The Marvel Cinematic Universe: The Avengers, etc.

[HoodlumSheep]

once in a blue moon I pop in here with an update on viewing the mcu movies and I gotta say it's been awhile. I wanna say 3 years but it feels longer than that? Idk.

Last ones I watched were Thor 3, gotg 2 and infinity war and those were a really enjoyable group of movies to watch back to back so to speak.

Since then I hadn't watched any of the movies from endgame and beyond nor any of the shows. I've followed along decently enough by ways of social media though so I pretty much know what goes on in all of those for the most part.

This weekend I binged The Marvels, Shang Chi and Multiverse of Madness. at this point I'm so behind I don't care about the watch order.

maybe it's bc I've essentially been away from the MCU for 3 yrs but I didn't think any of them were all that bad? I feel like that saved me from a good chunk of the Marvel fatigue that's hit everyone else.

Anyways, not super fantastic but not terrible. I enjoyed them.

The Marvels:

Fun. I liked the shorter length too tbh. a couple of bonkers moments with the Disney princess planet and the cats/memory scene but I liked it. Liked the trio. They worked well together. definitely was reminded of Spaceballs with the whole stealing a planet's oxygen/resources thing and I would have to say Spaceballs did a better job of it. Biggest flaw was the completely unmemorable villain. Hammer lady. maybe I misheard it, but did she not mention having a sick child (?) thnx to the war and stuff? I don't understand why they didn't use that angle to make her a more compelling villain. It would have fit perfectly with the different family units presented in the movie (Kamala and her fam, Carol and Monica and Maria)??? Lost opportunity there.

I feel like you could make a drinking game out of how many times they said 'jump point.'

Shang-Chi:

maybe it's bc I watched this right after the Marvels and I paused a couple of times due to various reasons, but oh boy you could feel the length of this movie. I really enjoyed the first two-thirds of the movie and am bummed that it devolved into a mystical monster fest right at the end. That giant soul sucking dragon was not needed. Like at all, especially when you have a compelling enough villain with the dad! Like he was great! And then they switched to the dragon :/

Multiverse of Madness:

wish they would have committed to the horror aspect just a bit more. I really enjoyed Scarlet Witch as the villain. up until the MCU's version I only really knew her from the X-Men: Evolution cartoon so I'm glad to see her in a more antagonistic role like we got in the cartoon and AoU at least. Stephen and Christine :'(

wish they would have taken bigger risks with the multiverse world stuff. They definitely played it safe.

Out of the three I think I prefer MoFM. less glaring issues at least to me lol.

Edited February 11 by HoodlumSheep

[Anduin]

Yep, everyone says that about Shang-Chi. It's great until it isn't. :)

[Raja]

9 hours ago, HoodlumSheep said:

The Marvels:

Fun. I liked the shorter length too tbh. a couple of bonkers moments with the Disney princess planet and the cats/memory scene but I liked it. Liked the trio. They worked well together. definitely was reminded of Spaceballs with the whole stealing a planet's oxygen/resources thing and I would have to say Spaceballs did a better job of it. Biggest flaw was the completely unmemorable villain. Hammer lady. maybe I misheard it, but did she not mention having a sick child (?) thnx to the war and stuff? I don't understand why they didn't use that angle to make her a more compelling villain. It would have fit perfectly with the different family units presented in the movie (Kamala and her fam, Carol and Monica and Maria)??? Lost opportunity there.

I really don't remember any specific line about her family. But she was the leader of all of the Kree. In a way all of the children were hers. Maybe another shot of the ordinary Kree like the city scenes in the first movie. Just something beyond folks standing around to die when the sudden introduction of atmosphere happens. would have helped.

