WandaVision

[Draconi Redfir]

i realized last night that i may have been a bit of a hypocrite.

Earlier in this thread, i was less then thrilled to see Agatha / Wanda having "True" witch / hex / coven "Magic" instead of psychic abilities or Dr-Strange style "science magic".

Yet back when Far-from-home was coming out, i was totally on board for Mysterio being a legitimate magical hero rather then his traditional illusionist villain.

Maybe that's because Mysterio's "Magic" at least bares a resemblance to Dr. Strange's variety? Or maybe i was more open to the idea of Wanda being psychic rather then magic. idk.

regardless, i should probably check myself on that.

[Dragonus45]

On the subject of hypocrisy, the more I take a wider look at the whole conversation about Wanda and the pass the show gives her on her abuse the more I notice an interesting trend. So many of the people who were outright furious at Endgame for the scene with Thanos and the soul stone, seem to also be the loudest voices defending Wanda and the series here, despite this being so much more egregious in the way it frames what she did. I wonder if the issue of Thanos as a directly abusive father doesn't just click better then the more nebulous mental enslavement and torture of an entire town so people feel the former has to be portrayed in so very specific ways and the latter just sort of gets a pass under the Eddie Izzard Cake or Death logic. Never mind how much it mirrors psychological abuse and gaslighting, the sheer fantastical elements of it mean some people just don't see it as being all that bad. I guess. That's my most charitable interpretation.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Draconi Redfir
Maybe that's because Mysterio's "Magic" at least bares a resemblance to Dr. Strange's variety? Or maybe i was more open to the idea of Wanda being psychic rather then magic. idk.

regardless, i should probably check myself on that.

I wouldn’t beat yourself up over it. Different characters, different expectations.

I’m not especially tickled with the convoluted origin of Wanda’s magic, but also not really involved enough to care one way or the other. For myself, I find that the more I think about this show, the less rewarding it is.

I’d rather be looking forward to Falcon & Winter Soldier, Loki, and the Wakanda series. I find that I’m more eager for the Wakanda series than the whole slate of new Star Wars shows put together.

[Psyren]

On the subject of hypocrisy, the more I take a wider look at the whole conversation about Wanda and the pass the show gives her on her abuse the more I notice an interesting trend. So many of the people who were outright furious at Endgame for the scene with Thanos and the soul stone, seem to also be the loudest voices defending Wanda and the series here, despite this being so much more egregious in the way it frames what she did. I wonder if the issue of Thanos as a directly abusive father doesn't just click better then the more nebulous mental enslavement and torture of an entire town so people feel the former has to be portrayed in so very specific ways and the latter just sort of gets a pass under the Eddie Izzard Cake or Death logic. Never mind how much it mirrors psychological abuse and gaslighting, the sheer fantastical elements of it mean some people just don't see it as being all that bad. I guess. That's my most charitable interpretation.

I don't think you mean me (I don't remember being "furious" at Endgame for Thanos and the Soul Stone - for one thing, that happened in Infinity War) - but also, I don't think I can even begin to follow the train of logic that connects these two events. There is no comparison between a villain consciously deciding he needs power at all costs and willingly sacrificing his daughter to achieve it, capitalizing on a very warped definition of love, and a traumatized woman's power that she didn't even know she had exploding out of her mind to try and protect the shattered remnants of her psyche and wholly inadvertently catching a bunch of bystanders in the blast radius.

[Tyndmyr]

Hayward isn't a cartoon villain - he is being driven by trauma, grief, and fear of super powers, and every reasonable and unreasonable thing he does is rooted in that.

He sort of is a cartoon villain. Both literally, in that this series is based on comic properties, and the fact that he's pretty hamfistedly evil.

There are occasional moments where a more reasonable, nuanced version is hinted at. For instance, in the second to last episode, when we see Wanda's visit to the facility, he appears to be quite reasonable.

I can see that being a *far* more reasonable opposition, particularly if we see more of his actual background and why he wants what he wants. But as it stands, he's kind of over the top evil. Even with the same motivations, he's mostly a jerk even when he has little reason to be...if that were dialed back, he could fill largely the same role without seeming so cheesy.

[Wookieetank]

There are occasional moments where a more reasonable, nuanced version is hinted at. For instance, in the second to last episode, when we see Wanda's visit to the facility, he appears to be quite reasonable.

I got the impression he was purposefully pushing Wanda's buttons to see what will happen, but that was after several episodes of jerk moves on his part so I was a bit biased against him at that point.

