#Wtf furry Dandy???

[skittles-the-epic]

The Dandy's World hyper fixation is real

I'm so addicted to Dandy's World help

[antirepurp]

ngl im still kinda pissed at the one blog i followed ages ago when i was still fairly new to sonic that at least lowkey sh!pped vector and espio and made me go like “oh that’s nice” only to get immediately hit in the face with their modern-continuity ages and the realization that people are fucking gross

[puppypaw-wc]

so... i was scrolling through servers (specifically undertale ones but that’s unimportant)... and i found one that seems cool... but one of their things they list is this:

“~+~ We accept anyone and everyone here. Queer, Furry, Straight, whatever- we will approve of you no matter what!”

which seems fine and dandy... but they say anyone and everyone... which makes it feel like they accept pedophiles, pro-shippers, lgbtq+phobes, etc... which uh... bruh.

also they can’t even spell cannon (as in canon) right-and they’re spelling aus as “Au’s” and it’s irritating me.

in short: wtf.

[hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger]

·         Did it ever occur to OP that the reason that people say the exact same shit whenever Spidey comes up in the media is because the exact same problems keep appearing!

·         Yes people COMPLAIN about the exact same shit....because there is continuously the exact same problem warranting complaint.

·         ‘People going into MCU Spidey movies don’t understand what they want from the MCU version’. Wow. Just...wow. Elitist much? Condescending much? Holy shit. It’s fairly simple what people want. They want to be entertained by a rendition of the character that is on a spiritual level fundamentally respectful of the character and his original intentions. Case in point, MCU Captain America has differences from the comic books, Bucky for example was his teen sidekick not his BFF of the same age. But that didn’t matter because the biggest point was Bucky was still his best friend in both versions and his death still rocked him. Iron Dad and Iron Man Junior is proveably against that original spirit for the character because Spider-Man was created specifically to NOT have that kind of dynamic at all but be independent. He can interact with other heroes, there was even a whole comic book dedicated to that. But he was nobody’s junior. He didn’t answer to anyone. He wasn’t being written to resemble any other superhero. Oh and another teeny tiny thing that’s part of the spirit of Spider-Man? Uncle Ben is his Dad. Tony Stark isn’t Uncle Ben.

·         Also nice research there buddy. ‘Spider-Man has been a character for over 60 years now’ I get you were not 100% on it. But you couldn’t even quickly google the year he was created? 1962. He’s 56 going on 57.

·         Yes. Spider-Man has had many different interpretations and versions. That’s not an excuse to do anything. There is a reason some of those interpretations and versions WERE BAD! I honestly cannot fathom this thinking ‘This happened in the past therefore it’s okay for it to happen again’. Okay cool so it’d be fine and dandy if Spider-Man was revealed to be a clone then smacked his pregnant wife around would it? It’d be fine if he was stranded on another planet ruled by furries would it? Why not. That’s an interpretation of Spider-Man right? Oh wait no they aren’t that is why the word ‘MISinterpretation’ exists

·         The reason fanboys and fangirls (I will give it to him at least he didn’t pretend fangirls don’t exist and that only men could be the problem) say MCU Spidey isn’t right is because he literally isn’t. Characters aren’t playdough, you can’t contort them into any and every shape and still call it the character

·         Also how messed up do you have to be to subtextually imply that no one complained abut any version of Spider-Man before the MCU. As if people didn’t complain about the Nick Hammond TV show or Spider-Man Unlimited

·         ‘What even is right’. Right is anything that respects the fundamental defining concept and themes of the character as originally envisioned. I.e. a grounded, relatively realistic super hero with relatable problems who was smart, in poor financial shape, his own man s a superhero and fundamentally driven by responsibility and guilt stemming from his father figure’s death that he could’ve prevented had he used his powers altruistically and not selfishly. That’s it. That’s what’s right. That allows plenty of room for interpretation but it also defines a fundamental bedrock to respect

·         Spider-Verse isn’t a comment on every interpretation of Spider-Man. it’s saying anyone can be Spider-Man, as in we all have the capacity to be heroes and use whatever power we have responsibility to help others.  So...who missed the point again?

·         This also pretends like every character in that movie is an interpretation of Spider-Man. They aren’t. They are altered versions that deliberately exist within the context of audience familiarity. Spider-Man: Noir is not an interpretation of Peter Parker. He isn’t someone looking at Spider-Man’s source material and saying ‘You know what is a hot take on this? A 1930s hard boiled detective kinda guy’. That’s just taking the character of Spider-Man and then overlaying traditionally Pulp//noir elements OVER him. Like you could interpret Halmet in such a way you set it in the modern day. But when you do Hamlet but he’s a teen girl in a mech suit then that’s not an interpretation, that’s an interpretation over layed with something else. Like there is a fucking reason in Spider-Verse they present you with versions of Peter Parker who ARE closer to the original version and wherein characters like Gwen and Miles were not versions of Peter Parker. Miles is his own character. Gwen is her own character. MCU Spider-Man isn’t his own character. He is supposed to be Peter Parker. And he isn’t.

·         There is a difference between a fucking Elseworlds take on Spider-Man where he is like a Medieval Knight and an adaptation of him like the Spec cartoon or the 1994 cartoon or the pre-MCU movies

·         Whether MCU Spider-Man has depth or not isn’t the discussion. I’ve not thought about it to be honest. Maybe he does have depth. But that’s not people’s problems. People’s problems is that his character (regardless of how deep it is) ISN’T Spider-Man’s character.