[tv echo]

GOTG VOL. 3 Director James Gunn Says He Couldn't "Legally" Work For Marvel Again Even If He Wanted To
By Mark Cassidy   Feb. 6, 2024
https://comicbookmovie.com/guardians-of-the-galaxy/vol-3/gotg-vol-3-director-james-gunn-says-he-couldnt-legally-work-for-marvel-again-even-if-he-wanted-to-a209235#gs.4v7oby 

Quote

On Threads, Gunn was asked if there was any chance he might write a fourth Guardians movie or the planned Star-Lord spin-off, and the filmmaker made it clear that he could not "physically or legally" work for Marvel Studios while acting as co-CEO of DC Studios.

Edited February 11 by tv echo

[Anduin]

Contract, of course. As for physically, maybe he doesn't have any good ideas? That's never stopped some writers, though. :)

[festivus]

15 hours ago, HoodlumSheep said:

Biggest flaw was the completely unmemorable villain. Hammer lady. maybe I misheard it, but did she not mention having a sick child (?) thnx to the war and stuff?

I just watched it last night and I misheard this too. Later I realized she was talking about their sun, not son. 

As for the movie, it was okay enough. Kamala was the best thing about it and the end with her recruiting Kate is about the only thing I'm interested in about Marvel these days. That and Deadpool.

I wish I could be interested in Thunderbolts but I already feel they'll do my boy Bucky wrong again. I do not have high hopes for that movie but I wish I did. 

[HoodlumSheep]

1 hour ago, festivus said:

I just watched it last night and I misheard this too. Later I realized she was talking about their sun, not son.

That makes so much more sense lol. Can't believe that didn't click with me.

@Raja I agree that we should have gotten a bit more scenes with the hammer lady and the kree. Everything she did was for them but we hardly got to see them or her interacting with them outside of her making speeches.

[Morrigan2575]

Deadpool and Wolverine. So they used the TVA or a version of it, to bring Deadpool into the MCU. I was amused at the destroyed FOX Studios 3D sign during one of the fights.

 

 

[Kel Varnsen]

On 2/10/2024 at 10:37 PM, HoodlumSheep said:

I really enjoyed the first two-thirds of the movie and am bummed that it devolved into a mystical monster fest right at the end. That giant soul sucking dragon was not needed. Like at all, especially when you have a compelling enough villain with the dad! Like he was great! And then they switched to the dragon

That was so weird. You had such a great set up for what could have been an epic Crouching Tiger style finale martial arts fight that could have been awesome and a perfect way to end that movie. But instead here is a crazy looking CG dragon. Which is extra weird since even at that point people had been calling out Marvel movies for ending in messy giant CGI battles.

[arc]

4 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

But instead here is a crazy looking CG dragon.

I kind of get it. Without the evil dragon -- I forget what its name was and it literally had no lines once it manifested in its true shape -- Wenwu's fight has little to no stakes for the world. It matters to Shang Chi and Xialing, and in a better movie maybe the filmmakers would have had faith in that. (Though given Cretton's previous films, I am strongly inclined to blame studio meddling rather than the director.)

Between Shang-Chi and Quantumania and Eternals, I think the biggest problem with phase 4 has been needing to hit their release dates, so the scripts end up underbaked. I've said elsewhere that Quantummania actually has a lot of good stuff in theory, but the execution is badly lacking. They should try sending the scripts through the Dan Harmon story circle; I think analyzing them through that lens might help show where the character beats the audience wants to see are being missed.

The second biggest problem is that for all that this is the studio that introduced "cinematic universes" and revolutionized crossover cameos, they've been falling dreadfully short at keeping things interconnected. By phase 2, Marvel had their characters cameoing regularly. Shang Chi hasn't shown up once after his own movie. In one sense it's only been two years so far, but in another sense it's been about fifteen canonical stories between the shows and movies. They couldn't fit in one cameo? Similar complaints for America Chavez or Moon Knight/Scarab, or the Eternals. Instead, Marvel spent all of phase 4 introducing new characters and giving them no followups. Kate Bishop's second appearance in the MCU came about fourteen to sixteen stories* after her first!

* it depends whether you want to count I Am Groot, Werewolf by Night, and the GOTG Holiday Special or not.

