is nothing in the comics to support him being pansexual either.
There doesn't have to be. You keep saying that as if it matters, it doesn't, as proven by the billions of dollars the movies make despite being different from the orginal.
4.The human torch used to be a white guy. Now he is black. Why is this OK and pansexuality isn't? It's just sex in a popcorn flick, get over it.
Because skin color and sexuality are a different thing. Obviously there are some differences growing up black vs white, but there is no real reason Johnny Storm couldn't have had pretty much the same life experiences as a black guy as he did as a white (although I am upset that Sue was white. They're supposed to be full blooded siblings). If Spider-man were gay or bisexual, that would have big ramifications on his lovelife, which is a big part of the Spider-man lore.
He will swing from building to building and fall on a man's lap sometime in the future, and he will like it and we are gonna hear about it in the movie. As I mentioned multiple times now, stop bringing up the source material , you are not making the point you think you are making.
|
