The Marvels , you know that new superhero movie

[Psyren]

Yes... I would leave it there but the board requires me to type more then 3 words so I may as well elaborate. If they are willing to erase me at the when it's not convenient for the bottom line than no amount of including me when it is makes is going to make me give a **** about it. They can kindly take that condescending illusion of care and shove it in the gulf of Mexico.

Well if you're going to hold out for perfect representation/inclusion worldwide before we're allowed to have any at all, all I can say is good luck with that. I for one am glad history hasn't worked this way.

[Dragonus45]

Well if you're going to hold out for perfect representation/inclusion worldwide before we're allowed to have any at all, all I can say is good luck with that. I for one am glad history hasn't worked this way.

I didn't say anything about perfect, I just said genuine. Here this might help. Perfect Genuine.

[Psyren]

I didn't say anything about perfect, I just said genuine.

Well, if you're going to hold out for "genuine" worldwide representation/inclusion before we're allowed to have any at all, my post remains unchanged.

[Dragonus45]

Well, if you're going to hold out for "genuine" worldwide representation/inclusion before we're allowed to have any at all, my post remains unchanged.

I'm holding out for Disney to release a movie with a two men kissing that they don't cut out from the release worldwide. Then do it 10 or so more times. Then I'll give them credit for ****. Otherwise they can kiss my fat gay ass.

[Psyren]

I don't want those scenes cut anywhere either. But I'll take a worldwide release that's edited in some markets vs the alternatives - a worldwide release edited everywhere, or a local-only release that generates no headlines at all.

When the world is consistently inclusive I'll certainly celebrate, but I'm glad they're not waiting for that far-flung future to push the envelope when and where they can today.

[Tyndmyr]

If it benefits anyone in any market, that's what I care about. Representation in some places but not others benefits some, no representation anywhere benefits no one.

Would I prefer representation everywhere, absolutely, but refusing to settle for anything less than that is Perfect Fallacy. Results matter to me far more than intentions or motivations.

Tokenism isn't helping. Sometimes doing a thing poorly is worse than not doing it at all.

Plenty of times a sort of character has been "included" but in a way that is a lazy stereotype or the like, and that doesn't necessarily help anyone, and might hurt. Disney made Song of the South, too, and yes, that "included" minorities, but it was most certainly not welcomed or helpful. The modern films don't rise to quite that overt level of stereotype, but yeah, when you make a habit of putting characters in a tangential role so you can cover over the presence entirely in a different market, that's...not really inclusive.

Also, I'm not sure why you're slapping the word "fallacy" in there. What purpose does it serve? Are you attempting to reference the Nirvana fallacy? To do so would imply that you believe that treating everyone as equals is an impossible ideal. That's...very strong. I'd rather not jump to that interpretation, so perhaps there is some other thing you mean by it.

I think it's entirely reasonable to have films about pretty much anyone that are good, and all stories ultimately come back to the same elements. Are the characters interesting? Do we understand their motivations and empathize with their struggle? Is the plot coherent, and well established and paid off? The entire concept of the monomyth in literature is identifying common storytelling traits across many cultures, times and histories. Good and bad stories can be told regarding pretty much anyone and anything.

That given, there is not much value to demanding that a weak tale be lauded simply because of who happens to be in it. It diminishes those stories that are genuinely good, and can even be somewhat patronizing. It is best if we simply judge works on their merits.

The consensus is that the movie is good, or at least decent, and that its box office failure is not due to it being devoid of quality. I don't see how recognizing that is "giving them a pass."

The movie is mediocre, but that is only a portion of the trend. Disney's products, in general, have been on a slump. This particular movie is probably incurring more of the financial cost for that slump than others that were arguably more deserving, sure...but Disney has earned this in general. It certainly appears as if you wish to defend Disney, and their products as a whole.

[Dragonus45]

I don't want those scenes cut anywhere either. But I'll take a worldwide release that's edited in some markets vs the alternatives - a worldwide release edited everywhere, or a local-only release that generates no headlines at all.

