|
So no one is shedding a tear at the old Fury anymore... traitors! ;)
Old Fury never really did it for me. I was always more fond of his supporting cast, Jimmy Wu, Gabe Jones, the Contessa deFontaine, Clay Quartermain, etc.
Typical of the Ultimates-verse to get rid of all the ethnic / minority / whatever already in SHIELD and replace them with an ethnic version of Fury, and then make him kind of an evil jerk anyway (turning on first the Hulk, then Thor, then Captain America...).
That's pretty typical, 'though. "Let's make things more diverse by race-lifting some of the white dudes! Oh, and let's make all the newly diverse people terrible monstrous unlikable people! Oh wait..."
Interestingly enough, the same friend of mine I referenced earlier, for all that he really enjoys the new Ultimates version of Nick Fury, actually prefers the classic version, but then to be honest, he is actually much more of a 'Comic Book Geek' than I am.
I miss the old Fury, but to be painfully honest, both versions were manipulative dicks, so my tears are relatively few...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I miss the old Fury, but to be painfully honest, both versions were manipulative dicks, so my tears are relatively few...
YUP. Perfectly put. Still love Hickman's SECRET WARRIORS though. One of the best Nick Fury / Shield stories in recent years.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well in my case, when people mention white Nick Fury, the first thought that pops into my head is David Hasselhoff, so nope...can't say I miss him...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I thought The Ultimates (the team, not the line) whole schtick was they were terrible, monstrous, unlikeable people that also happened to be heroes? (Well, except Thor. Ultimate Thor was still a decent guy for an eco-terrorist.) All I know is that by the end of the first run, Cap and Thor were the only ones I didn't hate, and Ultimate Cap was still a bit of a dick. I didn't bother reading anything more after that.
That's a completely valid point. Thor and the Wasp were pretty much the only characters that weren't some level of jerkish (Fury, Cap, at times), creepy (Wanda and Pietro) or deeply damaged / messed up (Banner, Pym, eventually Barton).
Eh. The perils of a comic book universe written by a writer who has expressed contempt for the entire concept of 'heroes' and wants to 'deconstruct' them.
I liked the New Universe (particularly DP 7 and Psi-Force) and the 2099-verse (particularly the X-Men 2099), but this Ultimates thing, not so much. The only thing I liked about Ultimates was that it kept those writers away from the 616 universe, so that the 'real' Captain America didn't turn into a jack-booted thug, and the 'real' Hulk didn't turn into a cannibal rapist.
I felt the same way when Rob Liefield left Marvel to help form Image, wishing him all the luck in the world on his new Youngblood venture, so that he never came back to Marvel and got his grubby little paws on my beloved New Mutants again. :)
I thought The Ultimates (the team, not the line) whole schtick was they were terrible, monstrous, unlikeable people that also happened to be heroes? (Well, except Thor. Ultimate Thor was still a decent guy for an eco-terrorist.) All I know is that by the end of the first run, Cap and Thor were the only ones I didn't hate, and Ultimate Cap was still a bit of a dick. I didn't bother reading anything more after that.
See, I read that as people with the kind of flaws you'd see with the lives they have. Of course Cap is a bit of a dick. He just came off winning a war and, much like the guys in charge after WWII (particularly in Vietnam), is a bit full of himself and his "take charge" attitude. He rings particularly true to me.
And where would Robert Downey Jr be without Ultimates Iron Man? He'd just be the tool Tony is in the main continuity.
Again, making Nick Fury black was NOT a change. The Ultimate line is a separate universe. It might happen to have characters that share the same name and sometimes appearance as the main line, but overall they're separate characters.
And the movies aren't a separate universe?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm just glad they haven't replaced Johhny with a robot like in that 90's cartoon
And the movies aren't a separate universe?
Not if, as they say, the story is based on the Ultimate line, no.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
Not if, as they say, the story is based on the Ultimate line, no.
And the movies aren't a separate universe?
And Ultimate Nick Fury was based on classic Nick Fury, but they still changed some things :) That it's "based on" something doesn't preclude it being an alternate universe from the thing its based on.
I think the point Ninja is making is that when they wrote the Ultimate comic line, they changed Nick Fury's race. If you're going to let that comic to comic change slide on the grounds that it's an alternate universe, why can't you let a comic to movie change slide based on the same principle?
