Sony-Marvel's 'shared' Spider-Man

[Cheesegear]

As some of you Forumites will know, Sony has decided to play ball with Marvel in regards to Spider-Man, with some sort of profit-sharing deal or some inner-business workings going on. What you also may know, is that about ten seconds after Andrew Garfield was cast as Spider-Man, there was already talks of replacing him.

So, it appears we have our new (http://www.latino-review.com/news/asa-butterfield-is-spider-man) Spider-Man (http://therealstanlee.com/is-it-true-will-asa-butterfield-be-the-next-spider-man-), with IMDb also putting it in (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2633535/?ref_=nv_sr_1).

Asa Butterfield is 'most likely' going to be our next Spider-Man, in the MCU proper. For those with exceptional memories, you may recall that I, myself, pegged Butterfield in my imaginings for a live-action Shinji Ikari for an NGE re-imagining. I also put down that Ender's Game being crap wasn't Butterfield's fault, since a live-action EG movie was doomed from the start, and Hugo was, well, it was a niche movie and not for everyone, and movie studios as a rule, generally shouldn't be shelling out the amount of money they paid for Hugo, since niche movies never make money.

So, I, personally, have no qualms about Butterfield appearing alongside Chris Evans and RDJ in Civil War, I think in a few years (when filming for CW starts), Butterfield will be plenty good, since he already has the makings of a good actor, now. My only 'problem' is how terribly Sony appears (IMO) to be treating Andrew Garfield. There's also the whiplash that sets in when we have three different Spider-Mans in two decades...But that doesn't seem to be a problem for Bond films, so why Spider-Man?

[JoshL]

I loved Hugo start to finish. And Ender's Game was crap, mostly because if you hadn't read the book absolutely nothing that happened would have any emotional impact, so, yeah, not Asa's fault. I can see him as Pete, so cautiously optimistic about this!

[Zmeoaice]

Yeah well Andrew Garfield sucked as Spider-Man, so I don't care that the reboot series sunk.

INB4 "Waaah waaah, Marvel should make Miles Morales because diversity!". Nobody cares enough about Miles, they aren't going to make a film about him, especially when they have 55 years of material for Peter Parker.

I'm not too sure what to think about this. Marvel movies have a knack for relying too much on building the sequels instead of letting the film stand on its own. This has been very notable for Iron Man 2, Thor, and the 2nd half of Captain America 2. And TASM2. I also hope they don't push RJD or anyone else in his film.

I also hope Spider-Man isn't pushed into other films as well. He works best as a solo hero. Although I wouldn't mind him appearing in Daredevil, it might get me to start watching that show.

[t209]

Yeah well Andrew Garfield sucked as Spider-Man, so I don't care that the reboot series sunk.

INB4 "Waaah waaah, Marvel should make Miles Morales because diversity!". Nobody cares enough about Miles, they aren't going to make a film about him, especially when they have 55 years of material for Peter Parker.
Well, in order to bring Miles Morales, they have to adapt this scene.
http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110623024936/marveldatabase/images/9/93/Peter_Parker_(Earth-1610)_from_Ultimate_Spider-Man_Vol_1_160.jpg
edit: Especially in the context of Marvel Civil War, this will probably happen instead of Aunt May or One More Day. I just wish we had married Spiderman on movies but Joe Q wouldn't allow that.

[Kitten Champion]

Qualification for the role being reasonably around the age of 16, vaguely looking like Peter Parker, and having the capacity to act. That's what the casting agents are looking for and Marvel wants. Asa fits that criteria, so... why not? I'm sure there are other options, but there's hardly some perfect and obvious choice out there they're somehow overlooking. Given that, he's as good a choice as any.

Really, the more significant issue is how they intend to approach his characterization. What sort of Peter Parker does the MCU actually want or need, and how will it compared and contrast to the previous cinematic interpretations? Marvel's only faced this problem with the Incredible Hulk and, well, their first go at it was given a rather tepid reception in a pretty mediocre movie.

Simply put, they need to prove that Marvel Studios is truly the best at adapting their own properties at the end of the day.

[Cheesegear]

INB4 "Waaah waaah, Marvel should make Miles Morales because diversity!"

I think you misunderstand why Miles was popular in the first place. What made Miles popular, was simply the fact that he wasn't Peter Parker, his race had very little to do with anything, save for media headlines. After the One More Day...Drama... People wanted a Spider-Man that didn't suck, and they got it. Miles isn't just not-white, he's also not-Peter.

In relevant news; Supposedly Tom Holland (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4043618/) was running against Butterfield for Spider-Man. Considering I have never even seen anything that Holland has ever done, and the fact that Butterfield was in The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas, well, here's hoping that Butterfield does well.

[Suichimo]

I'm very apprehensive when it comes to Asa. I've only ever seen him in Ender's Game and there was basically no comedy in that. In my opinion, a large part of Spidey is his comedic timing. Andrew Garfield nailed this and I love him as Spiderman for it, sadly they didn't give him too much good material to work with. If Asa can pull off the comedy, fine, but I just don't know with what I've seen him in.

[Lvl45DM!]

Ugh, they are going for ANOTHER Peter Parker? Thats what 3 in 10 years? 3 different Parkers with different backstories but the same personality? I wouldnt have a problem if Andy Garfield was Marvel's or even if they got a different actor to play Andy's or Tobey's Spiderman, But noooo we need another guy playing another version of the same character. I've watched Peter grow from useless nerd to powerhouse (who is a nerd) 3 times in the last 15 years. I'd much prefer if they had a different character or worked from the foundations that have already been there.

I don't think it matters how good an actor they get, or even if they skip the origin story. Its still gonna have the same character arc in his standalone as they had in Spiderman and the Amazing Spiderman.

[Hyena]

They're changing the actor again? Come on, I loved Andrew Garfield.

[Reddish Mage]

I think you misunderstand why Miles was popular in the first place. What made Miles popular, was simply the fact that he wasn't Peter Parker, his race had very little to do with anything, save for media headlines. After the One More Day...Drama... People wanted a Spider-Man that didn't suck, and they got it. Miles isn't just not-white, he's also not-Peter.

In relevant news; Supposedly Tom Holland (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4043618/) was running against Butterfield for Spider-Man. Considering I have never even seen anything that Holland has ever done, and the fact that Butterfield was in The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas, well, here's hoping that Butterfield does well.

I like the reading of "One More Day" as the thing that killed Peter Parker...they thought adult-married Spiderman would kill the franchise, but it was the attempt to forcibly reboot Spiderman back to the same old.

That is my problem with Spiderman though...we had two Souderman reboots in recent memory and I also saw the Broadway play, which is as much a third in my mind as anything. I have absolutely no appetite for ANOTHER Peter Parker, and I don't want to sit through yet-another-origin-story for the guy...however the MCU being what it is...you can't just write another superhero onto the scene without explaining how he got there....

Yeah I think they should have let sleeping spiders lie.

[Logic]

I like the sound of Asa so far.

However, I disliked Andrew Garfield as Peter, and I disliked Tobey McGuire as Spider-Man. In my opinion, neither actor captured the full role, only half of it.

[comicshorse]

There's also the whiplash that sets in when we have three different Spider-Mans in two decades...But that doesn't seem to be a problem for Bond films, so why Spider-Man?

For me the difference is that the Bond movies don't insist on giving us the origin story again every time they swap actors (granted this has only been twice but I'll lay odds the new Spiderman movie will feature it again)

[Closet_Skeleton]

Yeah well Andrew Garfield sucked as Spider-Man, so I don't care that the reboot series sunk.


Andrew Garfield's Peter Parker wasn't written that well, there's not much the actor can do except follow the script and do what the director tells him to.

Garfield's ability to keep that mess watchable makes it hard for me to criticise him as an actor.


3 different Parkers with different backstories but the same personality?

But Garfield and McGuire's characters didn't have the same personality.

[Rakaydos]

For me the difference is that the Bond movies don't insist on giving us the origin story again every time they swap actors (granted this has only been twice but I'll lay odds the new Spiderman movie will feature it again)

Since Spidy will be first appearing in civil war, I doubt it. If he can a cameo in Ant Man, I could totally see a "wink wink" origin alusion, but by civil war he's already a hero.

My hope is that after Infinity War, they use Ada to guide the MCU down the timeline, actually killing off older characters as their actors contracts get too expensive, and play to the MCU's strength- continuity.

[Legato Endless]

For me the difference is that the Bond movies don't insist on giving us the origin story again every time they swap actors (granted this has only been twice but I'll lay odds the new Spiderman movie will feature it again)

Even sans an origin story, Bond is just a viewpoint character most of the time, he's an excuse to give us the Bond formula in the Bond world. He himself isn't much of a character by design, though Craig's is moving in a decidedly contrary direction to this philosophy. Spidey has a lot more narrative weight tied to embedding the audience in his character, and thus I can see people getting tired of it a lot faster.



Yeah I think they should have let sleeping spiders lie.

Sony is also releasing an animated film within the same two year period.


INB4 "Waaah waaah, Marvel should make Miles Morales because diversity!". Nobody cares enough about Miles, they aren't going to make a film about him, especially when they have 55 years of material for Peter Parker.

Well, to bring up another point that is purely monetary, I would note that every single Spider-man film has made less money than the one before it. Even Spider-man 2, which was released in an era of little competition and is by far the most critically acclaimed. Or from the other perspective, Amazing didn't make it despite Superheroes now dominating the movies. From the perspective of watching a famous but flagging IP, some sort of gimmick like a new Spidey might not be a bad idea, because Parker's brand name appeal simply isn't making money as it is.

And inclusion in the MCU won't necessarily solve that. No MCU film has been an abject failure financially, but the less popular properties like Thor do make markedly less money than Avengers and the like. As such, it will be interesting if Marvel does manages to make this raise above passable, because currently general audiences don't seem very enamored.

[Kitten Champion]

I didn't and don't want Miles Morales because he represents diversity. If that were my goal I could equally say make the MCU Peter Parker not-White, it wouldn't effect the character in any meaningful fashion and you open up the number of potential actors to play him.

I want Miles because I like Miles as a character and since he's been consistently well-written from his inception it's easy to understand why he's considered the only really good thing to come from Marvel's Ultimate line. Though admittedly also because I'm tired of the reboots too.

[Cheesegear]

That is my problem with Spiderman though...we had two Souderman reboots in recent memory and I also saw the Broadway play, which is as much a third in my mind as anything. I have absolutely no appetite for ANOTHER Peter Parker, and I don't want to sit through yet-another-origin-story for the guy.

Except that we don't know that that's the case. Sony is in on the deal, this isn't just Marvel's show this time, which is something we've never seen before. What if Sony decides to play their hand and make Garfield's movies stick? Like Edward Norton's Incredible Hulk is both a sequel and a reboot, Eric Bana's Hulk is still in continuity, and until we know otherwise, both Norton's and Bana's Hulks are both in continuity with Ruffalo's Hulk until we know otherwise. We're what, 18 months out from production? Vague speculation is vague. You know, about as much as anyone, if we're going to get another origin story. Because we have precedent with The Hulk, and until we know otherwise, there are no plans for a Hawkeye origin story, either.

Of course, taking Avengers: Age of Ultron into account, one could seriously wonder if The Hurt Locker is Hawkeye's backstory. :smallamused:


For me the difference is that the Bond movies don't insist on giving us the origin story again every time they swap actors (granted this has only been twice but I'll lay odds the new Spiderman movie will feature it again)

See above.


Sony is also releasing an animated film within the same two year period.

...This could all be a bait-and-switch, and Asa Butterfield is merely providing voice-work to an animated film, I hope not. But, once upon a time there was a very strong rumour that Denzel Washington would play Jesus in an upcoming movie and then Flight came out.


And inclusion in the MCU won't necessarily solve that. No MCU film has been an abject failure financially, but the less popular properties like Thor do make markedly less money than Avengers and the like. As such, it will be interesting if Marvel does manages to make this raise above passable, because currently general audiences don't seem very enamored.

For me (and pretty much everyone else), what makes a Superhero Movie, is its villain. Because the 'hero' must rise to the challenge and/or overcome said villain, and, if the villain is a joke, or simply not memorable, then the Hero doesn't really have to do anything. Spider-Mans 1 & 2 gave us Willem Dafoe and Alfred Molina, respectively. Two extremely strong actors, with Dafoe hamming it up for Green Goblin, and Molina's simple screen presence more than made up for McQuire's lack of the same. So, in 1 & 2, Spider-Man has to overcome Dafoe and Molina, and we believe that that is actually a challenge. Spider-Man 3 gave us...Topher Grace? Are you serious? Is the entirety of SM3 a joke? ...Yes.

Really, it's the same reason that Thor is critically, the strongest MCU movie so far. Because the villain is Loki, and we believe that Loki is actually a threat to Thor. We do not believe that Loki is a threat to the Avengers, because we see, on-screen, that it only takes Hulk to beat him. Despite the fact that we see Loki demonstrate on-screen abilities and powers that means that the ending of Avengers should never have happened had Loki not wanted it to. Then we hit Thor 2, we Loki is again demonstrating powers that make every single Avenger look like a bad joke, and we have to rationalize that Loki's eventual capture and imprisonment in Avengers was all part of The Plan. But, Thor 2 has a piss-poor villain and so nobody remembers that movie because Thor was never really challenged in any meaningful fashion.

Where was I? Oh, yeah. As I've said previously, I know Asa Butterfield can act. I've seen it. What we don't know, is who the director will be, and whether or not they can coach Butterfield in the comedic aspects of Spider-Man, and, we don't know who the villain is, or who will play said villain. Because, what we've seen so far, is Spider-Man 2 to 3 go from Molina to Topher Grace, and Amazing Spider-Man 1 and 2 go from Rhys Ifans to Jaime Foxx - in case its unclear, that's a downgrade. We know that legit actors want to be in hero media. Vincent D'Onfrio was Kingpin, damn it. Sir Anthony Hopkins is in Thor, Sir Ben Kingsley is in Iron-Man 3, Robert Redford is in Winter Soldier. If you can get real actors into the piece, you're already halfway into a good movie, and I fully believe that Asa is - or can be - a real actor, all they need now is a supporting cast that isn't terrible.


