Marvel kowtows to fan outrage - There is a "real Mandarin"

[Illustrious]

i feel sorry for the people who paid a fortune for TOS 50 before the movie

 

You shouldn't...if people insist on playing the frenzied speculation game every time a character is announced for a movie/TV show, then they should learn you don't win every time.

[VintageComics]

 

If anything, the original 1960s Mandarin character catered to the paranoia that was instilled in the average American, and it reinforced the oriental mastermind stereotype. my

 

 

Ironically, it's no different than how IM3's Mandarin character was modeled to cater to paranoia that was instilled in the average person today.

 

 

Yes. Very perceptive.

 

Sometimes I find European films to be so refreshing because over all profit seems to take a second seat to artistic ability and license for a lot of film makers. The two don't have to be mutually exclusive of course, but sometimes you just want something 'true' that you know is not being mangled by the bean counters.

[vaillant]

Sometimes I find European films to be so refreshing because over all profit seems to take a second seat to artistic ability and license for a lot of film makers. The two don't have to be mutually exclusive of course, but sometimes you just want something 'true' that you know is not being mangled by the bean counters.

 

No matter the production, "Faraway so close" was nothing short than a Miracle, IMO.

 

A great movie I have seen recently is "Adam Resurrected" by Paul Schrader.

I am a big fan of his 1979 movie "Hardcore".

[Sauce Dog]

So what i'm hearing is that there is a CHANCE we could get a 'proper' Mandarin that has been lending out his rings, and *crosses fingers* will be played by Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa (Japanese but would kill it as it is pretty much his Shang Tsung role again )

 

[Mayor006]

Just trying to remember this off the top of my head, but didn't they change the mandarin's name to something along the lines of man-drin to get it past Chinese censors in the altered version for the Chinese market? Yes, there will be catering to....

[adamstrange]

I didn't know it was possible to screw up a movie that badly, not one that had so much going for it anyhow. Not sure why they bailed on the idea of just using the Mandarin as a real terrorist anyway, since it seems like it would have set up Captain America 2 perfectly where the new SHIELD seems to be on the offensive in going after threats rather than reacting to them as they happen.

China was a source of financing for the film and they are becoming a large enough market that films are being adjusted before they are filmed or alternate versions are created for the Chinese market. There will be more of this kind catering in the future not less given their increasing financial clout.

 

Given that the Marvel character of The Mandarin was created during a time that any Chinese national of strength was labeled a Red, or considered a Yellow Menace, I'm not sure the term 'catering' is accurate.

 

A conscious decision not to perpetuate an outmoded image is not catering, IMHO.

 

If anything, the original 1960s Mandarin character catered to the paranoia that was instilled in the average American, and it reinforced the oriental mastermind stereotype. my

 

Hey, I enjoy my silver age Marvels immensely, and I have a keen fondness for the Lee / Heck / Kirby Mandarin. Silver age is practically all I read.

I was a little disappointed that the Mandarin was not portrayed as he was in the comics I grew up with. That would have been cool.

These movies are being made 50 years later.

 

At my age I have learned that change is inevitable and that I may not like or agree with all of it. Yet my enjoyment of this modern take on a 50 year-old mythology does not hinge upon strict adherence to age old canon.

The catering I was referring to was the removal of any trace of the villain being Chinese. I would not think that it's somehow perpetuating stereotypes if a movie includes a Chinese person who is acting less than the ethical ideal.

 

The catering, btw, goes beyond this example as the Chinese government is using it's economic influence to eliminate criticism of their authoritarian regime.

 

...political speech that disparages the Communist government in any way.

 

“It’s so easy to fall afoul of censorship that you need to pre-clear everything and there are some very clear no-go areas,” says Mark Schipper, COO of Exclusive Media, which has partnered on several films in China

http://www.buzzfeed.com/jordanzakarin/how-hollywoods-obsession-with-china-may-change-movies-foreve

 

 

[Unca Ben]

At my age I have learned that change is inevitable and that I may not like or agree with all of it. Yet my enjoyment of this modern take on a 50 year-old mythology does not hinge upon strict adherence to age old canon.

