SocaShoe

No. They don't. And to me, the whole promo is a signal that everyone on the team will hug it out by the last scene of the next episode because Daisy's life was slightly threatened.

I have to admit, I've watched the pissy Colson scene more than once in order to convince myself that it was actually in the show. When he threw the tablet at Daisy...I thought, hmmm, this could really be good esp.if Daisy finally has to endure some real consequences for her actions. Did anyone else think that we got more about the real costs of being Inhuman and swayed by Hive in the brief moments with Hell fire than we did in the last 3 episodes of Daisy pouting her way around Los Angeles? I am waiting for a good Daisy/May scene. I wonder if May will be the one to offer advice to Daisy about healing and moving on.

I've been thinking about the episode on and off all day. Here are my random thoughts. I don't know how I feel about the Ghost Rider story. I actually think they need a little of the Nicholas Cage flavor with the crazy humor to maybe lighten things up. But I need to give it a little more time and see what they do with it. I'm less impressed with Daisy's story right now, but I like her being away from SHIELD. I'm with Fitz. She is being selfish. However, I can see the new Director viewing her as a threat even before she left. I wouldn't be surprised if we found out he helped push her out of the door because she's the team's ace in the hole when it comes to a fight. She's literally the only person on the team who could beat him up. I hate the new Director, but I think he's good for the other characters. To me, he's only interested in SHIELD because re-establishing the agency will bring recognition to him personally. It feels like he's literally planning the moment that he debuts himself as a hero to the world. It makes me think about Captain America: The First Avenger and the talks about how a person's heart truly makes them a hero. It would be interesting to ultimately find out that he's not as powerful as he seems and that he requires some version of the Super Soldier serum to maintain his strength. Every Inhuman power we've seen so far has a cost when it's used. What's going to be the negative to his power? Henry Simmons amazes me in the ways he manages to such depth and emotion to Mack. I want more Mack focused stories. Phil. Oh Phil. He really never made great decisions as Director. And now he's paying for one of his choices by having to deal with this pompous jerk who won't even let him visit a sick friend. It's almost like Phil's story is paralleling Daisy's. Both of them are punishing themselves and it hurts the people around them the most. Phil knows he didn't do a good job as Director, probably blames himself for the loss of Lincoln, Andrew and untold numbers of agents. So he "takes one for the team" so SHIELD can go public. But it's really him admitting that he sucked as a Director because he was often too busy trying to play Dad to Daisy and punishing himself by backing out of the main action. Phil desperately needs someone like Fury to come in and threaten to put a boot in his a__ if he doesn't get it together and TAKE CARE OF HIS TEAM. May was trying to get to him before she had her breakdown. But it seems like he's too far gone. The one small detail that gives me hope is finding out that Phil didn't hand over the money and maybe hung on to Fury's toolbox as a sort of backup in case SHIELD 3.0 (or is it SHIELD 4.0) implodes when the world needs saving. I hope Phil starts to get it together soon because everyone around him is in trouble.

Yeah, the magic is really just science premise is something that we can blame on the folks behind the MCU and Thor. I don't mind the inclusion of Ghost Rider as a start of exploring moe mystical stories. I think it will take a couple of episodes to find the right balance in the storytelling though. I hope they get the hang of it quickly.

Yes. It was brought up that board members had somehow made up the term "special snowflake." Then the use of the term was questioned. These things were answered.