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
Then you must have missed the crapstorm of racist comic book fans blasting Bendis and Marvel for political correctness and other such stuff for replacing their WHITE Spider-Man with a Black/Puerto Rican one. And believe you me, it was the BLACK part that people had an issue with. Because there's already a latino Spider-Man, Miguel O'Hara from Spider-Man 2099 and people never seemed to have much of an issue with him.
I'd been following Ultimate Spider-Man since the 5th or 6th issue so I was as invested as Ultimate Peter Parker as anyone. But Miles stepping up to the plate only made me afraid for Bendis and the ensuing backlash.
I would say that Miles Morales is the exception to that rather than the rule. A lot of it has to do with Bendis and his loyal fanbase. It also has to do with the fact that Bendis and his wife have adopted 2 black children alongside their own biological children. It's one of the reasons that I like him. Unlike a lot of people he talks the talk but more importantly he WALKS THE WALK.
That's absolutely true, and I didn't mean to imply that Miles was universally embraced. I remember reading some pretty disgusting comments following the change. My only point was that despite all that, Miles' book seems to have done well, which tells me at least some portion of the fan base is embracing him. I would agree that he is an exception rather than the rule, though.
What I'm saying is I'm pretty sure it's not meant to be an alternate universe. Otherwise it wouldn't be "based on the Ultimate line", it'd be its own thing.
The Ultimate Universe's entire point, unless I'm mistaken, was to make these sorts of changes just to see what would happen. It was created basically to see "Due, what would happen if..." and you fill in the blank with random stuff like "...If Nick Fury was black.", "...If the Blob was a cannibal.", "...If Tony Stark was really an ultra dickish robot replica who runs off alcohol and nobody could tell the difference", etc.
I'm pretty sure this movie isn't supposed to be that.
Why do they have to tell the stories the same way everytime?
Can there be no growth, no new ideas between universes and medias.
If you're going to let that comic to comic change slide on the grounds that it's an alternate universe, why can't you let a comic to movie change slide based on the same principle?
Because it's not the same principle. Changing Nick Fury was an improvement on an old idea. Combining Sam Jackson with Nick Fury was one of those changes where you think, "I'd never thought of that but it makes total sense!"
Changing Johnny Storm to a black guy, among other poor casting decisions for this movie, makes no sense. It comes across as a bumbling attempt to be politically correct, and objecting to the change is not automatically racism. As a few of us have already pointed out, we'd be happier if they'd made Reed the black guy. I could have bought that, and I would have been happy to finally see a black super-genius character in a comic book movie. Instead, they race-swapped one of the two Storm siblings, and specifically chose the guy that, in the Ultimates Universe, is the dumbass in the group. Personally, I find it condescending.
Because it's not the same principle. Changing Nick Fury was an improvement on an old idea. Combining Sam Jackson with Nick Fury was one of those changes where you think, "I'd never thought of that but it makes total sense!"Changing Johnny Storm to a black guy, among other poor casting decisions for this movie, makes no sense. It comes across as a bumbling attempt to be politically correct, and objecting to the change is not automatically racism. As a few of us have already pointed out, we'd be happier if they'd made Reed the black guy. I could have bought that, and I would have been happy to finally see a black super-genius character in a comic book movie. Instead, they race-swapped one of the two Storm siblings, and specifically chose the guy that, in the Ultimates Universe, is the dumbass in the group. Personally, I find it condescending.
Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury doesn't necessarily make "total sense" (unless you're injecting the Ultimates into it deliberately), but it works which is probably why they hit on him in the Ultimates anyway.
And Johnny Storm isn't really a dumbass. Everyone is dumb compared to Reed. But Johnny is immature and shallow for substantial parts of the series. Most of that had been developed away by the 1980s, though.
|
|
What I'm saying is I'm pretty sure it's not meant to be an alternate universe. Otherwise it wouldn't be "based on the Ultimate line", it'd be its own thing.
The Ultimate Universe's entire point, unless I'm mistaken, was to make these sorts of changes just to see what would happen. It was created basically to see "Due, what would happen if..." and you fill in the blank with random stuff like "...If Nick Fury was black.", "...If the Blob was a cannibal.", "...If Tony Stark was really an ultra dickish robot replica who runs off alcohol and nobody could tell the difference", etc.
I'm pretty sure this movie isn't supposed to be that.
Most of the movies take elements from Ultimate, take others from 616, and add a bit of their own new stuff. So, yes, they do form their own continuity.