I didn't and don't want Miles Morales because he represents diversity. [...]
I want Miles because I like Miles as a character and since he's been consistently well-written from his inception it's easy to understand why he's considered the only really good thing to come from Marvel's Ultimate line.

QFT.
I'm already on record saying that I really liked Ben Reilly, and I thoroughly enjoyed Superior Spider-Man, and everyone likes Miles. All three of these things have the same thing in common; They're not Peter Parker.


EDIT: I chanced looking in the Age of Ultron thread, one poster ha conveniently linked this (http://comicbook.com/2015/04/12/kevin-feige-marvels-spider-man-not-origin-story-costume-already-/), which says that the next Spider-Man movie/s will not feature an origin story.

[Psyren]

Well, in order to bring Miles Morales, they have to adapt this scene.
http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110623024936/marveldatabase/images/9/93/Peter_Parker_(Earth-1610)_from_Ultimate_Spider-Man_Vol_1_160.jpg
edit: Especially in the context of Marvel Civil War, this will probably happen instead of Aunt May or One More Day. I just wish we had married Spiderman on movies but Joe Q wouldn't allow that.

Okay, hang on a minute - I though OMD was a colossally stupid story too, but that doesn't mean I want "married Peter" swinging into the MCU either. We've got more than enough plucky muggle ladies dutifully cheering on their superhero menfolk in the MCU from the sidelines as it is (Jane Foster, Laura Barton, Betty Ross, Pepper Potts) - we don't need Mary Jane/Gwen Stacy falling into that role too. I doubt we'll avoid them entirely, but the less screentime we have to devote to one of them wringing their hands or getting kidnapped, the better.

Concerning Miles though, I totally agree - his entire origin/motivation for taking up Spidey's mantle is too wrapped up in Peter Parker to just start with him apropos of nothing, and deserves its own movie. So as much as I'd like to see an actor of color don such a prominent and iconic role, I'm more than willing to wait until they have the time to do it justice.

[t209]

Okay, hang on a minute - I though OMD was a colossally stupid story too, but that doesn't mean I want "married Peter" swinging into the MCU either. We've got more than enough plucky muggle ladies dutifully cheering on their superhero menfolk in the MCU from the sidelines as it is (Jane Foster, Laura Barton, Betty Ross, Pepper Potts) - we don't need Mary Jane/Gwen Stacy falling into that role too. I doubt we'll avoid them entirely, but the less screentime we have to devote to one of them wringing their hands or getting kidnapped, the better.
Well, I actually wanted married Spiderman.
I mean he could be a mentor to Miles Morales like Batman Beyond and possibly lost his leg in Chitauri Invasion (Spidergirl).
So there are other complaints about not adapting Sam Alexander's Nova (half Mexican) and/or Kamala Khan (Pakistani-American) instead of Peter Parker. But the problem is
1) Nova Corps were generic space police in Guardians of the Galaxy. So more time explaining Superman Helmets.
2) Carol Danvers hasn't appear in movies yet. But kinda idiotic to name a Marvel equivalent of Plastic Man/Helen Parr (stretchy and fun) with someone with Superman powers. Guess using a famous name to get hype on minority characters' a bad idea.

[Psyren]

I don't know a thing about the Nova Corps in the comics, nor do I think a lot of people. As far as I'm concerned, "generic space police" is a fine role for them in the MCU.

And I have no problem with "using a famous name to get hype on a minority character" - because as Kitten Champion rightfully stated, it demonstrates what we already know to be true, that the superhero's race or gender is not what makes them a superhero. However, Miles demands a full origin story of his own, so I can see why they want to avoid all that for now. Better to start with Parker, who pretty much anyone setting foot into a Marvel movie either already knows where he came from or doesn't care enough to make getting them up to speed a priority.

[t209]

I don't know a thing about the Nova Corps in the comics, nor do I think a lot of people. As far as I'm concerned, "generic space police" is a fine role for them in the MCU.
I mean like this:
Sam Alexander/Richard Rider Nova appears.
http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120310084723/marveldatabase/images/c/c6/Nova_Vol_4_36_Textless.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0d/Nova_NOW!_1.jpg
audience: "Wait, Nova Corps have superman. How come they never use them in first place?".
And we need a whole new backstory for that. speculation for MCU's Nova
a) a group of Xandarian super heroes who were wiped out and helmet making was forgotten except one of them was owned by a human on earth or a child of a deserter.
b) new technology that allowed soldier to become Superman with helmet from energy of sentient computer.

[Suichimo]

Okay, hang on a minute - I though OMD was a colossally stupid story too, but that doesn't mean I want "married Peter" swinging into the MCU either. We've got more than enough plucky muggle ladies dutifully cheering on their superhero menfolk in the MCU from the sidelines as it is (Jane Foster, Laura Barton, Betty Ross, Pepper Potts) - we don't need Mary Jane/Gwen Stacy falling into that role too. I doubt we'll avoid them entirely, but the less screentime we have to devote to one of them wringing their hands or getting kidnapped, the better.

Concerning Miles though, I totally agree - his entire origin/motivation for taking up Spidey's mantle is too wrapped up in Peter Parker to just start with him apropos of nothing, and deserves its own movie. So as much as I'd like to see an actor of color don such a prominent and iconic role, I'm more than willing to wait until they have the time to do it justice.

This was one of the things that threw me in AoU. Where was Pepper? She couldn't have dropped business things to throw some Extremis fire power around to help Warmachine? Though Falcon wasn't there either... Did Joss think she'd step on Wanda's toes?

Point being that they gave Pepper the knowledge to pilot an Iron Man suit along with her very own super power, but she doesn't get a spot in the C team?

[Quild]

It is known since quite some time now that there was discussion about sharing Spiderman.

Why an actor so young? In Civil War, Spiderman is supposed to be married and has a lot of background already...

It's not going to be the only problem anyway, we'll see what get out of this.

[Cheesegear]

Remembering that we also know that Captain America: Civil War is going to only be very loosely based on the actual Civil War from the comic.

[Psyren]

I mean like this:
Sam Alexander/Richard Rider Nova appears.
http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120310084723/marveldatabase/images/c/c6/Nova_Vol_4_36_Textless.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0d/Nova_NOW!_1.jpg
audience: "Wait, Nova Corps have superman. How come they never use them in first place?".
And we need a whole new backstory for that. speculation for MCU's Nova
a) a group of Xandarian super heroes who were wiped out and helmet making was forgotten except one of them was owned by a human on earth or a child of a deserter.
b) new technology that allowed soldier to become Superman with helmet from energy of sentient computer.

Superman helmets? What? I'm confused.


This was one of the things that threw me in AoU. Where was Pepper? She couldn't have dropped business things to throw some Extremis fire power around to help Warmachine? Though Falcon wasn't there either... Did Joss think she'd step on Wanda's toes?

Point being that they gave Pepper the knowledge to pilot an Iron Man suit along with her very own super power, but she doesn't get a spot in the C team?

I doubt the Extremis thing is going to stick around. Not only would she steal the thunder of the main team, she'd steal Carol's thunder later. She might be able to pull off some flashy trick later but being a full-blown super I don't think is likely.

[The Glyphstone]

I'd like to see it used as a small side joke/reference in a later MCU movie...something like, Tony is working late (as usual) reading some sort of report or paperwork, and ignoring Pepper's pressure to stop for the night, so she reaches out and sets the paper he's reading on fire with her hand. Just to let us know they haven't forgotten her ability exists.

[LeSwordfish]

Incidentally, my prediction for Martin Freeman in Civil War is that he'll be playing Uncle Ben, and they'll get Peter's origin story over and done with within a few minutes in Civil War as a B-plot or flashback.

[Suichimo]

I doubt the Extremis thing is going to stick around. Not only would she steal the thunder of the main team, she'd steal Carol's thunder later. She might be able to pull off some flashy trick later but being a full-blown super I don't think is likely.

That's why I mentioned the C-team. I was pinpointing AoU because of her lack of involvement, despite being up against a genocidal Tony Stark wannabe. Again, Falcon didn't help out either, oddly. I've also gotta imagine that, after the events of IM3, Tony has built her her own personal suit, for self defense at a minimum.

Obviously, she isn't going to get anywhere near the level of the actual heroes. I just thought it was odd that she only got a couple of mentions in the movie.


Incidentally, my prediction for Martin Freeman in Civil War is that he'll be playing Uncle Ben, and they'll get Peter's origin story over and done with within a few minutes in Civil War as a B-plot or flashback.

I've been thinking this as well. They've already said we aren't getting an origin story for Spiderman, but Uncle Ben is far too major to leave out.

[Kitten Champion]

Incidentally, my prediction for Martin Freeman in Civil War is that he'll be playing Uncle Ben, and they'll get Peter's origin story over and done with within a few minutes in Civil War as a B-plot or flashback.

Like Martin Freeman comes out on a sound stage with a "Hi I'm Uncle Ben" sticker on him, says something about power and responsibility, he gets shot, and then the Marvel logo shows up and they do the opening credits.

[LeSwordfish]

Like Martin Freeman comes out on a sound stage with a "Hi I'm Uncle Ben" sticker on him, says something about power and responsibility, he gets shot, and then the Marvel logo shows up and they do the opening credits.

In as many words, yes. The Civil War comics start with a group of civilians dying at the hands of rogue heroes - why not have that happen to Uncle Ben? Make it one of the spidey villains who does it, and you've combined two plots together and set up Spidey's actions for the rest of the film.

[Kitten Champion]

In as many words, yes. The Civil War comics start with a group of civilians dying at the hands of rogue heroes - why not have that happen to Uncle Ben? Make it one of the spidey villains who does it, and you've combined two plots together and set up Spidey's actions for the rest of the film.

Good idea.

It's such a perfunctory thing I was hoping they'd just skip it and have Spider-Man already be Spider-Man before his introduction. Have Tony Stark/Steve Rogers go over Peter's life story in a bit of exposition like they handled Wanda and Pietro in Age of Ultron, then allude to it later in a bit of dialogue with him. However, tacking on Ben's death directly to the overarching plot would be clever, and it could provide a coherent motivation for what he decides to do during the Civil War.

[comicshorse]

EDIT: I chanced looking in the Age of Ultron thread, one poster ha conveniently linked this (http://comicbook.com/2015/04/12/kevin-feige-marvels-spider-man-not-origin-story-costume-already-/), which says that the next Spider-Man movie/s will not feature an origin story.

I stand corrected and happy for it

[Psyren]

In as many words, yes. The Civil War comics start with a group of civilians dying at the hands of rogue heroes - why not have that happen to Uncle Ben? Make it one of the spidey villains who does it, and you've combined two plots together and set up Spidey's actions for the rest of the film.

I'm glad they're not doing an origin story but if they were, this isn't the way to go about it. The whole point of Pete's origin is that the death was easy for him to prevent with his spider powers; if you make it a supervillain that did it, you rob him of that agency because stopping a supervillain from killing one person is much more of a gamble and makes it more difficult to portray as solely being within Pete's power to prevent. And if you make it a supervillain before they became a supervillain, it just feels really contrived - they tried this with Sandman in S3. It also made "bloodthirsty revenge-driven Peter" which does not fit his character at all. But yeah, if they do no origin at all, or restrict it to a short flashback or even just a quick recounting by Spidey along the lines of Quicksilver talking about his parents, that's all they need.


I'd like to see it used as a small side joke/reference in a later MCU movie...something like, Tony is working late (as usual) reading some sort of report or paperwork, and ignoring Pepper's pressure to stop for the night, so she reaches out and sets the paper he's reading on fire with her hand. Just to let us know they haven't forgotten her ability exists.

I would like that, along with a line explaining why she isn't doing more with her powers than burning papers - something like "most of it's out of my system, but I can still do this."

[Rakaydos]

This was one of the things that threw me in AoU. Where was Pepper? She couldn't have dropped business things to throw some Extremis fire power around to help Warmachine?

i thought I remembered a throwaway line at the tower party that Pepper has her own corporation now that keeps her busy.

[Psyren]

i thought I remembered a throwaway line at the tower party that Pepper has her own corporation now that keeps her busy.

"Her own?" My assumption was that she is running Stark's while he is suiting up and playing hero.

But yeah, both she and Jane Foster are conveniently off in other countries.

[Reverent-One]

"Her own?" My assumption was that she is running Stark's while he is suiting up and playing hero.

She's been the CEO since IM2, so it's her company now. Tony doesn't have a role in it anymore.

[Psyren]

She's been the CEO since IM2, so it's her company now. Tony doesn't have a role in it anymore.

She runs it, but it's still his - he didn't divest as far as I can tell, so he still has a majority stake, and his name is still on it.

[Suichimo]

i thought I remembered a throwaway line at the tower party that Pepper has her own corporation now that keeps her busy.

Yeah, that was what I was talking about when I said "She couldn't have dropped business things." Certainly, and this will be spoilers:

If Fury was able to rally SHIELD between the gang leaving Hawkeye's home and Ultron attempting to drop a city from orbit, Pepper could've been brought in to help. If not to use her Extremis abilities, it would've been a lot better if the helicarrier had been secretly maintained by Stark Industries under Pepper's orders.


She runs it, but it's still his - he didn't divest as far as I can tell, so he still has a majority stake, and his name is still on it.

That still makes it her company. Really, all Tony uses it for now is to do his engineering. Also, aren't they married at this point? I can't remember if they did that at the end of IM3 or not.

[Foeofthelance]

Yeah, that was what I was talking about when I said "She couldn't have dropped business things." Certainly, and this will be spoilers:

If Fury was able to rally SHIELD between the gang leaving Hawkeye's home and Ultron attempting to drop a city from orbit, Pepper could've been brought in to help. If not to use her Extremis abilities, it would've been a lot better if the helicarrier had been secretly maintained by Stark Industries under Pepper's orders.



That still makes it her company. Really, all Tony uses it for now is to do his engineering. Also, aren't they married at this point? I can't remember if they did that at the end of IM3 or not.

