General Marvel Cinematic Universe thread

[Rakaydos]

For discussing things outside the movies/shows, interactions between movies/shows, and general marvel cinematic speculation.

Existing Marvel threads I could find:
Avengers Age of Ultron:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?409684-Avengers-Age-of-Ultron
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?401939-Avengers-2-Age-of-Ultron
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?379134-Avengers-Age-of-Ultron

Guardians of the Galaxy:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?384193-Finally-saw-Guardian-s-Of-The-Galaxy

Agent Carter:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?391658-Agent-Carter

Ant Man
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?391911-Ant-Man-Trailer

Agents of Shield (current thread):
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?384621-Agents-of-S-H-I-E-L-D-III-Cut-off-one-thread-two-more-shall-take-its-place

MCU Phase 3:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?380452-Marvel-Cinematic-Universe-Phase-3-%28official-announcements!%29

Spiderman!
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?397699-Spider-Man-joins-the-MCU

All hail Doom.

[Landis963]

You have the Ant-Man trailer thread twice, and the Agents of SHIELD thread is missing.

Now that that's out of the way, what are people's thoughts on why the Avengers never seem to call each other when they have a problem that's arbitrarily designated as "personal"? For instance, Tony Stark might take a keen interest in that Helicarrier gun trained on his current pride and joy in Captain America 2, but does Cap call him as a heads-up? No.

[BRC]

You have the Ant-Man trailer thread twice, and the Agents of SHIELD thread is missing.

Now that that's out of the way, what are people's thoughts on why the Avengers never seem to call each other when they have a problem that's arbitrarily designated as "personal"? For instance, Tony Stark might take a keen interest in that Helicarrier gun trained on his current pride and joy in Captain America 2, but does Cap call him as a heads-up? No.

That's in the finest Comic Book Tradition of "We don't want every story to be the hero calling up their 3-10 most powerful friends and having a smackdown".

[t209]

http://www.cracked.com/article_21650_6-avengers-comic-book-plots-that-need-to-be-in-movies.html
Got inspired by this and wanted to make questions based on my comments (they forgot to mention Steve Gerber's Defenders). What other franchise they could move to?
- New Warriors
- Steve Gerber's Defenders (they should make this instead of Agent of SMASH. I don't care if Silver Surfer and Namor can't be in the movie.)
- Great Lake Avengers
- Superior Foes of Spiderman
- Runaways
- Spiderman
- Nova (Definitely no since James Gunn hated him for being too "out of place")
- other members of Guardians of the Galaxy and as space police officer (Mantis, Quasar, and Adam Warlock. And no Iron Man since James Gunn hates Bendis' abomination creation and making them part of Avengers).
P.S- Are Shiar (X-Men) and Skrulls (Fantastic Four) part of rights that are not included in Marvel movie rights? On the bright side, Winter Soldier might be different if they go with Secret Invasion storyline. But we won't have Kree-Skrull War or "Cold War in space, but the neutral side decided to show their might against them" storyline. I don't know since many organization sided with Kree rather than Skrulls (Skrulls are good-ish in Earth's Mightiest Heroes but more villainous in comic-verse).

[Landis963]

That's in the finest Comic Book Tradition of "We don't want every story to be the hero calling up their 3-10 most powerful friends and having a smackdown".

You'd hope they'd at least lampshade it or give it some lip service, but no, not so much as a mention of the others in, say, Thor: the Dark World.

[BRC]

You'd hope they'd at least lampshade it or give it some lip service, but no, not so much as a mention of the others in, say, Thor: the Dark World.

Well

in Thor, They spent almost all of their time off-earth. I think they were only on-earth for less than an hour for the final fight.
Explanation: Thor dosn't own a cellphone, Jane dosn't have Tony Stark's number.

In Iron Man 3: You don't call Banner for this sort of thing, Thor is off-world, and the other three are all SHIELD agents. As far as government types were concerned, the situation with the Mandarin was being handled.
I suppose Tony could have called SHIELD for the final showdown, but they may not have had time to arrive (Okay, unlikely, since his suits had time to fly from his house in California all the way to wherever the oil tanker was, all with plenty of fuel left in the tank for a fight).
Explanation: Rider in AIM's contract with SHIELD (You know they had one) said that SHIELD agents were expressly forbidden from joining any operations against AIM personnel. Fury thought it wouldn't come up.

Captain America: TWS. Once they are aware that they might need help, Steve, Natasha, and Sam are wanted fugitives being hunted by SHIELD. They Between Fury, Hill, and Black Widow, they certainly had enough spymuscle to get a message to Tony Stark.
Explanation: Banner wouldn't have helped, Thor was off-world, Tony Stark was called, but he'd just blown up all his suits in a big romantic gesture.

[Rakaydos]

Well

in Thor, They spent almost all of their time off-earth. I think they were only on-earth for less than an hour for the final fight.
Explanation: Thor dosn't own a cellphone, Jane dosn't have Tony Stark's number.

In Iron Man 3: You don't call Banner for this sort of thing, Thor is off-world, and the other three are all SHIELD agents. As far as government types were concerned, the situation with the Mandarin was being handled.
I suppose Tony could have called SHIELD for the final showdown, but they may not have had time to arrive (Okay, unlikely, since his suits had time to fly from his house in California all the way to wherever the oil tanker was, all with plenty of fuel left in the tank for a fight).
Explanation: Rider in AIM's contract with SHIELD (You know they had one) said that SHIELD agents were expressly forbidden from joining any operations against AIM personnel. Fury thought it wouldn't come up.

Captain America: TWS. Once they are aware that they might need help, Steve, Natasha, and Sam are wanted fugitives being hunted by SHIELD. They Between Fury, Hill, and Black Widow, they certainly had enough spymuscle to get a message to Tony Stark.
Explanation: Banner wouldn't have helped, Thor was off-world, Tony Stark was called, but he'd just blown up all his suits in a big romantic gesture.

So why didnt Nova Prime ask Asgard for assistance in dealing with Ronan? :p

[BRC]

So why didnt Nova Prime ask Asgard for assistance in dealing with Ronan? :p
They did

But by this point, Loki had already replaced Odin (See Thor: The Dark World), and couldn't stop himself from making a "Nova Corpse" joke. Diplomatic relations fell apart after that.

[Foeofthelance]

So why didnt Nova Prime ask Asgard for assistance in dealing with Ronan? :p

Because Ronan was one nutjob with a small cluster of followers and therefore not much of a threat until he acquired the Infinity Stone. The Dark Aster didn't appear to be armed aside from the necrocraft. Sort of the equivalent of space going pirates, only with a semi-religious drive rather than a need for plunder. It made sense to contact the Kree, as he was one of their fanatics, but there are probably a dozen more similar scale threats running around on a daily basis when you're a multiplanetary government. Heck, Yondu and the Ravagers may have been even higher up the scale as an issue, considering they seemed to have more ships and men. It wasn't until Ronan got his hands on the shiny "Make-planet-go-boom" rock that he really became a threat, and the first the Nova Corps heard about it was when Quill showed up with only a few hours to spare. At that point they had to use the ships they had on hand.

The other aspect is that we don't know if the Nova Corps has any formal relationship with Asgard. The Asgardians only contacted Earth and the Collector that we've seen; Earth because it connects Midgard to Yggdrasil, and the Collector because they wanted to split up the Aether and the Tesseract.

[Landis963]

RE: Operation Clean Slate: I'm really, really hoping he downloaded the plans for Marks 5-42 onto some Stark Industries server and put a team on tinkering on and troubleshooting them. Mostly as an extra display of trust in Pepper, partially to put them away from him so that he doesn't get all obsessive again, partially because the Iron Legion is an astoundingly useful asset. And partially because its loss made fans from all over start crying.