Even the movies made by Marvel are assumed to exist in their own universe, hence the reference to the MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
According to posters here, in the Ultimates universe he is the dumbass of the group. Since they're using more of an Ultimates approach, that will come across badly if they do play him that way in the movie.
Disclaimer: I haven't read Ultimates enough to know if that's actually true. They could also not keep that part for the movie.
I've got most of the Ultimate FF run and the term dumbass still really doesn't apply. They raised the bar with Sue a lot by putting her on a closer to intellectual peer relationship with Reed, but Johnny is no dummy. He's a wise-cracking rock star, ergo still kind of immature and shallow. But he's a teen and the human torch. Who wouldn't go all rock star and be a bit immature and shallow?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I fail to see the huge issue. Why can't a black play the sibling of a white? ESPECIALLY in a reboot movie where they get to change a lot anyway.
There's also one other thing that no one else has brought up I think in Michael B. Jordan's casting as Johnny Storm in this movie and that he's worked with the director before in CHRONICLE and apparently they wanted to work together again.
Something in his screen test made them cast Michael as Johnny Storm, DESPITE his race. And I think while peoples objections are understandable (to a point...) I think that it's commendable that Josh Trank look past race in this casting decision. I'm kinda torn as the decision to cast Michael in the role has taken away from the fact that we might actually get a GOOD FF movie this time. Now because of the casting people are automatically writing it off as a movie made by people who have never read the comic.
I actually have more issue oddly enough with the voice casting of Rocket Raccoon in GAURDIANS OF THE GALAXY. Whenever I've read the character I've always had him with a british accent for some reason. Bradley Cooper? Not so much. Jason Statham or Bob Hoskins? Yes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder what would've happened if a white actor had done the best audition/screen test for the role of Nelson Mandela in the latest biopic.
Big difference. Nelson Mandela was a real person. Johnny Storm is not.
I fail to see the huge issue. Why can't a black play the sibling of a white? ESPECIALLY in a reboot movie where they get to change a lot anyway.
No one's saying he can't. But it does introduce a new dynamic that begs to be addressed. Will that distract from the story or add to it? That's the question.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
What I'm saying is I'm pretty sure it's not meant to be an alternate universe. Otherwise it wouldn't be "based on the Ultimate line", it'd be its own thing.
The Ultimate Universe's entire point, unless I'm mistaken, was to make these sorts of changes just to see what would happen. It was created basically to see "Due, what would happen if..." and you fill in the blank with random stuff like "...If Nick Fury was black.", "...If the Blob was a cannibal.", "...If Tony Stark was really an ultra dickish robot replica who runs off alcohol and nobody could tell the difference", etc.
I'm pretty sure this movie isn't supposed to be that.
Like I say though, a thing can be based on something, but still be a different universe than that thing. Ultimate marvel is based on 616 marvel.
As to the point of Ultimate marvel, it wasn't to make changes to characters willy nilly, or to see "what if..." Such and such happened. The point (at least originally) was to modernize marvel's classic characters and give people a way into comics that doesn't require dealing with decades of continuity. Spider-man is bitten by a genetically modified spider, not a radioactive one. He works on the daily bugle's website, not as a photographer. He's still in high school, not grown up and married to a supermodel but then unmarried because he made a deal with the devil but then they had a kid that one time what ever happened to her?
Nick Fury is black not because the point was to see "what if Nick Fury was black", he's black because they felt like making a change, and they could do it because black people can be generals now.
That original goal of the ultimates imprint--to modernize and make things accessible to new consumers--is exactly what every comic book movie tries to do.
I fail to see the huge issue. Why can't a black play the sibling of a white? ESPECIALLY in a reboot movie where they get to change a lot anyway.
Because that's not the real issue.
What is the real issue?
What is the real issue?
The real issue is that Johnny is white in the comic books, but they changed his race for no apparently good reason.
What is the real issue?The real issue is that Johnny is white in the comic books, but they changed his race for no apparently good reason.
But this isn't the comic books. It's a movie. It's different.
And it's ok to be different.| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Being different for the sake of being different is stupid.
If you don't have a good reason to change something...don't do it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
How about the actor selected has a working relationship with the director, and the director feels he would do a good job of playing Johnny Storm? And given the movie hasn't even filmed yet, its not like you can evaluate his acting or the influence of his race on the movie.