No, you would be cherry-picking the definition here. It says, a person who believes they are different or unique because of something they are or do. Daisy believes she's different and unique because she is half alien and it leads her to think that she and her powers are the best solution for every situation that arises. That is not always the case. This thing they do, most commonly is something many many other people are doing. So Daisy became a field agent. So did Mack, Fitz, Simmons, and May, who returned to the field after riding a desk. I would also argue Daisy's confidence has always been there too. You don't fake your way onto a SHIELD team because you lack confidence in yourself. When you talk about me being someone who shames women for becoming confident - I honestly don't know what you're trying to do with this except try to distract me from the debate at hand, hoping that I will engage on some sort of personal level. I will not. So within the AOS world, I actually have great interest and like for the characters of May and Simmons. I even at times liked Rosalind for her no-nonsense way of taking people down. Lady Sif freaking rules and should be the leader of Asgard over all the Odinson's family. And I would be remiss if I talked about SHIELD and didn't mention the amazing Peggy Carter who founded SHIELD. If I would say anything about female characters in general is that I get frustrated and put off by lazy writing that relies on tropes and old fashioned ideas of what a great female character should be. That is why I criticize the character of Daisy. Also, I have not questioned Daisy's skills. I even pointed out that she had to have skills when we first met the character. I criticize her emotional growth as a character. We get to see Daisy shoot, run and jump. What we're not seeing is really strong emotional growth and that tends to contradict what we hear from other characters who tell us how awesome she is. And I want to see it. I want to see better characters because I believe that those characters will be sustainable.

No one here made up the term special snowflake. It's urban slang and is generally defined as " a person who believes they are different and unique from everyone else because of something they are or do. This thing they are or do, most commonly is something is something many many other people are doing,. Special Snowflakes almost always have a superiority complex." The term itself is thought to be derived from a Tyler Durden quote in the movie Fight Club. And this is not the only board or site that has called Daisy a special snowflake. My references to Daisy have nothing to do with seeing her as a woman of color either. I see her as a badly written character. And often I find that it's Coulson (even though he's been my favorite character at times.) who helps enable the special snowflake syndrome that Daisy suffers from by continuously putting her safety and well being above every other person at SHIELD.

Yes, on the central protangonist arguments from Kitlee625 and Ottermommy. I would also argue that Daisy has known how to basically take care of herself from the beginning. She was largely left on her own in the foster system. You don't get a van, and the kinds of computers needed to hack SHIELD by being helpless. But you can know how to do things that make money and still be childish and not grown emotionally. That's what the sticking point for me is. She still acts and makes decisions like Season 1 Skye. Think about the episode where she got shot in Season 1. Knowing the location of the delivery for Quinn, she could have held back, observed until there was movement or even tried to get back to headquarters. She chooses to go ahead on her belief she can do it and gets shot, then needs to be saved. How is this really different from Season 3 when Mack wants her to retreat from the Watchdogs compound and then she goes in anyway, which leads to Fitz nearly imploded with nitramene? (It also leads to Mack being falsely identified as an Inhuman and getting attacked and shot.) Two missions, three years apart and Daisy is still doing what she wants without a real thought to what it might cost someone. Admittedly, I think hanging out with Coulson encourages this behavior but it's tough to see a character that could be great just neglected in this way. It is what makes it very hard for me to watch her or be interested in her stories.

Having powers doesn't make you a superhero. It can make you a super villain, or even a just a super jerk. Getting powers can create the opportunity for character development which could lead to someone being a superhero. But what we're seeing is Daisy returning to her Season 1 Skye days - running around on her own, deciding what's justice all by herself. That doesn't show emotional growth to me. It's just Daisy taking her new skills on the road. Character development has to include some sort of emotional change whether it's good or bad. Can gaining skills lead to emotional change? Yes. But in television you really need to see it happen. And the thing is, Daisy is really not being allowed to SHOW she's changed emotionally. We're being told she's changed when all we really get to see is her shoving things around, crying and jumping, while still needing to be saved by the people around her.

If an entire series was leading up to a character jumping really, really high... well, I'd say they really should have aimed for more. Gaining skill with one's powers doesn't necessarily character development.