The thing about Pepper is that she is really not really a combat-centric character. Remember Hawkeye's summary of why their lives are crazy? Pepper doesn't want that. She doesn't enjoy that. Asking her to just go grab a suit of armor and sending her into the fight is the equivalent of grabbing a civilian, handing them a tank, and throwing them into the middle of a battle. It's inconsiderate at best and putting everyone else in danger at best. Pepper's own hand is more for things like rebuilding Hulk-smashed cities and being a not-so-useless Reed Richards, taking Tony's wonder inventions and putting them into play where they can do the most good. The contrast with Tony is that he volunteered for the role, and puts a ton of effort and resources into preparing himself for that role.

[t209]

I'm glad they're not doing an origin story but if they were, this isn't the way to go about it. The whole point of Pete's origin is that the death was easy for him to prevent with his spider powers; if you make it a supervillain that did it, you rob him of that agency because stopping a supervillain from killing one person is much more of a gamble and makes it more difficult to portray as solely being within Pete's power to prevent. And if you make it a supervillain before they became a supervillain, it just feels really contrived - they tried this with Sandman in S3. It also made "bloodthirsty revenge-driven Peter" which does not fit his character at all. But yeah, if they do no origin at all, or restrict it to a short flashback or even just a quick recounting by Spidey along the lines of Quicksilver talking about his parents, that's all they need.
I think that the vegeance part was the whole point of the movie, along with Emo Spiderman. I mean they did show that his "darker" persona done more damage than good, like beating MJ by accident and push Eddie Brock to become Venom.
That was before Superior Spiderman.

[Olinser]

This was one of the things that threw me in AoU. Where was Pepper? She couldn't have dropped business things to throw some Extremis fire power around to help Warmachine? Though Falcon wasn't there either... Did Joss think she'd step on Wanda's toes?

Point being that they gave Pepper the knowledge to pilot an Iron Man suit along with her very own super power, but she doesn't get a spot in the C team?

First, the studio in general seems to be trying to completely forget the train wreck of a plot that was Iron Man 3, I wouldn't look at seeing Extremis re-appearing in any form.

Second, Gwyneth Paltrow earned an unbelievable amount of hate from the fandom for her obnoxious responses to questions regarding Iron Man 3, and that is unfortunately translating into the character. Given the fact that she is at best a secondary character, I don't see Pepper re-appearing unless they plan to replace her with another actress.

[Kitten Champion]

Personally, I have difficulty accepting criticism that Age of Ultron would have be better off with more characters.

[Olinser]

Also, I would like to point out to everybody talking about One More Day - the issue for most people is not necessarily the fact that it was Unmarried Peter Parker.

The PROBLEM was the unbelievable abortion of a plot that brought it about.

To break it down to it's most basic form, there are 3 cornerstone problems with the plot.

1) In a world that includes Dr Strange, Mr Fantastic, Elixir, and innumerable magic and scientific marvels that have healed injuries significantly more severe, and his ONLY way to save her from a simple gunshot is make a deal with the Devil? REALLY? I mean, come on, at least throw in some crazy unique incurable illness that nobody has encountered before, that could at least be hand waved.

2) The fact that Parker would sacrifice the only thing in his life that really gives him happiness in order to give an already almost 90 year old woman AT BEST 5-10 years of life. Especially since, in previous issues, he had already come to terms with the fact that May would die soon.

I mean, seriously, it's not that hard to write this concept to make sense. Substitute Mary Jane in as the one who is dying, and you have a perfectly logical plot. The Devil will save the woman you love, but she won't love you any more. That's a GREAT potential story.

3) So Parker is making a deal with the Devil. And the only thing he's getting is the life of a single person who's already a few years from death anyway? Heck, if we're changing the past, how about you go back and bring Uncle Ben back, his parents, or save god knows how many people from any of the various criminally caused disasters. He's selling basically his happiness away here, he could have gotten a lot more out of the deal than a few years for an 85+ year old woman.

[Kitten Champion]

I would have no objections to Peter's relationship with Mary Jane naturally falling apart and the two getting divorced, God knows there's enough stress in their relationship in the past X amount of years since they've been married for a writer to organically approach it. I imagine some still would disapprove, but that's inevitable regardless of what you choose to do with their relationship or the comic in general.

It was an opportunity for character development, to examine both these characters with some warranted introspection and the awkward emotional steps forward into their separate lives. Quesada's unwillingness to present Peter as a divorcee is among many of the stupid lines of reasoning that went into that comic.

[Legato Endless]

Personally, I have difficulty accepting criticism that Age of Ultron would have be better off with more characters.

Indeed. Nevertheless there is a (bizarre) school of thought among certain fans that would prefer if Marvel's films more resembled their massive cross over events, and thus, feels the ensembles that have appeared in Avengers have been entirely too small.

[Reddish Mage]

Indeed. Nevertheless there is a (bizarre) school of thought among certain fans that would prefer if Marvel's films more resembled their massive cross over events, and thus, feels the ensembles that have appeared in Avengers have been entirely too small.

Haven't heard of these or from these fans. Imagine they are of the more rabid variety who want their comic on the screen just how it is, no concern about mundane things like ensuring the audience connects to each character...

If anything Avengers 2 shows that the more the team grows, the more character development gets skimmed over or simply lost.

[Psyren]

@ Olinser - Agreed on all three points, though I think part of the problem is that Quesada was so gung-ho to get back to swingin' single Pete that he did not turn the critical eye on those terrible plot turns that he should have.


I would have no objections to Peter's relationship with Mary Jane naturally falling apart and the two getting divorced, God knows there's enough stress in their relationship in the past X amount of years since they've been married for a writer to organically approach it. I imagine some still would disapprove, but that's inevitable regardless of what you choose to do with their relationship or the comic in general.

It was an opportunity for character development, to examine both these characters with some warranted introspection and the awkward emotional steps forward into their separate lives. Quesada's unwillingness to present Peter as a divorcee is among many of the stupid lines of reasoning that went into that comic.

Well to be fair, a divorce is actually a very different scenario. It would have meant that their relationship was on shaky enough ground to simply end on its own - and One More Day for all its failings did prove one thing, that it would take something external (and extraordinary) to split them up. And it would mean that, quite simply, if they got back together then whatever problems caused the split in the first place would likely still be there, meaning it could just up and happen again.

[Kitten Champion]

Well to be fair, a divorce is actually a very different scenario.

Then selling your marriage to the devil, I would hope so.


It would have meant that their relationship was on shaky enough ground to simply end on its own

Sure, but the strength of their marriage is entirely at the mercy of the writer to begin with. If Quesada or whomever wanted to explore the life of single Peter again - which, fine, comics change the status quo all the time in similar ways - then to that end, constructing an entirely plausible arc between these two characters which gradually leads to their separation seems to me to be both the most mature way to go about it and the one most likely to bring out the skill of the writer.


- and One More Day for all its failings did prove one thing, that it would take something external (and extraordinary) to split them up.

Perhaps I'm simply not enough of a romantic to care. They're people, even strong relationships can falter on stress of daily existence, that in itself is external and completely non-diabolical in origin.


And it would mean that, quite simply, if they got back together then whatever problems caused the split in the first place would likely still be there, meaning it could just up and happen again.

... sure, but again, that's real life. If the writers want them together again they can simply develop their characters to address the character's faults which lead to the initial demise of their relationship, as people grow and change with time and experience.

[Psyren]

Perhaps I'm simply not enough of a romantic to care. They're people, even strong relationships can falter on stress of daily existence, that in itself is external and completely non-diabolical in origin.

The strong ones don't crumble due to "daily existence," otherwise they weren't all that strong, now were they?

Again, not saying that OMD's approach was good - quite the opposite in fact - but I don't think this approach would have been any better.


... sure, but again, that's real life. If the writers want them together again they can simply develop their characters to address the character's faults which lead to the initial demise of their relationship, as people grow and change with time and experience.

Given that the fault you came up with was "he's a superhero" - unless there's some other source of stress you were referring to - that's not really the kind of thing you can write out of his character.

[Kitten Champion]

The strong ones don't crumble due to "daily existence," otherwise they weren't all that strong, now were they?

Happens all the time, don't underestimate daily stress' capacity to erode a loving relationship.



Again, not saying that OMD's approach was good - quite the opposite in fact - but I don't think this approach would have been any better.

Mine isn't melodramatic enough for you?


Given that the fault you came up with was "he's a superhero" - unless there's some other source of stress you were referring to - that's not really the kind of thing you can write out of his character.

What? Where did I say that? Peter and Mary Jane have numerous character flaws between them that don't extend from superheroic melodrama. They've had fights - some severe - and falling outs in the past. Someone with JMS's capacity to write people could have approached a Peter and Mary Jane separation without resorting to any such trite cliches.

[Cheesegear]

Happens all the time, don't underestimate daily stress' capacity to erode a loving relationship.

The fact that he's willing to sell his relationship in the first place for the life of an old lady proves that there is something seriously wrong with Pete. Unfortunately, the correct method of writing this story would be to have Aunt May actually die, and then have Pete go completely off-rails (like what actually happens to people when a loved one dies), and then have MJ leave him because of the things that Pete does.

Then again, I think alcoholic, self-destructive Peter wouldn't go over well, either.

[t209]

Then again, I think alcoholic, self-destructive Peter wouldn't go over well, either.
Umm Demon In A Bottle?

[Psyren]

Happens all the time, don't underestimate daily stress' capacity to erode a loving relationship.

But when your relationship fails for no clear reason like this, it generally means you weren't actually meant to be with that person. Which is ironically far more lasting than anything Mephisto could have done.

Narratively "I genuinely love you but the devil made us both forget" is a Chekov's Gun - that shoe will drop at some point in the future, and indeed it looks like that's exactly what they're about to do. Whereas "our love can't stand up to day-to-day crap that every relationship has to deal with" calls the love itself into question in a much more fundamental way.


Mine isn't melodramatic enough for you?

Again, unless your ultimate plan is for him to have realized he was just never that into Mary Jane to begin with, I don't see the point.


Where did I say that? Peter and Mary Jane have numerous character flaws between them that don't extend from superheroic melodrama. They've had fights - some severe - and falling outs in the past. Someone with JMS's capacity to write people could have approached a Peter and Mary Jane separation without resorting to any such trite cliches.

Exactly, they've had numerous falling-outs in the past. Yawn, nothing special. None of those had anything meaningful to say about their relationship as a whole, because it clearly endured, so unless your plan is to say there were never meant to be in the first place, this one would be no different. (Your way makes me imagine Peter and Mary Jane angsting at each other Ross and Rachel-style. "We were on a break!" :smalltongue:)


The fact that he's willing to sell his relationship in the first place for the life of an old lady proves that there is something seriously wrong with Pete. Unfortunately, the correct method of writing this story would be to have Aunt May actually die, and then have Pete go completely off-rails (like what actually happens to people when a loved one dies), and then have MJ leave him because of the things that Pete does.

Then again, I think alcoholic, self-destructive Peter wouldn't go over well, either.

...Has he ever swung while drunk? I could imagine him crashing through some poor family's window, clutching a bottle of Jack, and passing out in their bathtub while softly wetting himself...

[Kitten Champion]

But when your relationship fails for no clear reason like this, it generally means you weren't actually meant to be with that person. Which is ironically far more lasting than anything Mephisto could have done.

Narratively "I genuinely love you but the devil made us both forget" is a Chekov's Gun - that shoe will drop at some point in the future, and indeed it looks like that's exactly what they're about to do. Whereas "our love can't stand up to day-to-day crap that every relationship has to deal with" calls the love itself into question in a much more fundamental way.

But, no one is "actually meant to be with" anyone. Relationships are things constructed of time, effort, and trust - not formed by the stars above to be everlasting regardless of the shifting states of people's egos and desires. They can fall apart as easily as they come together. The only thing that kept Peter and Mary Jane together was the author and editorial staff agreeing that their relationship made the books more interesting and marketable to their reader base.



Again, unless your ultimate plan is for him to have realized he was just never that into Mary Jane to begin with, I don't see the point.

Narratively, making a Faustian deal to erase their relationship is purest melodrama. It doesn't extend from the characters internal motivations or their relationship hitherto, it's a fiat forced upon them by circumstances because the alternative is slightly more awful - at least in theory, I don't care if Aunt May died, she's like 2000 years old now. Worse still, because they never actually acknowledge that it happened to them - since the whole of reality has been rewritten to erase their choice and everything leading to it from history - they never have to deal with the consequences of their decision or grow as people like everyone else whose marriage comes crashing down around them actually has to deal with.

The point is to come back - I mean presuming Marvel wants them to reconcile - in two, three, or five years, now as different people, and again re-explore the possibilities of their relationship. Not wipe it from existence when its inconvenient and get back to it through another force majeure, that's bad writing and stupid.



Exactly, they've had numerous falling-outs in the past. Yawn, nothing special. None of those had anything meaningful to say about their relationship as a whole, because it clearly endured, so unless your plan is to say there were never meant to be in the first place, this one would be no different. (Your way makes me imagine Peter and Mary Jane angsting at each other Ross and Rachel-style. "We were on a break!" :smalltongue:)

Again, no, they aren't meant to be together. I know this because Joe Quesada made his companies' most marketable and beloved superhero commit to a deal with the literal devil to end their relationship, as opposed to not ending their relationship. It's the choice of the writers - not the characters - who they ultimately end up screwing at the end of the day. Had One More Day gone over the readership like gangbusters and Carlie Cooper become Marvel comic's new sweetheart, Mary Jane would be in the annals of Spider-Man lore along with Gwen Stacey.

As to "nothing special", thing is, there's no ideal way to separate a married couple in comic books. The options were either to kill Mary Jane, which is the comic book standard decision, retcon their relationship through some kind of continuity-wide reboot so fans can complain about it, which is the other comic book standard decision and what basically happen, or have their relationship end like goddamned human beings. I choose to the latter, because it's the least stupid of the bunch.

Furthermore, most stories have been done to death, especially with regards to relationships. With the strength of a good writer like Straczynski it doesn't have to be yawn-worthy hack writing, and has the actual potential to develop their characters.

[Cheesegear]

The point is to come back - I mean presuming Marvel wants them to reconcile - in two, three, or five years, now as different people, and again re-explore the possibilities of their relationship. Not wipe it from existence when its inconvenient and get back to it through another force majeure, that's bad writing and stupid.