When the world is consistently inclusive I'll certainly celebrate, but I'm glad they're not waiting for that far-flung future to push the envelope when and where they can today.

We aren't talking about the world Psyren, we are talking about Disney. Who will gladly crow about representation and rake in good will and then undercut and abandon those "principles" when it might hurt the bottom line. They don't get credit for that and it's embarrassing to the entire community that people keep trying to say they should. I'm not here to argue for scraps and thank Walt for the privilege.

[Psyren]

We aren't talking about the world Psyren, we are talking about Disney.

A global release from Disney takes the world into account; as it exists, to be precise, not as they or I want it to exist.

It is best if we simply judge works on their merits.

I'm inclined to agree - but I don't think Marvels is getting a fair shake in that regard.

[Tyndmyr]

I'm inclined to agree - but I don't think Marvels is getting a fair shake in that regard.

As fair as any other.

Every entry in a franchise is affected by the franchise's popularity as a whole. That very effect is why franchises exist to begin with, and why studios seek to release yet another entry in a known franchise rather than strike out and do something wholly new.

Therefore, every entry in a franchise is sort of working from a baseline of what came before it. An MCU film around Infinity Wars/Endgame? Yeah, you're getting some buzz. Now? Less so.

Even with that taken into account, Guardians of the Galaxy 3 was released not so very long ago, in a fairly similar MCU, and did quite well. This is because GotG 3 was much better than The Marvels.

[Saph]

On the "sanctimonious moralizing" front, I truly don't know what you mean by that.

Really? You can't think of a single time in the past few years where Disney movies and TV shows have had characters deliver lectures that come across as thinly veiled 'take thats'? You can't remember any scenes or plots or casting choices that felt as if they might have been motivated by something other than the story, just a little bit?

I mean, if you genuinely can't remember seeing anything like that, then yeah, I guess that explains why you'd be so inclined to bat for Disney. But personally, I've been seeing it a lot, and I don't think I'm the only one.

[Psyren]

This is because GotG 3 was much better than The Marvels.

I agree it was better (especially the villain), but it also had the advantages of the cast being allowed to actually promote it and not needing any D+ material to know who the characters were. The one vague D+ tie-in it might have had was the holiday special and even that was entirely skippable, because the cast starts and ends exactly where they left off at the end of Endgame/G2. Whereas Kamala Khan and Monica Rambeau feel a lot more like homework.

You can't remember any scenes or plots or casting choices that felt as if they might have been motivated by something other than the story, just a little bit?

Uh, of course I can. And I think that's a good thing. There's a quote in my sig about that for exactly that reason.

[sktarq]

I'm inclined to agree - but I don't think Marvels is getting a fair shake in that regard.

But the social buzz/antipathy toward the direction of Marvels has been around for a while. I have heard about it plenty without ever having to see any of their product to see if it had validity or was mountain out of molehill. So if it only matters now but not during Love and Thunder or Black Panther 2 that says either that those making the arguments are converting people over time or that it is a red herring being blamed for other issues

Uh, of course I can. And I think that's a good thing. There's a quote in my sig about that for exactly that reason.

Okay but you understand that others may not agree with you take or even the assumptions you think fit the text and that leads them to not wish to give the next movie in a series the chance if they find it unpleasant. And if enough of them feel that way (if you happen to be in the minority say) it will effect the box office, merch sales, and park attraction draw?

[Tyndmyr]

I don't think I've ever made the decision to watch an MCU film based on pre-release cast tours. I don't even watch such things much, and if I do see them, it is because I am already interested somehow. I suspect a great deal of the fanbase is the same. People decided to go see Iron Man because they liked the character, or because they heard it was a good movie, not because they saw RDJ's press appearances before the movie even came out.

So, I really don't think that's a massive factor.

And as for the Disney+ tie ins, well, that's on Disney, the studio behind this. If Disney makes a poor decision and is financially punished for it, no unfairness exists. The audience did not demand multiple TV show tie ins to explain origins any more than they demanded a Fortnite tie-in to explain why somehow, Palpatine returned. That's entirely on Disney.

Uh, of course I can. And I think that's a good thing. There's a quote in my sig about that for exactly that reason.