[Dragonus45]

I don't think you mean me (I don't remember being "furious" at Endgame for Thanos and the Soul Stone - for one thing, that happened in Infinity War) - but also, I don't think I can even begin to follow the train of logic that connects these two events. There is no comparison between a villain consciously deciding he needs power at all costs and willingly sacrificing his daughter to achieve it, capitalizing on a very warped definition of love, and a traumatized woman's power that she didn't even know she had exploding out of her mind to try and protect the shattered remnants of her psyche and wholly inadvertently catching a bunch of bystanders in the blast radius.

No not aiming at anyone in particular, I'm not even sure I noticed the Soul Stone stuff coming up a whole lot on this server specifically anyways. And he connection is very very clear. You had a bunch of people saying the movie was framed too legitimizing abuse by having some neutral enough cosmic arbiter declare Thanos "really did love his daughter". Now, you have Wandavision using it's closing moments to have the character acting as the story's moral center, Monica, actively praising Wanda at the end of the series and giving her a pass for abusive and violent actions and now suddenly nothing is wrong with the framing of this scene or the abusive situation at all. No matter where you are with the Wanda thing you gotta admit there is a real disconnect between those two opinions.

[Tyndmyr]

I got the impression he was purposefully pushing Wanda's buttons to see what will happen, but that was after several episodes of jerk moves on his part so I was a bit biased against him at that point.

That's possible. But he's also a jerk to his own allies. Monica, quirky Astrophysicist that I can't recall the name of, etc. He seems to just be a jerk in general. I know Marvel has kind of a history of that for every military/quasi military org in it, but most of these folks don't make amazing villains as a result.

If he'd been, say, extremely relaxed and calm in his dealings with all other people, and explained it as a deliberate stratagem for dealing with Wanda, that'd have been one interesting way to handle it. As it stands, he's being a jerk quite often when it doesn't appear to further his goals.

[Wookieetank]

That's possible. But he's also a jerk to his own allies. Monica, quirky Astrophysicist that I can't recall the name of, etc. He seems to just be a jerk in general. I know Marvel has kind of a history of that for every military/quasi military org in it, but most of these folks don't make amazing villains as a result.

If he'd been, say, extremely relaxed and calm in his dealings with all other people, and explained it as a deliberate stratagem for dealing with Wanda, that'd have been one interesting way to handle it. As it stands, he's being a jerk quite often when it doesn't appear to further his goals.

Very true, even his reveal to Monica about being head of Sword came across smug at best, and purposely antagonistic at worst. On the bright side, his actor did a great job of making him an unlikeable ****. Definitely in the category of love to hate for me.

[Psyren]

No not aiming at anyone in particular, I'm not even sure I noticed the Soul Stone stuff coming up a whole lot on this server specifically anyways. And he connection is very very clear. You had a bunch of people saying the movie was framed too legitimizing abuse by having some neutral enough cosmic arbiter declare Thanos "really did love his daughter". Now, you have Wandavision using it's closing moments to have the character acting as the story's moral center, Monica, actively praising Wanda at the end of the series and giving her a pass for abusive and violent actions and now suddenly nothing is wrong with the framing of this scene or the abusive situation at all. No matter where you are with the Wanda thing you gotta admit there is a real disconnect between those two opinions.

I don't know that the Soul Stone's judgment of "love", in the context of being willing to sacrifice person A to get power source B, needs to square with nuanced concepts of abusive relationships. Certainly there are many abusers that would feel pain, even great pain, at giving up the object of their twisted "affections", and that pain may be all that the Stone is looking for. Or indeed, it might just give itself to literally anyone willing to chuck someone else in the pit, and the highly specific requirements that are stated for doing so are little more than a form of cosmic trolling. It's not like we have empirical evidence of anyone else trying to sacrifice someone they don't love and failing, nor indeed is Red Skull a truly trustworthy narrator or voice of the author the way that, say, the Ancient One is. So yeah, still not seeing the connection, at all.

That's possible. But he's also a jerk to his own allies. Monica, quirky Astrophysicist that I can't recall the name of, etc. He seems to just be a jerk in general. I know Marvel has kind of a history of that for every military/quasi military org in it, but most of these folks don't make amazing villains as a result.

If he'd been, say, extremely relaxed and calm in his dealings with all other people, and explained it as a deliberate stratagem for dealing with Wanda, that'd have been one interesting way to handle it. As it stands, he's being a jerk quite often when it doesn't appear to further his goals.

