Could Spider-Woman fill the role of Spider-Man in the Cinematic Universe?

This is a question I've been wondering about. Marvel Studios can't use Spider-Man related characters. Like characters that fall under the Spider-Man brand-name such as his villains and supporting characters. However what if they decided to use Spider-Woman. I mean Jessica Drew has no affiliation with Spider-Man aside from somewhat similar powers and the name, so why couldn't they use her to fill the same role? Spider-Woman has always been heavily affiliated with both SHIELD and The Avengers, even working for HYDRA for sometime in the comics, and all of those fall under Disney/Marvel's control.

Perhaps they could have her as a vigilante to begin with? Basically do the same thing Spidey does to start with, but gets drafted into the Avengers at some point? Really I think this would help flesh out their street level heroes more.

Start the Conversation

Mutates in the Cinematic Universe?

I was wondering if it's possible for Marvel/Disney to use the term "Mutate" for Pietro and Wanda Maximoff? Mutate is a term in Marvel used to refer to superhumans who acquired their superpowers by exposure to some compound or energy that can cause mutations. The Hulk, Captain America, Spider-Man, the Fantastic Four, etc, are all Mutates, but does that Marvel/Disney can't alter the term to apply to Pietro and Wanda?

Sure they can't be called mutants, but wouldn't this be the next best thing since Mutate is also a Marvel term? I mean, since they don't seem to have a concept of mutants in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, for obvious reasons, couldn't the usage of mutate allow them to keep to the Maximoff siblings origins and even allow for the use of other mutant characters that were never really a part of the X-Men/Brotherhood like Namor since he wasn't a confirmed mutant until the 90's.

What do you guys think?


The INDISPUTABLE "Superhero to Manga" Character List

Goku= Superman: 'Nuff said

L Lawlet= Batman

L is the world's greatest detective, Batman is the world's greatest detective. L has a butler, Batman has a butler. Both live in secrecy. Both have apprentices, Mello and Near for L and four Robin's for Batman.

Sailor Moon and the Sailor Scouts= Captain Marvel and the Marvel Family:

If you think about it, this fits a LOT more than Wonder Woman for Sailor Moon. Especially if you take the magical aspect, transformation, and the fact there's a GROUP of them which fits with the Marvel Family and the Lieutenant Marvels from the Golden Age which gave the Marvel Family 6 members total.

Naruto Uzumaki= The Hulk:

Really when you boil things down this fits amazingly well, what with Naruto's rough childhood, the vast majority of the people around him thinking he's a monster, the fact he actually DOES Hulk-out, Yami Naruto is obviously Devil Hulk, and since Naruto now has control over Nine Tails makes the connection even better as he is now like Professor Hulk, and in fact Menma Namikaze from the Road to Ninja movie could be viewed as a version of Maestro.

Ichigo Kuroaki= Thor:

Both are considered powerhouses in their respective universes, both have signature weapons which most of their power comes from, both have a mortal form and constantly travel between fantastical realms and Earth, both are hybrids with Thor being part Elder God and Ichigo part Quincy, and both have been trapped on Earth for a time such as Thor in the form of Donald Blake and Ichigo after he lost his powers for the second time. Also Ichigo's Hollow Form basically serves the same function as Thor's Warrior's Madness

Inuyasha= Wolverine:

Do I REALLY need to explain this one?

Kotetsu T. Kaburagi AKA Wild Tiger= Iron Man

Wears armor, had a company, both are superheroes, neither pay MUCH attention to property damage which is what actually cost Wild Tiger his company due to having to PAY for all the damage he caused fighting crime, and both have beards,

Vash the Stampede= Spider-Man:

Again, do I REALLY need to explain this one? If you've EVER seen Trigun this makes so much sense it's scary!!


According to Me: How to do Robin in the rebooted Batman films

Now I would love for them to have a GOOD interpretation of Robin in the next Batman film. Chris O'Donnell's Robin was horrible and in all seriousness having Batman take a 12 or 16 year old minor out to fight crime with him doesn't work in a live action setting. It works in the comics and cartoons, but not in a movie. Well a movie that's trying to be realistic so anyone with Hitgirl from Kick-Ass as a reference of how a traditional Robin could work need not post.