Not really ignorant. I've read the same interviews and it comes across more as Chloe defending Daisy's actions, in a sense trying to make sure everyone doesn't start to hate the character because she's left SHIELD and dressing differently. It's totally fine and right for her to defend her character. But a lot of the interviews were done around the time of SDCC when they had just started filming the season. So Chloe had seen one, maybe two scripts. I don't think Daisy will go bad...but darker, more likely to choose harsher actions towards those she sees as doing wrong...that's a possibility. I also agree with Kitlee..the show seems to want to have the Star Trek arrangement, but they don't do a good job of achieving it in writing the stories. I do think it's helped create a lot of the hostility towards the character of Daisy. Heck, it's made me grumpy about Coulson because he's willing to toss aside any relationship, including a years long friendship with May, to go running after Daisy. And they haven't earned the Phil/Daisy bond by showing us why very often. Phil is one of my favorite characters in the Marvel universe, but I'm tired of Daisy and Phil only stories. I really liked that Elizabeth Henstridge got featured last year. I like Mack. I want more Yo-Yo. I like Fitz. If they want a show entirely about Daisy then they should be bold and do a spinoff. Otherwise, I want this to be about the Agents of SHIELD.

http://www.spoilertv.com/2016/08/agents-of-shield-season-4-press-release.html I really hope some of this is being exaggerated for the press release, but come on, Coulson can't be director because the world thinks he's dead? Who the heck cares anymore? Daisy goes "rogue" to "atone" for her sins? ABC just really doesn't get comic book series at all.

Umm, except for the fact that the current Agents of Shield comic book is a spinoff from the tv series. It was launched after the first season. Daisy first appeared in the Marvel Secret Wars series in 2004. And SHIELD stories have been around for decades before that. While the last season has some of it's story basis in Secret Wars it doesn't follow it faithfully. Do I think Daisy is the central character? I think that there are certain producers who want her to be, but the character gets written like she's a teenager who's not capable of taking care of herself, much less anybody else. She's a hero that rarely gets to act like one. I do also think that for some reason Bennet has failed to resonate with audiences the way they wanted her to. The show's given her three years to do so, so maybe it's time to spend less time on her. And to me, when every character has an arc or stakes in the story it's a more interesting show.

I'm not optimistic.

Reporting on the Save Agent Carter campaign - Hayley responds to the question of whether she would do another season of Agent Carter if renewed http://popwrapped.com/hayley-atwell-wants-season-3-agent-carter/ http://moviepilot.com/posts/3940023 If you can, sign the petition or help in the ways listed below: https://www.change.org/p/netflix-save-agent-carter-bring-her-to-netflix?recruiter=3158512&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=share_twitter_responsive Thanks!

I was listening to an AOS podcast review of the season finale. A sharp-eyed reviewer noted that when Phil is sitting im the window looking for Daisy, there id a prescription pill bottlr in front of him. That's a little scary especially since dr. Radcliffe is likely building Could our fearless Phil be sick, or has he developed a problem of his own?They'd better not kill him again....

Yes. We do know. We're really not even looking for an ABC pickup. What it comes down to is this. She does have a new series. Like most new series, it will likely receive a 13 episode commitment and have to succeed or fail. The new show is in Castle's old timeslot on Mondays after Dancing with the Stars. But that's all they have right now. Without good ratings, they'll be no more than 13 episodes. And ABC has been known to pick up full "seasons" of shows that had no more than 16 episodes. And they still have have eight series already waiting to premiere at midseason. The new show, "Conviction" will air against CBS' Scorpion and NBC's "Timeless. Does it have a chance? Yes. It's got Hayley Atwell in it. Anything she does has a chance. But, with all the variables in the air, it seemed prudent to speak up at the time of cancellation because this is when the show got a lot of press with it being near the top of people's lists as a show that should somehow be saved. It's easier to ask now - even if the main thing we get is for both already broadcast seasons becoming available on Netflix. All of the Marvel Netflix shows are produced by ABC Studios. And Disney, Marvel, and ABC are all the same company so if there's a deal made then schedules could be possibly coordinated. Let's face it. ABC never really loved the show that much. It was filler for the three months AOS took off. They don't get have the promotional consideration that AOS does. They never even sent the first season to Netflix after it aired, choosing to make it only available by purchase. It's also a very serialized drama - something Ben Sherwood wants less of on his network. But I look at it like this, I don't expect even if we get a renewal that the show will go immediately into production. Gilmore Girls got picked up and it hasn't aired a new episode since 2007. Netflix has shown they want to play the long game. Netflix already has a schedule of Marvel series in production but only one other show has a female hero lead. If we show the networks and streaming services that yes, there is a demand for female shows and more Agent Carter, then maybe when they finally talk about doing one, they'll consider Agent Carter. We've seen Peggy in the 1950s, the 1280s and after 2000. It's a show that could pick up at anytime. And for you, it only takes a moment to sign an online petition. So why not do it?