[BRC]

RE: Operation Clean Slate: I'm really, really hoping he downloaded the plans for Marks 5-42 onto some Stark Industries server and put a team on tinkering on and troubleshooting them. Mostly as an extra display of trust in Pepper, partially to put them away from him so that he doesn't get all obsessive again, partially because the Iron Legion is an astoundingly useful asset. And partially because its loss made fans from all over start crying.

He blew up the suits themselves, nothing says he destroyed the blueprints.

[Landis963]

He blew up the suits themselves, nothing says he destroyed the blueprints.

In fact, I'm really, really hoping he didn't destroy the blueprints. However, the movie doesn't say anything with regard to what happened to them. (He did rescue Dummy and You from the wreckage of his house at the end of Iron Man 3, same scene as when he tossed the Arc Reactor powering his heart into the ocean, so he probably salvaged the suit plans on the same)

[t209]

http://marvel.com/news/movies/24469/nicole_perlman_meg_lefauve_to_write_marvels_captai n_marvel
Too bad that Ms. Marvel isn't joining the Civil War, though it might be for a good reason.
- No more Speedball turning to Penance (I know that they fixed it but the damage was done).
- No more Registration turning to fascist but more like reasonable but harsh handed.
- No more Mr. Fantastic.
- Best of all, No more One More Day (Spiderman will be a teenager unless Joe decided to make it with teenage pregnancy).

[Landis963]

http://marvel.com/news/movies/24469/nicole_perlman_meg_lefauve_to_write_marvels_captai n_marvel
Too bad that Ms. Marvel isn't joining the Civil War, though it might be for a good reason.
- No more Speedball turning to Penance (I know that they fixed it but the damage was done).
- No more Registration turning to fascist but more like reasonable but harsh handed.
- No more Mr. Fantastic.
- Best of all, No more One More Day (Spiderman will be a teenager unless Joe decided to make it with teenage pregnancy).

Where are you getting that info? The lack of OMD can be deduced by Spidey still being in high school, sure, but what about the rest of it?

[Kitten Champion]

Where are you getting that info? The lack of OMD can be deduced by Spidey still being in high school, sure, but what about the rest of it?

Yeah, that's the reason. They're still going through with the whole Doctor Octopus marrying Aunt May though.

[Landis963]

Yeah, that's the reason. They're still going through with the whole Doctor Octopus marrying Aunt May though.

But what about the Speedball thing? The registration turning fascist thing? The lack of Mr. Fantastic? Have any of those been confirmed, or is it a similar sort of deduction? (Because for the first two, I can only assume they're not doing it because stupidity and pettiness, while for the last I can only assume legal issues)

[Kitten Champion]

But what about the Speedball thing? The registration turning fascist thing? The lack of Mr. Fantastic? Have any of those been confirmed, or is it a similar sort of deduction? (Because for the first two, I can only assume they're not doing it because stupidity and pettiness, while for the last I can only assume legal issues)

Reasonable deductions based on familiarity with the MCU and its mechanics. There isn't a press release explaining how Aunt May isn't marrying Otto Octavius either.

The registration turning fascist-like is largely a result of the lack of cohesive vision for the Civil War event by the Marvel writers (along with a great deal of political animosity directed at the then Bush administration that was expressed in fairly hyperbolic ways) which isn't a problem the MCU has ever experienced and largely can account for its continued success. Furthermore, Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark is a billion dollar + commodity that they'd like to keep on the up & up for a variety of reasons, so a softer and more reasoned approach to the character is more than likely.

As for Speedball, no one cares about Speedball. Comics have a lot more space over dozens of titles to explore a variety of characters, the movies obviously don't and can only juggle a few at a time. The fact that the first Avengers movie worked could be put at the feet of Joss Whedon's ability to manage a large-ish cast of colourful characters, the existence of the shared universe in the first place, and the simplistic comic book-esque plot. The long-term traumatic hardships of a character they would have just introduced is fundamentally unimportant to a Captain America movie.

..and besides, it's likely that the Captain America: Civil War is going to be kicked off as the eventual result of the Age of Ultron events.

[JoshL]

The Speedball thing led to one of my favorite single panels:
http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090413202034/marveldatabase/images/1/1a/Niels_%28Earth-616%29_P-cat.jpg

Just the look on the poor cat's face! So awful and adorable! Also, I don't really care about Speedball either, but I do care an awful lot about Squirrel Girl!

[Legato Endless]

2nd Ant-Man trailer released this week. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HpZevFifuo&spfreload=10)

[Landis963]

The Speedball thing led to one of my favorite single panels:
http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090413202034/marveldatabase/images/1/1a/Niels_%28Earth-616%29_P-cat.jpg

Just the look on the poor cat's face! So awful and adorable! Also, I don't really care about Speedball either, but I do care an awful lot about Squirrel Girl!

:smallconfused:...:smallamused:Pfffffff:smallbiggr in:HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA. Oh poor P-cat! Oh god, that's awful! I assume the context isn't much better.

[t209]

Reasonable deductions based on familiarity with the MCU and its mechanics. There isn't a press release explaining how Aunt May isn't marrying Otto Octavius either.

The registration turning fascist-like is largely a result of the lack of cohesive vision for the Civil War event by the Marvel writers (along with a great deal of political animosity directed at the then Bush administration that was expressed in fairly hyperbolic ways) which isn't a problem the MCU has ever experienced and largely can account for its continued success. Furthermore, Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark is a billion dollar + commodity that they'd like to keep on the up & up for a variety of reasons, so a softer and more reasoned approach to the character is more than likely.

As for Speedball, no one cares about Speedball. Comics have a lot more space over dozens of titles to explore a variety of characters, the movies obviously don't and can only juggle a few at a time. The fact that the first Avengers movie worked could be put at the feet of Joss Whedon's ability to manage a large-ish cast of colourful characters, the existence of the shared universe in the first place, and the simplistic comic book-esque plot. The long-term traumatic hardships of a character they would have just introduced is fundamentally unimportant to a Captain America movie.

..and besides, it's likely that the Captain America: Civil War is going to be kicked off as the eventual result of the Age of Ultron events.
And not to mention the Avengers shifting from earthbound villainy to starbounds. It's kinda like "Earth locked in conflict until they discovered something worse from outerspace".
Hadn't Kree be sold as part of Fantastic Four rights, we might have a film version of Kree-Skrull War or other Avengers Space Opera storyline.

[Rakaydos]

And not to mention the Avengers shifting from earthbound villainy to starbounds. It's kinda like "Earth locked in conflict until they discovered something worse from outerspace".
Hadn't Kree be sold as part of Fantastic Four rights, we might have a film version of Kree-Skrull War or other Avengers Space Opera storyline.

Kree are fine, it's the skrulls marvel cant use.

Kree already showed up in GotG and Agents of Shield.

[t209]

Kree are fine, it's the skrulls marvel cant use.

Kree already showed up in GotG and Agents of Shield.
Yes, I mean Skrulls.
Too bad that they didn't show up in Fantastic Four movie, except Superskrull power was shown in Return of the Silver Surfer as Johnny Storm used all of Fantastic Four powers.
:smallfurious: That kind of abuse kinda one of my peeve.
On the other hand, it did brought a more obscure elements of Marvel Universe to the public eye.

[t209]

So which one will be in Guardians of the Galaxy 2?
- Quasar
- Adam Warlock
- Mantis
- Nova (definitely no since James Gunn hated him, both Rich and Sam)
or Guardians 3000 characters since Yondu appeared in movie.
- Vance Astro
- Charlie 27
- Martinex
- Yondu clone

[Chen]

I have a feeling at least Adam Warlock from that list. Since we're pretty sure GotG 2 will feature another infinity stone, it seems reasonable to have him there. Plus wasn't his cocoon visible in the collector's place in the first movie?