Also, if you really think that casting Nelson Mandela as a white person is the exact same as casting a black person as Johnny Storm, than you live in a much different reality than I do.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How about the actor selected has a working relationship with the director, and the director feels he would do a good job of playing Johnny Storm?
That's not a good reason for changing the character. "I like this actor" is all well and good, but if it necessitates a character change (one like this that will likely trigger a cascade of other changes) you may need to step back and ask yourself if he's the best choice for the movie, even if he's a good actor.
I mean, I like a lot of actors. Peter Dinklage is a pretty cool guy.
Do I want him playing Reed Richards, even though he's a great actor? No.
And given the movie hasn't even filmed yet, its not like you can evaluate his acting or the influence of his race on the movie.
Acting isn't the issue. By all accounts he's a great actor, though I've never seen one of his movies.
The issue is that it will either influence the movie in some way (when Johnny's race shouldn't be the focus of a superhero movie at all), or it won't (and is thus a pointless change).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, if you really think that casting Nelson Mandela as a white person is the exact same as casting a black person as Johnny Storm, than you live in a much different reality than I do.
They are not exactly the same, but they have this in common: we know what Mandela looks like, and he's black. We also know what Johnny Storm looks like, and he's white.
I'm not prejudiced against women, either real or imagined. But I wouldn't want Johnny (or Nelson) played by a woman looking like a woman. Nor would I want Sue played by a man looking like a man. Nor would I want Ben Grimm pre-cosmic powers played by Peter Dinklage (who's brilliant BTW).
I don't care how good an actor is, you don't just take any good actor, you cast for the role. Do you ever wonder how Helen Mirren got the role of The Queen, rather than, say, Oprah Winfrey, or Sir Ben Kingsley? Or Peter Dinklage?
All great actors! So how did Helen get the role? Do you think that 'looking like the character you portray' has no relevance?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The good reason would be thinking that the actor was the best performer available for the role combined with no pressing reason that the character might have to be a certain race.
Not if, as they say, the story is based on the Ultimate line, no.
And the movies aren't a separate universe?
"Based on" and "part of" or "beholden to" are different things.
Also, if you really think that casting Nelson Mandela as a white person is the exact same as casting a black person as Johnny Storm, than you live in a much different reality than I do.They are not exactly the same, but they have this in common: we know what Mandela looks like, and he's black. We also know what Johnny Storm looks like, and he's white.
I'm not prejudiced against women, either real or imagined. But I wouldn't want Johnny (or Nelson) played by a woman looking like a woman. Nor would I want Sue played by a man looking like a man. Nor would I want Ben Grimm pre-cosmic powers played by Peter Dinklage (who's brilliant BTW).
I don't care how good an actor is, you don't just take any good actor, you cast for the role. Do you ever wonder how Helen Mirren got the role of The Queen, rather than, say, Oprah Winfrey, or Sir Ben Kingsley? Or Peter Dinklage?
All great actors! So how did Helen get the role? Do you think that 'looking like the character you portray' has no relevance?
BIG difference, with a capital B, I & G.
Mandela is a real person whose life story revolves around racial discrimination in South Africa.
Meanwhile Jonny Storm is just a fictional person.
Nothing in his identity was comes from being white.
Being Sue's brother is more important to his character than his race.
Which doesn't have to change with his race. And doesn't have to detract from the movie.
A 15 sec clip with a photo of a black boy, a white kid and their parents is all you need to show that they are a family.
Also, if you really think that casting Nelson Mandela as a white person is the exact same as casting a black person as Johnny Storm, than you live in a much different reality than I do.They are not exactly the same, but they have this in common: we know what Mandela looks like, and he's black. We also know what Johnny Storm looks like, and he's white.
I'm not prejudiced against women, either real or imagined. But I wouldn't want Johnny (or Nelson) played by a woman looking like a woman. Nor would I want Sue played by a man looking like a man. Nor would I want Ben Grimm pre-cosmic powers played by Peter Dinklage (who's brilliant BTW).
I don't care how good an actor is, you don't just take any good actor, you cast for the role. Do you ever wonder how Helen Mirren got the role of The Queen, rather than, say, Oprah Winfrey, or Sir Ben Kingsley? Or Peter Dinklage?
All great actors! So how did Helen get the role? Do you think that 'looking like the character you portray' has no relevance?