Problem is that reasonably speaking it’s not "mythology". Despite all the cultural factors you can contextualize, Stan Lee crystallized a concept and a vision, which has been consistently brought forward by generation of authors, that went beyond mere "entertainment". The Marvel Age was something, the current productions are generic "entertainment" and treat like "mythology" what happened before just because they do not have an adequate background to cancel the mess they have done and bring that vision forward.

 

It’s not a question of being condescending to the "fans", there‘s a lot more in play.

I'm not sure I understand your statement, but if you're saying the comics have been following Stan's concepts, I disagree. If you're saying otherwise, then I agree.

I don't feel Stan's vision has been "consistently brought forward by the generations of comic book authors that followed":

 

Regarding Stan Lee's Tony Stark-

How about "teen" Tony?

How about a Tony Stark that suddenly wanted all super heroes to reveal their identities and register with the government, which was in stark contrast (heh) with Stan Lee's Tony Stark, who fought against Senator Byrd in TOS about the very same subject.

What about Tony and Reed Richards negligent homicide of Goliath, by creating a clone of Thor?

 

Stan's '60s Captain America - was all about a man out of time, filled with remorse over the death of his sidekick, Bucky. That vision was abolished with the Winter Soldier (which was a pretty good storyline).

 

Stan and Steve's Spider-Man-

Alternate reality "House of M" Uncle Ben? Please.

Norman Osborn and Gwen Stacy hooking up (which was a horrible storyline), is not even close to Ditko and Lee's characters.

 

One of Stan's catchphrases from the Marvel Age was "Not a dream! Not an imaginary story!"

All these "alternate universes" and "Earth-616's" (whatever that means) sure seems to broach on Stan's original concept of a cohesive universe (singular).

 

The comics have deviated the characters from the original Marvel Age for years now.

 

Why shouldn't Marvel Studios, re-imagining Stan's '60s Marvel Age for a different medium and placing them in a different century, be allowed the same leeway?

 

 

 

[Unca Ben]

The catering I was referring to was the removal of any trace of the villain being Chinese. I would not think that it's somehow perpetuating stereotypes if a movie includes a Chinese person who is acting less than the ethical ideal.

 

The catering, btw, goes beyond this example as the Chinese government is using it's economic influence to eliminate criticism of their authoritarian regime.

Ahh. On this, you and I agree.

[Magneto]

i feel sorry for the people who paid a fortune for TOS 50 before the movie

 

You shouldn't...if people insist on playing the frenzied speculation game every time a character is announced for a movie/TV show, then they should learn you don't win every time.

 

+1

[Prince Namor]

At my age I have learned that change is inevitable and that I may not like or agree with all of it. Yet my enjoyment of this modern take on a 50 year-old mythology does not hinge upon strict adherence to age old canon.

Problem is that reasonably speaking it’s not "mythology". Despite all the cultural factors you can contextualize, Stan Lee crystallized a concept and a vision, which has been consistently brought forward by generation of authors, that went beyond mere "entertainment". The Marvel Age was something, the current productions are generic "entertainment" and treat like "mythology" what happened before just because they do not have an adequate background to cancel the mess they have done and bring that vision forward.

 

It’s not a question of being condescending to the "fans", there‘s a lot more in play.

I'm not sure I understand your statement, but if you're saying the comics have been following Stan's concepts, I disagree. If you're saying otherwise, then I agree.

I don't feel Stan's vision has been "consistently brought forward by the generations of comic book authors that followed":

 

Regarding Stan Lee's Tony Stark-

How about "teen" Tony?

How about a Tony Stark that suddenly wanted all super heroes to reveal their identities and register with the government, which was in stark contrast (heh) with Stan Lee's Tony Stark, who fought against Senator Byrd in TOS about the very same subject.

What about Tony and Reed Richards negligent homicide of Goliath, by creating a clone of Thor?

 

Stan's '60s Captain America - was all about a man out of time, filled with remorse over the death of his sidekick, Bucky. That vision was abolished with the Winter Soldier (which was a pretty good storyline).

 

Stan and Steve's Spider-Man-

Alternate reality "House of M" Uncle Ben? Please.

