|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Nov 21, 2017 20:29:30 GMT
I don't get this controversy over Aunt May being younger. I have a Aunt that's in her 40's! How is this unrealistic?! I'm not talking about whether or not that's realistic. I'm talking about MCU fans claiming that SMH is the most faithful adaptation of the comic books, but in the comic books Aunt May was an elderly woman and didn't get free meals in restaurants. Eh. Marvel tried a different approach to the character. Like what DC did with Superman in Man of Steel. |
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Nov 21, 2017 20:41:29 GMT
The younger Aunt May makes more sense even though it wasn't that way in the original comics. Peter Parker was what? 16 or 17. His mom would likely be in her 40's and yet Aunt May looked like this  Never mind being an Aunt, she looks like she could be his Great Grandmother. That was something the Ultimate comics fixed. DC-Fan seems unaware there are different Marvel universes that have been used as the basis of the MCU. A younger Aunt May and especially Nick Fury are more Ultimate Universe. Ned Leeds is very similar to Ultimate Universe Ned, and Aaron Davis is from the Ultimate verse |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 21, 2017 22:06:23 GMT
The younger Aunt May makes more sense even though it wasn't that way in the original comics. Peter Parker was what? 16 or 17. His mom would likely be in her 40's and yet Aunt May looked like this Never mind being an Aunt, she looks like she could be his Great Grandmother. That was something the Ultimate comics fixed. DC-Fan seems unaware there are different Marvel universes that have been used as the basis of the MCU. A younger Aunt May and especially Nick Fury are more Ultimate Universe. Ned Leeds is very similar to Ultimate Universe Ned, and Aaron Davis is from the Ultimate verse He's fully aware. He just doesn't care. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Nov 21, 2017 22:16:21 GMT
I don't get this controversy over Aunt May being younger. I have a Aunt that's in her 40's! How is this unrealistic?! It's not. Just like how Martha Kent isn't all that old looking in the DCEU, but no one cares there. Hey Sam, since when is the Flash Jewish? I don't think that fits in with established canon. Is that a retcon? New 52? Since you're still in touch with DC-Fan don't be afraid to call on his expertise. |
|
|
|
Post by claudius on Nov 21, 2017 23:15:04 GMT
I believe the regular MU (either in the late 1960s when the parents were identified or at least the late 80s/early 90s) established that Ben and Richard Parker had a distant age difference (maybe 15 years or so), meaning if Richard and Mary were 40, then May- being Ben's peer would be near her 60s. They did the same thing for Peggy and Sharon when the former was introduced as her sister. Its not as crazy as it reads- my mother's eldest brother was at least 20 years older than her. THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN hinted this, with Martin Sheen and Campbell Scott clearly not close to age.
Yes, I am aware of how they retcon age of parents. Ma and Pa Kent went from elderly in raising Clark to middle-age in the SUPERBOY comics to still youthful when Byrne retconned the origin.
|
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 22, 2017 0:50:27 GMT
I believe the regular MU (either in the late 1960s when the parents were identified or at least the late 80s/early 90s) established that Ben and Richard Parker had a distant age difference (maybe 15 years or so), meaning if Richard and Mary were 40, then May- being Ben's peer would be near her 60s. They did the same thing for Peggy and Sharon when the former was introduced as her sister. Its not as crazy as it reads- my mother's eldest brother was at least 20 years older than her. THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN hinted this, with Martin Sheen and Campbell Scott clearly not close to age. Yes, I am aware of how they retcon age of parents. Ma and Pa Kent went from elderly in raising Clark to middle-age in the SUPERBOY comics to still youthful when Byrne retconned the origin. The current comics have been retconning the ages of Ben and Richard too. The last time I saw a flashback story with them, Ben didn't seem much older than Richard. It was a rather touching story, it was about how May knew that Ben wanted to propose but he didn't have the nerve so she and Richard set up a romantic situation where he finally asked her. |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Nov 22, 2017 1:23:08 GMT
The younger Aunt May makes more sense even though it wasn't that way in the original comics. Peter Parker was what? 16 or 17. His mom would likely be in her 40's Not necessarily. My sister gave birth to her 1st child when she was 35. If Peter's mother was mid-30s when Peter was born, then Peter's father may have been as old as mid-40s and Uncle Ben and Aunt May may have been as old as mid-50s when Peter was born. So Aunt May would be 70s when Uncle Ben was killed, which would match up with the comics.
|
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 22, 2017 1:29:38 GMT
The younger Aunt May makes more sense even though it wasn't that way in the original comics. Peter Parker was what? 16 or 17. His mom would likely be in her 40's
It's also possible that Aunt May is the older sister of Peter's father instead of Peter's mother.