Anyway, that being said, I believe I've come up with a way to make Robin work in a new movie. Basically 14 year old Dick Grayson is taken in by Bruce Wayne, having the same origin he does in the comics. However he's not given a costume. He IS trained by Bruce in criminology and martial arts, but Bruce doesn't allow him to go out in the field. Instead Dick actually acts more like Oracle from the Batcave, under the codename Robin, which also sets up Barbara Gordon's future role. Dick does occasionally go out in the field, wearing a homemade domino mask to hide his identity, to aid Batman though he never outright gets involved in the fights.

This sets up Nightwing very well and allows for the Robin Mantle to be established.


To those of you bashing Man of Steel(Spoiler Heavy)

Ya know? One would think people give a new Superman movie a chance since there hasn't been a good one since 1980!!! I mean film is art and art is subjective. Not everyone is going to see a film and get the same thing out of it, but this is just mind boggling. I personally think most bad reviews come from Batman fanboy's who cannot stand the fact that Superman has produced a movie that is just as good, if not in many cases BETTER, than Batman Begins was for Batman. I won't compare Man of Steel to The Dark Knight because there's no comparison to be had. Trying to judge Man of Steel against The Dark Knight is like trying to judge Superman against Batman. There's no way to do it because they are two different characters!!

People saying "Oh, they made a Batman movie and swapped him out for Superman" should be fired from breathing. There was NOTHING about this film that said Batman aside from the Wayne Enterprises satellite!!!! It was not dark like a Batman movie is dark. It was dark in places, but you cannot go too dark with Superman or it's NOT Superman anymore.

They went dark enough and only when they NEEDED to go dark. Having Zod kill Jor-El? Dark, but it was unexpected and added something to Zod's character. It showed just how far he was willing to go, even killing his own friend to reach his goals. Zod willing to and fulling intending to wipe out all of humanity instead of just ruling Earth? Again, dark, but it again adds something to Zod's character. He said it best himself.

"No matter how violent, every action I take is for greater good of my people."

He's not the admittedly one dimensional "Take over the world" villain he was in Superman II or in the comics. He's still a great villain in those instances, but his motivations are just so basic and we've seen it a hundred times already in other villains. Man of Steel's Zod is a sympathetic villain as he simply wants to save his race, but is still someone you want to see defeated as he is more than willing to cause total genocide to achieve this goal.

Really the only dark spot for Superman himself was when he killed Zod and in that instance there was no choice. Other Superman fans have harped on this one act, but what was he supposed to do? He couldn't lock Zod in the Phantom Zone as that ship had sailed, there was no Kryptonite to use on him, there was no red sunlight generator he could use, and there was no magic users for him to call either. So it was either kill Zod and save an innocent family from being brutally murdered, or let the family die and let the fight continue with everyone suffering because of the untold amounts of destruction their fight would cause. And it's not like they had Superman feel OKAY with killing Zod. He broke down afterward!!! He HATED the fact that he had to take a life!!! This is a Superman that has only officially been Superman for about a day or so, it's not a Superman that has been on the job for a few years and could figure out a way to defeat Zod without killing him even without all of the weaknesses I mentioned.


Homosexuality in Comics: Shameless Gimmick or Artistic Choice?

I will say this to begin with. I don't mind homosexuality. I can't understand it for the life of me, but I don't mind it.

This is a topic I feel must be addressed. You see I am a fan of Alan Scott. The ORIGINAL Green Lantern from the Golden Age. I always found him to be a very interesting character with an interesting origin and look. I don't even MIND the fact his costume doesn't have much green. If he's flying or when he's using his ring he's got the green glow so that's enough really. Now in DC's reboot they changed plenty of things. However these changes are the most jarring with their reboot of the Earth 2 universe. Some of the biggest changes is that Alan Scott's ring isn't powered by an extremely magical lantern anymore, his costume is the most unimaginative redesign I have EVER seen and looks a random member of the Green Lantern Corps. Not to mention he's gay. I have no problem with gay people and feel there should be gay superheroes, just as there should be African/African-American, Hispanic, or Asian superheroes

And there ARE gay superheroes: Batwoman, Obsidian(Alan Scott's SON who apparently will never exist again as with Alan Scott's daughter whom I was a fan of), Mikaal Tomas AKA Starman, Northstar, Wiccan, Hulking, and Apollo and Midnighter(Personally hate these two since they're basically one big "Superman and Batman are gay" joke. At least that's the feeling I've gotten every time I read a comic with them in it).