After having seen Age of Ultron it looks like they've changed up the infinity gem colors.

Tesseract (Space): Blue in MCU but purple in comics
Loki's scepter gem (Mind): This one looked right until they showed the blue part was not the actual stone, with the stone being yellow.
Aether (Reality): This one is red in the MCU but yellow in the comics
GotG stone (Power): Purple in the movies, red in the comics

[t209]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irK2q8a79GM
Ummm, I don't think Antman wouldn't be a good idea due to his infamous reputation (http://www.thewire.com/static/img/upload/2013/08/26/hank_pym_slap.jpg) that would be offensive without knowing the context.

[Tyndmyr]

You have the Ant-Man trailer thread twice, and the Agents of SHIELD thread is missing.

Now that that's out of the way, what are people's thoughts on why the Avengers never seem to call each other when they have a problem that's arbitrarily designated as "personal"? For instance, Tony Stark might take a keen interest in that Helicarrier gun trained on his current pride and joy in Captain America 2, but does Cap call him as a heads-up? No.

In part because of the timeline, if memory serves. You've got different people dealing with different problems at the same time. Plus, there are elements like Thor being offworld until Avengers, which covers some movies.

Now, we all know the real reason is "god, this would get complicated to cast everyone in all movies", but I think in-universe it's handled decently well.

As for Asguard, they are actually kind of niche on the galactic level. The big cheese in the nine(nine, right?) realms, but that's only a sprinkling of worlds in the galaxy. Kree, etc are playing on a WAY bigger scale.

[t209]

www.comicvine.com/forums/gen-discussion-1/james-gunn-reveals-2-more-characters-owned-by-fox-1677834/
Maybe they can change Kang's origin to a generic time traveling conqueror.
Then again, I am only familiar with Earth's Mightiest Hero version.

[Joran]

BTW, the current Agents of SHIELD thread is actually on the 4th one: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?414582-Agents-of-S-H-I-E-L-D-IV-Oh-the-Inhumanity!

Also, you're missing the Daredevil thread: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?408973-Daredevil-(Netflix)

[Landis963]

In part because of the timeline, if memory serves. You've got different people dealing with different problems at the same time. Plus, there are elements like Thor being offworld until Avengers, which covers some movies.

Now, we all know the real reason is "god, this would get complicated to cast everyone in all movies", but I think in-universe it's handled decently well.

As for Asguard, they are actually kind of niche on the galactic level. The big cheese in the nine(nine, right?) realms, but that's only a sprinkling of worlds in the galaxy. Kree, etc are playing on a WAY bigger scale.

See, that makes sense, but the question of "Where TF is Tony during Cap 2?" is still unanswered for me. It'd take, what, a minute, tops, to warn him?

EDIT: Although looking back through the thread points out that "He just blew up all his suits last winter" so there's the suited-up cameo scuppered, and besides, he'd probably use the time to evac Avengers Tower.

[DiscipleofBob]

See, that makes sense, but the question of "Where TF is Tony during Cap 2?" is still unanswered for me. It'd take, what, a minute, tops, to warn him?

EDIT: Although looking back through the thread points out that "He just blew up all his suits last winter" so there's the suited-up cameo scuppered, and besides, he'd probably use the time to evac Avengers Tower.

Also this is during a time when Cap is told to trust no one. And that probably includes the self-serving megalomaniac who just helped redesign SHIELD's new helicarriers, the same SHIELD which was now hunting down Captain America. And as Avengers 2 pointed out, while they'll work together to save the world, there's still plenty of lingering trust issues between the two.

[-Sentinel-]

Is anybody else suffering from MCU fatigue?

Marvel's movies are still enjoyable, don't get me wrong, but they have a sameness to them that makes them rather forgettable once you've left the movie theater, no matter how big the action scenes. Iron Man blew my mind, but by the time Ultron rolled around, I felt that Marvel had given up on trying to surprise me. I'm reaching the point where I'm no longer sure which event or villain was featured in which movie. I'm no longer excited about Marvel's future offerings.

Come on, Marvel. Don't let the MCU get stuck in a rut.

(And no, I don't have any specific ideas on how to fix the problem.)

[BRC]

Is anybody else suffering from MCU fatigue?

Marvel's movies are still enjoyable, don't get me wrong, but they have a sameness to them that makes them rather forgettable once you've left the movie theater, no matter how big the action scenes. Iron Man blew my mind, but by the time Ultron rolled around, I felt that Marvel had given up on trying to surprise me. I'm reaching the point where I'm no longer sure which event or villain was featured in which movie. I'm no longer excited about Marvel's future offerings.

Come on, Marvel. Don't let the MCU get stuck in a rut.

(And no, I don't have any specific ideas on how to fix the problem.)
The same could be said for a lot of Action Movies. And Marvel Movies are definitely formula action movies, just with some different flavors mixed in.

Iron Man was a near-future sci-fi action movie.

Thor was a Fantasy action movie

Captain America 1 was a Period piece action movie

Captain America 2 was a spy thriller action movie

GoTG was a Space Opera action movie

When you get down to it, Superhero as a genre has very few defining factors besides the existence of a broad-strokes Good vs Evil and the presence of silly costumes. GoTG wouldn't be considered a Superhero movie at all if it were not based on a comic first.

That said, Marvel has a formula that puts butts in seats. Action movie, sci-fi or fantasy elements to taste, dedicated five minutes of screentime to worldbuilding, put in some easily quoteable jokes, slap a stinger on the end. Then give whichever characters are in the movie their own comics (Retooled to fit the movie version of course), churn out some merchandise (Sans female characters. The Almighty Mouse wants girls buying princesses), and keep the geek media fed with a steady stream of casting rumors. Put Stan Lee in there somewhere.

[t209]

Just thinking, instead of Hulk (he was a Defender material or solo hero before the Avengers movie's release),
what other hero they could use?
- Incredible Hercules (Disney owned, even if they owned Marvel).
- Black Panther
- Black Knight

[Rakaydos]

I had a random thought on GotG2.

As Thanos gears up to take all the infinity stones the guardians are going to try to stop him. Drax is certian to publically blame Thanos for Ronan killing his daughter and wife.
Meanwhile Nebula returns to Thanos, gets Worf's by a new "daughter" of Thanos, called Moondragon.

Halfway through the movie, they set up a showdown... Gammora nods to Moondragon, both start drawing their weapons... and Drax calls out his daughter's name in surprise, having reckonised her at last.

What do you think the odds are?

(bonus points if Peter Quill throws in an Empire Strikes Back reference)

[t209]

www.cracked.com/photoplasty_1494_if-famous-pop-culture-had-been-made-20-years-earlier/
So do you wonder what characters will be used for Guardians of the Galaxy if they were made in 80s and 90s?
Major Victory- Bruce Willis
Charlie-27- Ultimate Warrior
Martinex- Bens Kingsley
Yondue- some native american extra

[Suichimo]

Just thinking, instead of Hulk (he was a Defender material or solo hero before the Avengers movie's release),
what other hero they could use?
- Incredible Hercules (Disney owned, even if they owned Marvel).
- Black Panther
- Black Knight

I know he is owned by Fox and a lot of people are tired of him by now, but hasn't Wolverine been an Avenger?

Edit: Cap/Wolverine/Thor team up would be fun to watch.

[Psyren]

Is anybody else suffering from MCU fatigue?

Obviously someone else somewhere in the world is. I'm not.