I will acknowledge that Hayward, clearly having an axe to grind against Wanda specifically, could have benefited from an explanation as to why. This is obviously a personal crusade for him, but she isn't the only Avenger to start off as a bad guy or criminal, and apparently her actions against Thanos are either public knowledge or at the very least well known within the SWORD base.

The best I can determine is that he (correctly) deduced that he couldn't properly deploy his Vision Realdoll without her finding out and Pinnochio-ing it back to life, which of course she did the very first time he deployed it. But his plan to violate the Accords in order to create his own enforcer that would unfailingly follow/enforce the Accords requires some logical pretzels that I can't quite navigate.

[Ramza00]

On the subject of hypocrisy, the more I take a wider look at the whole conversation about Wanda and the pass the show gives her on her abuse the more I notice an interesting trend. So many of the people who were outright furious at Endgame for the scene with Thanos and the soul stone, seem to also be the loudest voices defending Wanda and the series here, despite this being so much more egregious in the way it frames what she did. I wonder if the issue of Thanos as a directly abusive father doesn't just click better then the more nebulous mental enslavement and torture of an entire town so people feel the former has to be portrayed in so very specific ways and the latter just sort of gets a pass under the Eddie Izzard Cake or Death logic. Never mind how much it mirrors psychological abuse and gaslighting, the sheer fantastical elements of it mean some people just don't see it as being all that bad. I guess. That's my most charitable interpretation.

There is dozens of reasons why this occurs.

One of which is about “authority” and how people justify good or bad behavior. Including the justification of murder and war.

* Thanos as father (adoptive) justified his murder of his daughter, calling it love, for he was going to use his love to murder / save half the Galaxy.
* Hayward as acting director / governmental official with a different form of parental duty, a parental obligation, justified droning Wanda saying it would save lives. 4 episodes later he justified trying to kill Wanda not to save lives but to cover up creating White Vision. (Aka he is lying 4 episodes later, he does not have stable motivations with his justification, they are self-serving yet he claims authority not due to his self and his wants but because he claims to be a protector of others.)

Skeptical of authority people 🤨 are not necessarily against authority and someone making the call, we just believe one should be a little skeptical including over the power of life and death for you can not undo death.

[Dragonus45]

I don't know that the Soul Stone's judgment of "love", in the context of being willing to sacrifice person A to get power source B, needs to square with nuanced concepts of abusive relationships. Certainly there are many abusers that would feel pain, even great pain, at giving up the object of their twisted "affections", and that pain may be all that the Stone is looking for. Or indeed, it might just give itself to literally anyone willing to chuck someone else in the pit, and the highly specific requirements that are stated for doing so are little more than a form of cosmic trolling. It's not like we have empirical evidence of anyone else trying to sacrifice someone they don't love and failing, nor indeed is Red Skull a truly trustworthy narrator or voice of the author the way that, say, the Ancient One is. So yeah, still not seeing the connection, at all.

Alright, once more unto the breach here. You have a sizable, loud, vociferous group of people insisting Marvel dropped by ball by having a scene they claim legitimized abusive relationships as being love by cosmic decree, and that Marvel was wrong and bad to show such a scene. Those same people when discussing a series that ends with "Those people will never understand just how much you are giving up by not enslaving and torturing them anymore, have fun going off to study how to get even stronger." Either have nothing to say or actively defend the narrative framing of Wanda's abusive actions as ok, and you really see nothing hypocritical or inconsistent between those two sentiments?

[ecarden]

There is dozens of reasons why this occurs.

One of which is about “authority” and how people justify good or bad behavior. Including the justification of murder and war.
*
Skeptical of authority people 🤨 are not necessarily against authority and someone making the call, we just believe one should be a little skeptical including over the power of life and death for you can not undo death.

Okay, this is what makes me nuts here. If you can:

1) Take over a town.
2) Mind control everyone inside.
3) Hold off all attempts by the local authorities to stop you.
4) Defeat all adversaries who attempt to stop you.
5) Willingly choose to stop.
6) Walk away with no one able to stop you or impose any consequences.

YOU ARE AN AUTHORITY.

It does not matter that you are unelected, self-appointed authority. You are an authority. You have the power to do, apparently, whatever you want. That seems more worthy of skepticism than the authority who is being hauled off to jail, at least to me.