However they should NOT have an established straight superhero for that. Why? Not only does it show a SEVERE lack of imagination on the writers part as it makes them seem incapable of creating a new character, it also makes the entire character into a sales gimmick and nothing more.

Now some of you may say

"But what about Batwoman? She was an established straight character and she's now gay!"

And you would be right. The difference? Originally the entire reason Katherine Kane AKA Batwoman existed in the first place was to show people that Batman and Robin were not gay. That's the entire reason. She also fell into extreme obscurity very quickly. This means she had no time to form real fans before she fell into obscurity. Unlike a character like Alan Scott who actually has fans and appeared in quite a number of comics. The current Batwoman is so different a character with so different a back story that she only thing she has in common with the original Batwoman is the name.

And if any of you still can't see where I'm coming from, think of it like this. Is not making an established heterosexual character a homosexual the same as making an established gay character straight? Would not there be a backlash from the LGBT community? It's the same thing here. When dealing with established characters you need to make sure of but one thing. Make sure the character you plan on making gay is either completely original or so completely obscure with so little previous appearances that no one will even care.


The New 52 Pros and Cons List

Pro: New universe with none of the bad stories of the previous one

Con: New universe with none of the good stories of the previous one

Pro: Superman having a more believable way of concealing his costume in his street clothes.

Con: Superman's costume is armor.

Con: Fortress of Solitude is no longer in the arctic thus taking away that classic location

Pro: Changing Captain Marvel's name to Shazam thus finally ending the decades long explanation of his name, giving a reason why he can say his name without changing, and finally the hood on his costume makes him look more mystical.

Con: Billy Batson is not a likable kid and is basically a little snot

Con: Shazam is not an accronym for Solomon, Hercules, Achilles, Zeus, Atlas, and Mercury anymore

Con: Captain Thunder is a far more fitting name change for Captain Marvel

Pro: Wonder Woman is the daughter of Zeus

Con: Could have been worked in without the reboot

Pro: Aquaman is still a badass

Con: Everyone in the comic treats him like crap and think he's useless when they have no reason to

Pro: Caitlin Fairchild, Grifter, and most recently Mr. Majestic, three of my favorite Wildstorm characters being introduced into the DCU

Con: Grifter's series sucks and Majestic is no longer anything like himself.

Pro: Making a new Teen Titans team

Con: Getting rid of all the original members of the Teen Titans, thus destroying one of the greatest teams in comics

Con: Removing the original Teen Titans members means removing the crucial events in their lives that shaped who they were

Pro: Earth 2's premise of a modern day Justice Society is highly original and interesting

Con: Massive punch in the face to the original characters in every facet imaginable

Pro: Batman's corner of the universe staying basically the same

Con: Batman's entire history as well as the history of his supporting cast crammed into a 5 year time frame.

Con: This means Batman went through four Robins in just under 5 years when it should have been 10 at the least.

Con: Mr. Freeze is just another random crazy guy that just happens to have ice powers

Pro: Justice League Dark because it was the most awesome thing DC has put out in recent years.

Con: It could have easily been done without the reboot.

Pro: Red Hood and the Outlaws

Con: Starfire, a character I have always wanted to like OUTSIDE the Teen Titans animated version(Seriously I love that version of her) is the biggest slut in comics now

Con: Lobo is no longer the universes ultimate badass and is just lame now. What happened to the Main Man?!?!??!

Pro: The New 52 is like Ultimate Marvel, having many good and interesting ideas.

Con: Many of these good ideas could have been worked in without the reboot and are only good ideas on paper. There's also no regular DC universe to fall back on unlike what Marvel has.


Sony Selling the Rights to Spider-Man: Disney or FOX?

Okay, so Sony is seriously considering selling the movie rights to Spider-Man. While many jumped at the idea that Disney/Marvel would get the rights, no one seems to take into account that FOX may also attempt to buy the rights as well before Disney/Marvel can. Now I for one see either outcome as a good thing. Before I'm ripped to shreds let me explain.