(I'll never understand questions like "is anybody else X" or "am I the only one who Y.")

[Kitten Champion]

I don't have MCU fatigue so much as a certain wariness that Marvel thinks they need to keep making their films bigger and bigger to impress their audience anymore. Civil War in particularly has more concerned, since the solo films have been more or less well focused on their characters - in much the same way the individual comic titles do - while the Avengers are their big party/crossover events where these established characters get to be played around in the MCU sandbox like action figures. Civil War on the other hand has like everyone ever in it short of the Guardians of the Galaxy - probably - plus Spider-Man and who knows who else, in a rather large-scale story. That does sound more like Avengers 2.5 than a Captain America story.

Though I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt since they've earned that much, I'd rather have more tightly focused movies than ones with more cool stuff I like in the comics in them.

[Legato Endless]

Is anybody else suffering from MCU fatigue?


Personally no, but you've got a lot of company among film critics. The most common criticism of Age of Ultron was the general feeling of familiarity and formulaic convention.


Iron Man blew my mind, but by the time Ultron rolled around, I felt that Marvel had given up on trying to surprise me. I'm reaching the point where I'm no longer sure which event or villain was featured in which movie. I'm no longer excited about Marvel's future offerings.

Well, Ironman was a revelation. Before 2008 came along with Dark Knight, the best we'd seen for superheroes was Spider-man 2. Solid, but the storytelling didn't transcend the genre's reputation.

As for excitement, eh, you can't expect them to completely do a 90 degree turn after the amount of success they've been having as it stands. Guardians was something of a risk industry wise, but it turned out well. I think optimistically, Marvel continuing to tweak things would be best general strategy both for storytelling and their bottom line. Now, eventually they're going to run this into the ground, or audiences will lose interest anyway, but I don't think we need to be too worried about that happening yet.

Now, if you were to dismiss Marvel's most recent outing as somewhat inconsequential, thanks to being not particularly well integrated into the various characters' larger arcs and withholding some of the logical aftereffects for Cap 3, I can see the general thrust though it didn't particularly bother me. Especially in terms of the overall franchise. I do think the Execs getting too committed to their conventions could eventually start to seriously dampen the various works. Whedon having to fight with the higher ups to get the scenes of the Avengers staying at Hawkeye's into AoU is rather worrisome, as that was by far the best subplot in the movie.

The action-comedy-exposition waltz of the films isn't always the correct way to go, and if future films forget about the power of quiet drama, or letting the movie slow down, then I think more people will come run around to your general apathy.

[t209]

Kinda start to hate current Disney Marvel shows that were trying to 1) appeal to kids 2) making it lean towards movies rather than comics.
When will we have a good Marvel show since Earth's Mightiest Heroes? Now that Ms. Marvel (the muslim stretchy girl) is going to appear on Avengers Assemble (though sources said that it's gonna be under the helm of EMH writers), it's gonna be harder to cancel. And hoping they didn't adapt One More Day for Civil War storyline.

[Psyren]

Guardians was something of a risk industry wise, but it turned out well.

That's one hell of an understatement (http://deadline.com/2014/10/guardians-of-the-galaxy-box-office-records-853083/) :smalltongue:



The action-comedy-exposition waltz of the films isn't always the correct way to go, and if future films forget about the power of quiet drama, or letting the movie slow down, then I think more people will come run around to your general apathy.

Well, it wouldn't be the first time executive meddling ruined a good thing, but for now Whedon seems to have a firm hand on the reins, and at least for now the effect has not been deleterious.

[Dienekes]

Is anybody else suffering from MCU fatigue?

Marvel's movies are still enjoyable, don't get me wrong, but they have a sameness to them that makes them rather forgettable once you've left the movie theater, no matter how big the action scenes. Iron Man blew my mind, but by the time Ultron rolled around, I felt that Marvel had given up on trying to surprise me. I'm reaching the point where I'm no longer sure which event or villain was featured in which movie. I'm no longer excited about Marvel's future offerings.

Come on, Marvel. Don't let the MCU get stuck in a rut.

(And no, I don't have any specific ideas on how to fix the problem.)

Not really. I can keep watching them with no problem, but that said I do think there are high and low movies. Guardians had me laughing. Winter Soldier had me engaged. And the Daredevil show was great from start to finish. But I haven't enjoyed a single Thor movie, and I thought Ultron was only ok. But that's to be expected, like the comics there's a lot of good stories in there, and a few that really aren't that good.

[VanaGalen]

Not really. I can keep watching them with no problem, but that said I do think there are high and low movies. Guardians had me laughing. Winter Soldier had me engaged. And the Daredevil show was great from start to finish. But I haven't enjoyed a single Thor movie, and I thought Ultron was only ok. But that's to be expected, like the comics there's a lot of good stories in there, and a few that really aren't that good.

I liked Ultron, but at the same time I had a feeling of déjà vu: one of the avengers endangers Earth by bringing villain who wants to rule the world, then the avengers fight one another a bit, then they make up and fight together to save the world. Kind of the same story as Avengers 1. Captain America 2 also has plot a bit recycled (although way better executed) from Captain America 1.


But I think the main problem that makes Marvel movies forgettable is the lack of proper villains. Each of them is some kind of one-dimensional fanatic taking over the world, who in fact is only there so the heroes have someone to fight. Marvel villains feel more like punching bags than real characters.
<Minor Thor & Avengers spoilers ahead>
The only exception from that rule is Loki, but after the 3rd movie with him it feels like "ok, so we need to defeat Loki, just don't hurt him cause he needs to be alive and cute for the next movie".
I think with better and more diverse villains the movies wouldn't feel the same so much.

[Tyndmyr]

Meh. Ronan the Destroyer is probably among the lamest villains so far. Not a great deal of backstory or character, pretty GD one dimensional.

But GotG was awesome. Certainly not the weakest of the Marvel films. So, while I appreciate excellent villains(and believe both Loki and Ultron to be pretty awesome at the job), I don't think it's strictly necessary.

[Dienekes]

I liked Ultron, but at the same time I had a feeling of déjà vu: one of the avengers endangers Earth by bringing villain who wants to rule the world, then the avengers fight one another a bit, then they make up and fight together to save the world. Kind of the same story as Avengers 1. Captain America 2 also has plot a bit recycled (although way better executed) from Captain America 1.


But I think the main problem that makes Marvel movies forgettable is the lack of proper villains. Each of them is some kind of one-dimensional fanatic taking over the world, who in fact is only there so the heroes have someone to fight. Marvel villains feel more like punching bags than real characters.
<Minor Thor & Avengers spoilers ahead>
The only exception from that rule is Loki, but after the 3rd movie with him it feels like "ok, so we need to defeat Loki, just don't hurt him cause he needs to be alive and cute for the next movie".
I think with better and more diverse villains the movies wouldn't feel the same so much.


Meh. Ronan the Destroyer is probably among the lamest villains so far. Not a great deal of backstory or character, pretty GD one dimensional.

But GotG was awesome. Certainly not the weakest of the Marvel films. So, while I appreciate excellent villains(and believe both Loki and Ultron to be pretty awesome at the job), I don't think it's strictly necessary.

I think it has to do with focus and implementation more than the villain.

On that note, I think the plot of Cap 2 is wildly different from Cap1, they only really share a main character and a villain.

But looking at what worked (for me, and only for me). Guardians focus was not the villain, the villain was accidental. The focus was, look at these funny and kooky characters as they grow to become friends. A simple story, but one that they pulled off by making the characters actually fun and likeable. It didn't need a great villain, because what it focused on it did very well.