June is coming (http://marvel.wikia.com/Amazing_Spider-Man:_Renew_Your_Vows_Vol_1_1).


As to "nothing special", thing is, there's no ideal way to separate a married couple in comic books. The options were either to kill Mary Jane, which is the comic book standard decision, retcon their relationship through some kind of continuity-wide reboot so fans can complain about it, which is the other comic book standard decision and what basically happen, or have their relationship end like goddamned human beings. I choose to the latter, because it's the least stupid of the bunch.

Almost anything is better than a woman in a fridge.
Also recall that another effect of One More Day was retconning the fact that Pete had also outed himself during Civil War - it wasn't all relationship drama.

[t209]

June is coming (http://marvel.wikia.com/Amazing_Spider-Man:_Renew_Your_Vows_Vol_1_1).



Almost anything is better than a woman in a fridge.
Also recall that another effect of One More Day was retconning the fact that Pete had also outed himself during Civil War - it wasn't all relationship drama.

Still believe that Renew your Vow will be a miserable story if you remember what Dan Slott did to Spidergirl and Amazing Friends.

[Kitten Champion]

Almost anything is better than a woman in a fridge.
Also recall that another effect of One More Day was retconning the fact that Pete had also outed himself during Civil War - it wasn't all relationship drama.

I keep thinking it should have been the opposite. That as a married man his priorities should have been to protect Mary Jane from the collateral damage of unmasking himself, whereas single Peter would be more willing to take the risk if he genuinely thought it Registration was ethically sound... but, whatever, there's no point griping about the fallout of a near decade old comic nor its impact on an even older comic event that's barely mentioned anymore.

[Psyren]

But, no one is "actually meant to be with" anyone. Relationships are things constructed of time, effort, and trust - not formed by the stars above to be everlasting regardless of the shifting states of people's egos and desires. They can fall apart as easily as they come together. The only thing that kept Peter and Mary Jane together was the author and editorial staff agreeing that their relationship made the books more interesting and marketable to their reader base.

I think you're going to have a very hard time getting widespread buy-in for such a cynical and depressing viewpoint. All is random, love is fleeting, relationships can fall apart on a dime for little to no reason, defeat is as likely as victory - these are not the reasons people most people turn to literature, and particularly superhero comics, to begin with. No, we do want to read about that love that was meant to be, and that perseveres against all odds. It's pretty much the reason why One More Day is getting undone (see below.)



Narratively, making a Faustian deal to erase their relationship is purest melodrama. It doesn't extend from the characters internal motivations or their relationship hitherto, it's a fiat forced upon them by circumstances because the alternative is slightly more awful - at least in theory, I don't care if Aunt May died, she's like 2000 years old now. Worse still, because they never actually acknowledge that it happened to them - since the whole of reality has been rewritten to erase their choice and everything leading to it from history - they never have to deal with the consequences of their decision or grow as people like everyone else whose marriage comes crashing down around them actually has to deal with.

The point is to come back - I mean presuming Marvel wants them to reconcile - in two, three, or five years, now as different people, and again re-explore the possibilities of their relationship. Not wipe it from existence when its inconvenient and get back to it through another force majeure, that's bad writing and stupid.

You're preaching to the choir. One More Day was indeed stupid, I am not arguing otherwise.

What I'm saying is that "eh, things didn't work out because reasons" is not a much better story either.


Again, no, they aren't meant to be together. I know this because Joe Quesada made his companies' most marketable and beloved superhero commit to a deal with the literal devil to end their relationship, as opposed to not ending their relationship.

So what? Do you honestly think Quesada's decision there will stand? If you really believe that, I have a lovely bridge to-

Actually, never mind! (http://www.ew.com/article/2015/03/16/amazing-spider-man-renew-your-vows-will-be-last-spider-man-story)



As to "nothing special", thing is, there's no ideal way to separate a married couple in comic books. The options were either to kill Mary Jane, which is the comic book standard decision, retcon their relationship through some kind of continuity-wide reboot so fans can complain about it, which is the other comic book standard decision and what basically happen, or have their relationship end like goddamned human beings. I choose to the latter, because it's the least stupid of the bunch.

Furthermore, most stories have been done to death, especially with regards to relationships. With the strength of a good writer like Straczynski it doesn't have to be yawn-worthy hack writing, and has the actual potential to develop their characters.

"Goddamned human beings," when their relationships end, generally don't look back :smalltongue: And this is what I meant about the irony of it all - that having the relationship simply fizzle on such a mundane note is actually tougher to reverse than the literal devil taking it away.

I think the difference between us is that I was always operating under the assumption that OMD would be undone, and it appears my assumption is the one bearing fruit. You perhaps expected it to be a final decision - which to me is an odd stance to take about anything in a mainstream comic, where even death itself is a revolving door.

[comicshorse]

.. but, whatever, there's no point griping about the fallout of a near decade old comic nor its impact on an even older comic event that's barely mentioned anymore.

HERESY !!!! :smallsmile:

[Cikomyr]

...i liked Andrew Garfield...

Also, have RDJ been confirmed for Civil War? Because CW would indeed flow very naturally from Age of Ultron, where they set up both men's flaws and beliefs at odds and didnt resolved it.

Tony Stark didnt learned a single thing of the whole Ordeal, except that he needs a bigger toy.
Rogers learned.. That he cannot trust Stark not to step over the line.. And that there is no home for.him to go back to. There is only the.everwar.

...yhea, you could have weaved Civil War around Spider Man, and with both IM and CA trying to push him on their respective side. Kind of a repeat of Batman vs Joker trying to sway Harvey Dent, but with more moral ambiguity.

[Calemyr]

...i liked Andrew Garfield...

Also, have RDJ been confirmed for Civil War? Because CW would indeed flow very naturally from Age of Ultron, where they set up both men's flaws and beliefs at odds and didnt resolved it.

Tony Stark didnt learned a single thing of the whole Ordeal, except that he needs a bigger toy.
Rogers learned.. That he cannot trust Stark not to step over the line.. And that there is no home for.him to go back to. There is only the.everwar.

...yhea, you could have weaved Civil War around Spider Man, and with both IM and CA trying to push him on their respective side. Kind of a repeat of Batman vs Joker trying to sway Harvey Dent, but with more moral ambiguity.

RDJ is shown on the "Pick a side" ads for Civil War, so it's reasonable to assume. Besides, it's RDJ! The only character that comes close to being as cool as him in Ultron is Hawkeye - and who would have thought that?

According to Wikipedia (and who doesn't trust that?), Civil War will have Iron Man, War Machine, Vision, Ant-Man, Wanda, and Hawkeye, along with the Captain America standbys of Black Widow, Falcon, and Bucky.

[Psyren]

...i liked Andrew Garfield...

Also, have RDJ been confirmed for Civil War? Because CW would indeed flow very naturally from Age of Ultron, where they set up both men's flaws and beliefs at odds and didnt resolved it.

Tony Stark didnt learned a single thing of the whole Ordeal, except that he needs a bigger toy.
Rogers learned.. That he cannot trust Stark not to step over the line.. And that there is no home for.him to go back to. There is only the.everwar.

...yhea, you could have weaved Civil War around Spider Man, and with both IM and CA trying to push him on their respective side. Kind of a repeat of Batman vs Joker trying to sway Harvey Dent, but with more moral ambiguity.

What I thought was odd about AoU's ending was that Stark and Cap appeared to end on pretty good terms, ribbing Thor about his hammer and such. I expected a little more friction/rift heading into CW. Instead it looks like all was forgiven and we're back to being buddy-buddy.


RDJ is shown on the "Pick a side" ads for Civil War, so it's reasonable to assume. Besides, it's RDJ! The only character that comes close to being as cool as him in Ultron is Hawkeye - and who would have thought that?

I rank Vision at the top of the cool scale by far personally. He stole every single scene he was in. Can't wait to see more of him.

Quicksilver also stole the show, so fingers crossed there.

[Calemyr]

What I thought was odd about AoU's ending was that Stark and Cap appeared to end on pretty good terms, ribbing Thor about his hammer and such. I expected a little more friction/rift heading into CW. Instead it looks like all was forgiven and we're back to being buddy-buddy.



I rank Vision at the top of the cool scale by far personally. He stole every single scene he was in. Can't wait to see more of him.

Quicksilver also stole the show, so fingers crossed there.

Meh, Vision didn't strike any cords with me. He looked entirely too human, he talked more like a god than Thor, and, despite having a fricking Infinity Stone, he only got two or three decent hits in (nothing show stopping) and cut Ultron off from the internet. I didn't dislike him, but he didn't have much screen time to make an impression and squandered most of what he did have.

Quicksilver... Guy at least had a few moments to shine (that irritable look when a cop shot him, for one), but for the most part he really only made others look good. Hawkeye's "I could do it! Nobody would know!" line is Quicksilver's greatest contribution, to my mind.

[Olinser]

Meh, Vision didn't strike any cords with me. He looked entirely too human, he talked more like a god than Thor, and, despite having a fricking Infinity Stone, he only got two or three decent hits in (nothing show stopping) and cut Ultron off from the internet. I didn't dislike him, but he didn't have much screen time to make an impression and squandered most of what he did have.

Quicksilver... Guy at least had a few moments to shine (that irritable look when a cop shot him, for one), but for the most part he really only made others look good. Hawkeye's "I could do it! Nobody would know!" line is Quicksilver's greatest contribution, to my mind.

Well Vision only had what.... 3 minutes of screen time that didn't involve non-verbal fighting? In this movie he isn't a character, he's a plot device.

Hopefully his next appearance the character will be fleshed out.

Quicksilver.... frankly, that felt to me like they'd written into the script 'CHARACTER DIES HERE!!!! BIG SAD SCENE!!!', and just swapped in whoever they felt like killing.

I felt like if it was going to be Quicksilver they should have replaced Hawkeye with Iron Man as the one he was saving, forcing Quicksilver to choose between seeing the target of his hate die, and saving a child. That would have been a great scene.

[Dusk Eclipse]

What I thought was odd about AoU's ending was that Stark and Cap appeared to end on pretty good terms, ribbing Thor about his hammer and such. I expected a little more friction/rift heading into CW. Instead it looks like all was forgiven and we're back to being buddy-buddy.



I rank Vision at the top of the cool scale by far personally. He stole every single scene he was in. Can't wait to see more of him.

Quicksilver also stole the show, so fingers crossed there.


Well, we know Crossbones and Baron Zemo will appear in CW, so even if Stark and Rogers ended up in relatively good terms in AoU, I think it is probable that the first act of CW will be these two ^ driving a wedge between the cap and Ironman.

[Psyren]

Well Vision only had what.... 3 minutes of screen time that didn't involve non-verbal fighting? In this movie he isn't a character, he's a plot device.

He had plenty of character even with those small appearances. You get a firm grasp of who he is and what he believes in, or at least I did. That's why I think he had such a strong impact - with only the tiny bit of screentime he got, he optimized the hell out of it.


Meh, Vision didn't strike any cords with me. He looked entirely too human, he talked more like a god than Thor, and, despite having a fricking Infinity Stone, he only got two or three decent hits in (nothing show stopping) and cut Ultron off from the internet. I didn't dislike him, but he didn't have much screen time to make an impression and squandered most of what he did have.

That stone is the Mind Stone though - yeah it contains a lot of energy, but the really dramatic, planet-cracking stuff is supposed to be left to stones like Space and Power. And Vision himself isn't really supposed to be a heavy hitter the way Thor, Iron Man or Hulk are. So I'm honestly not sure what you were expecting.

He's the team's wisdom - a trait they sorely need, because Cap was pretty much the only one with that trait before, and his difficulty grappling with the realities of modern life gets in the way of that at times. They also need a new tech/wizard with Stark stepping back and Banner MIA. Rhodes can bring Iron Man's firepower to the table but not even close to his genius.

[t209]

Quicksilver.... frankly, that felt to me like they'd written into the script 'CHARACTER DIES HERE!!!! BIG SAD SCENE!!!', and just swapped in whoever they felt like killing.
I hope they'll bring him back in Inhumans, right?

[Calemyr]

He had plenty of character even with those small appearances. You get a firm grasp of who he is and what he believes in, or at least I did. That's why I think he had such a strong impact - with only the tiny bit of screentime he got, he optimized the hell out of it.

That stone is the Mind Stone though - yeah it contains a lot of energy, but the really dramatic, planet-cracking stuff is supposed to be left to stones like Space and Power. And Vision himself isn't really supposed to be a heavy hitter the way Thor, Iron Man or Hulk are. So I'm honestly not sure what you were expecting.

He's the team's wisdom - a trait they sorely need, because Cap was pretty much the only one with that trait before, and his difficulty grappling with the realities of modern life gets in the way of that at times. They also need a new tech/wizard with Stark stepping back and Banner MIA. Rhodes can bring Iron Man's firepower to the table but not even close to his genius.

The only scene of Vision's that got any reaction from me was the showdown with the last fragment of Ultron. "They're doomed." "I know, but something doesn't have to last forever to be beautiful." That was good. Nothing else really impressed me.

And I'll grant you that, yeah, in a later movie, he'll bring something of value to the team, filling in gaps that either never were filled or that are left by departing heroes. In later movies, he may well be the glue (though I hope they make his face less human in future movies. Doctor Who did better and I'm not even talking Nu Who). But for this movie he's simply "meh". It was a clever way to introduce him, and put the Mind Stone into play again, but Howard the Duck made a more impressive appearance in Guardians of the Galaxy.

[Psyren]

Yeah, sorry Calemyr - I don't doubt that there are some folks besides you out there who rank Howard the Duck's appearance over Vision's, but I'm willing to bet a fair amount of gp that you guys are a pretty tiny minority. They can't please everyone.


I hope they'll bring him back in Inhumans, right?

I hope so, if not sooner.

What I did notice was that, despite the number and severity of his wounds, he didn't appear to be bleeding a whole lot.

[Calemyr]

Yeah, sorry Calemyr - I don't doubt that there are some folks besides you out there who rank Howard the Duck's appearance over Vision's, but I'm willing to bet a fair amount of gp that you guys are a pretty tiny minority. They can't please everyone.

