Spidey OUT of MCU

So it's being suggested that Chris Evans do more Cap movies? I thought he was ready to move on.

I know I am.

 

Yes, but it doesn't change that's more the kind of story you'd see from the Avengers than Spidey. It's most certainly not the kind of story the Silver Age and Raimi Purists are saying Spidey should be about.

No, he's done. But sometimes it's best to go out on a high note.

 

So, what you're saying is, Sony did in fact learn from Feige how to tell those kind of stories like Rothman said. Check.

 

...and yet at the same time of the disastrous FF cartoon, Marvel was still in danger of bankruptcy. Star Wars had not fully pulled the out yet. DePatie–Freleng Enterprises was not some licensing fee coup for Marvel.

Further, as mentioned earlier, the fact Frank Price only wanted to develop a Human Torch series speaks to the disinterest he (and his partners) had in the FF concept. It was not a "must have" concept at that point in history.

They were not popular. DePatie–Freleng merely obtained an available license tossed their way. There was no animation studio bidding war for a FF cartoon at all.

By arguing against their being set in the decade which defined them, that is advocating a contemporary setting, which has been tried by three productions--all failures not living up to the greatest of what the concept was (formed by a very specific point of history as much as Captain America was by the WW2 environment), and that's not to be found in a FF set in the "present day" MCU.

...but would Disney even consider it--or Chris Evans return to the part?

 

Yeah, and now those Purists who were going on about how much they HATED those Avengers type stories are somehow okay with Peter having them as long as there are no characters from the rest of Marvel and if there are other characters it's okay if they're from other Universes.

Bunch of Hypocrites.

 

I'm sure if there was enough money to be made and Evans has a price, then, sure, they would consider it.

But, I hope they don't. I don't feel the need to go backwards character arc wise. I feel like I got enough of the Cap of that era to understand him, and then, I've watched the characters evolution and "end."

I don't think there's a compelling story reason, we saw his origin, what's left that isn't just more of the same?

 

Did Strange see a timeline where Spider-man is an anthropomorphic pig?

 

That was in the 1616 universe version of the Dr. Strange movie.
We are stuck with the 616. boo hiss.

 

What exactly is it about the FF that it can't work outside of the '60s?
And how would you account for runs by people like John Byrne or Johnathan Hickman, which I believe were very successful both in sales and with critics?

 

He definitely wants people to notice he can do more than throw a shield

 

The funny thing is that before Cap, he was typecast playing Goofy Fratboy types. Most didn't think he had it in him to play Cap.

Really, if you look at his other work like Snowpiercer and The Iceman he's got a pretty varied career.

 

I have said it elsewhere but the five year gap is the perfect way to introduce the FF.

 

Raimi purists?!

So, the flashback potential means fuck all, then.

 

The Fantastic Four are about discovery and exploration -- new dimensions and creatures and aliens. You could argue that setting them in the past is outright antithetical to the concept.

 

If they wanted they could someday do another Evans Captain America movie were he fights in Korea or Vietnam in his alternate universe. He doesn't want to do more now but people can change their minds especially if they need a career boost. Jason

 

Nothing. It's just something to argue about for no reason.

 

You know, the ones who hate that Spidey exists in a world where he isn't the one and only hero and he's constantly struggling with his rent because the writers refuse to develop the core premise and show Peter isn't an incompetent.

 

Spidey bring the only superhero acknowledged onscreen isn't exclusive to Raimi Spidey, it's the norm for all live-action Spider-Man adaptations except the most recent one. The titular hero(es) being the only ones acknowledged onscreen is also the norm for the entire genre in film, with the MCU and the DCEU being the outliers, and even then they can make a lot of movies inside those universes without even mentioning other heroes.
As for Peter having problems making rent, I don't remember it being an issue except for two or three scenes in the second movie, but other than that, even Raimi had other things to tell. Not to mention that it's been a repeated theme in the comics, and I seem to remember you being big on movies sticking to the comics.

So I don't See anybody here being a Raimi purist, but you appear to me as a MCU purist making strawman arguments.

 

Just the opposite: it was in their origin era that there was still mystery of the unknown...a feeling of danger about things beyond humam comprehension instead of everyone seeing superheroes and aliens on every corner. That just was part of what gave the FF its edge and unique position in those early years. That, and its Cold War backdrop framed the urgency of that kind of exploration in a way that does not exist when your tapestry is splitting from the weight of "been there, done that".

 

Which was executive produced by Avi Arad but he sure doesn't get credit for it.

The focus on everyday angst doesn't have to be continual but it should be the norm and cosmic or dimensional fantasy the rare exception.

I did think yes Spider-Verse's overall approach wasn't too different from the MCU, also very different from the classic comics and a pretty bad interpretation and adaptation of Peter Parker.

He can exist along with other heroes without becoming an apprentice or protege.