Cap2 the focus was about Cap coming to terms with the living in the modern world, and in espionage shenangans. It did those well, with a very sad scene with Carter in the beginning and him showing up in costume to try to bring Bucky back as emotional beats and the ridiculous but engaging spy stuff to carry the plot. It didn't really need to have a thoroughly engaging villain either, though I thought Redford delivered on that front anyway, which just adds to the experience.

Then going on what didn't work for me. Thor 1. Thor has one of the strongest villains. The relationship of Loki and Thor comes right out of Shakespeare and could have been great. But, really the beginning and the end is about that. The majority of the movie was watching Thor be a fish out of water in modern America, and getting a romance subplot. None of which interested me. Thor 2 was a bit the same, but it didn't even have the interesting villain to fall back on. And for some ungodly reason decided to focus even more on the pointless and annoying sidekick character from the first one. And, unsurprisingly, the best bits of Thor 2 were when he interacted with the actually interesting villain for 15 minutes. The rest was uninteresting and dull.

For Avengers 2, Ultron was interesting. But it felt like that should have been an Iron Man movie. Tony created something and now he has to deal with it is a fine Iron Man arc. Sure, we kind of already had that from Iron Man 1, but that was his company. This was pure Tony's fault, not Stane, not Hammer, not whatever the Mandarin's name was, just him. So, it's no surprise the most potent parts of the movie were Ultron getting angry about being compared to Tony and Tony scrambling to fix his problem. Everyone else was there just to argue amongst each other and deal with the B plot, which was: here are Magneto's kids, except we can't say that. They're weird, they're powerful. Thor was there to, pretty much only to deliver some exposition about how the future will be bad. Widow and Hulk had their own thing, which was entirely unrelated to the plot. And Cap was there to give doubts to Tony's project, a position that would have been much more poignant if it was held by Pepper. And Hawkeye was there. He made some jokes and spotted a bus and got my most despised Avenger of all time killed. Good job Hawkeye. Now, I like Avengers 2, didn't think it was as good as Avengers 1, but I liked it. But I think the weakness of what they were trying to do (a Frankenstein story on the world stage) got cluttered and unfocused because they also tried to do the bickering teamwork thing, which was already done in the first one where it made sense to focus on that.

[Talakeal]

I have a question about Asgard:

Is it in the same dimension as Earth?

When they talk about the Nine Worlds, is each one just a seperate planet that happens to be connnected by Yggdrasil, or is each one actually a whole 'nother universe?

If it is the latter, is it our whole dimension that is considered one of the nine worlds, or is it only Earth itself?

[Thrudd]

I have a question about Asgard:

Is it in the same dimension as Earth?

When they talk about the Nine Worlds, is each one just a seperate planet that happens to be connnected by Yggdrasil, or is each one actually a whole 'nother universe?

If it is the latter, is it our whole dimension that is considered one of the nine worlds, or is it only Earth itself?

It's not exactly clear. In the movies, it seems like it is meant to be another planet, the nine realms are the planets under Asgard's rule connected by their bridge technology.

In the comics, it is definitely another dimension, of sorts. I believe the nine realms (and some others, like Olympus, limbo, heaven and hell) are all technically part of earth. Thor is earth's God of Thunder. Other planets in the universe are shown to have their own gods (or did, before the events of "Thor: God of Thunder ").

When Dr Strange comes out, we might get more clarification on this stuff, as that will probably be where the cinematic universe gets introduced to alternate dimensions, demons, supernatural stuff (though Netflix might get there first with Iron Fist, don't know which will come out first).

[VanaGalen]

I think it has to do with focus and implementation more than the villain.

On that note, I think the plot of Cap 2 is wildly different from Cap1, they only really share a main character and a villain.

But looking at what worked (for me, and only for me). Guardians focus was not the villain, the villain was accidental. The focus was, look at these funny and kooky characters as they grow to become friends. A simple story, but one that they pulled off by making the characters actually fun and likeable. It didn't need a great villain, because what it focused on it did very well.

Cap2 the focus was about Cap coming to terms with the living in the modern world, and in espionage shenangans. It did those well, with a very sad scene with Carter in the beginning and him showing up in costume to try to bring Bucky back as emotional beats and the ridiculous but engaging spy stuff to carry the plot. It didn't really need to have a thoroughly engaging villain either, though I thought Redford delivered on that front anyway, which just adds to the experience.

Then going on what didn't work for me. Thor 1. Thor has one of the strongest villains. The relationship of Loki and Thor comes right out of Shakespeare and could have been great. But, really the beginning and the end is about that. The majority of the movie was watching Thor be a fish out of water in modern America, and getting a romance subplot. None of which interested me. Thor 2 was a bit the same, but it didn't even have the interesting villain to fall back on. And for some ungodly reason decided to focus even more on the pointless and annoying sidekick character from the first one. And, unsurprisingly, the best bits of Thor 2 were when he interacted with the actually interesting villain for 15 minutes. The rest was uninteresting and dull.

For Avengers 2, Ultron was interesting. But it felt like that should have been an Iron Man movie. Tony created something and now he has to deal with it is a fine Iron Man arc. Sure, we kind of already had that from Iron Man 1, but that was his company. This was pure Tony's fault, not Stane, not Hammer, not whatever the Mandarin's name was, just him. So, it's no surprise the most potent parts of the movie were Ultron getting angry about being compared to Tony and Tony scrambling to fix his problem. Everyone else was there just to argue amongst each other and deal with the B plot, which was: here are Magneto's kids, except we can't say that. They're weird, they're powerful. Thor was there to, pretty much only to deliver some exposition about how the future will be bad. Widow and Hulk had their own thing, which was entirely unrelated to the plot. And Cap was there to give doubts to Tony's project, a position that would have been much more poignant if it was held by Pepper. And Hawkeye was there. He made some jokes and spotted a bus and got my most despised Avenger of all time killed. Good job Hawkeye. Now, I like Avengers 2, didn't think it was as good as Avengers 1, but I liked it. But I think the weakness of what they were trying to do (a Frankenstein story on the world stage) got cluttered and unfocused because they also tried to do the bickering teamwork thing, which was already done in the first one where it made sense to focus on that.

Guardians were great, but it was the first movie, they were introducing the characters, so the problem doesn't apply there, compared to 9 avengers movies so far.

I'm not saying that a good villain is sufficient to make a good movie. It's true Thor 1 was unevenly paced, with way too much focus on the teaching-the-spoiled-prince-some-humility and that awkward, 3-day romance of Thor & Jane.
Still, in most of the superhero movies, it's the villain who actually drives the plot. I think Ultron didn't do a good job there, being somewhat stereotypical world-destroying villain with no personality and no surprises. As a result, the heroes don't actually have much to do, so apart from a few action scenes, we get something like "Sex and the City": relationship problems of Thor and Tony, Hawkeye's family life, Black Widow's maternity angst etc.
So I believe that getting better villains is essential for making interesting, original stories that won't get jumbled together and forgotten.


I have a question about Asgard:

Is it in the same dimension as Earth?

When they talk about the Nine Worlds, is each one just a seperate planet that happens to be connnected by Yggdrasil, or is each one actually a whole 'nother universe?

If it is the latter, is it our whole dimension that is considered one of the nine worlds, or is it only Earth itself?

They appear to be separate planets in the same universe, at least judging from Jane's and Selvig's drawings in Thor 2. Also, the characters always refer to "the universe", which implies there is only one.

[t209]

Meh. Ronan the Destroyer is probably among the lamest villains so far. Not a great deal of backstory or character, pretty GD one dimensional.