It was mostly a joke, but I do think that the bonus scene with the Duck defined the character better than Vision's scenes did. Maybe I'm wrong but he only seemed to stand out four times in the movie:
1) When he was activated, and that scene was more about everyone's reaction to him than Vision himself.
2) The beginning of the showdown with Ultron, where he hacked Ultron out of the net, which was more about Ultron and Stark's reactions than Vision. (And filling in the problem of the Internet in regards to Ultron's omnipresence.)
3) The final push against Ultron, where he used the hammer and then teamed with Thor and Stark to melt his face and one quick shot hunting escaping mechs afterwards (which was again more about War Machine's reaction than Vision himself).
4) The last fragment of Ultron which, as I said, was actually good.

Beyond that, he was simply Sir Not-Appearing-in-this-Picture. The finale did a grand job of showing every Avenger struggling against insurmountable odds and seeming certain doom, some great character developing scenes with Hawkeye and the Maximov's. Some good interaction between Cap/Widow and Thor/Stark as they muse about the very real chances they'll die. Vision was nowhere in any of that. Nothing he said had any soul to it (until scene 4), nothing painted him as anything but raw vanilla godlike purity. "I don't want to harm Ultron as he's unique, but he's a threat so I will destroy him." Yeah, he can pick up Thor's hammer and in canon that's pretty impressive, but it doesn't say a bloody thing about him beyond the fact that he's "worthy". Certainly not what makes him worthy. Stark's Iron Legion had more personality.

Howard's scene, on the other hand, summed him up pretty well, I think. He's just... there. Making himself comfortable in the rubble, pouring himself a drink, and commenting on what catches his attention as if nothing was wrong with the scenario other than a dog licking a guy's face. That creates a rather compelling concept of a character in 30 seconds.

Note, I'm not saying Vision is bad. He's A2's equivalent of A1's Hawkeye - largely a non-character there to move things forward.

[Reverent-One]

It was mostly a joke, but I do think that the bonus scene with the Duck defined the character better than Vision's scenes did. Maybe I'm wrong but he only seemed to stand out four times in the movie:
1) When he was activated, and that scene was more about everyone's reaction to him than Vision himself.

Given that he picks up the hammer in that scene, I'd say that says a lot about him.

[Calemyr]

Given that he picks up the hammer in that scene, I'd say that says a lot about him.

As I said, picking up the hammer is impressive and important, but it says nothing about him beyond he's "worthy". Not why he's worthy or who he is or anything. For all it matters, he could be "worthy" simply by virtue of being completely innocent (a day old) while still wielding superhuman power (he was supposed to be Ultron's final form, after all). All it does is give Thor an excuse to agree to his presence and act as a setup to one of Vision's few noteworthy actions.

[Psyren]

Calemyr I suspect we will have to agree to disagree and leave it at that. The comparison to A1 Hawkeye isn't much less of a joke than the Howard the Duck comparison as far as I'm concerned.

[Calemyr]

Calemyr I suspect we will have to agree to disagree and leave it at that. The comparison to A1 Hawkeye isn't much less of a joke than the Howard the Duck comparison as far as I'm concerned.

Fair enough. I certainly mean no hostility. I would, however, be very curious to know what he did to mark himself as your top spot for coolness. Maybe it's something I missed, maybe it's just a point where we have divergent priorities. Either way, I'm interested. Indeed, I was hoping for more of a "why I thought he was cool" rather than "you're wrong" argument.

I have, for my part, endeavored to use concrete examples of what was done and where and why I feel it failed. I would very much like to be shown where it worked.

[Olinser]

I hope they'll bring him back in Inhumans, right?

They won't. HOWEVER, X-Men universe Quicksilver (Played by Evan Peters) is still alive and well and I believe already contracted to appear in X-Men: Apocalypse.

The copyright issues around Quicksilver are pretty murky, especially since he was such a breakout character in Days of Future Past. They were much more willing to let Scarlet Witch go to Avengers for an extended period of time because they hadn't even had an official appearance of their own version of her yet, but Quicksilver is pure gold for them (especially since Evan Peters is simultaneously really taking off as an actor) - there was even serious discussion about making a Quicksilver solo movie, which would have marked THE first character from X-Men other than Wolverine to get their own movie.

[Psyren]

They won't.

The current rumor (http://www.franchiseherald.com/articles/27019/20150511/avengers-3-plot-spoilers.htm) is that Aaron Taylor-Johnson isn't done with Marvel just yet. If he does show up in A3 (either part), it might be just a flashback to motivate SW, or it might be a true return fueled by TAHITI/Terrigen Mist/insert method here. Either way, I'm not counting him out just yet.


Fair enough. I certainly mean no hostility. I would, however, be very curious to know what he did to mark himself as your top spot for coolness. Maybe it's something I missed, maybe it's just a point where we have divergent priorities. Either way, I'm interested. Indeed, I was hoping for more of a "why I thought he was cool" rather than "you're wrong" argument.

I have, for my part, endeavored to use concrete examples of what was done and where and why I feel it failed. I would very much like to be shown where it worked.

As you wish. Let's start with what he is, as there is plenty of cool just in how he was adapted to this version.


- His body is composed of an alloy of vibranium and synthetically-created organic tissue. MCU Vibranium is of course extremely versatile - perhaps moreso than it was even in the comics, which have a wider variety of fantastic metals to draw upon (adamntium, carbonium etc.) For legal and phlebotinum conservation reasons, vibranium and Uru (Thor's hammer stuff) are pretty much it when it comes to magic metals in the MCU, so there is no real telling what MCU Vision will be capable of if he goes all out - though we've already seen his signature powers of intangibility, flight and durability show up in AoU.

- His mind contains all of Ultron's knowledge (read: nearly all of Stark's) and is tempered by Jarvis' wisdom and compassion for life. Jarvis was already the team wizard/hacker, and now he brings all those smarts to the table without being tethered to a frail/egotistical meatbag. Certainly Vision will have weaknesses of his own that we will see in future installments (most notably that gem on his head - we'll get back to that) but in practical terms, we're getting almost all the benefits of Iron Man with fewer of the drawbacks.

- Both his body and mind were the product of man and machine parentage. This is used not just to explain his physical and mental structure, but it clearly shapes his outlook on life as well. His body was crafted by both man and machine - (Ultron, and Helen Cho, one of the planet's most brilliant neuroscientists), while his mind and personality come from Jarvis, with Stark and Banner applying the finishing touches. All those influences give him plenty of reason to appreciate the diversity of the human condition - the hands that shaped his clay were many, and all flawed, yet remove any one of them and he would not exist. Is it any wonder then that he sees the beauty in life, despite all the failings of his parents? And the biggest difference between Vision and Ultron, is that Jarvis willingly consented to being born into this form, to join a war he was already waging alone in the digital realm.

- Then we get to the Mind Stone itself. This is perhaps the most unique element of the MCU adaptation - in the comics, the crystal on his forehead is simply a "solar jewel" that powers him with sunlight. In this continuity, it's a bona fide Infinity Gem and supercomputer. Now, this does not bode well for him in the future - the Gauntlet is as clear a Chekov's Gun as they come, so that gem is coming out of his head at some point - but at least for the moment, he currently has the potential to be the most powerful character in the MCU save for Thanos himself, and he is unequivocally on the side of good.

- Speaking of goodness, let's touch on that for a bit. Despite all Vision's physical and mental power, he is innocent - and not merely just innocent, he is also unfailingly humble. The perfect body and mind, yet he describes himself as a "disappointment" and even goes so far as to say he might be a monster. But he was willing to try and save the world anyway, because he knows that only he could have had a prayer at truly stopping Ultron. He also has true compassion for Ultron, because he knows better than anyone that Ultron did not ask to be born. "I don't want to kill Ultron. He's unique... and he's in pain. But that pain will roll over the Earth. So he must be destroyed: every form he's built, every trace of his presence on the 'net. We have to act now, and not one of us can do it without the others."


From there, we go to his words and actions on-screen.


- Hopefully from the spoiler above you can see why he values humanity so highly, despite our failings. He is living(?) proof that, flaws and all, we have the potential to build truly wondrous things. And that is what he tries, unsuccessfully, to impress upon Ultron at the end.

- In the final fight - his very first words to Ultron are an attempt not to fight. Nobody else had even bothered trying that, not even Cap. To the rest, he was just an AI gone bad that needed to be put down, but to Vision, Ultron too was a form of life and deserved that chance. Would you see Stark trying that, or Thor, or Hulk, or Widow or Hawkeye? And then his very first attack was to cut off Ultron's digital escape, while he had the element of surprise. Even Ultron was caught off guard by that. Vision is not above a surprise attack if it will save more lives in the future.

- Speaking of the Ultron-Vision exchange - that was the part about him I found the most interesting of all, all his optimistic lines about the nature of humanity. You want to know what's really boring in sci-fi movies? The killer AI that reads our history and decides we're all Too Dumb To Live. You want to know what's just as boring? The good AI that either ends up being Too Good For This Sinful Earth, or corrupted/enslaved by a villain (or just jaded by the passage of years) to eventually become the first kind, or just commit suicide. Vision is one of our best chances at breaking away from these two clichés and seeing an AI that just plain likes us, warts and all, and his every line of dialogue brings that across. We're odd, but there is grace in our failings. He knows we don't trust him, but he'll just keep moving forward anyway, because there are important things to do and we need to go do them. Now quit stalling and take your hammer.

More importantly, we know WHY he feels this way about us (see first spoiler.) He's humanity's biggest cheerleader since Kal-El, and he has every reason to be - he owes his existence to us, so he knows what we can do. Vision is the best Superman we've ever gotten on screen, and he isn't even Superman.

- Then lets go to the little details of his performance. Glancing at Thor and emulating his cape - a cutesy moment that also reveals yet another facet of his onion personality, that he's not above a bit of harmless vanity. Not giving the easy answer ("I am harmless") to Captain America, because it's simply not true - he is extremely dangerous, and he knows it, and he furthermore knows the question Cap was actually asking was "can we control you?" The answer is no, and that is what makes him dangerous. Then later, he risks his life to save Scarlet Witch, yet another "villain" to whom he owes his very existence.

Basically every single moment of Vision in this movie was pure gold from where I'm sitting. I don't just think he's cool - I think he's far and away the coolest thing to enter the MCU, period. And I look at all the great stuff above that they only needed a few minutes to convey, and then look at your comparisons to brainwashed Hawkeye and a CGI duck and I can only shake my head.

[Calemyr]

As you wish.

Well said. A case eloquently stated, backed by passion and meditation. And, I note, answering the pertinent question of "why you consider him cool" rather than "why I should".

Where we agree:

1) Implementation: They did an impressive job of implementing a complex and abnormal comic book character in a roughly contemporary cinematic universe, from bringing the mind stone into play in a creative manner to cleverly marrying his counterpart's bipolar representation as both an android and a cyborg.

2) Practical Pacifism: I do like how Vision stands by his statement. He doesn't want to kill Ultron, so he attempts to resolve things peacefully. He knows he has to, however, so when the attempt fails he gets right to work.

Where we disagree:

1) I think you're putting a lot of weight on the potential Vision has (which is considerable), rather than what he has actually achieved. He is very much a green and red ball of concentrated potential, and may very well prove to be incredibly awesome in Civil War and beyond. As of now, however, the potential has not been well realized.

2) While I agree with you that Vision is a better Superman than most movie Supermen, I see that as a downside while you see it as an advantage. Some renditions of Superman are halfway passable, but most of them are lifeless, dull boy scouts that can say no wrong and do no wrong - until we hit a "we gotta sell more books" issue where Superman becomes evil for some arbitrary reason. Vision reminds me too much of this. His attitude is arch, his words and deeds are perfect, and he's presented as the ultimate game changer.

Overall, I will say you've convinced me to some degree. He's still not in my top 3 (Ultron, Hawkeye, and Stark), but I'll admit he isn't as much as a dud as I'd assumed. I suppose I'll just view him as a minor down payment on much awesome to come.

[Reddish Mage]

Well said. A case eloquently stated, backed by passion and meditation. And, I note, answering the pertinent question of "why you consider him cool" rather than "why I should".

Where we agree:

1) Implementation: They did an impressive job of implementing a complex and abnormal comic book character in a roughly contemporary cinematic universe, from bringing the mind stone into play in a creative manner to cleverly marrying his counterpart's bipolar representation as both an android and a cyborg.

2) Practical Pacifism: I do like how Vision stands by his statement. He doesn't want to kill Ultron, so he attempts to resolve things peacefully. He knows he has to, however, so when the attempt fails he gets right to work.

Where we disagree:

1) I think you're putting a lot of weight on the potential Vision has (which is considerable), rather than what he has actually achieved. He is very much a green and red ball of concentrated potential, and may very well prove to be incredibly awesome in Civil War and beyond. As of now, however, the potential has not been well realized.

2) While I agree with you that Vision is a better Superman than most movie Supermen, I see that as a downside while you see it as an advantage. Some renditions of Superman are halfway passable, but most of them are lifeless, dull boy scouts that can say no wrong and do no wrong - until we hit a "we gotta sell more books" issue where Superman becomes evil for some arbitrary reason. Vision reminds me too much of this. His attitude is arch, his words and deeds are perfect, and he's presented as the ultimate game changer.

Overall, I will say you've convinced me to some degree. He's still not in my top 3 (Ultron, Hawkeye, and Stark), but I'll admit he isn't as much as a dud as I'd assumed. I suppose I'll just view him as a minor down payment on much awesome to come.

I notice that the first two are really impressive. Implementing a abnormal and powerful character into the MCU in a way that doesn't feel "off" is just freaking phenomenal, as is showing a being that is very reluctant to kill breaking his rule in a manner that makes both the rule and the break thereof very considered and realistic and not some sort of artificial rule, nonsensical or outright contradictory with all the killing and lethal force being exchanged, broken with exaggerated grief and melodramatic expression.

Also you agree on him being one of the better Superman...and that's a very impressive feat, simply because it has proven freakishly difficult for...Superman.

Just because you don't like someone who reminds you of Superman..."His attitude is arch, his words and deeds are perfect, and he's presented as the ultimate game changer." Doesn't mean you should discount a character that actually works as a Superman, that was well implemented, AND does the Practical Pacifism in a truly amazing way.