Not seeing the parallels between us nitpicking the comic(which, fair, the fanbase has done that from time to time) and Disney preaching at us, and most importantly, doing really boring, uninspiring preaching that doesn't fit the tale we are there to see.

All stories embody a morality to a degree. That's fine. If it's well told, it can even be an asset. If it's not, well...nobody is likely to look back and fondly reminise about that time when Cap kissed his ex's niece, yknow? And, looking back at it, the whole "Bruce falls on top of Natasha" is pretty much just like the "oops, fell on top of Wonder Woman" bit, and then one suddenly remembers hey, it's Joss Wedon directing both of these and darn, he loves that dodgy trope as much as Tarentino loves finding excuses to include feet.

These detract from the story being told, and most of the time, we try to overlook them, and focus on the parts we do enjoy.

But if you think that having all the female characters land together, take off helmets, and pose together in Endgame is great and won't be remembered in the same way as the other cringeworthy moments...I dunno what to tell you. You don't make up for a kind of crappy moment by trying to make an equally crappy moment the other direction, you just have to....not do that altogether.

People relish the moments when characters are revealing their individual character, when they're struggling against the odds, etc. Not when they're preaching. It is extremely rare that a monologue is the most beloved moment of a movie, which is kind of odd, given how often it's used as the conflict resolution. It *can* work, but only when the opposition is real, and it feels grounded in the moment. Go back and watch some old movies, and look at any conflict solved by a long speech followed by everyone clapping. It's teeth grindingly painful.

[Infernally Clay]

But the social buzz/antipathy toward the direction of Marvels has been around for a while. I have heard about it plenty without ever having to see any of their product to see if it had validity or was mountain out of molehill. So if it only matters now but not during Love and Thunder or Black Panther 2 that says either that those making the arguments are converting people over time or that it is a red herring being blamed for other issues

It's not really that surprising that there was never a whole lot of enthusiasm surrounding the movie. Nobody has even seen Carol Danvers in four years and she was barely even in Endgame to begin with. If we're being completely pragmatic, the only reason Captain Marvel did as well as it did is because it came out right after Infinity War and rode that hype train to the next station.

To be frank, we needed a Captain Marvel 2 movie in 2021 and we needed an Avengers movie by now that asserted Carol's position as the new Steve Rogers (aka the inspirational military figure). Maybe then Kamala Khan being such a huge Captain Marvel nerd would have made sense.

Iron Man came out in 2008 and we had an Avengers movie by 2012, a second Avengers movie in 2015 and then Infinity War in 2018 and Endgame in 2019. Endgame feels like it came out a lifetime ago and we still have no release date for the next Avengers movie and it's like they're skipping to the end too by going straight into a Kang's Dynasty and Secret Wars two-parter. That means we're missing two Avengers movies, or at least two big crossovers, that are the entire reason the MCU exists in the first place - to see these superheroes, who get their own franchises, team up with each other.

And that is a Marvel problem. Sony released Far From Home in 2019 and No Way Home in 2021 and both made an absolute killing at the box office. They probably would have released another Spidey movie this year if it hadn't been for Tom Holland wanting to take some time off and Marvel being so indecisive about what they're actually planning to do with the MCU right now. Sony already had to have super awkward marketing campaigns for the last two Spidey movies because they had to work around the MCU.

[Tyndmyr]

To be frank, we needed a Captain Marvel 2 movie in 2021 and we needed an Avengers movie by now that asserted Carol's position as the new Steve Rogers (aka the inspirational military figure). Maybe then Kamala Khan being such a huge Captain Marvel nerd would have made sense.

I hadn't thought about that since I haven't really followed Kamala, not having gotten into her show, but that's a decent point. It doesn't make a great deal of sense for her to know much about Captain Marvel. The events of the first movie were in the Blockbuster era, when Kamala wasn't even alive yet, and she's not really publicly visible on earth after that. The Endgame battle didn't take place near a city, it was at the Avengers compound. After it was flattened. There probably isn't even much in the way of video, and if there was, it'd be Tony centric or the like.