Norman Osborn and Gwen Stacy hooking up (which was a horrible storyline), is not even close to Ditko and Lee's characters.

 

One of Stan's catchphrases from the Marvel Age was "Not a dream! Not an imaginary story!"

All these "alternate universes" and "Earth-616's" (whatever that means) sure seems to broach on Stan's original concept of a cohesive universe (singular).

 

The comics have deviated the characters from the original Marvel Age for years now.

 

Why shouldn't Marvel Studios, re-imagining Stan's '60s Marvel Age for a different medium and placing them in a different century, be allowed the same leeway?

 

 

 

+1

Good points all around.

 

It makes even more sense when put into the context of: None of these characters and stories (properties) is driven by any sense of nostalgia, it's about creating profit on an owned concept.

When putting the ideas together for the movies, the goal isn't to aim it at 'the nostalgic memories' of what is really a tiny part of the audience (nostalgic comic fans), but to create something that has an appeal that crosses over into as large a demographic as possible. Including foreign markets.

 

[Prince Namor]

The Mandarin thing probably has to do with a fear of alienating foreign markets that make up a huge chunk of money for these movies.

 

Not sure I understand this, Chuck. What do you mean?

 

An ugly stereotype of a culture in a movie that is being sold to that same country, isn't a very smart business decision.

[Comicopolis]

At my age I have learned that change is inevitable and that I may not like or agree with all of it. Yet my enjoyment of this modern take on a 50 year-old mythology does not hinge upon strict adherence to age old canon.

Problem is that reasonably speaking it’s not "mythology". Despite all the cultural factors you can contextualize, Stan Lee crystallized a concept and a vision, which has been consistently brought forward by generation of authors, that went beyond mere "entertainment". The Marvel Age was something, the current productions are generic "entertainment" and treat like "mythology" what happened before just because they do not have an adequate background to cancel the mess they have done and bring that vision forward.

 

It’s not a question of being condescending to the "fans", there‘s a lot more in play.

 

So - silver age Marvel stories/plots/characters are real?

 

I knew it!

[Comicopolis]

Seriously - the Mandarin is such a stupid villain. A guy with alien rings

 

What next - a guy made out of sand?

[goldust40]

Well at least they realized they ruined the movie for fans. Not that Marvel gives a damn about their fans but still..

 

Didn't ruin it for me.

 

Agreed. The film was pretty average anyway, so the presence of a real archaic super-villain as opposed to a joke one wouldn't've made much difference.

[Comicopolis]

Well at least they realized they ruined the movie for fans. Not that Marvel gives a damn about their fans but still..

 

Didn't ruin it for me.

 

Agreed. The film was pretty average anyway, so the presence of a real archaic super-villain as opposed to a joke one wouldn't've made much difference.

 

You were still asleep at that point.

[FineCollector]

At my age I have learned that change is inevitable and that I may not like or agree with all of it. Yet my enjoyment of this modern take on a 50 year-old mythology does not hinge upon strict adherence to age old canon.

 

In movie terms, it's about being faithful to the source material. In every other genre, the success of the movie hinges on a good translation of the story to film. The plots have already been laid out, the dialogue has already been written, just cast it and film it. Meanwhile, a comic book movie comes along, and every writer who touches it wants to be remembered as the guy who changed everything. Gimme a break.

 

Mandarin isn't stereotypical in any way. He's a hardcore imperialist. He goes against his country's globalization because he's convinced the old ways are best. Putting Mandarin in a movie isn't racist, it could carry a thoughtful political message to the Chinese viewers.

 

It was wrong to ruin the character that way. If you're indifferent about it, you're probably not a fan.

[Comicopolis]

At my age I have learned that change is inevitable and that I may not like or agree with all of it. Yet my enjoyment of this modern take on a 50 year-old mythology does not hinge upon strict adherence to age old canon.

 

In movie terms, it's about being faithful to the source material. In every other genre, the success of the movie hinges on a good translation of the story to film. The plots have already been laid out, the dialogue has already been written, just cast it and film it. Meanwhile, a comic book movie comes along, and every writer who touches it wants to be remembered as the guy who changed everything. Gimme a break.