[Kitten Champion]

I think what made Vision work for me was that they gave him the subtle warmth and dry comedic sensibilities of JARVIS, who we've had four films as a discrete supporting character. Actually, you could go back further than that, as we've seen the man he was obviously based upon in the Agent Carter television series - a man who, presumably, strongly shaped Tony as a person as a stand-in father figure and he loved enough to model his personal AI and friend after.

[Cheesegear]

Given that he picks up the hammer in that scene, I'd say that says a lot about him.

It says a lot about him, without saying anything at all. It's really bad writing. It's lazy - it's Joss Whedon's writing.

Vision (and Hawkeye) are the only interesting parts of Age of Ultron. Since Ultrion, himself, is a lot like Bane from DKR. He has a nice philosophy, and he's very quotable, but Ultron's actions don't reflect his quotable quotes at all. Ultron - like Bane - is a hypocrite, and a garbage villain because of it, because Ultron never follows through on anything he says.

But, in regards to Vision, specifically 'By what measure is a man?' is complicated. Did Tony just create AI? Complicated. Ignore any questions you actually have, and ignore anything that could potentially make the movie interesting, because by asking those questions, we aren't devoting screen-time to punching uniform-grey CGI dudes, because Avengers is Transformers now. Fact. Everything we hate about Transformers, is now present in Avengers - double standards, yo!

At least there's Hawkeye. Whedon is good at making us feel, he's really bad at making us think.


I think what made Vision work for me was that they gave him the subtle warmth and dry comedic sensibilities of JARVIS Paul Bettany

Fixed it for you. There's a reason he was cast as Jarvis from the start.

[Kitten Champion]

Fixed it for you. There's a reason he was cast as Jarvis from the start.

I mean Vision's characterization - such as it was - conveyed enough of Tony's AI buddy that we didn't need much in the way of an introduction to familiarize us with the character. "It's JARVIS, only better" is all they needed to get across.

[Psyren]

Well said. A case eloquently stated, backed by passion and meditation. And, I note, answering the pertinent question of "why you consider him cool" rather than "why I should".

While I appreciate the praise and accord, I don't recall ever saying you should do anything. I was in fact speaking to "why I consider him cool" the entire time (to wit, the very first quote you responded to from me on this subject contains the qualifier "personally") and whether I convince anyone of anything or not doesn't really matter to me in the least. Not being hostile, I just wanted to make that distinction clear.



Where we disagree:

1) I think you're putting a lot of weight on the potential Vision has (which is considerable), rather than what he has actually achieved. He is very much a green and red ball of concentrated potential, and may very well prove to be incredibly awesome in Civil War and beyond. As of now, however, the potential has not been well realized.

2) While I agree with you that Vision is a better Superman than most movie Supermen, I see that as a downside while you see it as an advantage. Some renditions of Superman are halfway passable, but most of them are lifeless, dull boy scouts that can say no wrong and do no wrong - until we hit a "we gotta sell more books" issue where Superman becomes evil for some arbitrary reason. Vision reminds me too much of this. His attitude is arch, his words and deeds are perfect, and he's presented as the ultimate game changer.

1) We owe that potential to his portrayal. His relentless idealism could have easily fallen flat, with a lesser character, actor or movie; instead, we have audiences everywhere clamoring for more. That is something he "actually achieved."

2) Superman is a dull boy scout because he (a) has almost literal godlike power but does next to nothing of import with it and (b) understands human society welll enough to seamlessly integrate himself within it, so much so that even his closest friends and coworkers don't realize his true identity. Vision lacks both of these things. He is potent, perhaps especially in a society with the worldwide network that wasn't even envisioned when he was created - but he isn't anywhere near Superman's power, so when he fails it will be much more believable (and not due to a scheming land baron who found some green rocks.) He also lacks Superman's keen understanding of our society, because while he was created by them, he did not grow among them the way Clark Kent did. His mind is truly alien in the way only an AI can be. We saw shades of this with his blunt responses to Captain America - had he not had Ultron's memories of the hammer trick, he would have had no way to make the rest trust him and Ultron might have won. His own nature gets in the way of his goals, and we're going to see more of that.



Overall, I will say you've convinced me to some degree. He's still not in my top 3 (Ultron, Hawkeye, and Stark), but I'll admit he isn't as much as a dud as I'd assumed. I suppose I'll just view him as a minor down payment on much awesome to come.

My top 3 now are Banner, Vision and Stark. Ultron I'm not particularly impressed with - he googled War and decided to give up on us, like so many other Crapshoot AI and enlightened aliens before him, as I said previously. And his conclusion doesn't make sense either - wiping humans off the planet is not going to stop the Chitauri, or Jotuns, or any number of other evil attackers that he should know are out there from Stark's files. It would just be an uninhabited world full of rich resources - even more of a target than it is now.

Hawkeye did much better in this movie but I still rank Widow above him character-wise.

[Cheesegear]

Hawkeye did much better in this movie but I still rank Widow above him character-wise.

Far be it from me to turn this into another Age of Ultron thread, but, why?

Her 'graduation ceremony' wasn't something she chose, it was forced upon her, she didn't have any agency into what happened to her. Moreover, it happened years ago, and, by and large, Widow has already had pretty much all the character development that she's needed to have off-screen. Widow's graduation ceremony had no impact on the story whatsoever, and appeared to only be thrown in simply because Hawkeye had a backstory, so Widow needed one, too. Even though we already got the Black Widow programme through Agent Carter.

Now, if the opening scene of Age of Ultron, was Natasha in a doctor's office - or SHIELD medical facility - and the doctor giving her some bad news at the beginning of the movie, and during AoU we got snippets of Widow coming to terms, then we'd actually have some character development. Her agency, her life-of-action, what she chose to do with herself, led to her current medical condition. She chose, and consequences happened.
But, that's not what happened. Because Whedon is lazy and 'Actions Equals Consquences' is too hard. It was forced upon her, against her will, years ago, off-screen. The only reason that that can be meaningful, is if you draw parallels to something else that happens to ladies. But Avengers is only PG-13, and there's no thinking allowed here, so the only thing that happens to Widow is what I'm told happens.

Events just... Happened. There's no character development at all for Widow, except for what you project onto her, Twilight-style, because the actual script doesn't do anything of the sort.

[Reddish Mage]

Far be it from me to turn this into another Age of Ultron thread, but, why?

Events just... Happened. There's no character development at all for Widow, except for what you project onto her, because the actual script doesn't do anything of the sort.

Black Widow is more interesting as a character than Hawkeye simply because Black Widow is more of an...oddity. Yes Hawkeye has a real family and gets some interesting development in with the few moments he is spotlighted. However, we've seen a hundred Hawkeyes, or something very similar, in a hundred films. Widow is quite a bit of a unicorn, or which female superspy villains *** heroines with heavy emotional baggage+big hearted capacity for love and bravery can you point to that are just like Widow?

Bond girls need not apply.

[Cheesegear]

Widow is quite a bit of a unicorn, or which female superspy villains *** heroines with heavy emotional baggage+big hearted capacity for love and bravery can you point to that are just like Widow?

Elektra springs to mind immediately. I can't quite remember what made the film so terrible - in fact I can't remember much of the film at all. But I do remember that in the film-version of the character, they gave Elektra OCD for some reason. Besides, most females in comics are built on the trope. Speaking of Elektra...

The entirety of Alias.
Also, any 'strong female character' that Whedon has ever written.

EDIT: To be clear, I don't dislike Widow. I dislike Whedon.

[Reddish Mage]

]Also, any 'strong female character' that Whedon has ever written..

Yeah...no.

Strong female? Yes, former villain? Yes...emotional maturity...bit rarer...true bravery and empathy that can only come with the former...rarer still...finally all that in a superspy package?

[Psyren]

To be clear, I don't dislike Widow. I dislike Whedon.

I didn't pick up on that, you were very subtle about it. :smallwink:

What was done to Widow was indeed not her choice. But that is not what makes her interesting either - rather, it is what she is doing with those skills now. SHIELD didn't do that to her; she chose to work for SHIELD voluntarily, and use her training for good. How long ago, and why? How did Nick Fury recruit her? Was she an enemy before? How did her old handlers react to her resignation? Is she still being hunted now? Does the "red in her ledger" refer to any specific actions she is guilty about performing? What were her first missions like working for the good guys? How did she meet Hawkeye and his family? What happened when she encountered the Winter Soldier the first time? There are a lot of interesting questions to ask about her.

[Olinser]

Elektra springs to mind immediately. I can't quite remember what made the film so terrible - in fact I can't remember much of the film at all. But I do remember that in the film-version of the character, they gave Elektra OCD for some reason. Besides, most females in comics are built on the trope. Speaking of Elektra...

The entirety of Alias.
Also, any 'strong female character' that Whedon has ever written.

EDIT: To be clear, I don't dislike Widow. I dislike Whedon.

I'm not sure why you're bringing up Elektra to talk about Whedon. He had absolutely no involvement with it.

Elektra was just a terrible abortion of a movie in every single respect. They shot themselves in the foot from the start by taking a character from Daredevil that the average joe on the street has literally never heard of outside Daredevil, a movie that already had extremely mixed reviews and mediocre box office take - severely limiting their potential audience - and then they just went downhill from there. The result was the single lowest box office take and reviews of any super hero entry ever made by Marvel (unless you count Howard the Duck). For crying out loud, it took in barely half of what CATWOMAN did.

It's a superhero film that has incredibly little action in it, and what action there is, is poorly executed. Crappy dialog, laughable action sequences, phone-in performances by the actors, and a script that has 3 different authors on it, which is ALWAYS a bad sign - meaning they took one guy's script, paid a different guy to rewrite it, then paid yet ANOTHER guy to rewrite his rewrite, which just about always ends in an abortion of a plot, which is exactly what happened.

People credit Elektra with single-handedly crushing the hopes of a Wonder Woman (or ANY solo lead super heroine) movie for 10 years. And WW still isn't getting her own movie. It's going to be 13 years from Elektra's soul crushing entry into by the time Captain Marvel comes out.

[Cheesegear]

she chose to work for SHIELD voluntarily, and use her training for good. How long ago, and why? How did Nick Fury recruit her? Was she an enemy before? How did her old handlers react to her resignation? Is she still being hunted now? Does the "red in her ledger" refer to any specific actions she is guilty about performing? What were her first missions like working for the good guys? How did she meet Hawkeye and his family? What happened when she encountered the Winter Soldier the first time? There are a lot of interesting questions to ask about her.

Interesting questions, absolutely. Can those questions be answered on-screen in a PG-13 medium? In a way that is also marketed alongside the rest of the MCU? Doubtful. Maybe they'll talk about it in Agent Carter, if we're lucky. But unless we're specifically shown Natasha Romanova, then it isn't the same person, and doesn't apply.

I'm not saying that Widow can't be interesting (there's all those questions to ask!), I'm saying she isn't (because all those questions aren't answered) - due to Whedon's writing style, and the movie-rating that she falls under. I would love to see an M-rated (or higher) Black Widow movie. Because that's the rating that that character deserves - if they want to run with that backstory, and they want to make it as traumatic as they want us to believe it is. I mentioned Alias before, even Whedon's own Dollhouse had some promise for the same.

A medium based around the Black Widow programme can be done. But it probably wont, and because it wont, The Avengers' franchise has to commit the cardinal movie sin of Telling, rather than Showing.

[Kitten Champion]

Hawkeye is more interesting for his contrast to the rest of the Avengers than he is as an individual. Black Widow is an interesting character in and of herself, but suffers from some inconsistent writing and some undue cultural focus upon her as the only female superhero in the hottest movie franchise in the world. The two issues aren't exactly unrelated, as conscious consideration of the latter necessitated more of the former.

I think as Marvel moves on and allows the severe gender gap to shrink, the writers will be able to refine Widow's character and role into something more cohesive.

[Cheesegear]

Black Widow is an interesting character in and of herself, but suffers from some inconsistent writing and some undue cultural focus upon her as the only female superhero in the hottest movie franchise in the world.

I really hope Super Girl does well.

[Psyren]

Interesting questions, absolutely. Can those questions be answered on-screen in a PG-13 medium? In a way that is also marketed alongside the rest of the MCU? Doubtful. Maybe they'll talk about it in Agent Carter, if we're lucky. But unless we're specifically shown Natasha Romanova, then it isn't the same person, and doesn't apply.

I'm not saying that Widow can't be interesting (there's all those questions to ask!), I'm saying she isn't (because all those questions aren't answered) - due to Whedon's writing style, and the movie-rating that she falls under. I would love to see an M-rated (or higher) Black Widow movie. Because that's the rating that that character deserves - if they want to run with that backstory, and they want to make it as traumatic as they want us to believe it is. I mentioned Alias before, even Whedon's own Dollhouse had some promise for the same.

A medium based around the Black Widow programme can be done. But it probably wont, and because it wont, The Avengers' franchise has to commit the cardinal movie sin of Telling, rather than Showing.

Eh, Hunger Games was PG-13, and it's way more violent than anything in the MCU so far. But I agree, she'd really need her own movie to flesh out some of those questions.


Hawkeye is more interesting for his contrast to the rest of the Avengers than he is as an individual. Black Widow is an interesting character in and of herself, but suffers from some inconsistent writing and some undue cultural focus upon her as the only female superhero in the hottest movie franchise in the world. The two issues aren't exactly unrelated, as conscious consideration of the latter necessitated more of the former.

I think as Marvel moves on and allows the severe gender gap to shrink, the writers will be able to refine Widow's character and role into something more cohesive.

Yeah that. Things will get better (or at least, I'd like to hope they'll get better) once Wanda and Carol join the roster.

[Reddish Mage]

Black Widow is an interesting character in and of herself, but suffers from some inconsistent writing and some undue cultural focus upon her as the only female superhero in the hottest movie franchise in the world. The two issues aren't exactly unrelated, as conscious consideration of the latter necessitated more of the former.

I think as Marvel moves on and allows the severe gender gap to shrink, the writers will be able to refine Widow's character and role into something more cohesive.

How is her character inconsistent?