[Draconi Redfir]

Alright, once more unto the breach here. You have a sizable, loud, vociferous group of people insisting Marvel dropped by ball by having a scene they claim legitimized abusive relationships as being love by cosmic decree,

hopefully not starting a thing here, but personally what i took away from the scene is that while he was absolutely a **** to his kids, Thanos did genuinely care for them (or at the very least, for Gamora.) Thanos certainly was never going to win any "Dad of the year" awards, and might be in the running for "Worst dad of the year" more then a few times, but relationships are a complicated thing, is it so impossible to believe he also cared about his kid through all that?

[Ramza00]

It does not matter that you are unelected, self-appointed authority. You are an authority. You have the power to do, apparently, whatever you want. That seems more worthy of skepticism than the authority who is being hauled off to jail, at least to me.

This conversation is going nowhere but let’s engage one last time

In the past other people have said person A has the authority to kill in this situation. Person B in the same conversation, who is skeptical of authority but also recognizes the authority exists wanted to expand the options being consider beyond the false choice of to kill or not kill for there was dozens of other options they could have done at the moment. It is a false choice, a false binary, for there were more than two options the person with authority should have considered.

————

Likewise the conversation between whether this witch should be arrested was between Person C and Person D with different arguments.

The conversation has fragmented that using short hand of authority means two groups of people can not tell if we are talking about persons A and B or persons C and D.

————

So since the conversation has fragmented Ecarden please keep using all caps, for speaking louder in the keyboard will somehow make us all mind readers

[Ramza00]

hopefully not starting a thing here, but personally what i took away from the scene is that while he was absolutely a **** to his kids, Thanos did genuinely care for them (or at the very least, for Gamora.) Thanos certainly was never going to win any "Dad of the year" awards, and might be in the running for "Worst dad of the year" more then a few times, but relationships are a complicated thing, is it so impossible to believe he also cared about his kid through all that?

Words have magic and the critique was not over the word “care” but over the word “love”

After all in art both song and literature, love can lift us up where we belong, or it can be used to justify abuse. The critique was a $300 million dollar movie (budget not sales) should not be that hamfisted with the word love for it will be used to justify abuse in peoples homes for literally millions of people are going to watch this movie, Disney knew that, they are counting on it to make billions of dollars, and thus a different word should be used.

Law of large numbers, improbable effects become more likely at larger scales, and Disney knew what scale their movie was playing at. They meticulously make small detail choices like what color a costume should be, should this costume be more white or gray to sell more toys in this tv spot with the action figures. The critiquers were hoping Disney would use the same care with its word choice as its aesthetic choices since the main theme of the movie was abuse and how big bad villain was going to justify killing and hurting people.

Love the English word may not be the best word in this situation.

[Psyren]

hopefully not starting a thing here, but personally what i took away from the scene is that while he was absolutely a **** to his kids, Thanos did genuinely care for them (or at the very least, for Gamora.) Thanos certainly was never going to win any "Dad of the year" awards, and might be in the running for "Worst dad of the year" more then a few times, but relationships are a complicated thing, is it so impossible to believe he also cared about his kid through all that?

More importantly, what definition of "care" or "love" is an infinity stone even using? I would suspect it's not one that is particularly nuanced or moral by our standards, so the Red Skull's instruction manual should be taken with a generous heaping of salt.

Alright, once more unto the breach here. You have a sizable, loud, vociferous group of people insisting Marvel dropped by ball by having a scene they claim legitimized abusive relationships as being love by cosmic decree, and that Marvel was wrong and bad to show such a scene. Those same people when discussing a series that ends with "Those people will never understand just how much you are giving up by not enslaving and torturing them anymore, have fun going off to study how to get even stronger." Either have nothing to say or actively defend the narrative framing of Wanda's abusive actions as ok, and you really see nothing hypocritical or inconsistent between those two sentiments?

My point is that the former is not "love by cosmic decree," despite what those hypothetical loud people you claim to have seen might believe. That the Soul Stone judged Thanos worthy of possessing it for murdering Gamora should in no way be interpreted as "he loved her in a totally not-creepy and abuse-free way, father of the year!"

As for Monica's statement, your quote isn't accurate. Her exact words were "they'll never know what you sacrificed for them." That's a simple statement of fact, because there's no real way to explain to those folks what an infinity-stone-conjuration of your dead synthetic lover's personality and two who-knows-where-they-came-from souls that corporealized into your children even are, how they came to be, or how unlikely it is that Wanda will see them again.