She's not. She wasn't related to him at all until the Ultimate Comics changed things by having Richard and Ben marry sisters so both Ben and May were related to Peter. Of course the Ultimate comics also made her younger, but no one complains there. |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Nov 23, 2017 4:17:38 GMT
I believe the regular MU (either in the late 1960s when the parents were identified or at least the late 80s/early 90s) established that Ben and Richard Parker had a distant age difference (maybe 15 years or so), meaning if Richard and Mary were 40, then May- being Ben's peer would be near her 60s. They did the same thing for Peggy and Sharon when the former was introduced as her sister. Its not as crazy as it reads- my mother's eldest brother was at least 20 years older than her. THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN hinted this, with Martin Sheen and Campbell Scott clearly not close to age. Yes, I am aware of how they retcon age of parents. Ma and Pa Kent went from elderly in raising Clark to middle-age in the SUPERBOY comics to still youthful when Byrne retconned the origin. It makes perfect sense that Aunt May is an elderly woman in the comics. When Peter was born, let's say:
1. Peter's mother was 35. 2. Then Peters father (Richard Parker) could be 45 when Peter was born. 3. Then Richard Parker's older brother (Ben Parker) could be 55 when Peter was born. 4. Then Ben Parker's wife (May) could also be 55 when Peter was born.
So Aunt May would be around 70 when Uncle Ben was killed, which matches up with the comics.
|
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 23, 2017 4:19:03 GMT
I believe the regular MU (either in the late 1960s when the parents were identified or at least the late 80s/early 90s) established that Ben and Richard Parker had a distant age difference (maybe 15 years or so), meaning if Richard and Mary were 40, then May- being Ben's peer would be near her 60s. They did the same thing for Peggy and Sharon when the former was introduced as her sister. Its not as crazy as it reads- my mother's eldest brother was at least 20 years older than her. THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN hinted this, with Martin Sheen and Campbell Scott clearly not close to age. Yes, I am aware of how they retcon age of parents. Ma and Pa Kent went from elderly in raising Clark to middle-age in the SUPERBOY comics to still youthful when Byrne retconned the origin. It makes perfect sense that Aunt May is an elderly woman in the comics.
No, it doesn't. It was because she was originally a sexist caricature that's rightfully been discarded in favor of a real character. And you still haven't answered why it's wrong for Spidey to do this but DC de-aged Martha Kent. |
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Nov 23, 2017 5:29:44 GMT
I believe the regular MU (either in the late 1960s when the parents were identified or at least the late 80s/early 90s) established that Ben and Richard Parker had a distant age difference (maybe 15 years or so), meaning if Richard and Mary were 40, then May- being Ben's peer would be near her 60s. They did the same thing for Peggy and Sharon when the former was introduced as her sister. Its not as crazy as it reads- my mother's eldest brother was at least 20 years older than her. THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN hinted this, with Martin Sheen and Campbell Scott clearly not close to age. Yes, I am aware of how they retcon age of parents. Ma and Pa Kent went from elderly in raising Clark to middle-age in the SUPERBOY comics to still youthful when Byrne retconned the origin. It makes perfect sense that Aunt May is an elderly woman in the comics. When Peter was born, let's say:
1. Peter's mother was 35. 2. Then Peters father (Richard Parker) could be 45 when Peter was born. 3. Then Richard Parker's older brother (Ben Parker) could be 55 when Peter was born. 4. Then Ben Parker's wife (May) could also be 55 when Peter was born.
So Aunt May would be around 70 when Uncle Ben was killed, which matches up with the comics.
Dude, who cares about her age. My aunt is only 55 and I'm 23, so that means when I was Peter's age, she was 47-48 years old. It's a minor tweak to the adaption. Comic book movies do it all the time. Why should it be a 100% accurate? All you're doing is just nitpicking because you just can't stand the fact that SMH was a hit and has a high RT score and DC keeps falling short. You hate it, fair enough, your opinion, but that's all it is. Not going to change anything or make it any better or worst and certainly won't stop Marvel from continuing to bring out great movies |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Nov 23, 2017 6:09:20 GMT
It makes perfect sense that Aunt May is an elderly woman in the comics. When Peter was born, let's say:
1. Peter's mother was 35. 2. Then Peters father (Richard Parker) could be 45 when Peter was born. 3. Then Richard Parker's older brother (Ben Parker) could be 55 when Peter was born. 4. Then Ben Parker's wife (May) could also be 55 when Peter was born.
So Aunt May would be around 70 when Uncle Ben was killed, which matches up with the comics.
Dude, who cares about her age. My aunt is only 55 and I'm 23, so that means when I was Peter's age, she was 47-48 years old. It's a minor tweak to the adaption. Comic book movies do it all the time. Why should it be a 100% accurate? Because the reason MCU fans have given for claiming SMH is the best Spider-Man movie is that SMH is the most faithful adaptation of the comics. But I've proven that's just a bullshit excuse by MCU fans and I've proven that SMH isn't a faithful adaptation to the comics. Moreover, it's not nitpicking at all because Aunt May's age isn't the only thing that SMH butchers from the comics.