[Kel Varnsen]

3 hours ago, arc said:

kind of get it. Without the evil dragon -- I forget what its name was and it literally had no lines once it manifested in its true shape -- Wenwu's fight has little to no stakes for the world. It matters to Shang Chi and Xialing, and in a better movie maybe the filmmakers would have had faith in that

Well that is sort of the catch. If you are going to end the movie with an epic one on one martial arts battle, you have to write the story so that final one on one battle is what matters.

3 hours ago, arc said:

The second biggest problem is that for all that this is the studio that introduced "cinematic universes" and revolutionized crossover cameos, they've been falling dreadfully short at keeping things interconnected.

 I have been thinking about that too. Wikipedia says that Shang Chi 2 won't come out until after Avengers 5 which means maybe 2026. So 5 years after the first one. So if you are someone who really liked it that's a long time to wait. If you were a 12 year old who loved marvel movies you will be getting close to graduating high school and might not care as much anymore. Compare that to phase 1 and 2 and there were 2 Iron man movies and the Avengers in the space of 4 years. And within 4 years there were two Thor/Cap movies and two Avengers movies.

[HoodlumSheep]

Ended my binge with Thor L&T and Quantumania.  A bit long for just 2 flicks, sorry!

Love & Thunder:

Based on how the Internet reacted to this movie I was expecting a lot worse??? Probably an unpopular opinion but I enjoyed it!
I can see why people have issues with this film...those issues just didn't affect my enjoyment of the film nearly as much as others by the sound of it lol.

The goats: I was expecting a lot more of the screaming goats based on everyone complaining about them but they really weren't in the movie that much? Like what? Four-ish scenes? With their first scene being the longest? Not enough to ruin anything.

I totally understand the issue concerning the flip flopping tonal shift between silly and serious. Tbh I think they needed 10-15% less silly, 10% more Gorr (maybe getting to see him slay another god or two?) And I think the movie would have reached a much better balance.

Things I really liked:

Jane's story. Cancer, man ☹️. You think you get to escape from reality for 2 hrs watching a silly superhero movie, but nope. She was great imo. it hurt to see her go; I think she got a beautiful send off.

I liked the rock dude's narration of the story, but I didn't think he needed to be actively present in the film. He was just...there. Thor, Jane and Valkyrie would have been enough.

Gorr. Christian Bale was fantastic. Wish we could have gotten a little bit more.

Loved loved loved the black and white segment of the film. It looked gorgeous. Wish we could have gotten more.

Starts with Love & Thunder (Jane & Thor), ends with Love & Thunder (Thor's newly adopted daughter & Thor). I like it.

the not so much:

Rock dude didn't even need to be there, like I already stated above.

The army of thor-powered kids. didn't need that imo. heimdall had a kid????

Didn't need a naked Thor at the god council thing.

Ant man & the wasp: Quantumania:

Biggest issue definitely was the movie being 99% cgi greenscreen. Sometimes I miss the old days where they hand painted the backgrounds in a lot of films. they looked a lot more natural tbh, even if the clouds in the sky never appeared to be moving. all the greenscreen stuff takes me out of the film, it's so in your face.

The movie felt more about Janet than Ant-man and the Wasp.

One of the most forgettable side casts in the MCU.

the ants only showed up in the last third of the movie ☹️

The best part of the movie was bar none Michael Douglas waltzing into the scene with his army of ants. Not sure what that says about the movie tbh.

The all powerful kang, the dude who was being set up to be the next big bad...got defeated by a swarm of ants, an explosion and then fistacuffs with just two superheroes. And I'm supposed to believe he'd give the next gen avengers team a run for their money?? I mean I understand he was just one variant. But he was not the threat they built him up to be all movie.

Was there any way they could have brought back evil bee man not as Modok or whatever he was called?

That just leaves Endgame, far from home, no way home, wakanda forever and black widow. Hoping to at least watch one more, otherwise it'll probably be another year until the next update lol.