Now, you might say the townsfolk won't/shouldn't care, at all, about any of that, and I'd even say you're right (Wanda herself certainly thinks so). But I didn't interpret Monica's brief statement as suggesting the townsfolk should be in any way grateful or feel bad for Wanda, just that neither of them know where to begin explaining to them how it all transpired and why. Again, simple statement of fact.

5) Willingly choose to stop.

This is the main point of contention I'd say. I would argue that this wasn't the case until a ways into episode 9, and even then she had already attracted and needed to deal with Agatha first, who is near to cosmic horror threat levels herself.

[Kareeah_Indaga]

hopefully not starting a thing here, but personally what i took away from the scene is that while he was absolutely a **** to his kids, Thanos did genuinely care for them (or at the very least, for Gamora.) Thanos certainly was never going to win any "Dad of the year" awards, and might be in the running for "Worst dad of the year" more then a few times, but relationships are a complicated thing, is it so impossible to believe he also cared about his kid through all that?

I had got the impression that one of the subtext messages of Infinity War was ‘You have to be insane to be willing to sacrifice someone you love.’ Notice how none of the good guys - down to and including Loki - were willing to do it. Even Clint and Natasha in Endgame refused to sacrifice the other person. The closest we got were Wanda and Quill, and their respective sacrifices asked them to do it before hand - and had to ask them more than once. And then the sacrificers still hesitated, for most of the movie in Wanda’s case.

...and on reflection the fact that she did ultimately pull the metaphorical trigger makes for interesting foreshadowing for her return to supervillainy in WandaVision. Almost makes me interested in finding out what happens to Quill...

[Ramza00]

This is a good article by Emily. It is about WandaVISION but also storytelling in general with the 2010s, 2020, and 2021.

Sub-lead: We don’t want justice in a story. We want the authors to know what justice might look like.

https://www.vox.com/culture/22325656...nt-story-karma

[Dragonus45]

More importantly, what definition of "care" or "love" is an infinity stone even using? I would suspect it's not one that is particularly nuanced or moral by our standards, so the Red Skull's instruction manual should be taken with a generous heaping of salt.


My point is that the former is not "love by cosmic decree," despite what those hypothetical loud people you claim to have seen might believe. That the Soul Stone judged Thanos worthy of possessing it for murdering Gamora should in no way be interpreted as "he loved her in a totally not-creepy and abuse-free way, father of the year!"

Yes, though we get there from different directions it looks like we both agree the people I'm talking about have a probably wrong take on things. That is not remotely connected to what I'm saying nor relevant to the point I was making I'm not sure why you keep bringing it up.

As for Monica's statement, your quote isn't accurate. Her exact words were "they'll never know what you sacrificed for them." That's a simple statement of fact, because there's no real way to explain to those folks what an infinity-stone-conjuration of your dead synthetic lover's personality and two who-knows-where-they-came-from souls that corporealized into your children even are, how they came to be, or how unlikely it is that Wanda will see them again.
Now, you might say the townsfolk won't/shouldn't care, at all, about any of that, and I'd even say you're right (Wanda herself certainly thinks so). But I didn't interpret Monica's brief statement as suggesting the townsfolk should be in any way grateful or feel bad for Wanda, just that neither of them know where to begin explaining to them how it all transpired and why. Again, simple statement of fact.

It is not just a simple statement of fact. It is a statement by the character who the narrative frames as carrying the conscience of the show carrying the heavy implication through cinematography and literally everything else going on in the series up to that point that the townsfolk Wanda has spent the entire show abusing should, and perhaps even would, be grateful to her if they just understood what Wanda was giving up by no longer enslaving and violating their minds.

[Psyren]

Yes, though we get there from different directions it looks like we both agree the people I'm talking about have a probably wrong take on things. That is not remotely connected to what I'm saying nor relevant to the point I was making I'm not sure why you keep bringing it up.

What? I'm pretty sure you brought up Thanos and the Soul Stone, not me

It is not just a simple statement of fact. It is a statement by the character who the narrative frames as carrying the conscience of the show carrying the heavy implication through cinematography and literally everything else going on in the series up to that point that the townsfolk Wanda has spent the entire show abusing should, and perhaps even would, be grateful to her if they just understood what Wanda was giving up by no longer enslaving and violating their minds.

I got no "they should be grateful" from Monica's statement. "They might understand what happened better if we had a way to explain it to them" maybe.