Hell, the cast of Eternals would be more publicly visible. That said, I fully expect the MCU to just ignore that whole half emerged god thing forevermore. And like...the living planet sized god that showed up to scream at earth. I dunno, that seems like the kind of thing people would care about.

[Saph]

To be frank, we needed a Captain Marvel 2 movie in 2021 and we needed an Avengers movie by now that asserted Carol's position as the new Steve Rogers (aka the inspirational military figure).

I mean . . . did we really? To me, MCU Captain Marvel felt less like Captain America and more like knockoff Superman, just without the weakness to Kryptonite, or the unshakeable decency, or the focus on moral constraints . . . so, you know, all the things that make Superman stories actually interesting. Was anyone really THAT excited about a rather bland "flying brick" type punching her way through yet another army of faceless alien mooks before punching out their forgettable alien boss?

[Psyren]

Okay but you understand that others may not agree with you take or even the assumptions you think fit the text

Not that quote, the one I linked to.

But the social buzz/antipathy toward the direction of Marvels has been around for a while.

Yes, it has - and that's exactly the kind of thing cast promotions are meant to generate buzz/reminders for and counteract. They didn't have that chance.

I don't think I've ever made the decision to watch an MCU film based on pre-release cast tours.

Sure, we wouldn't - we're regular posters on a geek-oriented message board. I don't regularly watch Jimmy Fallon or Good Morning America or Hot Ones et al either. Those cast promotions are aimed at mainstream audiences, and the studios wouldn't allocate millions to doing it if it never worked.

But if you think that having all the female characters land together, take off helmets, and pose together in Endgame is great and won't be remembered in the same way as the other cringeworthy moments...I dunno what to tell you.

I mean, I don't need you to tell me anything you're bringing up the scene 4 years later, so it did its job as far as I'm concerned.

To be frank, we needed a Captain Marvel 2 movie in 2021 and we needed an Avengers movie by now that asserted Carol's position as the new Steve Rogers (aka the inspirational military figure).

Carol can't and shouldn't be the new Steve Rogers. For one, she's not beholden to any particular government or power the way he is, not even in a lip-service way, her association with Nick Fury is entirely voluntary. (Not that they'd be able to constrain her even if she was.) But for two. she's just too powerful. You couldn't really do a Winter Soldier type story with her, she'd just grab the helicarriers and throw them into the sun. The best way to use her is to explain that space is big and have her show up for global threats when she's in the neighborhood.

We already have a new Steve Rogers - Sam Wilson.

[Infernally Clay]

I hadn't thought about that since I haven't really followed Kamala, not having gotten into her show, but that's a decent point. It doesn't make a great deal of sense for her to know much about Captain Marvel. The events of the first movie were in the Blockbuster era, when Kamala wasn't even alive yet, and she's not really publicly visible on earth after that. The Endgame battle didn't take place near a city, it was at the Avengers compound. After it was flattened. There probably isn't even much in the way of video, and if there was, it'd be Tony centric or the like.

Hell, the cast of Eternals would be more publicly visible. That said, I fully expect the MCU to just ignore that whole half emerged god thing forevermore. And like...the living planet sized god that showed up to scream at earth. I dunno, that seems like the kind of thing people would care about.

This is what I mean when I say Marvel lacks direction and consistency. There were rumours that the Celestial would become Krakoa or that it would be made of adamantium or something like that to tie it into the X-Men, but Marvel is evidently in absolutely no rush to make an X-Men movie. They're only just now casting the Fantastic Four after announcing that movie four years ago. We probably wont even see any X-Men until 2030 at this rate and by then the Celestial will have been an unresolved plot point for almost a decade. That's ridiculous.

What's taking them so long? Why did we have to wait six years for Doctor Strange 2? Even Sony managed to do something with the character before we got that sequel. Why did it take them four years to bring Captain Marvel back and how long will we have to wait to see her again? What about Shang-Chi? It's been two years since that movie came out, so where's the second one?