 

Edited February 13 by HoodlumSheep

[Kel Varnsen]

1 hour ago, HoodlumSheep said:

The army of thor-powered kids. didn't need that imo. heimdall had a kid????

I still can't wrap my head around how Asgardian kids work. Like Heimdall is like 1000 years old right. And his kid is like a teenager. Do those kids stay kids for like 100 years or do they grow up as fast as humans do and then just stay adults forever?

[Anduin]

2 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

I still can't wrap my head around how Asgardian kids work. Like Heimdall is like 1000 years old right. And his kid is like a teenager. Do those kids stay kids for like 100 years or do they grow up as fast as humans do and then just stay adults forever?

The second way is how I've seen it done in other places. Seems better than the first way. The trope is Immortality Begins at 20.

[baldryanr]

9 hours ago, HoodlumSheep said:

The movie felt more about Janet than Ant-man and the Wasp.

Janet is the original Wasp, if you want to interpret the title that way.  It certainly wasn't about the current version, that's for sure: Evangeline Lilly could have been replaced by a cardboard cutout in most of her scenes.

[Kel Varnsen]

On 2/11/2024 at 6:43 PM, Morrigan2575 said:

Deadpool and Wolverine. So they used the TVA or a version of it, to bring Deadpool into the MCU. I was amused at the destroyed FOX Studios 3D sign during one of the fights.

 

 

It will probably be fun, although I hope a lot of the TVA stuff is just Wade mocking the shit out of them. Because although I did enjoy Loki season 2 and it finished strong all the space/time and time loom bullshit was way too much crazy made up sci fi mumbo jumbo for me.

17 hours ago, Anduin said:

The second way is how I've seen it done in other places. Seems better than the first way. The trope is Immortality Begins at 20.

Yea that's probably it, although it is funny to think of  someone who can live for 1000's of years can go through teenager stuff after being alive for 15 years. It's also weird to think how Thor was the hot headed youngster in his first movie when he was only a tiny bit younger than he was in love and thunder, and was already like 1500 at that point.

As for the movie Love and Thunder I still hate it that cancer is a thing in a world with Pym particles.

[arc]

4 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

As for the movie Love and Thunder I still hate it that cancer is a thing in a world with Pym particles.

This is the fundamental difference between superhero stories and sci-fi. In the former, Tony Stark invents a revolutionary energy system and uses it to power suit armor.

In the latter, cars all run on arc reactors, they're 80% lighter and rely on repulsor "airbags" and they fly so they don't leave tire particulates. Then you add vibranium, Pym particles, multiple humans who literally command a fraction of infinite power (Wanda and Vision and Carol, plus to a lesser extent the Sorcerer Supreme), a revived super soldier serum that at minimum reverts most of the degradations of old age, casual space travel, Spider-Man's chemical wizardry, time travel, actual magic, and pretty soon that world no longer resembles our own. It's a better world, but it's less relatable to the real world.

[tv echo]

'Thank God For Marvel Movies': Christopher Nolan Acknowledges MCU's Impact
BY MONICA COMAN   February 14, 2024
https://www.cbr.com/marvel-christopher-nolan-mcu-impact/ 

Quote

Speaking to The New York Times and Robert Downey Jr., the director noted the importance Marvel has had in the pandemic.

"Coming out of Covid, you say, 'Thank God for Marvel movies,'" the Academy Award-nominated director said. During the same interview, Nolan couldn't help but note Downey Jr.'s casting as Tony Stark was quintessential to the MCU's success: "I think Jon Favreau casting Robert as Tony Stark is one of the most significant and consequential casting decisions in Hollywood history. It wound up defining our industry."

There has been an ongoing conversation about "superhero fatigue," but Marvel has been essential in the pandemic. 2021's Spider-Man: No Way Home was the highest-grossing film of the year, almost hitting the $2 billion mark. The same year, Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings grossed $432.2 million, Eternals made $401.7 million, and Black Widow brought in $379.7 million, whose release happened simultaneously on Disney+ with Premier Access.

Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness almost hit the $1 billion mark in 2022, followed by Black Panther: Wakanda Forever with $853.9 million and Thor: Love and Thunder with $760.9 million worldwide. In 2023, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 made $845.4 million, becoming Marvel's most successful film of the year. (via The Numbers).
*  *  *
During the same interview, Nolan and Robert Downey Jr., who stars in Nolan's latest film Oppenheimer, also addressed meeting for another superhero film for the first time. Downey Jr. was rejected for a role in 2005's Batman Begins, although they ended up working together almost two decades later. "I 100 percent knew you weren’t the guy. In my head that was already cast. But I always wanted to meet you," Nolan said. When Downey asked which role he didn't get, Nolan replied, "I’m just trying to think if this is a good thing to reveal, or a bad thing." The actor didn't press further.

Nolan also addressed the fact that Robert Downey Jr.'s past also prevented him from giving him the part. "I was a huge admirer of yours and therefore selfishly just wanted to take the meeting. But I was also a little afraid of you, you know. I had heard all kinds of stories about how you were crazy. It was only a few years after the last of those stories that had come out about you."

Edited February 14 by tv echo

[blackwing]

https://variety.com/2024/film/news/fantastic-four-cast-marvel-studios-1235875766/

New Fantastic Four cast has been revealed:

Pedro Pascal as Mr. Fantastic, Vanessa Kirby as Invisible Woman, Joseph Quinn as Human Torch, Ebon Moss Bachrach as Thing

I like Vanessa Kirby but I'm disappointed at the selection of Pedro Pascal.  Seems like the guy is everywhere, he already is the Mandalorian and he's in The Last of Us.

I would have liked to have seen John Krasinski again.  Or Jamie Dornan.  Their names were discussed in connection with the role and the criticism was that they are "too old" because it was thought they were going with a younger cast.  Both of them are younger than Pedro Pascal.

 

[Raja]

4 minutes ago, blackwing said:

I would have liked to have seen John Krasinski again.  Or Jamie Dornan.  Their names were discussed in connection with the role and the criticism was that they are "too old" because it was thought they were going with a younger cast.  Both of them are younger than Pedro Pascal.

From my comic's days I always saw Reed Richards and Ben Grimm as  older men. Then came the movies where Reed was a generational peer of his wife and brother in law as that age gap relationship was probably scary for modern movie makers.

My first thought when Rhody/War Machine was recast was that Don Cheadle was too old and he always seemed even older than his years compared to other actors. And now he seems very old to be taking up the mantle in any Armor Wars. It a good thing his character didn't Blip.

[Kel Varnsen]

18 hours ago, arc said:

This is the fundamental difference between superhero stories and sci-fi. In the former, Tony Stark invents a revolutionary energy system and uses it to power suit armor.

Yea and that kind of bugs me. I mean sure I don't want it to look like star trek or something but in the back of my mind it bugs me that they have helicarriers and robots vision but people still have the same crappy cars we have. I mean Tony's arc reactor should have solved climate change which would have saved more lives than any of his super heroine (pre-endgame at least).

38 minutes ago, blackwing said:

Pedro Pascal.  Seems like the guy is everywhere, he already is the Mandalorian and he's in The Last of Us.

To be fair Mandalorian is basically a voice over role at this point. And Last of Us could have been really bad based on the kind of story it was. And Pedro was one of the reasons it was actually good.

26 minutes ago, Raja said:

My first thought when Rhody/War Machine was recast was that Don Cheadle was too old and he always seemed even older than his years compared to other actors. And now he seems very old to be taking up the mantle in any Armor Wars. It a good thing his character didn't Blip.

Older Rhody works for me. He was supposed to be a USAF lieutenant colonel in Iron Man which makes me think someone over 40. Especially with the sweet posting like being Tony Stark's liaison. Terrence Howard was 39 when Iron Man came out. 