[Dragonus45]

What? I'm pretty sure you brought up Thanos and the Soul Stone, not me

Because for months afterword I kept hearing people complain about the movie supposedly giving a cosmic pass to abusers, and yet almost none of the creators, critics, or people, that I heard voicing that take are remotely interested in anything other then defending Wanda and her actions here. Because everyone knows that if you are just going through a rough time, and your emotions just got a bit the better of you, and you really didn't know your strength and promise to never do it again that makes everything ok right?

I got no "they should be grateful" from Monica's statement. "They might understand what happened better if we had a way to explain it to them" maybe.

You know, perhaps grateful is a bit much, but only barely. That scene reeks of them using Monica as a mouthpiece to absolve Wanda of her crimes, and I bet you that the next time her being probably wanted comes up in universe as a plot point someone is going to make an effort to frame her as the victim of a big needlessly vindictive government agency, probably run by a cardboard caricature like the last one was, and the idea she did real and lasting harm and needs to take responsibility for it will only barely come up.

[Psyren]

Because for months afterword I kept hearing people complain about the movie supposedly giving a cosmic pass to abusers, and yet almost none of the creators, critics, or people, that I heard voicing that take are remotely interested in anything other then defending Wanda and her actions here. Because everyone knows that if you are just going through a rough time, and your emotions just got a bit the better of you, and you really didn't know your strength and promise to never do it again that makes everything ok right?

You know, perhaps grateful is a bit much, but only barely. That scene reeks of them using Monica as a mouthpiece to absolve Wanda of her crimes, and I bet you that the next time her being probably wanted comes up in universe as a plot point someone is going to make an effort to frame her as the victim of a big needlessly vindictive government agency, probably run by a cardboard caricature like the last one was, and the idea she did real and lasting harm and needs to take responsibility for it will only barely come up.

Wanda's specific question to Monica is "And you... you don't hate me?" Monica replies that given the chance and Wanda's power, she'd try to bring her mom back. That doesn't read as "absolution" to me, just sympathy.

If you're disappointed that Monica didn't try to knock her out, or clap her in irons, I'm not sure what to tell you. Wanda is by all accounts a fugitive, but locking her up isn't SWORD's job, even if they thought trying would've been a good idea.

As for the Thanos connection, I'd just drop it, that's a huge reach. That last sentence in your first paragraph in particular doesn't describe him at all.

[Clertar]

It's hearwarming that the fanbase pays homage to the spirit of WandaVision, a story about Wanda taking too seriously the escapism of American TV, by taking the escapism of WandaVision and the MCU too seriously.

[Dragonus45]

Wanda's specific question to Monica is "And you... you don't hate me?" Monica replies that given the chance and Wanda's power, she'd try to bring her mom back. That doesn't read as "absolution" to me, just sympathy.

Everything about that finale was framed to try and absolve Wanda of her culpability in what she had done.

If you're disappointed that Monica didn't try to knock her out, or clap her in irons, I'm not sure what to tell you. Wanda is by all accounts a fugitive, but locking her up isn't SWORD's job, even if they thought trying would've been a good idea.

Like I said upthread, I never expected that nor did I particularly want it. I just wanted to story to at least acknowledge the idea that she likely should be locked up in some capacity. That article that Ramza linked summed it up nicely really.

As for the Thanos connection, I'd just drop it, that's a huge reach. That last sentence in your first paragraph in particular doesn't describe him at all.

Two people commit sever acts of abuse, one gets framed as being in the wrong. However a large number of people think the movie portrayed him as actually being in the right because he loved his daughter and the universe confirmed that. The other gets constantly framed as being not responsible for harm caused for no real good reason. These same people who were really on the lookout for Marvel giving a pass to abusers to the point they were practically seeing ghosts where there were none are now conspicuously absent. I'm curious why, that's not a stretch. It's barely even a reach. Oh, and that last sentence was describing Wanda not Thanos.

[hungrycrow]

It's hearwarming that the fanbase pays homage to the spirit of WandaVision, a story about Wanda taking too seriously the escapism of American TV, by taking the escapism of WandaVision and the MCU too seriously.

Wandavision is all about running away from your problems through TV. We're all about creating new problems by nitpicking absolutely everything in TV.

[Psyren]

Everything about that finale was framed to try and absolve Wanda of her culpability in what she had done.

Like I said upthread, I never expected that nor did I particularly want it. I just wanted to story to at least acknowledge the idea that she likely should be locked up in some capacity. That article that Ramza linked summed it up nicely really.