But GotG was awesome. Certainly not the weakest of the Marvel films. So, while I appreciate excellent villains(and believe both Loki and Ultron to be pretty awesome at the job), I don't think it's strictly necessary.
Yeah, I am only familiar with Ronan from Fantastic Four: World's Greatest Heroes (EMH didn't have that much on Ronan other than generic superior officer) but the show's version is the best non-comic iteration of him. However, I kinda have a peeve that they made him a terrorist rather than a extremely loyal and tough authority figure, especially during Annihilation storyline (Now how they are going to make Annihilation now that Ronan is dead).

[Dienekes]

Yeah, I am only familiar with Ronan from Fantastic Four: World's Greatest Heroes (EMH didn't have that much on Ronan other than generic superior officer) but the show's version is the best non-comic iteration of him. However, I kinda have a peeve that they made him a terrorist rather than a extremely loyal and tough authority figure, especially during Annihilation storyline (Now how they are going to make Annihilation now that Ronan is dead).

Apparently, Ronan is villainous in the Ultimates universe, which is what they drew inspiration from. Not surprising, since most of Ultimates made grimmer versions of heroes so an already grim one would be a villain. Still yeah, I wanted Blue Alien Judge Dredd, he was fun.

[Legato Endless]

Meh. Ronan the Destroyer is probably among the lamest villains so far. Not a great deal of backstory or character, pretty GD one dimensional.

But GotG was awesome. Certainly not the weakest of the Marvel films. So, while I appreciate excellent villains(and believe both Loki and Ultron to be pretty awesome at the job), I don't think it's strictly necessary.

Nah, that still has to be Thor 2's dullard of an antagonist.

One dimensional though it was, Ronan had a discernible motive, and we got Lee Pace epically chewing the scenery. Malekith wanted to destroy the universe because...um...he's a dark elf? It's just what they do?

[Kitten Champion]

Apparently, Ronan is villainous in the Ultimates universe, which is what they drew inspiration from. Not surprising, since most of Ultimates made grimmer versions of heroes so an already grim one would be a villain. Still yeah, I wanted Blue Alien Judge Dredd, he was fun.

They retconned his character completely later - apparently, I've never read Ultimate Fantastic Four - to make him an Admiral of the Kree who is closer to the 616 version.

[Dienekes]

They retconned his character completely later - apparently, I've never read Ultimate Fantastic Four - to make him an Admiral of the Kree who is closer to the 616 version.

Wasn't the point of the Ultimate universe to stop doing those kind of shenanigans? Bah, why am I complaining? The only good things to come out of the Ultimate line was the first story arc (and only the first arc) of the Ultimates and Spiderman

[Tyndmyr]

Nah, that still has to be Thor 2's dullard of an antagonist.

One dimensional though it was, Ronan had a discernible motive, and we got Lee Pace epically chewing the scenery. Malekith wanted to destroy the universe because...um...he's a dark elf? It's just what they do?

Agreed, Malekith was also a weaker villain. Something something, light vs darkness...it feels like they didn't try all that hard.

Ultron has motives, and there's a lot of texture there. His relationship with the twins, for instance. His loneliness and pain.

[Legato Endless]

Matthew McConaughey has been approached by Marvel. (http://www.pointofgeeks.com/pog-exclusive-marvel-courting-matthew-mcconaughey-for-norman-osborn/)

Because apparently two depictions weren't enough, according to Point Geek's inside source, the role pitched to McConaughey for Spider-man 6 is the Green Goblin.

[t209]

Matthew McConaughey has been approached by Marvel. (http://www.pointofgeeks.com/pog-exclusive-marvel-courting-matthew-mcconaughey-for-norman-osborn/)

Because apparently two depictions weren't enough, according to Point Geek's inside source, the role pitched to McConaughey for Spider-man 6 is the Green Goblin.
So are they going to adapt Siege too, which Green Goblin became Director of Shield?

[Dienekes]

So are they going to adapt Siege too, which Green Goblin became Director of Shield?

I don't know. SHIELD already had it's arc of being corrupted from the inside only to rise again better than it was. It'd be strange to try doing that again.

[Psyren]

Nah, that still has to be Thor 2's dullard of an antagonist.

One dimensional though it was, Ronan had a discernible motive, and we got Lee Pace epically chewing the scenery. Malekith wanted to destroy the universe because...um...he's a dark elf? It's just what they do?

Because he was the Valeyard :smallbiggrin:


Wasn't the point of the Ultimate universe to stop doing those kind of shenanigans? Bah, why am I complaining? The only good things to come out of the Ultimate line was the first story arc (and only the first arc) of the Ultimates and Spiderman

Ultimate FF started off awesome too, and apparently the new movie is borrowing quite a bit from it - younger team, alternate dimension instead of cosmic radiation etc. But Ultimate went downhill really fast after that.


I don't know. SHIELD already had it's arc of being corrupted from the inside only to rise again better than it was. It'd be strange to try doing that again.

Agreed, at that point they would be better off just packing it in.

[t209]

Ultimate FF started off awesome too, and apparently the new movie is borrowing quite a bit from it - younger team, alternate dimension instead of cosmic radiation etc. But Ultimate went downhill really fast after that..
But I am pretty angry at making them "dark and edgy" take on it instead of family (The first movie got that part but they aren't heroic since most of their "save the day" was caused by their own idiocy and Dr. Doom's evil was pretty much Reed Richard's* fault).
*I know that they did stupid things in older comics (first part of their first issue pretty much summed up the movie, which the Thing caused havoc in the city and possibly caused tons of damages as a result). And Skrull burgers. Funnily, they were going to make Galactus as the comic version but turned into a cloud to make him "mysterious" until the release of Silver Surfer.
Not to mention that they missed the point of them as "celebrity family".
I don't know if separating them from X-Men is good idea but Mutant discrimination didn't make sense in a universe where Superheroes are respected to some degree.
Unless their machine started to merge with X-Men universe.

[Logic]

So, who else is excited to see confirmation of the Punisher in Daredevil Season 2? (http://comicbook.com/2015/06/08/jon-bernthal-cast-as-punisher-in-daredevil-season-2/)

I wasn't fan-casting anyone for Castle, but the actor Marvel selected seems like a great fit.

If only those knot-heads at Disney would announce who will portray Captain Marvel, and we'd be set.

[Legato Endless]

So, who else is excited to see confirmation of the Punisher in Daredevil Season 2? (http://comicbook.com/2015/06/08/jon-bernthal-cast-as-punisher-in-daredevil-season-2/)

I wasn't fan-casting anyone for Castle, but the actor Marvel selected seems like a great fit.

Well they've got the look down. And he gave very solid performances in Fury and Walking Dead.

So yeah, I've no complaints.

[t209]

So, who else is excited to see confirmation of the Punisher in Daredevil Season 2? (http://comicbook.com/2015/06/08/jon-bernthal-cast-as-punisher-in-daredevil-season-2/)

I wasn't fan-casting anyone for Castle, but the actor Marvel selected seems like a great fit.

If only those knot-heads at Disney would announce who will portray Captain Marvel, and we'd be set.

Hope they made this scene for the new season.
http://punisher.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/punishermarvelknights9.jpg
That's Ennis for you, other than the Boys (ironically, or hypocritically, he liked Superman and female superheroes, which even the comic condemned the latter's status as fanservice and "rape as backstory".)
For Captain Marvel, I heard that they were going to cast Charlize Theron. I don't know, on one hand, she's a bit old to be Carol Danvers, but her rank--I don't know how Airforce ranks works--would be suited for older soldiers.

[Tyndmyr]

but her rank--I don't know how Airforce ranks works--would be suited for older soldiers.

This is not the case. Captain is a rank typically held by twenty somethings. Maaaybe 30s.