If there are any fans of Agent Carter left, we have over 111,000 signatures. We're trying to get to 120k. If you know of a forum or place that would be ok with us posting a request to help Save Agent Carter, would you post the link to the petition or let me know of where it is.... https://www.change.org/p/netflix-save-agent-carter-bring-her-to-netflix Thanks so much guys.

Iron Man is just fun. If you are a fan of Phil Coulson, you can see him in Thor. Iron Man 2 actually has the fun I-will-tase-you scene eith Phil too, but the overall film isn't that great. Skip the hulk movies, Ruffalo is the only actor who has gotten Banner right in the films. I haven't seen Ant-man.

I've always found it interesting that the series tends to go to a very strange sort of tone when it comes to depicting adult romantic relationships. It sometimes feels like I'm watching a romantic comedy out of the 1940s.The thing is, unless the actors have onscreen chemistry, they tend to feel like they're not real. It's not like I need or want lots of skin-baring, bodice ripping scenes, but I feel like they could sometimes there could be a real place for quiet intimacy and physical contact. (Hold her hand. Hug her. Put your arm around her, Coulson.) Even though I loved Clark and Constance Z. in their scenes together, I always felt kind of weird about the Coulsalind romance because it felt...fake. Even the idealized dream that Coulson has of Rosalind telling him to wake up it just feels like two strangers in bed next to each other because we saw them kiss once? and then it was like they were in a serious love of your life kind of relationship. I felt like we got some authentic moments in Andrew and Melinda's relationship. I'm hoping we see that in Fitz and Simmons relationship - but if everyone keeps showing up when they're trying to have a moment, it's gonna get weird.

Ok. cool. I stand corrected. Apologies for the earlier rant.

You mean when he scolds Ward for blowing the interrogation? He tells Ward that they need Skye because they don't have any information on her and that that never happens with SHIELD. This makes her an asset in the sense she's a spy's asset, to be used until the information she has is no longer worthwhile and pretty makes her at the least a recurring character or someone to check in with via Skype. But, bringing her along on the plane, making her an agent - that's not discussed. edited to change "worthless" to "worthwhile."

Yes. this. It's because over and over, we're told not shown the kind of person she is. And more often than not, they have her acting/reacting like a teenager - which would be absolutely fine if they didn't try to tell us that she's a super special agent. You know if I'd heard something along the line of Phil saying to Melinda "I know, she's young. She doesn't have the advanced educations that Fitz and Simmons have. She's openly defiant and sometimes she doesn't make the best decisions. But she's alone and living in a van. And somehow SHIELD's been responsible for that. So maybe we should help her out -see if we can help her get to a better place in life. Until then, we could use her - she does have strong computer skills and she definitely has a way with people. Who knows? Maybe she'll even become an agent someday? But right now, I could certainly see her as an asset." I might have give the character more of a chance. And I'd be more understanding about her actions esp. when they try to sell her as the best agent ever.