Marvel is spending so much money on movies and TV shows that nobody really needs to see, like Ant-Man 3, Thor 4, Echo, Black Widow, Secret Invasion that if they instead cut all the fat, focused on a small number of characters and got their movies out quickly and to a high standard of quality, the MCU wouldn't be in the state it's in now.

We got Iron Man movies in 2008, 2010 and 2013, Captain America movies in 2011, 2014 and 2016, Thor movies in 2011, 2013 and 2017 and Avengers movies in 2012, 2015, 2018 and 2019. That's consistency. You knew who the main players were, you followed them over the years and then you got your crossovers as the supporting roster grew.

How can it be so hard to repeat a formula that works? Sony is doing it just fine. We got Spider-Man movies in 2017, 2019 and 2021 and Spidey still showed up in three crossover movies.

[Trixie_One]

I can't imagine anyone I know cares about Thunderbolts.

I care about the Thunderbolts... or at least I would if y'know the film called Thunderbolts had any actual Thunderbolts in it.

[Infernally Clay]

Carol can't and shouldn't be the new Steve Rogers. For one, she's not beholden to any particular government or power the way he is, not even in a lip-service way, her association with Nick Fury is entirely voluntary. (Not that they'd be able to constrain her even if she was.) But for two. she's just too powerful. You couldn't really do a Winter Soldier type story with her, she'd just grab the helicarriers and throw them into the sun. The best way to use her is to explain that space is big and have her show up for global threats when she's in the neighborhood.

We already have a new Steve Rogers - Sam Wilson.

I wasn't really speaking in a literal sense, but a spiritual sense. Had Chadwick Boseman not passed away, Carol Danvers and T'Challa would have replaced Steve Rogers and Tony Stark as the emotional and intellectual leaders of the Avengers respectively. It would have been a big upgrade in terms of power, as you point out, but the Avengers would have faced much greater threats so it'd even out.

If I'm being totally honest, as well, Antony Mackie isn't leading man material. He lacked the commanding presence he needed in both the second season of Altered Carbon and that episode of Black Mirror he was in and Falcon and Winter Soldier suffered because it felt like two sidekicks working together and that was in a TV show. The most compelling parts of that show were when John Walker or Zemo were on the screen. What's it going to be like when the movie comes out? Is Sam Wilson just going to get overshadowed by other characters with more screen presence? Say what you want about Brie Larson but she can carry a movie.

You need someone like Carol Danvers to lead the Avengers, both from an in-universe perspective and a meta one. You need someone who says "I'm in charge" without ever having to say a word.

[Psyren]

This is what I mean when I say Marvel lacks direction and consistency. There were rumours that the Celestial would become Krakoa or that it would be made of adamantium or something like that to tie it into the X-Men, but Marvel is evidently in absolutely no rush to make an X-Men movie. They're only just now casting the Fantastic Four after announcing that movie four years ago. We probably wont even see any X-Men until 2030 at this rate and by then the Celestial will have been an unresolved plot point for almost a decade. That's ridiculous.

What's taking them so long?

Reportedly, they contractually cannot recast the X-Men until 2025 at the earliest, because the Fox contracts carried over to Disney. This is why all the X-Men we've seen since the buyout have been portrayed by existing actors, e.g. Patrick Stewart as Charles Xavier in MoM, Evan Peters as "Quicksilver" in Wandavision, Hugh Jackman returning as Wolverine in Deadpool 3 next year, and

Spoiler

Show

Kelsey Grammer as Beast in the ending of this movie.

The actual contract terms haven't leaked anywhere, but the inside sources haven't given me a reason to doubt them.

How can it be so hard to repeat a formula that works? Sony is doing it just fine. We got Spider-Man movies in 2017, 2019 and 2021 and Spidey still showed up in three crossover movies.

Well.... Keep in mind that the whole "Sony is doing it just fine" thing is pretty recent (and Madame Web will be the true litmus test in that regard.) Their truly solo Spiderman movies, the Garfield ones, fell off a cliff fairly quickly. Venom managed to do well, but a big part of that was due to Eastern markets taking a shine to the character.

Miles is doing great though, no argument there. I imagine Spiderman 4 would do well also, the character is just that popular.