Your two examples are portrayals of real life people for whom a change of race would have had huge repercussions on their life.
The good reason would be thinking that the actor was the best performer available for the role combined with no pressing reason that the character might have to be a certain race.
A) You can't possibly tell me that it isn't possible to find a white actor to play the role just as well, and
B) There is a pressing reason the character might have to be a certain race. The character is based on an existing comic book character who is and always has been a certain race.
There are plenty of scenarios or characters for which I think a race swap would be a great idea. This isn't one of them.
But this isn't the comic books. It's a movie. It's different. And it's ok to be different.
When said movie is based on the comic book, it is not okay - not to me, at least.
The comics rewrite themselves all the time. So why would it bother you if a movie did the same? And let me guess you are upset with ALL comic based movies then? Because they all change stuff.
The good reason would be thinking that the actor was the best performer available for the role combined with no pressing reason that the character might have to be a certain race.A) You can't possibly tell me that it isn't possible to find a white actor to play the role just as well, and
B) There is a pressing reason the character might have to be a certain race. The character is based on an existing comic book character who is and always has been a certain race.
There are plenty of scenarios or characters for which I think a race swap would be a great idea. This isn't one of them.
A) I can tell you that it's entirely probable that they believe that he's the best actor who is available to them schedule wise, willing to work for what they're ready to pay, and has some level of "name" value (due to the critical acclaim he got for his performance in Fruitvale Station). There are a lot of not-so-good actors that get cast in pretty major roles all the time, so I wouldn't discount just how hard it can be to find quality actors who are available for a project like this.
B) I was speaking in terms of story and characterization. Johnny Storm is a quick witted, charismatic teenager from New York who gets super powers and enjoys the fame it brings him. Nothing about that strongly indicates an importance of the character's race.
As I said before, I'm sympathetic to wanting a character from a visual medium to maintain a certain look, but can't consider that a primary concern in casting a movie.
If there are plenty of characters where a race swap would be a great idea, what makes this situation different?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As I said before, I'm sympathetic to wanting a character from a visual medium to maintain a certain look, but can't consider that a primary concern in casting a movie.
...Why?
Even if it's not a primary concern, it should be A concern.
It speaks poorly of a studio who picks someone who looks nothing like the character just because they like them or they're the first person with a good audition. It looks lazy.
They don't need to be identical, but SOME resemblance would be nice, and is quite doable. There's a lot of actors out there. I'm quite sure this guy was not the ONLY PERSON who had the acting chops to play this role.
He's also the least suited appearance-wise (as far as I know, there could have been some talented auditions from 7 ft. tall white dudes or 300 lb. Mexicans but we didn't hear about them).
This entire casting will rise or fall depending on one word: why.
My biggest issue, so far, is that is possibility that Johnny Storm is played by a black actor simply for the sake of having a black actor in the film. Diversity because, well, diversity.
Does anyone else remember this: Cinderella (1997 film)? I enjoyed the movie, all of the actors playing their parts were good, fit well, and interacted well. But that's not what stood out. Fairytale utopia or not, the first thing that jumped out was - race/ethnicity. That is what I fear for this casting. That Johnny's casting will overshadow the rest of the film.
Black Nick Fury? After an initial confusion (who's that?) and checking the history of the character, I enjoyed the casting and it fits quite nicely.
Black Heimdal is still a what?!?!? at least partially because I know (on a list I'm on) a pagan who worships the Nordic pantheon. I never asked him how he felt about the casting because it wasn't relevant to the list topics, still it seemed to be a slap in the face to such followers to me. As an example; while I wouldn't object to a black Jesus, some folks would. (I'd actually prefer a semitic actor portraying Jesus). You'd get the same reaction to a black actor portraying Mohammad.
I see the discussion going:
Reed Richards - can't do a black guy married to a blonde white woman; too much baggage.
Ben Grimm - couldn't tell unless we went with bad stereotypical speech/actions; we'd get slammed.
Dr. Doom - same as with Ben Grimm.
Sue Storm - black woman/white guy; worse than the reverse.
Johnny Storm - perfect! I know just the actor. We'll explain it later.
I have no objection to mixed families (I love that Cheerios series). I just (currently) am concerned about this change due to it feeling forced. That may change when I see the movie. It will all depend on why. Give me a good reason for Johnny to be black, don't overshadow the rest of the plot with it, and you're gold. 'We needed a black person in the movie' is not enough.