 

Mandarin isn't stereotypical in any way. He's a hardcore imperialist. He goes against his country's globalization because he's convinced the old ways are best. Putting Mandarin in a movie isn't racist, it could carry a thoughtful political message to the Chinese viewers.

 

It was wrong to ruin the character that way. If you're indifferent about it, you're probably not a fan.

 

Fan of what?

[Logan510]

At my age I have learned that change is inevitable and that I may not like or agree with all of it. Yet my enjoyment of this modern take on a 50 year-old mythology does not hinge upon strict adherence to age old canon.

 

In movie terms, it's about being faithful to the source material. In every other genre, the success of the movie hinges on a good translation of the story to film. The plots have already been laid out, the dialogue has already been written, just cast it and film it. Meanwhile, a comic book movie comes along, and every writer who touches it wants to be remembered as the guy who changed everything. Gimme a break.

 

Mandarin isn't stereotypical in any way. He's a hardcore imperialist. He goes against his country's globalization because he's convinced the old ways are best. Putting Mandarin in a movie isn't racist, it could carry a thoughtful political message to the Chinese viewers.

 

It was wrong to ruin the character that way. If you're indifferent about it, you're probably not a fan.

 

Just don't call them alleged fans...trust me...

 

 

I agree with a lot of what you said BTW.

[Comicopolis]

At my age I have learned that change is inevitable and that I may not like or agree with all of it. Yet my enjoyment of this modern take on a 50 year-old mythology does not hinge upon strict adherence to age old canon.

 

In movie terms, it's about being faithful to the source material. In every other genre, the success of the movie hinges on a good translation of the story to film. The plots have already been laid out, the dialogue has already been written, just cast it and film it. Meanwhile, a comic book movie comes along, and every writer who touches it wants to be remembered as the guy who changed everything. Gimme a break.

 

Mandarin isn't stereotypical in any way. He's a hardcore imperialist. He goes against his country's globalization because he's convinced the old ways are best. Putting Mandarin in a movie isn't racist, it could carry a thoughtful political message to the Chinese viewers.

 

It was wrong to ruin the character that way. If you're indifferent about it, you're probably not a fan.

 

Just don't call them alleged fans...trust me...

 

 

I agree with a lot of what you said BTW.

 

Who gets to decide what a 'fan' is?

[FineCollector]

At my age I have learned that change is inevitable and that I may not like or agree with all of it. Yet my enjoyment of this modern take on a 50 year-old mythology does not hinge upon strict adherence to age old canon.

 

In movie terms, it's about being faithful to the source material. In every other genre, the success of the movie hinges on a good translation of the story to film. The plots have already been laid out, the dialogue has already been written, just cast it and film it. Meanwhile, a comic book movie comes along, and every writer who touches it wants to be remembered as the guy who changed everything. Gimme a break.

 

Mandarin isn't stereotypical in any way. He's a hardcore imperialist. He goes against his country's globalization because he's convinced the old ways are best. Putting Mandarin in a movie isn't racist, it could carry a thoughtful political message to the Chinese viewers.

 

It was wrong to ruin the character that way. If you're indifferent about it, you're probably not a fan.

 

Just don't call them alleged fans...trust me...

 

 

I agree with a lot of what you said BTW.

 

Who gets to decide what a 'fan' is?

 

A fan is someone who knows and cares.

 

I don't read Swamp Thing or Hellblazer, and I know nothing about John Constantine. I liked the Keanu Reeves movie, despite it being inaccurate. I am a consumer, but I am not a fan. You might argue my ticket money is worth the same as a Hellblazer fan's ticket money, and it is, but you'd be missing out on so much more.

 

If DC puts out Hellblazer comics and merchandise, I won't buy it, I'm not a fan. A Hellblazer fan will buy the stuff, but only if he feels the movie shares his love for the material. If the movie is entertaining, I'll like it no matter what happens, but that's the only money I'll spend on this. It's in DC's best interest to cater to the person who's passionate about the material, and will pay for peripherals.

 

I'm a fan of Iron Man and Mandarin. I don't feel like the people behind the movie share my love for the source material. Am I spending for Iron Man material with this going on? Heck no, they can roll it up and stick it.