Captain and Major are normally a two shot thing. If you can't make the promotion in two gos, they kick you out. So, with a few exceptions(reserves, enlisted becoming officer, certain other oddball things) it would be extremely unusual to have an old captain in the AF.

[t209]

This is not the case. Captain is a rank typically held by twenty somethings. Maaaybe 30s.

Captain and Major are normally a two shot thing. If you can't make the promotion in two gos, they kick you out. So, with a few exceptions(reserves, enlisted becoming officer, certain other oddball things) it would be extremely unusual to have an old captain in the AF.
Well, Carol was an Airforce Major and taken as Ms. Marvel until the death of previous Captain Marvel, a Kree scientist/officer, which she took his name instead.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Seems like a bad idea for them to cast an older actress for a role that's presumably going to be spearheading part of the next MCU phase after Infinity War, but maybe they're doing it with the aim of bringing in Kamala?

[BRC]

Seems like a bad idea for them to cast an older actress for a role that's presumably going to be spearheading part of the next MCU phase after Infinity War, but maybe they're doing it with the aim of bringing in Kamala?

Robert Downy Junior is 50, so he would have been 43 when Iron Man came out in 2008.

Charlize Theron is 39, four years younger than RDJ was when he kicked started the franchise.

[Legato Endless]

Although for that exact reason Theron probably won't be considered, despite her recent accolades for Mad Max. The Film Industry is pretty ageist, but while aging actors usually just get saddled with problematic stereotypes, most actresses just get shifted out of prominent roles completely.

Edit: And while 39 isn't old by any reasonable metric, the industry starts looking at you sidelong once you've passed like, 35.

[Logic]

Concerning Captain Marvel: I had heard Emily Blunt, Jessica Chastain, and Katie Sackhoff were the front-runners. This is the first I'd heard Charlize Theron was being considered.

And in my military experience, the youngest Colonels are in their late 30s. Which is the highest rank Carol Danvers has attained.

[Dusk Eclipse]

I recall that Margot Robbie was at some point rumoured to be in consideration for Carol's role, but now that she is Harley Quinn in suicide squad I doubt it, which saddens me a little to be honest.

[Rogar Demonblud]

I doubt they'll begin the casting process until the script is done. By which point most of the current candidates will have moved on to other projects. Personally, I'd prefer Jessica Chastain.

[Tyndmyr]

Concerning Captain Marvel: I had heard Emily Blunt, Jessica Chastain, and Katie Sackhoff were the front-runners. This is the first I'd heard Charlize Theron was being considered.

Not familiar with Chastain, but either Blunt or Sackhoff would be absolutely awesome in such a role.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Robert Downy Junior is 50, so he would have been 43 when Iron Man came out in 2008.

Charlize Theron is 39, four years younger than RDJ was when he kicked started the franchise.
That is a very good point. I keep forgetting how old RDJ is. Wow.

[thorgrim29]

I heard Katheryn Winnick was a contender for Captain Marvel, and she's pretty fantastic in Vikings. Other than that Emily Blunt was pretty great in Edge of Tomorrow (I still maintain that she should play Shepard in Mass Effect the movie). Thing is I don't know Carol very well so I'm going off look alone.

[Kitten Champion]

I heard Katheryn Winnick was a contender for Captain Marvel, and she's pretty fantastic in Vikings. Other than that Emily Blunt was pretty great in Edge of Tomorrow (I still maintain that she should play Shepard in Mass Effect the movie). Thing is I don't know Carol very well so I'm going off look alone.

Either would be fine. Personally I'd love Emily Blunt to portray Carol, her role as Rita Vrataski is only a smidgen off of how I'd characterize movie Carol.

But... whatever. Marvel has done an overwhelmingly good job with casting, so I'm not worried they'll put in Megan Fox or something.

[t209]

So anyone familiar with The Defenders? I don't know but the upcoming Netflix seem like Heroes for Hire and Bendis' New Avengers.
I wonder how would Universal make Namor without other Marvel-verse since his famous story is an old battle with Jim Hammon's Human Torch.

[Thrudd]

So anyone familiar with The Defenders? I don't know but the upcoming Netflix seem like Heroes for Hire and Bendis' New Avengers.
I wonder how would Universal make Namor without other Marvel-verse since his famous story is an old battle with Jim Hammon's Human Torch.

Comic Defenders is nothing like what I imagine the TV show will be. In comics, they are Dr Strange, Silver Surfer, Hulk and Namor.

TV show is closer to comics Heroes for Hire, like you said. Though Daredevil was never technically a part of Heroes for Hire, and neither was Jessica Jones. Luke Cage, Iron Fist, Misty Knight and Colleen Wing were the official Heroes for Hire, I believe.

So this team up has never technically happened in comics, though of course Daredevil has interacted with them many times, and Jessica Jones marries Luke Cage and has a baby with him. It would be cool if Misty Knight and Colleen Wing show up in one if the later series, probably Luke Cage or Iron Fist. Iron Fist has a serious relationship with Misty in the comics for a while.

The Daredevil show has already set up stuff that will connect to the other series, I'm sure. They mention a couple times that Owlsey has a son, who I am sure will show up as the Owl at some point. Madame Gao's reference to her home clearly indicates a realm like Kunlun, or even one of the other immortal cities from "Immortal Iron Fist". Of course the Hand and the Chaste might be a recurring thing throughout multiple series. I wonder if they would take inspiration from "Shadowland" and have Matt become possessed by the Beast and need to be defeated by the other heroes in order to free him.

[Kitten Champion]

Defenders is just a generic name Marvel uses when it wants to put some characters together that don't really fit into their established comic titles. They could equally be called "Super Hero Team-Up Team" and it would be just as meaningful.

[Thrudd]

Defenders is just a generic name Marvel uses when it wants to put some characters together that don't really fit into their established comic titles. They could equally be called "Super Hero Team-Up Team" and it would be just as meaningful.

Except it's pretty much always Dr Strange leading the group, almost always Hulk too, and some mystical/supernatural kind of stuff.

[Kitten Champion]

Except it's pretty much always Dr Strange leading the group, almost always Hulk too, and some mystical/supernatural kind of stuff.

Except in the Secret Defenders and New Defenders, which was basically the same deal - bunch of characters without a title put together for nebulous reasons probably because Marvel wanted to protect its copyright claims.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Not familiar with Chastain, but either Blunt or Sackhoff would be absolutely awesome in such a role.

Chastain's had a couple Oscar nods, but is probably best known for her leading role in Zero Dark Thirty.


That is a very good point. I keep forgetting how old RDJ is. Wow.

Well, Stark's going to be 50 in 2018, so RDJ's about the right age for the role.

[t209]

So since Deathlok is in MCU, so what else should or can be brought to MCU?
- Damian Hellstrom (But Son of Satan might have problems for religious viewers)
- Rom the Space-Knight
- Beta-Ray Bill
- Celestial Madonna storyline
- Blackknight
Definitely, not Gladiator since he's part of X-Men (he's like Superman with a mohawk.)
P.S- So instead of Hulk and Blackwidow, who would be suitable counterpart? All I know is Hercules and Mantis.
edit: I know it's part of Fox but do you feel that the new X-Men movie is trying to be like 1992 cartoon series (Jubilee, 80's clothings, and focusing on other mutants, instead of Wolverine and pushed-aside mutants?

[Logic]

Not familiar with Chastain, but either Blunt or Sackhoff would be absolutely awesome in such a role.

I don't like Katie Sackhoff for the part of Carol Danvers. Between the fact that I can't really picture her as anything but Starbuck, and the fact that the only traits she shares with Carol is being a blond woman.