I wasn't really speaking in a literal sense, but a spiritual sense. Had Chadwick Boseman not passed away, Carol Danvers and T'Challa would have replaced Steve Rogers and Tony Stark as the emotional and intellectual leaders of the Avengers respectively. It would have been a big upgrade in terms of power, as you point out, but the Avengers would have faced much greater threats so it'd even out.

If I'm being totally honest, as well, Antony Mackie isn't leading man material. He lacked the commanding presence he needed in both the second season of Altered Carbon and that episode of Black Mirror he was in and Falcon and Winter Soldier suffered because it felt like two sidekicks working together and that was in a TV show. The most compelling parts of that show were when John Walker or Zemo were on the screen. What's it going to be like when the movie comes out? Is Sam Wilson just going to get overshadowed by other characters with more screen presence? Say what you want about Brie Larson but she can carry a movie.

You need someone like Carol Danvers to lead the Avengers, both from an in-universe perspective and a meta one. You need someone who says "I'm in charge" without ever having to say a word.

I know the sense you meant, but I still don't really see it working. I totally agree with you that Brie is a stronger actor, but the issue is the character - the MCU Captain Marvel we've been shown up until now, including in this movie, just isn't the kind of person that would lead a terrestrial team as a regular gig. She views her jurisdiction as being galaxy-wide, to the point that she has no qualms, say, saving a distant planet by getting married to its alien regent. Even putting concerns about her power level aside, you'd have to radically change her outlook to make her want to stick around in one place, even if that one place was her birth planet.

[Zevox]

To be frank, we needed a Captain Marvel 2 movie in 2021 and we needed an Avengers movie by now that asserted Carol's position as the new Steve Rogers (aka the inspirational military figure).

This actually brings up a point that does bug me a bit about the post-Endgame Marvel films. The Avengers. That was always the backbone of the MCU before - phase 1 was all about building up to doing an Avengers movie at all, and even though the next build-up was to Thanos and that didn't culminate until the end of phase 3, they still made a point to have Age of Ultron in the middle (plus the informal might-as-well-be-an-Avengers-movie that was Civil War). Post-Endgame though, they've not had a clear buildup to the next big thing, and while we know Avengers movies are in the works, phase 4 became the first phase of the MCU to pass without one, and phase 5 does not have one planned either; both of the announced Avengers films are coming at the end of phase 6, in 2026 and 2027 if there's no delays. That'll be most of a decade after Infinity War/Endgame. And it's still deeply unclear what the team will be like when we do get them, despite four years having passed since Endgame. No one has been set up to fill the void left by Captain America and Iron Man as the main leaders of the group. For one of the obvious candidates, Black Panther, there's a clear reason for that of course, but they could've taken steps towards that with characters like Captain Marvel and Doctor Strange, but haven't.

It makes the whole thing feel less connected than ever before. These characters technically inhabit a shared universe, but aside from when Doctor Strange got to play a significant supporting role in No Way Home because they needed multiverse shenanigans to happen somehow, we're not really seeing them interact with each other anymore now that the Avengers films have gone by the wayside, and that's leaving kind of a void. Part of what made the MCU what it was is just missing as a result.

[VampiricLongbow]

This actually brings up a point that does bug me a bit about the post-Endgame Marvel films. The Avengers. That was always the backbone of the MCU before - phase 1 was all about building up to doing an Avengers movie at all, and even though the next build-up was to Thanos and that didn't culminate until the end of phase 3, they still made a point to have Age of Ultron in the middle (plus the informal might-as-well-be-an-Avengers-movie that was Civil War). Post-Endgame though, they've not had a clear buildup to the next big thing, and while we know Avengers movies are in the works, phase 4 became the first phase of the MCU to pass without one, and phase 5 does not have one planned either; both of the announced Avengers films are coming at the end of phase 6, in 2026 and 2027 if there's no delays. That'll be most of a decade after Infinity War/Endgame. And it's still deeply unclear what the team will be like when we do get them, despite four years having passed since Endgame. No one has been set up to fill the void left by Captain America and Iron Man as the main leaders of the group. For one of the obvious candidates, Black Panther, there's a clear reason for that of course, but they could've taken steps towards that with characters like Captain Marvel and Doctor Strange, but haven't.