Except where that article fails is that it's equating intentional acts with unintentional powers run amok. Even the example of so-called "story karma" it uses, Walter White letting a girl choke to death so he can get his drug-making partner-in-crime back on his team, was a conscious decision on Walter's part. Whether it was murder or just negligence, it was undeniably premeditated and the show frames it as such. Making the Hex was not for Wanda, the show goes out of its way to show this (and even have our audience stand-in openly state it), and that makes a massive difference.

Two people commit sever acts of abuse, one gets framed as being in the wrong. However a large number of people think the movie portrayed him as actually being in the right because he loved his daughter and the universe confirmed that.

And again I say, the universe confirmed no such thing. What we saw is that he murdered his daughter and got the stone. The stone's authority on the subject of love, or the specific criteria it looks for in conjunction with that word, or even the Red Skull's own understanding of the process, are still matters of debate.

And if that last sentence doesn't describe both Thanos and Wanda, why is Thanos even being brought up? He had no "emotions get the better of him." Everything he does is premeditated - like Walter, and unlike Wanda.

[Mordar]

I wasn't questioning your motives per se, just an unconscious bias that seems to be running underneath your arguments. To wit, you seem to be presumptively dismissive of the possibility that her powers can do any of the driving in this situation, and how that might affect her culpability. To that end, you're bringing up other heroes in the MCU whose powers require agency, but none of them use "Chaos Magic."

Not at all! I totally buy "powers acting on their own", I just hadn't applied some any version of that or sentience to Wanda's magic. I was working from a perspective of conscious or subconscious control until you suggested otherwise, and it made me think about what other MCU characters might be in the same bucket.

The concept of powerful magic acting on its own to protect its user and having unintended consequences is not unique to Marvel properties by any stretch of the imagination. Putting Jean and Wanda aside (and even similar characters, like Vanya from Umbrella Academy) we also have examples like Aang subconsciously activating the avatar state to not drown, sealing himself in ice and leaving the Fire Nation unopposed for years. Or Harry Potter's very first use of magic being flying or apparating away from bullies but stranding him on a roof. These things happen to the untrained and it's not a particularly difficult concept for speculative fiction audiences to grasp.

And all that is putting aside the possibility that The Scarlet Witch's magic may be a wholly Sentient Cosmic Force in its own right - not just a set of powers, but possessing intelligence or will.

For certain - and I don't think it is limited to magic, even, and there are other Marvel book characters that had similar "issues" for at least a while. Spider-Man's black suit, for instance...long before it was Venom it was doing things on its own. Your closing line is *exactly* where I was going, but with the Infinity Stone-granted powers being potentially sentient, not Wanda's magic. Since the door is probably closed on the Stones in MCU, it seems unlikely to be explored, and your conclusion is the more probable.

I included Hulk and IM/WM in the first section because those were characters that could have their powers turned loose without conscious control (at least as Banner would choose to think of it) and if being controlled by an outside force (IM/WM - unless whatever version of VI they are running develops true AI, it would be some third party...so they count less). Dr. Strange has items that work independently, but the Eye/Time Stone didn't seem to be one of them. Captain Marvel is the next option...we see dramatic proficiency growth with her power set in her core movie, but that was probably just for expedience, not meant to indicate she is either learning or they are operating independently.

I think there is an interesting discussion to be held about culpability of the character in similar situations, but seems maybe a little too far afield for this thread. In short, what should be the responsibility of the host (for lack of a better word) when the powers present in that host, for whatever reason, act independent of conscious control?

- M

[Gallowglass]

Everything about that finale was framed to try and absolve Wanda of her culpability in what she had done.

Like I said upthread, I never expected that nor did I particularly want it. I just wanted to story to at least acknowledge the idea that she likely should be locked up in some capacity. That article that Ramza linked summed it up nicely really.


Two people commit sever acts of abuse, one gets framed as being in the wrong. However a large number of people think the movie portrayed him as actually being in the right because he loved his daughter and the universe confirmed that. The other gets constantly framed as being not responsible for harm caused for no real good reason. These same people who were really on the lookout for Marvel giving a pass to abusers to the point they were practically seeing ghosts where there were none are now conspicuously absent. I'm curious why, that's not a stretch. It's barely even a reach. Oh, and that last sentence was describing Wanda not Thanos.

So, I reject several points of your argument.