A lot of Carol's history is being a woman in a man's world, and while that would be less the case in a modern retelling, Katie Sackhoff's Starbuck character was almost hyper-masculinized, which is not something I see when I think of Carol Danvers.

Emily Blunt could work, as could Jessica Chastain (she also played the role of Matthew McConaughey's daughter in Interstellar, besides her leading role in Zero Dark Thirty)

Other names I hear as fan cast are:

Yvonne Strahovski - she could work, but can she do American accents?
Margot Robbie - in a DC movie, and she looks WAY too young for the character I envision. Yes, I am a bit biased agianst Margot, but I've not seen her work.
Tricia Helfer - She could work. She is not quite what I pictured, but I also lamented the casting of Chris Evans as Steve Rogers, so I have been known to be wrong on some of these casting decisions.

[Landis963]

Strahovski's accent in Chuck was passable enough, IIRC.

[thorgrim29]

Other names I hear as fan cast are:

Margot Robbie - in a DC movie, and she looks WAY too young for the character I envision. Yes, I am a bit biased agianst Margot, but I've not seen her work.



She's a pretty good actress actually (from what I've seen in Wolf of wall Street and Focus), but I think she might be too slight to play an action hero (she is pretty tall though). I guess we'll see in suicide squad if she can sell fighting scenes. Also, a bit out of topic but she seems to have a tendency to be paired off with men more than 20 years older than she is which I think is weird.

Yvonne Strahovski would probably do a good job too, she was great in Chuck. She probably isn't high profile enough though, and they'll want to get a popular actress to bring in fans of the actress (because for some reason female led action movies don't seem to sell/are perceived to sell less).

[Logic]

She's a pretty good actress actually (from what I've seen in Wolf of wall Street and Focus), but I think she might be too slight to play an action hero (she is pretty tall though). I guess we'll see in suicide squad if she can sell fighting scenes. Also, a bit out of topic but she seems to have a tendency to be paired off with men more than 20 years older than she is which I think is weird.

Yvonne Strahovski would probably do a good job too, she was great in Chuck. She probably isn't high profile enough though, and they'll want to get a popular actress to bring in fans of the actress (because for some reason female led action movies don't seem to sell/are perceived to sell less).
If that's the case, they should select a high profile actress. Someone with the star power of Jennifer Lawrence (currently under contract with Fox for the X-Men, and probably not ready to commit to another 3-5 films) Charlize Theron (probably my favorite actress that fits the high profile bit, or Jessica Chastain (she is a dark horse pick, as she is more of a rising Star, similar to Chris Pratt.)

Can anyone else think of a high profile actress that fits the part and could fill seats based on Star Power alone?

[Xondoure]

I'm rather hoping they pick someone who is relatively unknown. I expect the excitement for a female led super hero film is stronger than they think, and it would be nice to see someone new catapulted into stardom.

[Tyndmyr]

I don't like Katie Sackhoff for the part of Carol Danvers. Between the fact that I can't really picture her as anything but Starbuck, and the fact that the only traits she shares with Carol is being a blond woman.

A lot of Carol's history is being a woman in a man's world, and while that would be less the case in a modern retelling, Katie Sackhoff's Starbuck character was almost hyper-masculinized, which is not something I see when I think of Carol Danvers.

She plays more characters than just Starbuck. She's good at actiony roles, but she's a, yknow, actor. It's not necessary that one character's traits perfectly match the traits of another character played.

And, even if they DID, through some strange means, you still have more similarities, like both being in the military.

It might help to watch Longmire or something if you want to picture her in a somewhat different role.

[Logic]

She plays more characters than just Starbuck. She's good at actiony roles, but she's a, yknow, actor. It's not necessary that one character's traits perfectly match the traits of another character played.

And, even if they DID, through some strange means, you still have more similarities, like both being in the military.

It might help to watch Longmire or something if you want to picture her in a somewhat different role.

I'm not denying that she has had other roles. What I'm saying is that it is hard for me to see her as anything but Starbuck in a different costume.

[McStabbington]

I'm not denying that she has had other roles. What I'm saying is that it is hard for me to see her as anything but Starbuck in a different costume.

You should see Oculus then. She did a pretty bang-up job with a role incredibly unlike Kara Thrace.

That being said, it might help if we collectively stop casting roles based on looks and focus instead on the actor's ability to play the role. In retrospect, both Chris Evans and Heath Ledger were fantastically cast; neither passed the eye test in any meaningful way until they changed the way we view the character. By contrast, Brandon Routh could have been cloned out of a petri dish of Christopher Reeve's DNA; that still didn't breathe life into a turd of a script.

[Kitten Champion]

So, apparently the new iteration of Sony/Marvel's Spider-Man will be Tom Holland (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4043618/), a relative unknown who I know mostly from Wolf Hall and as the voice of Sho in Ghibli's The Secret World of Arrietty dub.

I approve, personally.

Edit; Oh, and Ava DuVernay - who did Selma recently - is picked up to direct Black Panther. While Marvel has a history of treating directors as disposable and interchangeable, I think they'll probably stick with her given the wider context of the movie.

[Tyndmyr]

You should see Oculus then. She did a pretty bang-up job with a role incredibly unlike Kara Thrace.

That being said, it might help if we collectively stop casting roles based on looks and focus instead on the actor's ability to play the role. In retrospect, both Chris Evans and Heath Ledger were fantastically cast; neither passed the eye test in any meaningful way until they changed the way we view the character. By contrast, Brandon Routh could have been cloned out of a petri dish of Christopher Reeve's DNA; that still didn't breathe life into a turd of a script.

This is also a huge factor, and is the biggest reason why I see fantasy casting lists as a waste of time. Script and ability are so huge that everything else is basically irrelevant. Yeah, so we picked a Bond who was blonder. Feh.

[t209]

Just hope that he nailed the fun-loving quipster and most likely a hero joining Tony and his fascist parades (depends if the movie will make them likable, personal opinion on registration, or go with Mark Millar's route) unintentionally.

[Solamnicknight]

Just hope that he nailed the fun-loving quipster and most likely a hero joining Tony and his fascist parades (depends if the movie will make them likable, personal opinion on registration, or go with Mark Millar's route) unintentionally.
The movie's version of Ironman cannot be as bad as The Ironfuhrer from the comics. I think he will have major regret from creating Ultron and wants Rodgers and any superheroes who don't register to be treated fairly. I would assume the authorities are the ones who mess up, maybe take things a little to far while hunting Cap and company and Stark is stuck in a tough situation where he doesn't want to get arrested.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Seriously people, we know that both Baron Zemo and Crossbones will appear in Civil War, I'm 100% than one of them (most likely the Baron) will somehow pit Tony vs. Steve, and in the end they will most likely find out and join forces to stop him.

[t209]

Seriously people, we know that both Baron Zemo and Crossbones will appear in Civil War, I'm 100% than one of them (most likely the Baron) will somehow pit Tony vs. Steve, and in the end they will most likely find out and join forces to stop him.
And possibly the first Thunderbolts, villains pretend to be superheroes to trick the populace until the team betrayed Zemo after realization that being a Superhero is awesome.

[Legato Endless]

If Zemo does turn out to be in charge of an evil team masquerading as heroes though, I don't think the team in question will pull an allegiance shift. Maybe we'll get a token turncoat, but not much more. Mostly because, we're already waist deep in heroes at this point, so adding a significant number more at the start of Phase 3 seems...counterproductive.

[Milo v3]

Since I've heard that Phase 3 will be putting more focus on different dimensions and magic, I wouldn't be surprised if MCU embraced with whole spider totem thing with the Spiderman movie... might even surprise some people who are only familiar with the movies, and helps make it not just just cover stuff everyone's seen before.