It makes the whole thing feel less connected than ever before. These characters technically inhabit a shared universe, but aside from when Doctor Strange got to play a significant supporting role in No Way Home because they needed multiverse shenanigans to happen somehow, we're not really seeing them interact with each other anymore now that the Avengers films have gone by the wayside, and that's leaving kind of a void. Part of what made the MCU what it was is just missing as a result.

That is basically what I have felt since Endgame. They needed to pick a handful of heroes to build around, then do a smaller Avengers film at the end of Phase 4. Then build out the team a little and have a bigger enemy to defeat in Phase 5. All the while, slowly build Kang up as the major big bad for the Avengers film in Phase 6.

Like:

• Phase 4: Pick 4 heroes to build around, Avengers film: Avengers vs a resurgent HYDRA
• Phase 5: Solo film for Dr. Strange (setting up the multiverse fully), Solo movies for the most popular Phase 4 hero, Spider-Man No Way Home, Solo movie for the second most popular Phase 4 Hero, Avengers Film: Avengers vs Wanda
• Phase 6: Solo movies for Thor, team up film for the two least popular Phase 4 heroes the addition of a fan favorite hero from other phases (explicitly a multiversal movie), Solo movie for the most popular phase 4 hero, the Marvels, Avengers Film: Avengers vs Kang

[Infernally Clay]

I know the sense you meant, but I still don't really see it working. I totally agree with you that Brie is a stronger actor, but the issue is the character - the MCU Captain Marvel we've been shown up until now, including in this movie, just isn't the kind of person that would lead a terrestrial team as a regular gig. She views her jurisdiction as being galaxy-wide, to the point that she has no qualms, say, saving a distant planet by getting married to its alien regent. Even putting concerns about her power level aside, you'd have to radically change her outlook to make her want to stick around in one place, even if that one place was her birth planet.

That’s kinda the point I’m making, though. Up until Infinity War, the Avengers were a terrestrial superhero team. The biggest threat they had faced as a team was a genocidal murderbot of their own design and, honestly, Thor was punching well below his weight in that regard. In his own movies he was fighting literal gods, so Ultron and HYDRA and regular ol’ arms dealers were never really on his level. Even in 2012, during the Battle of New York, the aliens they fought were pretty lame and the universe at large didn’t think much of it.

Fast forward to 2018, however, and the Avengers are fighting Thanos, one of the worst people in the entire universe that has killed half the population of many worlds across the universe and, after gathering the Infinity Gems, successfully kills half of all life in the universe. Five years later, those same Avengers bring everyone back. At that point the Avengers are no longer merely a terrestrial team and Earth is no longer just some backwater world nobody wants to visit, half the universe literally owes the Avengers their lives. If that doesn’t promote the Avengers to superheroes of the universe who travel across galaxies to fight bad guys, nothing will.

You’d be right if Carol Danvers joined the team in, say, Age of Ultron like the behind-the-scenes stuff says she was originally going to, but post-Endgame I can’t think of anyone better than Captain Marvel to lead a new Avengers team that fights threats across the universe like Galactus or errant Celestials threatening to judge civilisations to determine if they’re worthy of their continued existence. Heck, could you imagine the Shi’ar Empire showing up on Earth one day because this primordial creature known as the Phoenix just destroyed their home world and chose a human from Earth to be its host and Captain Marvel is like “If you think I’m letting you invade Earth you’re pretty stupid” and then she gets into an epic fight with Gladiator?

[Dragonus45]

A global release from Disney takes the world into account; as it exists, to be precise, not as they or I want it to exist.

And I judge Disney as it actually acts, not like how I wish they would act.

[Psyren]

And I judge Disney as it actually acts, not like how I wish they would act.

As do I, so we're aligned. Well, that was easy!

