so then you want an all new character then
No more than Iron Man was an "all new character" since current Iron Man
doesn't drink.
The great thing about comic book adaptations is that you can adapt from literally
any version of the character that exists. Do I want Drunk Iron Man? Sure. Do I want to use Jean Grey before she became Phoenix? Can do. Adapting Sentry from his initial run of comics rather than the terrible Bendis version isn't that big of a stretch.
That run really was outstanding (due in no small part to Conner's incredible artwork). And I agree that the DC films have run off the rails in entirely the wrong tonal direction lately. Granted I would imagine it's hard to write a "happy" Batman story, but it's a tragedy to see Superman be stuffed into the company of bombastic, heavy-handed, ultra-grim superhero movies that take themselves way too seriously. Power Girl can't suffer the same fate. I won't allow it! (Not that she'll ever star in a movie at this rate.)
That one page spread of Power Girl and Terra in the cinema is in my top ten of favorite comic book moments. They just saved Manhattan in spectacular fashion, and now they're enjoying themselves and watching a horror movie together. You know you have a good character when you can be entertained by watching her eat popcorn in between bench-pressing apartment buildings.
I'm sure that a lot of executives think it's pointless or difficult to showcase a woman as a superhero, but it's really not that hard. Just have her be her own character, standing on her own two feet, doing awesome shit all the time without playing second fiddle to dudes.
The problem here is going to be that DC's filmverse is largely influenced by Didio and Johns' take on the DCU, which is terrible, and has been a big part of their decline over the past decade or so. DC in the early 00s was in a really exciting place, with writers like Morrison and Waid doing some amazing stuff. But... go read Johns comics. His stuff's all about depowering women, needless grimdarkery, and a lot of superheroes yelling at each other.
This is the universe that killed off a Batgirl and only brought her back after extreme fan outcry, pretending she hadn't been dead all along. It's the universe where they've basically retconned
every change ever so things can be stuck in the silver age. For them, it's all about legacy and symbols and stuff. Oh, and they have no problem doing things like they did to Mary Marvel in countdown. It's like "hey, if a woman has power, she has to be evil" with DC.
No it is NOT.
It is the easiest way to put a woman super hero on screen, which will make MUCH MORE PEOPLE KNOWN THE CHARACTER than creating a new character, marketing it to a market who as sexist as gamers only acepting hot women and then trying to pitch it a movie about her.
Give cate blantchet or tilda swilton a non sexualized robe and call her Stephanie Strange.
THEN you will have girls seeing in the big screen something they can relate and feel they can be superheroes too.
Not in a niche cult comic book that needs to survive in a world full of big names
Your point is accurate, but we're already getting a male Strange. And also, again, huge overlap with Wanda, since both of them would be magic users who do basically the same thing.
I'm tired of my fiction limiting women to energy/magic powers or "being regular people who know kung fu."
I think it's lazy. There are female characters that deserve their own movies (Carol and Storm, please, God), and I don't want to see gender-swapped characters before they get their own movies.
Also, if Miles Morales gets on screen before BP, I'm punching someone.
EDIT: While I'm here - it'd be better if Danvers got her own movie as opposed to being introduced in a team movie... this way they could hopefully establish Binary.
Storm is with Fox... what's up with people who keep suggesting things that can't happen within the Marvel cinematic universe? :|
As for Binary, you might as well do a Warbird movie. All of that is too complex for cinema. Best way to do this is to just do ONE take on the character. Too much, and your audiences will start getting confused.
One of the reasons I don't think a gender swap of Mar-Vell would be too bad is because it'd really just be condensing the Ms. Marvel/Captain Marvel story into just one character. The most
interesting side of that entire area of comics is, I think, the way Rick Jones and Captain Marvel switched places. So if I were going to adapt a Captain Marvel story, it'd be somewhere between a gender swap and an adjustment to Carol's story.
Use the Characters you have or make new ones. Gender Swapping, Race Swapping etc. is a sign that you don't have any faith in the original creations and you need to gimmick it up to try and find success. It also does a disservice to the countless characters already created as they are apparently useless so you need a female captain america or whatever
There are so many Female Superheroes/Villians out there already that they could use.
hell look at Falcon. He really wasn't that awesome a character in the comics. Oh he can talk to birds and fly woohoo. Instead of trying to radically change him they simply modernized him and he came across as an awesome character in TWS.
Most female characters in comics are
terrible, so any faith in them would be pretty misplaced. And "Female superheroes exist" isn't a good argument based on the criteria in the OP, since nearly all female superheroes are weak compared to their male counterparts.
I don't see why a movie exec would need or want female Vision.
They're making a male Vision if memory serves correctly. But I don't see your point.
DocSeuss why do you keep calling it Agents of HATE. Its called Nextwave. Its not like MARVELS Agents of SHIELD. Well I guess the name is technically Nextwave: Agents of HATE is the full title, but I've never seen or heard anyone refer to it just by its subtitle.
I know.
I just like typing Agents of HATE.
Reading this thread just made me realize how totally awesome a Sentry movie would be.
Played out in the current Marvel movie universe and following the first volume of the comic.
And why not have a woman playing the role? Marvel should get on this!
Too bad I don't have an in with Marvel, or I'd script over the summer and pitch this fall.
I've never liked this picture only because they kinda seem to be missing the point with She-Hulk. She's an idealized version of Jennifer Walters--basically, she's everything Jen wants to be. Outgoing, attractive, etc. So the ogre face doesn't really fit the idea.
Ms America
Rescue
Valkyrie or Sif
She Hulk or Betty if red is your fetish.
and its different for gods.
Technically, that first one would be American Dream?
There are plenty of strong females available to keep from needing to throw tradition and history of characters away to fill a quota.
It is a matter of them using who they have and then writing them worthy.
People act like just because it is a certain character it will automatically be written stronger than another when if they want to write a strong female it won't matter how big a name it was before.
Please, by all means, list them. Most of the ones people have brought up are She-Hulk and Carol Danvers, who I mentioned in the OP. Or they're X-Women, who Marvel can't use. Or they're magic/kung fu people, and we've already got that covered with Scarlet Witch and Black Widow. Or they're Spider-Woman.
The only thing you're doing is increasing the popularity of a char that will become male again.
Why? The filmverse has to keep things simple. It's not like comics where they can change things comic-to-comic, writer-to-writer. When you spend a hundred million dollars on a movie and make back a few hundred million, you're not going to suddenly go "okay, yeah, let's make this a dude like it is in the comics."
You're
waaaaaay more likely to go "okay, let's make the comic character like it is in the movies."
See: how Marvel gave Spidey a black costume just in time for Spider-Man III, even though it wasn't venom or anything.
There are plenty of great female Marvel heroes. You totally skipped Wasp, but really all it takes is a good writer. I think a lot of these characters will be appreciated more when they're done justice on the screen.
1) Most of these either overlap with what we have/will have on screen, or are X-characters, who can't be used.
2) Wasp's power is "being tiny." It's not like the original Avengers, where you had Giant Man and Wasp, who had very different powers. They're gearing up for the Kirkman version of Ant-Man. The tiny guy. You could always go with Giant Wasp, I guess, but at that point, why is she even Wasp? The Giant Wasp thing only really works if you know why she's Wasp to begin with. Plus, I mean, she works best with Hank, just like Hank works best with her.