I've explained this many times: SMH is the WORST Spider-Man movie adaptation ever because SMH completely butchers Marvel Comics' flagship character Spider-Man by changing his entire motivation for being a hero from the comics and turns him into nothing but an immature show-off whose only motivation for being a hero is to try to impress Tony Stark. That's a shallow reason for wanting to be a hero and completely betrays the comic-book character and that's why SMH is the WORST Spider-Man movie adaptation ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 23, 2017 13:04:50 GMT
Dude, who cares about her age. My aunt is only 55 and I'm 23, so that means when I was Peter's age, she was 47-48 years old. It's a minor tweak to the adaption. Comic book movies do it all the time. Why should it be a 100% accurate? Because the reason MCU fans have given for claiming SMH is the best Spider-Man movie is that SMH
Blended several aspect from various incarnations together and created a very firm whole. Instead of a sadsack Peter like Maguire or a overly anti-heroic Spidey like Garfield, here Holland got both right. And they got him right in how he interacts with a world where they are other superbeings instead of lazily pretending Spidey is the ONLY hero. |
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Nov 23, 2017 15:23:19 GMT
Why should it be a 100% accurate? Because the reason MCU fans have given for claiming SMH is the best Spider-Man movie is that SMH is the most faithful adaptation of the comics. But I've proven that's just a bullshit excuse by MCU fans and I've proven that SMH isn't a faithful adaptation to the comics.
In his rush to “prove” that SMH isn’t the most “faithful” adaptation of the Spider-Man comic, DC-Fan has lost sight of the initial argument. Is SMH the best of the Spider-man movies? Ironically, DC-Fan has proven that it is. DC-Fan’s Favorite List of Top Superhero MoviesJust give him enough rope and DC-Fan will hang himself, every time!  |
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Nov 23, 2017 19:24:34 GMT
Dude, who cares about her age. My aunt is only 55 and I'm 23, so that means when I was Peter's age, she was 47-48 years old. It's a minor tweak to the adaption. Comic book movies do it all the time. Why should it be a 100% accurate? Because the reason MCU fans have given for claiming SMH is the best Spider-Man movie is that SMH is the most faithful adaptation of the comics. But I've proven that's just a bullshit excuse by MCU fans and I've proven that SMH isn't a faithful adaptation to the comics. Moreover, it's not nitpicking at all because Aunt May's age isn't the only thing that SMH butchers from the comics.
I've explained this many times: SMH is the WORST Spider-Man movie adaptation ever because SMH completely butchers Marvel Comics' flagship character Spider-Man by changing his entire motivation for being a hero from the comics and turns him into nothing but an immature show-off whose only motivation for being a hero is to try to impress Tony Stark. That's a shallow reason for wanting to be a hero and completely betrays the comic-book character and that's why SMH is the WORST Spider-Man movie adaptation ever.
Newsflash though, that's just your opinion, not facts. |
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Nov 25, 2017 2:28:17 GMT
Because the reason MCU fans have given for claiming SMH is the best Spider-Man movie is that SMH is the most faithful adaptation of the comics. But I've proven that's just a bullshit excuse by MCU fans and I've proven that SMH isn't a faithful adaptation to the comics. Moreover, it's not nitpicking at all because Aunt May's age isn't the only thing that SMH butchers from the comics.
I've explained this many times: SMH is the WORST Spider-Man movie adaptation ever because SMH completely butchers Marvel Comics' flagship character Spider-Man by changing his entire motivation for being a hero from the comics and turns him into nothing but an immature show-off whose only motivation for being a hero is to try to impress Tony Stark. That's a shallow reason for wanting to be a hero and completely betrays the comic-book character and that's why SMH is the WORST Spider-Man movie adaptation ever.
Newsflash though, that's just your opinion, not facts. Actually it's his opinion based on his own misinterpretation of the narrative, seeing how he does not comprehend that Peter was saving people prior to meeting Stark, or that his whole impress Tony bit is to get him to let Peter join the Avengers, Peter's motivation isn't to impress Tony but to prove himself so he can do more good than just to stop muggers and other petty crooks.
Considering he fails to grasp such things and can only judge films on such a superficial level, I kind of find his arrogant boasting of how he will tell people how and why this film is good or bad laughable, too be fair a film that actually consisted of a plot as he dscribes would be a very bad Spidey interpretation, it's just sad that's not the film we got that he rambles about.
|
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 25, 2017 2:31:13 GMT
It's indicative of how people who started off with the FoX-Men movies and the Sony Spidey movies hate the rest of Marvel's characters. They just can't stand the sheer idea of the X-Men or Spidey interacting in a world where there are other superheroes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2017 13:57:04 GMT
Spider-Man: Homecoming was so bad that I didn't even bother seeing it in theaters nor will I bother ever seeing it because just the sheer concept of the film is an plain assult to my intelligence.
|
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 25, 2017 14:13:55 GMT
Spider-Man: Homecoming was so bad that I didn't even bother seeing it in theaters nor will I bother ever seeing it Then how can you know it was bad? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2017 14:16:56 GMT
Spider-Man: Homecoming was so bad that I didn't even bother seeing it in theaters nor will I bother ever seeing it Then how can you know it was bad? All I had to see was the awful title and some horrendous commercials promoting the film on TV. Maybe. it's just my age...or maybe as I get older and more and more Spider-Man films come out, he gets lamer and lamer... |
|