[Morrigan2575]

Eddie lives on as The Human Torch!

I love Pedro Pascal, he's a great actor I have no idea if he'll be a good Reed Richard's but, I'm willing to wait and see.

I adore Joseph Quinn as Eddie so I'm happy he's finding post Stranger Things success but, again I have no idea if he's a good choice for Johnny Storm.

I'll wait and see on the movie before casting judgement. For the most part I think MCU has done a really good casting job

 

Edited February 14 by Morrigan2575

[festivus]

Pedro Pascal is one of those actors that always elevates whatever he's in, so I'm liking this casting. I loved Joseph Quinn as Eddie so I like this pick too. The other two I don't know but I'm sure they'll be good. Marvel casting has rarely been wrong.

As far as the actual movie, I really do want it to be good. I've got Marvel fatigue I guess where I'm not too excited anymore except about certain things. I'd love to get my excitement back. I'm feeling it for Deadpool & Wolverine so please don't let me down!

[AimingforYoko]

I don't know who Pascal's agent is, but dude, up your fee!

[Enigma X]

I don't dislike Pedro Pascal, but I was hoping he wasn't going to be cast as Reed Richards.

[rmontro]

I have mixed feelings about the '60s setting.  On one hand, it gives the Fantastic Four its respected position as the first Marvel comic and predating the other teams (well, except the Invaders).  But it also seems to give credence to people who say that the Fantastic Four was too corny to work in our present time, and I've never agreed with that.

Kevin Fiege said he wanted the team to be diverse.  Is that what happened, because of Pedro Pascal? 

[Kel Varnsen]

5 minutes ago, rmontro said:

I have mixed feelings about the '60s setting.  On one hand, it gives the Fantastic Four its respected position as the first Marvel comic and predating the other teams (well, except the Invaders).  

Has there been an actual announcement that it will be set in the 60's? The variety article didn't say anything about it. The AV Club article said that the picture in the announcement is a suggestion that it might be that, but that was just a guess and AV Club reporting is generally not great. As for the 60's setting, they have already done the hero from another time movie thing twice. And if it is set in the 60's they will either have to come up with an explanation why no one ever mentions them in current day or they will have to do more alternative universe crap.

[Morrigan2575]

8 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

Has there been an actual announcement that it will be set in the 60's? The variety article didn't say anything about it.

Oh good, I just re-read the Variety article twice trying to find the mention of the 1960's setting, thought I was missing something.

I just assumed Fantastic Four and X-Men we're going to be a multiverse collapse or something, kind of like in Secret Wars.

[arc]

19 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

And if it is set in the 60's they will either have to come up with an explanation why no one ever mentions them in current day

They’ll probably end up getting parked in the Negative Zone till the current day. (They already used deep space for Carol Danvers, the Quantum Realm for Janet van Dyne (and also how Scott Lang rode out most of the Blip era), a temporary retirement for Wenwu, and a big block of ice for Steve Rogers. Also, I figure they’re saving universe merging for the X-men.)

Edited February 15 by arc

[Raja]

17 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

And if it is set in the 60's they will either have to come up with an explanation why no one ever mentions them in current day or they will have to do more alternative universe crap.

It certainly doesn't fit the source materials and the Fantastic Four's public superstar status like Tony Stark has. Ant-Man Henry Pym being the ultimate secret S.H.I.E.L.D. in that era fits.

[rmontro]

35 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

Has there been an actual announcement that it will be set in the 60's? 

No, but the Valentine's Day pic has many '60s references, from the style to the pictue of Ben wearing an Apollo suit, to the magazine he is reading which has been identified as an issue of Life from 1963.  It's enough to convince me, since it has been long rumored.  

I agree we've already done the "man out of time" thing with Captain America.  But it looks like the FF will either come out of the '60s, or else some the '60s equivalent of some other place in the multiverse.