FOX's current superhero properties include X-Men and Fantastic Four, having just sold the rights to Daredevil back to Disney/Marvel. Now, it makes logical sense that they would attempt to get the rights to Spider-Man, not necessarily to it out of trying to keep it out of Disney's hands, but to fill the void left by Daredevil.

Also Spider-Man would be the crucial linchpin to make FOX's idea for a shared X-Men/Fantastic Four universe work. Let me explain how. Fantastic Four don't mesh well with the X-Men, they really don't. Sure they can work together, but the F4's status as celebrity superheroes doesn't fit with a universe where before the only people with superpowers were mutants and they were hated and feared. It's too big a tone difference. However with Spider-Man added to the mix, the tone difference begins to make sense. Here's how I see it playing out should FOX get the rights to Spider-Man and add him to their shared universe.

On the top we have the big famous and well loved superhero team AKA the Fantastic Four. People love them because they're celebrities and because they were normal humans who just happened to gain superpowers. Everyone knows everything about them, what they can do, and know that they're on their side. Maybe even have them government sponsored and endorsed by the government as superheroes to put people at ease.

Then we have Spider-Man in the middle. No one knows who he is because he of course has a secret identity. He's far more of a vigilante than the Fantastic Four are because they deal with really big supervillains like Dr. Doom, the Mole Man, even aliens like the Skrull. Spider-Man gets plenty of bad press, but the number of people that hate him are roughly on par with the number of people who like him. No one knows what to think of him because he could either be a mutant, but because of his secret identity it's also entirely possible he's just another human who gained powers like the Fantastic Four.

And finally we have the X-Men. No one likes them, no one cares about them. All people know is that they're definitely mutants and as a result hate and fear them as per usual.

While I would LOVE to see Spidey in a New Avengers movie with Luke Cage, Iron Fist, Captain America, Spider-Woman, and Dardevil(My dream team for a New Avengers movie), I would easily be just as pleased if FOX got the rights since he could also work very well in their universe as well.


According to Me: Is it time for a new Riddler story arc?

Okay Riddler is my favorite Batman villain(Joker is just a favorite villain in general), but we haven't gotten to see him DO anything in the New 52. Personally I would like them to make Riddler Joker's equal, like how dangerous he is.

How to do this? Riddler is a narcissist and people with severe narcissism are known to do things that will get them attention, anything really. If it involves doing something horrible? Then yeah they'll do it. Full list of what narcissism entails are as follows:

Reacting to criticism with anger, shame, or humiliation

Taking advantage of others to reach own goals

Exaggerating own importance, achievements, and talents

Imagining unrealistic fantasies of success, beauty, power, intelligence, or romance

Requiring constant attention be it positive or negative

Becoming jealous easily

Lacking empathy and disregarding the feelings of others

Being obsessed with self

Pursuing mainly selfish goals

Trouble keeping healthy relationships

Becoming easily hurt and rejected

Setting goals that are unrealistic

Wanting "the best" of everything

This fits Riddler to a T. Also here's something that furthers the point

A lot of these traps for the people Batman has to save in the game would definitely lead to a Saw-esque death. Which actually brings me to my next point. Currently there's been a theme going for all of Batman's villains. Make them horror themed. This really started with Rocksteady's Arkham game series, with characters like Scarecrow, Solomon Grundy, and Riddler to name a few being more or less modeled after horror movie characters. Scarecrow after Freddy Kruger, Grundy after Frankenstein(The electrical aspect and undead nature), and finally Riddler who's traps were obviously lifted right out of Saw.

What I would like to see is a story where Riddler gets an idea. People are always afraid of The Joker while they treat him with little respect. This drives Mr. Nigma to step up his game. Now this isn't to say he's not compelling on his own or to compare him to Joker, but with his narcissism Riddler wouldn't take this lying down. Picture this scene in a comic

Sure he's never done anything this bad, but if you're going for a darker more driven version then this is pretty much what you'd get. Now this isn't to say make Riddler a Jigsaw rip off, but make it where he's a VERY big threat that's pushing Batman not only mentally but physically.