Reasons to go ahead and sign the Agent Carter Petition: - You can write a statement about what the series has meant to you. Several of the actors have already read the notes. - Yes, Hayley has another show on ABC. But if we go by logic from TV seasons past we know these facts: -- The new show, Conviction, will initially get a 13 episode pickup. The show will have to be a ratings success in order to get a back nine pickup to make a full season. ABC has also been known to order less than 22 episodes and call it a full season pickup. So Hayley's free time for other productions might be more than you think especially if Conviction doesn't do terribly well. -- The Netflix shows are produced by ABC studios. If even a movie is picked up, then, ABC profits as well. -- Netflix picked up a new season of the Gilmore Girls - a show that hasn't aired a new episode since 2007. They are willing to play the long game. They already have several series in production so saying we'll get another season but have to wait until 2018 when Infinity War premieres is fine. --Agent Carter was produced by two women, Michelle Fazekas and Tara Butters. These women know how to make tv. Any publicity for their work gets them more work in Hollywood and more work for women in a business where we're woefully under represented. -Use the media boost received from the ABC cancellation - this was covered in many major media publications including "Variety" to let the comics gods know that not all heroes have to be male, blond and buff. Heroes can be women. Heroes can be larger than a size 4. Heroes can need a crutch to walk. We need to speak up more or we'll never get the comics we deserve. It was really funny the other day, AgentM from Marvel tweeted that if we "loved Agent Carter" he hoped we would be reading the Captain Marvel comic book series that's also written by Fazekas and Butters. And it's a great book. Agent M is a nice guy and really supportive of the fans, but this tweet highlights the problem that they don't see that there is a demand for more than one female hero - that we need Captain Marvel, Peggy Carter, Black Widow, Scarlett Witch and Ms. Marvel. Also, he failed to point out that Fazekas and Butters will not be writing the Captain Marvel book when Civil War II starts. (That made me exceedingly cranky to think that he would believe that I'm not keeping up with who writes what book.) If we never complain about the loss of a character, then we won't get to revisit that character in any form. An Agent Carter of SHIELD comic would rock! But if they think we don't care who we see, then they'll never make her story a priority. So sign the petition. Tweet using the hashtag #SaveAgentCarter. Visit the facebook page Renew Agent Carter. Let your voice be heard. The worst thing they can say is "no." Let's make it hard for them to say it. https://www.change.org/p/netflix-save-agent-carter-bring-her-to-netflix If you never speak up, if you never object, then it's likely you'll never get anything you want.

I think if AOS pushes the inhumans story too much for the movie studio's comfort, they will get shut down by Disney or there will be a break between the tv and movie continuity that is acknowledged. In my opinion though, Daisy will be known as a person with powers and her background will be classified. Ellis ran for office on a whole keep America safe kind of platform. It actually serves Ellis' fear-based appeal to not have knowledge about the inhumans' history to be known. He doesn't want people to identify with Daisy in any way. So he has Daisy and others like her treated like a rare occurrence. It's easier for the government to deny basic rights to a lone "terrorist" or "vigilante" esp. when they leave behind damage like "Quake" has. His administration plays the hero because it is "one person" who decided the laws were wrong and is destroying things for unknown reasons when all he and his administration want to do is keep people safe from harm. In Ellis' version of the world, quake is like the nameless faceless monsters that attacked New York - different and dangerous. So we control them. We look for cures like rosalind did. If we find that she's part of a group of people, who possibly who number in the thousands and have been a part of this planet for millenia then Ellis has to address why he's denying rights to a race that has lived in peaceful co-existence with other beings on this planet...He also has to address why they suddenly need special laws when the ones serving us have been largely just fine. Any kind of request for recognition from the inhumans is actually quite inconvenient for his and any other government that wants to control gifted people and use them. So yeah, it is pretty easy for the movies to ignore them, esp when you have character douchebags like Ellis who could keep information about them classified. He could easily classify the inhumans as a first wave of alien invaders that are intent on destroying humanity. Peter Parker who might not have access to all the shield files initially would not know anything about inhumans outside whatever information the governments have allowed to be distributed. Which is probably very little.