You’d be right if Carol Danvers joined the team in, say, Age of Ultron like the behind-the-scenes stuff says she was originally going to, but post-Endgame I can’t think of anyone better than Captain Marvel to lead a new Avengers team that fights threats across the universe like Galactus or errant Celestials threatening to judge civilisations to determine if they’re worthy of their continued existence. Heck, could you imagine the Shi’ar Empire showing up on Earth one day because this primordial creature known as the Phoenix just destroyed their home world and chose a human from Earth to be its host and Captain Marvel is like “If you think I’m letting you invade Earth you’re pretty stupid” and then she gets into an epic fight with Gladiator?

But they can't just graduate to a nonstop parade of Kang into Galactus into Arishem into the Beyonder into God Emperor Doom etc. That's never-ending escalation. There needs to be room for threats that are serious enough to challenge a superhero team, but not so serious that without Carol around to tank their fleet or punch them into a black hole everything dies (or conversely, serious enough to challenge a superhero team but not serious enough to need the biggest gun the heroes have.) Putting her front and center pushes things up that scale too quickly, unless they plan to have Rogue jump out from behind a bush and dramatically weaken her in the near future - which I suppose could happen, but still.

[Ramza00]

But they can't just graduate to a nonstop parade of Kang into Galactus into Arishem into the Beyonder into God Emperor Doom etc. That's never-ending escalation. There needs to be room for threats that are serious enough to challenge a superhero team, but not so serious that without Carol around to tank their fleet or punch them into a black hole everything dies (or conversely, serious enough to challenge a superhero team but not serious enough to need the biggest gun the heroes have.) Putting her front and center pushes things up that scale too quickly, unless they plan to have Rogue jump out from behind a bush and dramatically weaken her in the near future - which I suppose could happen, but still.

Give it to me! ^{the rogue stuff}

I want a straight teen to be a little oppositionally defiant, for if your momma can see the future, and your other momma is Mystique, well you are going to do something brash if merely to feel alive and not in someone’s shadow.

[Dragonus45]

As do I, so we're aligned. Well, that was easy!

Aligned? You seem to want to apologize on their behalf for mealy mouthed, fair weather, preachy, ineffectual, half-assed "support" in the name of cynical profit while I want to hold them accountable for it. Where is the alignment?

[GloatingSwine]

There's a good video from Every Frame a Painting discussing that, and ways scenes could have been scored better

Whilst the MCU is a large and therefore easy target in this regard, when was the last time you heard a movie score that wasn't licensed music, or by John Williams, and it really really stuck with you?

Writing movie scores that both enhance the scene they're in and are independently memorable pieces of music is pretty much a dead art. Anyone who is minded to compose music like that just gets a job in videogame music now.

[Eldan]

I mean . . . did we really? To me, MCU Captain Marvel felt less like Captain America and more like knockoff Superman, just without the weakness to Kryptonite, or the unshakeable decency, or the focus on moral constraints . . . so, you know, all the things that make Superman stories actually interesting. Was anyone really THAT excited about a rather bland "flying brick" type punching her way through yet another army of faceless alien mooks before punching out their forgettable alien boss?

I think that's actually the problem with lacking a Captain Marvel 2.

At the end of Captain Marvel 1, we've established what Carol Denvers no longer is. She's no longer Mar-vell, Kree soldier. She's liberated herself and freed the Kree. But it doesn't actually develop what she will do next.

That should have immediately be followed up by a Captain Marvel 2, where Carol Denvers is trying to find out what to do next. We know what she isn't, but we haven't really established what she is now. What her intention and motivation is other than "fight Kree" (done), protect Earth (ongoing, but not very interesting) and help the Skrull (seems to be mostly failing).

The Marvels could have been that movie, if it had just allowed a bit more time in the beginning and end to establish a character arc for Carol. Like, if she actually decide to help the Kree rebuild more in the end rather than just punch their sun. Could have worked: she doens't want to work for their military regime and destroyed that, but she still feels connected to the Kree and wants to help them rebuild into something peaceful. Or she still feels guilty over hastily destroying the supreme intelligence and plunging them into civil war, so now needs to find some new purpose elsewhere. Also hinted at in this movie, but not developed enough.