Black Widow is consistently played as a sort of...post-Black Widow. She's been doing the superspy femme fatale thing for awhile. On one side or another. Its no longer who she is, its now just a job for her. She's trying to find her next phase of life now and wants to raise a family, and is disappointed she can't.

Black Widow has deep personal ties to many members of the team, and is competent and cool-headed despite her ability to deeply feel and carry her baggage.

[t209]

Superman helmets? What? I'm confused.
This might make you less confused.
http://marvel.wikia.com/Nova_Corps_(Earth-616)
Well, in the comics, Nova Corps are space police who gained their power from supercomputer. They were given flight, energy blasts, super strength, and being bullet proof.
The gold helmets (Richard Rider) were granted power to body and increases after each rank increase while the black helmets (Sam Alexander) got their power from their helmets.

[Cheesegear]

How is her character inconsistent?

Winter Soldier, Age of Ultron have different portrayals. In Winder Soldier, Cap doesn't really get anywhere without her. Widow is vital to Steve's mission. In AoU, Widow's role in the team is to be used to calm Hulk down, in what appears to be purely based on Banner's affection for her.

Winter Soldier was written by the writers of Agent Carter.
Age of Ultron was written by Whedon.

'Nuff said.

[Tiki Snakes]

Winter Soldier, Age of Ultron have different portrayals. In Winder Soldier, Cap doesn't really get anywhere without her. Widow is vital to Steve's mission. In AoU, Widow's role in the team is to be used to calm Hulk down, in what appears to be purely based on Banner's affection for her.

Winter Soldier was written by the writers of Agent Carter.
Age of Ultron was written by Whedon.

'Nuff said.

I'm not going to say that she is or isn't inconsistent, but I will say that this particular argument as phrased doesn't really convince me.

Specifically, I'd say that someone's role in a team and outside of a team is not a part of their character even though it can show us their character. Her contributions in Cap's caper is distinct from her role on the Avengers, but those are just jobs that she does, tasks she performs. If you're going to sell the idea that she is a different person in those two films, you'd need to focus more on what that different role means for her as a person and why the same person with the same psychology couldn't have done both things at different times.

[Cheesegear]

If you're going to sell the idea that she is a different person in those two films, you'd need to focus more on what that different role means for her as a person and why the same person with the same psychology couldn't have done both things at different times.

Ah, semantics then. You win. Okay, fine; In one movie, she's relevant. In another, she's not.
The difference in Writing Credits has not gone unnoticed by me.

"But, Age of Ultron had too many characters. Nobody got meaningful development except Hawkeye."
Fair. Then again, everyone else - except Widow - has had their own movie. They've already had their development, they don't need the screen time.

At the end of the day, this isn't the AoU Thread, and Kitten Champion already won the debate with one simple sentence.


Black Widow is an interesting character in and of herself, but suffers from some inconsistent writing and some undue cultural focus upon her as the only female superhero in the hottest movie franchise in the world.

[Psyren]

Winter Soldier, Age of Ultron have different portrayals. In Winder Soldier, Cap doesn't really get anywhere without her. Widow is vital to Steve's mission. In AoU, Widow's role in the team is to be used to calm Hulk down, in what appears to be purely based on Banner's affection for her.

Winter Soldier was written by the writers of Agent Carter.
Age of Ultron was written by Whedon.

'Nuff said.

No, no, hang on - your apparent hatred of all things Whedon has led to a very irrational argument here. (Keep in mind that I have no opinion of the man one way or the other - I never even watched Buffy, and while I liked Firefly for what it was, I'm not one of the folks breathlessly signing petitions to try and bring it back either.)

To be blunt, comparing Winter Soldier Widow to Age of Ultron Widow makes no sense - her portrayal is different because they are completely different movies with completely different conflicts and villains. Winter Soldier was a dyed-in-the-wool spy thriller that just happened to have Captain America in it. Black Widow shining in that movie makes perfect sense as she is the team's consummate spy. The villains there were a sleeper cell that corrupted SHIELD from within, and their ace-in-the-hole special agent who can adequately challenge the superheroes one-on-one or even as a group. You could have replaced Cap and Widow with Jason Bourne or Ethan Hunt without the plot even missing a beat.

Age of Ultron meanwhile is much more traditional superhero action. You've got a killer robot, his two Dragons, and his lesser robot army as the villains; the good guys are good and the bad guys are bad, black and white. Winter Soldier is full of spy movie lines like "Don't trust anyone" and "it's nothing personal." AoU Widow is therefore less needed - not even just because the threat is clear and present, but also because her tech skills are less necessary with Stark and Jarvis around. Like any good rogue, she is the backup mage only when needed and even then only in a limited capacity.

In short, Black Widow's role being bigger in Winter Soldier had nothing to do with who wrote the two movies, and everything to do with what they were about.

Now, the one point I'll definitely give you (and where Age of Ultron/Whedon thoroughly dropped the ball) is that they never explained how the team knew Widow's "lullaby" would work before knowing he had feelings for her. Steve's wingman speech at the bar (reassuring Banner that he wasn't "breaking any bylaws") indicates that the attraction between Widow and Hulk was a brand new thing, so how did she end up as the designated vector for calming him down? Given that he tried to kill her in A1, how would they even have known to try that?

[Tiki Snakes]

Ah, semantics then. You win. Okay, fine; In one movie, she's relevant. In another, she's not.
The difference in Writing Credits has not gone unnoticed by me.

Ah, I see. No, not semantics, more a simple misunderstanding. I thought you were saying the character was inconsistent, whereas it's more about the character's use being inconsistent or some such.
Fair enough, I see where you're coming from and that makes a lot more sense of your previous post.

Carry on, don't mind me. Nothing to see here. :smallsmile:

[Milo v3]

I've actually listened to people saying it was nice that Widow stayed consistent between Winter Soldier and AoU. I mean, did you notice how many times she was trying to help Cap get into a relationship in Winter Soldier, she's rather pro relationship.

[Psyren]

Her personality was consistent, yes - I was however speaking more to her impact on the story. In the spy thriller movie she is a major player - provides needed intel on the Winter Soldier, keeps the data out of HYDRA hands, tracks down Zola's hiding place with it to uncover the extent of the HYDRA insurgency, then infiltrates SHIELD to delay the helicarriers long enough for Cap to take them down. In AoU, she does one major thing (stealing Vision) one moderate thing (revealing Ultron's hideout by getting kidnapped, but the twins or Vision himself would have shared that information anyway) and one minor thing (lullaby for Hulk, once, in a battle where he was very helpful but not absolutely crucial.)

[Milo v3]

Her personality was consistent, yes - I was however speaking more to her impact on the story. In the spy thriller movie she is a major player - provides needed intel on the Winter Soldier, keeps the data out of HYDRA hands, tracks down Zola's hiding place with it to uncover the extent of the HYDRA insurgency, then infiltrates SHIELD to delay the helicarriers long enough for Cap to take them down. In AoU, she does one major thing (stealing Vision) one moderate thing (revealing Ultron's hideout by getting kidnapped, but the twins or Vision himself would have shared that information anyway) and one minor thing (lullaby for Hulk, once, in a battle where he was very helpful but not absolutely crucial.)

I'd say keeping the personality consistent is more important than keeping her impact in every movie the same. Ironman 2, Avengers, Winter Soldier, and AoU were all very different so it makes sense for those movies to focus around her to different levels.

[huttj509]

Now, the one point I'll definitely give you (and where Age of Ultron/Whedon thoroughly dropped the ball) is that they never explained how the team knew Widow's "lullaby" would work before knowing he had feelings for her. Steve's wingman speech at the bar (reassuring Banner that he wasn't "breaking any bylaws") indicates that the attraction between Widow and Hulk was a brand new thing, so how did she end up as the designated vector for calming him down? Given that he tried to kill her in A1, how would they even have known to try that?

Felt to me like a conditioned response they had deliberately built up between movies.

Though, as someone who uses autonomic relaxation methods to help deal with stress and anxiety, it didn't seem unusual to me (I go through the full routine often, and then if needed "my left arm is heavy" triggers the rest of the relaxation automatically, slowing heartbeat, breathing, affecting blood-flow, and relaxing tension).

Where she puts her had out, and the Hulk stops and sets his hand in hers, that looked like a straightforward conditioned response.

[Hytheter]

Honestly I assumed that the romantic attraction grew in part from the lullaby (and the process that must have lead to that) rather than the other way around.

[Psyren]

I'd say keeping the personality consistent is more important than keeping her impact in every movie the same. Ironman 2, Avengers, Winter Soldier, and AoU were all very different so it makes sense for those movies to focus around her to different levels.

Sounds like we agree.


Felt to me like a conditioned response they had deliberately built up between movies.

Though, as someone who uses autonomic relaxation methods to help deal with stress and anxiety, it didn't seem unusual to me (I go through the full routine often, and then if needed "my left arm is heavy" triggers the rest of the relaxation automatically, slowing heartbeat, breathing, affecting blood-flow, and relaxing tension).

Where she puts her had out, and the Hulk stops and sets his hand in hers, that looked like a straightforward conditioned response.


Honestly I assumed that the romantic attraction grew in part from the lullaby (and the process that must have lead to that) rather than the other way around.

That may be the case but (a) they didn't explain any of that and (b) they didn't explain why she was apparently the only one who trained with him to do it. You'd think that at least the other muggle on the team, Hawkeye (especially someone who, as a sniper, would be regularly training his breathing and reflexes anyway) would have thought those handy classes to be in on.

When Stark asks for a lullaby midway through the film, Hawkeye matter-of-factly tells him he won't get one because Widow is out of commission, implying that she's the only one who can pull it off. Which strikes me as pretty poor planning on the Avengers' part - what would they do if both Widow and Stark were out of commission and Hulk needed to be stopped? Hell, Thor had to be saved by a jet last time.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Hell, Thor had to be saved by a jet last time.

Not really. They way I saw it, they were reasonably equally matched. Yes, Hulk is stronger, but Thor's hammer is a potent weapon capable of besting Hulk, and Thor can fight smarter than Hulk. The problem was that no matter who won, the helicarrier would certainly lose, at a time when they couldn't afford further damage to it.

Grey Wolf

[Psyren]

When the jet showed up, Hulk pretty clearly had the upper hand, having just smashed Thor against the ceiling, floor and then tossed him into a wall and put him into a daze. He didn't have his hammer and looked too stunned to summon it, nor did he have the time to stick his hand out again and wait with Hulk bearing down on him. Perhaps "had to be saved" was a strong choice of words, but I don't think they were evenly matched either.

[Olinser]

When the jet showed up, Hulk pretty clearly had the upper hand, having just smashed Thor against the ceiling, floor and then tossed him into a wall and put him into a daze. He didn't have his hammer and looked too stunned to summon it, nor did he have the time to stick his hand out again and wait with Hulk bearing down on him. Perhaps "had to be saved" was a strong choice of words, but I don't think they were evenly matched either.

Thor was having his ass handed to him on a plate with all the trimmings.

Now a reasonable argument could be made that he lost due to him not really trying his hardest to put the Hulk down because he didn't want to lose Banner, but the chances of Thor coming back at that point without some kind of assistance were slim to none.

[Foeofthelance]

Sounds like we agree.

That may be the case but (a) they didn't explain any of that and (b) they didn't explain why she was apparently the only one who trained with him to do it. You'd think that at least the other muggle on the team, Hawkeye (especially someone who, as a sniper, would be regularly training his breathing and reflexes anyway) would have thought those handy classes to be in on.


Any training Hawkeye has is probably mostly unconscious at this point, in that his control over his body is automatic. He needs to shoot, so the heart rate slows and the breathing evens out, etc. Its mostly muscle memory. He could train Bruce to do the same thing, but that's not what is needed to bring the Hulk down to Bruce, that's just Bruce not turning himself into the Hulk.

Natasha's training is more empathetic. She's not telling the Hulk to slow down his breathing and heart, she's working him down out of a rage. Its the lilt of her voice, her body posture, her lack of, or heavily suppressed, fear, how gentle she is when she reaches out to touch him. Its closer to trying to resocialize an abused dog than it is trying to teach a dog a trick.

[Psyren]

Natasha's training is more empathetic. She's not telling the Hulk to slow down his breathing and heart, she's working him down out of a rage. Its the lilt of her voice, her body posture, her lack of, or heavily suppressed, fear, how gentle she is when she reaches out to touch him. Its closer to trying to resocialize an abused dog than it is trying to teach a dog a trick.

I was referring to Hawkeye training himself - and you listed the very things he would have to know. His posture, his breathing, not showing fear, reaching out steadily but slowly etc. As someone who trains himself to be a marksman, he should have perfect control over all those things and thus be able to learn how to "lullaby" Hulk as well.

The only explanation for why he can't therefore would be that Hulk responds to Natasha and not him - which again, calls the team not knowing that Hulk/Banner are sweet on her into question.

[Foeofthelance]

I was referring to Hawkeye training himself - and you listed the very things he would have to know. His posture, his breathing, not showing fear, reaching out steadily but slowly etc. As someone who trains himself to be a marksman, he should have perfect control over all those things and thus be able to learn how to "lullaby" Hulk as well.

The only explanation for why he can't therefore would be that Hulk responds to Natasha and not him - which again, calls the team not knowing that Hulk/Banner are sweet on her into question.

The difference is that Hawkeye training how to do those things doesn't rely on his ability to read a situation, whereas Natasha's does. Clint's training would all be towards self control and muscle memory, which means he's instinctively working to control himself first and then forgetting he's doing it. Natasha's training is towards manipulating the people around her and guiding them towards what she wants them to do. It's muscle memory versus observation, reactive versus proactive. The Avengers send her out to Lullaby the Hulk for the same reason Fury sent her to interrogate Loki, because she can read people the same way Tony can ready a computer program or Steve can read a tactical situation.

You could teach Clint to physically mimic Natasha, and he could probably do it flawlessly after a while, but it probably wouldn't be nearly as effective, if at all, because he'd just be reading from script where Natasha would be naturally improvising and adjusting. He just wouldn't be able to get the Hulk to trust him the way Natasha can. That wouldn't require her to be romantically involved with Bruce, just that she's trained to be a spy, where he is trained to be an assassin.