·         Wait what? MCU Spider-Man has depth it’s just less obvious than in the older movies because they are focussing upon reintroducing him....huh? Putting aside how character depth is something you usually always focus on...why focus on reintroducing a character we already know over making him a character of depth? We already know who he is. Isn’t that why we didn’t do the origin again

·         ‘MCU Spider-Man’s depth comes from being Iron man’s understudy and Iron Man is now dead’ Yes...and that is the problem. Because Spider-Man was created to NOT be anyone’s understudy

·         ‘We are going to see how Peter responded Uncle Ben through the lens of Tony Stark’....wtf is this guy talking about? WTF does that even mean? Tony could never be portrayed even metaphorically as ‘that Uncle Ben figure’ for Peter because the whole conceit about Uncle Ben’s death and it’s impact on Spider-Man was that IT WAS PETER’S FAULT! Tony’s death WASN’T Peter’s fault. Not to mention Tony wasn’t his Dad! Uncle Ben was. Like how broken does your understanding of Spider-Man have to be that you honestly think that Spider-Man simply responding to any loved one dying is the deal with Uncle Ben.

·         We don’t know if Peter will be literally Iron Man Junior by the end of the movie. But the objections are that at any point in this movie  the idea of Peter being Iron Man Junior is a defining part of his story because that actively has no place in Spider-Man’s story! It’s literally against THE POINT of his character!

·         ‘The movie’s message is going to be that he doesn’t need to be Iron Man but Spider-Man?’ According to what? Maybe that will be the message the movie sends but the OP hasn’t seen the movie and couldn’t therefore know that. all we have are the trailers and the trailers don’t say that at all. They have Happy telling Peter Tony died knowing he’d be there to pick up the pieces. Peter saying the world needs the next iron man. Fury asking if he’s going to step up to fill Tony’s shoes. That’s the OPPOSITE of the message OP is alleging the movie will have

·         ‘If it’s MCU Spider-Man then it’s not the real Spider-Man’....yeah....no lies detected

·         ‘There is no such thing as the real Spider-Man’ Gerry Conway, Steve Ditko and Stan Lee would disagree. Real Spider-Man is the original Spider-Man. how could he not be when it’s the version every other version comes from and bases itself on to some extent. The version that made him popular. Also that’s not the issue. It’s not the issue that people are complaining it isn’t 1:1 the same as the comics but that it violates THE POINT of the comic book version!

·         ‘There is no definitive Spider-Man’ say OP over an image of the single most iconic Spider-Man story of all time written and drawn by his original creators

·         ‘My interpretation of Spider-Man is different to your interpretation’...Jesus.....there is a reason the word ‘misinterpretation’ exists. An interpretation can be wrong. And other interpretations are only as valid as the evidence you can bring to bear in support of them. If you write Hamlet like Macbeth you’ve misinterpreted Hamlet. If you argue Macbeth saw Banquo’s literal ghost or it was all in his head both are valid interpretations, but arguing it was aliens holographically projecting Banquo’s ghost into his head is not because there is no evidence supporting that

·         So whilst we might all have different interpretations of Spider-Man that doesn’t mean we are all right. E.g. when OP says he thinks the MCU movies have the essence of Spider-Man he is essentially admitting he doesn’t know what the fuck the essence of Spider-Man is

·         ‘Maybe just let go of things’ Oh fuck off. This rendition of Spider-Man causes problems within the fandom because Marvel imposes upon other versions of the character (including the original version) elements from that version. They contort those other versions. And it’s disrespectful to the original fanbase who made Spider-Man popular enough to WARRANT him appearing in movies in the first place. We supported a character who represented a particular philosophy and side of the human experience and that made the brand successful enough to be turned into a movie which was then contorted to be nothing like that.

·         Imagine being so deluded that you say that people who dislike MCU Spider-Man because he goes against the essence of the original character are not in the same group as those who do not ‘genuinely’ like this version of the character

·         Plenty of people are willing to accept a new interpretation of Spider-Man. Most Spider-man fans enjoyed the Raimi movie which was a new interpretation. Most fans loved Into the Spider-Verse. Most fans loved the ps4 video game which was in fact based upon stories most fans didn’t even like. But there is a line in the sand between a new interpretation and ‘this is literally just the character in name only’. That line in the sand is the point where Peter Parker (aside from the visuals) is based upon Miles Morales, has Iron Man in place of Uncle Ben and is akin to his sidekick

·         People don’t have a rigid structured mentality towards Spider-Man. they literally just want ‘normal kid, nobody’s sidekick, uncle ben is his dead Dad, great power=great responsibility’ respected. That’s it. that’s all. Nobody is demanding that Peter live in the 1960s. Nobody is saying Peter shouldn’t interact with other superheroes. They are simply saying ‘can you maybe respect the defining themes of this character, the entire point behind his creation please’. Like if they created a version of Punisher who doesn’t kill, is never implied to kill and is motivated to reform criminals would you be saying you are just too rigid to enjoy that interpretation because Punisher isn’t murdering criminals

·         Imagine being so delusional you think Venom is a version of Spider-Man instead of you know...Venom

·         The OP’s problem is that he is treat the mere existence of ANY version of Spider-Man as valid versions. They aren’t. I loved Venom but it was aweful. It was an aweful take on Venom and if you treat it as a version of Spider-Man it was even worse.

·         Imagine being so up yourself you declare people wanting Spider-Man to be...like Spider-Man...as ‘whining’.

·         It boils down to this. The argument OP is making is that every interpretation is valid, Spider-Man can be anything. Which is another way of saying....Spider-Man is nothing.

·         ‘Just accept new interpretations’ I don’t accept crap and neither should you.

·         How the fuck is someone saying they dislike MCU Spider-Man because it violates the spirit of the character NOT them saying ‘it’s not my cup of tea’