1. You assume that those of us in what you term "the pro wanda camp" are also in the "Thanos was right because he loves his daughter". To use your actual words: "These same people who were really on the lookout for Marvel giving a pass to abusers to the point they were practically seeing ghosts where there were none are now conspicuously absent. " I can speak for myself when I say that is not true. Nor does you claiming it to be true make it true. You are creating a false equivalency that simply doesn't exist and you have no evidence it exists beyond your vague assertions. Stop outright lying about what our points are, it doesn't help your argument.

2. You keep describing Wanda with terms like "just going through a rough time, and your emotions just got a bit the better of you, and you really didn't know your strength and promise to never do it again" which are insultingly minimalizing of the truth of the character and language couched to make it seem absurd when it isn't. She isn't going through a rough time. She is experiencing a full on trauma induced dissociative identity disorder event. If your level of understanding and are so devoid of understanding and sympathy of a person or character with these kind of mental issues is so immature and minimalistic then there's no wonder you don't understand our point of view. And frankly makes me glad I only interact with you on a message board and not in real life.

3. Despite ALL of that, you keep stating that we "want to give her a total pass" which, frankly, -we- (by we I mean me, as I'm only going to speak for myself) which we don't. There is a huge difference between wanting to see her get some help that would actually HELP vs a punishment that would only serve to make it worse or retrigger her back into another DID state.

[BRC]

Everything about that finale was framed to try and absolve Wanda of her culpability in what she had done.

I wouldn't say that

I would say, instead, that the finale sidesteps the very real question of culpability by dancing around it.

So, "Framed to try" is probably accurate, as opposed to directly trying to Absolve Wanda.


We know that Wanda isn't down for trapping people in a horrible waking nightmare. We're told, via Monica, that Wanda's motivations are understandable, but that's not the same thing as being Justified, or Wanda being Guiltless.

Wanda gets to be the Act 3 MCU Hero in her fight scene. Wanda gets to loudly affirm that she is taking control of her own destiny.

None of which explicitly says "You, the audience, shouldn't blame Wanda for what she did", but is a little jarring.


I've probably missed it in a couple pages, but could somebody reiterate for me (Or point me to) the evidence that the creation, and maintence of the Hex, was not a conscious decision on Wanda's Part?


As I interpreted it. Wanda did not intentionally create the Hex, she stood, crying in an empty lot, and then stood in wonder as the hex was constructed around her, but she did consciously maintain, defend, and play along with it.

She ejected Monica when she recognized the SWORD necklace, she stormed out to confront Haywood, and she later intentionally expanded the bounds of the Hex. All these seemed to be conscious actions done with full intention and full awareness.

In the Finale, Wanda expresses that she thought the residents of Westview were "At peace", unaware of what was happening.

All of which says to me that Wanda spent the whole time, while not fully aware of what was happening (Unaware that the residents were not at peace, unaware that "Agnes" was not just another actor under her spell), she was in possession of her memories, and had some idea of the basics (That her power had turned the town of Westview into a sitcom themed fantasy for her to live in).

She was traumatized, and living in denial, so she never acknowledged those memories, and gladly played along with the sitcom scenario/ domestic fantasy as much as she could, but I didn't see any hard evidence that she was unaware of the basic nature of the Hex, or incapable of ending it if she so chose.

2. You keep describing Wanda with terms like "just going through a rough time, and your emotions just got a bit the better of you, and you really didn't know your strength and promise to never do it again" which are insultingly minimalizing of the truth of the character and language couched to make it seem absurd when it isn't. She isn't going through a rough time. She is experiencing a full on trauma induced dissociative identity disorder event. If your level of understanding and are so devoid of understanding and sympathy of a person or character with these kind of mental issues is so immature and minimalistic then there's no wonder you don't understand our point of view. And frankly makes me glad I only interact with you on a message board and not in real life.

This is a take I don't think I'd seen especially well stated (it's possible it's been stated over and over in this thread and I just missed it).

The idea that Wanda was unaware of the hex initially, not because of any supernatural compulsion, but because of good old fashioned psychology.

"So traumatized you become unable to recognize the blatant unreality in front of you" is an idea that nicely straddles the line between "Wanda played along because she wanted to" and "The Hex compelled Wanda to play along".


What gets me is that there are instances that are pretty clearly Wanda being aware of the Hex (specifically, her storming out to confront SWORD after the drone strike), but no moment in which we recognize "Wanda is now Aware in a way she was not before". I guess if she's in a trauma-induced disassociate state, she could kind of drift in and out of that, even if she's literally incapable of just Deciding To End the Hex.