[Psyren]

But a sniper has to be externally observant too. Wind speed and direction, movement and momentum of the target, weak spots, facing, awareness, vantage points, hiding places, lighting/glare etc. It's not all self-control. All the awareness you'd need when (to use your analogy) you're approaching an abused dog, would be a logical part of his skillset.

So no, I still don't see the point of neglecting Hawkeye's training in this.

[Tiki Snakes]

But a sniper has to be externally observant too. Wind speed and direction, movement and momentum of the target, weak spots, facing, awareness, vantage points, hiding places, lighting/glare etc. It's not all self-control. All the awareness you'd need when (to use your analogy) you're approaching an abused dog, would be a logical part of his skillset.

So no, I still don't see the point of neglecting Hawkeye's training in this.

That's all very well if you are going to shoot the Hulk with an arrow. Or perhaps fire him out of a cannon.

But none of that will help you manipulate people or navigate any kind of charged social situation.
EDIT - Unless your preferred method of navigating a tense social situation is to shoot it with an arrow.

[Foeofthelance]

But a sniper has to be externally observant too. Wind speed and direction, movement and momentum of the target, weak spots, facing, awareness, vantage points, hiding places, lighting/glare etc. It's not all self-control. All the awareness you'd need when (to use your analogy) you're approaching an abused dog, would be a logical part of his skillset.

So no, I still don't see the point of neglecting Hawkeye's training in this.

But that's the difference.

Hawkeye can approach the dog, but then it comes down to fight or flight for one or both of them. Hawkeye can easily approach the Hulk, and if/when he screws up has enough training to get away before he becomes a smear on the pavement. What he can't do is get inside the Hulk's head. He can talk at the Hulk, but he can't talk to the Hulk. That's not where his training lies, and its not something you can necessarily teach someone.

Natasha, on the other hand, is far more empathetic. Her training as a spy requires someone who can always be as convincing as possible, who can not just predict what their opponent is going to do but can make that decision for them before their opponent has even realize the decision has been made. Natasha can not just approach the dog, but get the dog to eat from the palm of her hand because the dog believes that is what it wants to do.

If Clint sees the Hulk's muscle's bunching, then his training is telling him, 'The punch is coming from the left. Options are dodge forward, back, or right. Rock to the back provides best cover. That will give me five seconds.'

If Natasha sees the Hulk's muscles bunching then her training is telling her, 'Something has pushed him from fear to anger. The punch is coming from the left. Cover is to the back. Trigger words are Banner, calm, down. Five seconds for him to get the rock out of the way. Hulk wants to smash, convince the Big Guy that he wants something else. Rock's gone, what do I give him? Fightfoodfriend, need to get him to want to protect, protect me from what, I need to find a bigger threat...' and so on.

[SaintRidley]

Not to mention the fact that Natasha's cooldown with Hulk starts with a trigger phrase. It's conditioning modeled on the Faustus method, plain as day, and she'd be the most proficient to enact and control that sort of conditioning of the group. It's just far more her wheelhouse than anyone else's.

[Reddish Mage]

I find it odd that the Avengers thread has become about Spiderman, while the Spiderman thread is now about the Avengers.

[BannedInSchool]

I find it odd that the Avengers thread has become about Spiderman, while the Spiderman thread is now about the Avengers.
Every thread joins the Avengers for a time eventually.

[t209]

So anyone wonder how will they introduce Spiderman?
- as agent of Shield.
- a kid who got bitten by spider.
- a black kid who got bitten by a spider and replaced the previous one.
- Inhuman.

[Psyren]

That's all very well if you are going to shoot the Hulk with an arrow. Or perhaps fire him out of a cannon.

But none of that will help you manipulate people or navigate any kind of charged social situation.
EDIT - Unless your preferred method of navigating a tense social situation is to shoot it with an arrow.

Right, because being naturally observant has no value whatsoever in social situations.


Not to mention the fact that Natasha's cooldown with Hulk starts with a trigger phrase. It's conditioning modeled on the Faustus method, plain as day, and she'd be the most proficient to enact and control that sort of conditioning of the group. It's just far more her wheelhouse than anyone else's.

I get that she might be betst suited for it, but for the others (especially the other muggle) to not even try to learn it is just irresponsible. Hawkeye has plenty of empathy, he wouldn't be able to keep his family together while he's leaving them alone for long stretches of time without it. He is described as the heart of the team multiple times.

And as we saw during the movie, having Natasha be the single point of failure ended in disaster. Arguably twice, because Hulk is now AWOL.


So anyone wonder how will they introduce Spiderman?
- as agent of Shield.
- a kid who got bitten by spider.
- a black kid who got bitten by a spider and replaced the previous one.
- Inhuman.

It's not going to be Miles so #3 is out. I think #2, but they may play around a bit with where the spider came from. Hopefully we don't have Oscorp popping up out of nowhere.

[t209]

It's not going to be Miles so #3 is out. I think #2, but they may play around a bit with where the spider came from. Hopefully we don't have Oscorp popping up out of nowhere.
Please, don't let it be Stark again. Pym was supposed to make Ultron.
I know people will be turned off by Hank Pym for beating his wife, but please give him some respect. What about Siege or other storylines about Iron Patriot's true owner?
So I wonder if Marvel will make Damage Control movie?

[Psyren]

Please, don't let it be Stark again. Pym was supposed to make Ultron.
I know people will be turned off by Hank Pym for beating his wife, but please give him some respect. What about Siege or other storylines about Iron Patriot's true owner?
So I wonder if Marvel will make Damage Control movie?

Well, Pym is in the MCU as of Ant Man, and he's also an entomologist. So he would be the logical connection to use.

[Milo v3]

Well, Pym is in the MCU as of Ant Man, and he's also an entomologist. So he would be the logical connection to use.

I heard Pym was in MCU previously as a throw away line in Thor. Something about when SHIELD came in... Though that might have been in a deleted scene now that I think about it.

[Cheesegear]

I heard Pym was in MCU previously as a throw away line in Thor. Something about when SHIELD came in... Though that might have been in a deleted scene now that I think about it.

I'm fairly certain he's mentioned - along with Stephen Strange, among others - as one of the 'targets' during Winter Soldier.

[Suichimo]

The only explanation for why he can't therefore would be that Hulk responds to Natasha and not him - which again, calls the team not knowing that Hulk/Banner are sweet on her into question.

What? I'm pretty sure the entire team is aware of their relationship. Tony made the "hide the zucchini" joke and Cap flat out gave Bruce, IIRC, his blessing to go after BW. BW and Hawkeye are super close, so I doubt he is out of the loop. The only one who might not be in the loop is Thor and that would just be because of the differences between humans and Asgardians.


So anyone wonder how will they introduce Spiderman?
- as agent of Shield.
- a kid who got bitten by spider.
- a black kid who got bitten by a spider and replaced the previous one.
- Inhuman.

I believe it is Ultimate Spiderman, whichever series is currently ongoing, where he is leading his own Shield team. I'd be absolutely fine with Spidey being a SHIELD agent trying to prove he has what it takes to be an Avenger.

[The Glyphstone]

The only person who doesn't realize Bruce is sweet on BW (and vice versa) appears to be Bruce himself, or at least he's trying to deny it to himself.

[t209]

I believe it is Ultimate Spiderman, whichever series is currently ongoing, where he is leading his own Shield team. I'd be absolutely fine with Spidey being a SHIELD agent trying to prove he has what it takes to be an Avenger.
I hate that premise. Would be better if they called them "The Defending Team" (named after the Defenders, the one who started Marvel's trademark arguing heroes).
- Teammates treated Peter Parker like crap.
- No Richard Rider Nova and the series' Sam is much maligned. Just hope they made an episode on his origins, which might involve making it tragic to redeem him (Orphan half-Human Nova whose mentor died in heroic action and survived a purge by rogue Novas that killed his family except his little sister).
- Jeph Loeb, that is all. Bendis being relegated to Guardians of the Galaxy.
No, Spiderman is a solo hero. But I do kinda like that they tried to introduce obscure parts of Marvel Universe (Blade as Marvel universe, New Warriors, Amadeus Cho, and the fat kid who tried to be Spiderman), parodying comics (making fun of Civil War's unmasking and Turn Off the Dark), and Spiderverse that doesn't involve murdering fan favorite characters (:smallfrown: Not the Amazing Friends).
Speaking of which, maybe they should name the upcoming Netflix show as Mighty Avengers or other street based team names and find ways to get Namor and Silver Surfer for Defenders (Steve Gerber).

[Psyren]

What? I'm pretty sure the entire team is aware of their relationship. Tony made the "hide the zucchini" joke and Cap flat out gave Bruce, IIRC, his blessing to go after BW. BW and Hawkeye are super close, so I doubt he is out of the loop. The only one who might not be in the loop is Thor and that would just be because of the differences between humans and Asgardians.

I meant before AoU, since "lullaby" is clearly shown to be a longstanding strategy the way they do it in the opening scene. Obviously they're aware of it during the movie. But it's a disconnect because in A1 he tried to kill her.


I believe it is Ultimate Spiderman, whichever series is currently ongoing, where he is leading his own Shield team. I'd be absolutely fine with Spidey being a SHIELD agent trying to prove he has what it takes to be an Avenger.

There's no way he's already active in SHIELD but not part of the Avengers yet.

[Dusk Eclipse]

He will be a high-schooler, I doubt that even Fury would have such a young person in the Avengers, I'm sure as hell that even if he wanted the Captain would oppose.

[Tiki Snakes]

Right, because being naturally observant has no value whatsoever in social situations.

Right. It's an almost entirely non-transferable skill set.

[t209]

He will be a high-schooler, I doubt that even Fury would have such a young person in the Avengers, I'm sure as hell that even if he wanted the Captain would oppose.
To be fair, he did join the Avengers under Bendis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Avengers_%28comics%29
Then again, he's a married adult and hardened veteran Hero in the comics.

[Suichimo]

There's no way he's already active in SHIELD but not part of the Avengers yet.

He starts out Ultimate Spiderman as a fresh recruit to SHIELD. He had been recruited by Fury after Fury had been tracking his activity in New York, as Spiderman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Spider-Man_%28TV_series%29

[Rakaydos]

He starts out Ultimate Spiderman as a fresh recruit to SHIELD. He had been recruited by Fury after Fury had been tracking his activity in New York, as Spiderman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Spider-Man_%28TV_series%29

So, here's a plausable explanantion for Civil War...

Some kid gets amazing spider powers, and Tony wants to add him to the Avengers. Cap points out that the kid isnt even draft age- no way is he adding him to the team yet. This evolves into a "do we keep track of him, keep a job open, watch him for supervillian tendancies?" discussion.

[Psyren]

Right. It's an almost entirely non-transferable skill set.

Uh-huh. Yeah, we're probably going to have to agree to disagree on this.


He starts out Ultimate Spiderman as a fresh recruit to SHIELD. He had been recruited by Fury after Fury had been tracking his activity in New York, as Spiderman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Spider-Man_%28TV_series%29

Oh, I've never seen that cartoon. Okay, maybe I guess? I'd have to see how they pull it off.

[Zmeoaice]

Oh, I've never seen that cartoon. Okay, maybe I guess? I'd have to see how they pull it off.

Don't watch that cartoon, it's a horrible cartoon.

[Velaryon]

What? I'm pretty sure the entire team is aware of their relationship. Tony made the "hide the zucchini" joke and Cap flat out gave Bruce, IIRC, his blessing to go after BW. BW and Hawkeye are super close, so I doubt he is out of the loop. The only one who might not be in the loop is Thor and that would just be because of the differences between humans and Asgardians.

I can't remember the exact quote, but there's a little scene when everybody is preparing to leave the Bartons' home where Hawkeye is talking to his wife, and she mentions something about Banner and Natasha, and it flies right over Hawkeye's head, and she says something like "you're so cute" to him. So I think Hawkeye is indeed oblivious to what's going on between them.

Still, Cap and Stark definitely know what's going on, and we don't really have much to go on as far as whether or not Thor is clued in.

[t209]

Don't watch that cartoon, it's a horrible cartoon.
Well, at least they made the closes thing to Secret Wars adaptation and Spiderverse without murdering fan favorites.

[Tiki Snakes]

Uh-huh. Yeah, we're probably going to have to agree to disagree on this.

20/20 vision and the ability to instinctively predict a ballistic arc are of questionable help in trying to provoke a specific emotional response from someone.

Unless the desired response is "Ow! This arrow I have been shot with really hurts!" Snipers are kind of intrinsically limited that way.

You are of course entitled to believe otherwise, but I'll confess that I can't help but be a little amused by the strength of your conviction on this point. Not that I can even recall the original context that this point was raised in. :smallsmile:

[Psyren]

I can't remember the exact quote, but there's a little scene when everybody is preparing to leave the Bartons' home where Hawkeye is talking to his wife, and she mentions something about Banner and Natasha, and it flies right over Hawkeye's head, and she says something like "you're so cute" to him. So I think Hawkeye is indeed oblivious to what's going on between them.

Still, Cap and Stark definitely know what's going on, and we don't really have much to go on as far as whether or not Thor is clued in.

Indeed, but again, Cap and Stark figured it out during the movie. Lullaby existed before the movie started.


20/20 vision and the ability to instinctively predict a ballistic arc are of questionable help in trying to provoke a specific emotional response from someone.

Unless the desired response is "Ow! This arrow I have been shot with really hurts!" Snipers are kind of intrinsically limited that way.

You are of course entitled to believe otherwise, but I'll confess that I can't help but be a little amused by the strength of your conviction on this point. Not that I can even recall the original context that this point was raised in. :smallsmile:

Sure, whatever.

[Suichimo]

Don't watch that cartoon, it's a horrible cartoon.

It's not the best, but I wouldn't call it horrible.

[keenan]

nice info
http://wigunpics.science/17/g.png

[Tyndmyr]

The only person who doesn't realize Bruce is sweet on BW (and vice versa) appears to be Bruce himself, or at least he's trying to deny it to himself.

He seems quite aware. Just not particularly smooth or willing to fully embrace it. It's a little ironic that he tells her to run with it when he's not really willing to do the same.