[Tenshinhan]

1 hour ago, rmontro said:

Kevin Fiege said he wanted the team to be diverse.  Is that what happened, because of Pedro Pascal? 

I have not seen Fiege say that about the team.  What I did see was that Fiege reportedly saw the rest of the cast and thought that it was (understandably) "way too white".  That is supposedly part of the reason they went with Pascal.  I think that they may also be considering a non-white actor for Doom for the same reason.

It may not be as diverse as it could be, but it is something.

[Anduin]

34 minutes ago, Tenshinhan said:

I think that they may also be considering a non-white actor for Doom for the same reason.

Maybe they could get a Slav. Latveria is in eastern Europe.

[Kel Varnsen]

2 hours ago, rmontro said:

agree we've already done the "man out of time" thing with Captain America.  But it looks like the FF will either come out of the '60s, or else some the '60s equivalent of some other place in the multiverse.

They also did it with Captain Marvel being set in the 90's.  Having a third super hero (or team) being set in the past that either have to adjust to modern times or that people conveniently forgot about would be kind of annoying.

[rmontro]

1 hour ago, Tenshinhan said:

I have not seen Fiege say that about the team.  What I did see was that Fiege reportedly saw the rest of the cast and thought that it was (understandably) "way too white". 

That line from Fiege comes from several years ago.  Pascal is white (hispanic), so that doesn't solve that particular situation, if one considers it a problem.  I'm sorry that Fiege doesn't approve of Stan Lee's work.  Fiege wouldn't make a wart on Stan Lee's behind. 

But I want to see the characters onscreen that are in the comic books.  I don't want to see a white Miles Morales, or a white Black Adam, or a white John Stewart, or a white Sam Wilson, or a white Power Man.  Or a Fantastic Four with four different shades of skin.  If Fiege made a film about the Beatles, would he race swap them?  At some point it becomes ridiculous. 

Not saying comic book characters should never be race swapped, but when it comes to characters as iconic as the Fantastic Four, have a little respect.

Just now, Kel Varnsen said:

They also did it with Captain Marvel being set in the 90's.  Having a third super hero (or team) being set in the past that either have to adjust to modern times or that people conveniently forgot about would be kind of annoying.

Really, just because no one has mentioned the Fantastic Four yet doesn't mean they didn't exist.  I haven't heard anyone talk about Amelia Earhart in the MCU either, but that doesn't mean there wasn't one.

[Guest]

9 hours ago, festivus said:

Pedro Pascal is one of those actors that always elevates whatever he's in, so I'm liking this casting. I loved Joseph Quinn as Eddie so I like this pick too. The other two I don't know but I'm sure they'll be good. Marvel casting has rarely been wrong.

 

Same for me. Casting is the one area I still feel confident in Marvel. I’m way more concerned about the script and other choices. 

[Cobalt Stargazer]

5 hours ago, rmontro said:

Not saying comic book characters should never be race swapped, but when it comes to characters as iconic as the Fantastic Four, have a little respect.

Look at it this way: Pascal's Reed Richards is unlikely to end up as a pile of spaghetti.

[Trini]

2 hours ago, rmontro said:

I'm sorry that Fiege doesn't approve of Stan Lee's work. 

He said that? Every adaptation has changes and that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with "approval".

2 hours ago, rmontro said:

But I want to see the characters onscreen that are in the comic books.

I don't think they announced any characters that aren't in the comic books. But if you mean they need to look exactly like the printed page, that's almost never going to happen for a variety of reasons, especially in live-action.

 

2 hours ago, rmontro said:

... I don't want to see a white Miles Morales, ...

...  If Fiege made a film about the Beatles, would he race swap them?  At some point it becomes ridiculous. 

Not the same situation.

It's 2024, and the filmmakers can't only cater to white American teen boys in the 60's like when these characters were first created.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

15 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

Yea and that kind of bugs me. I mean sure I don't want it to look like star trek or something but in the back of my mind it bugs me that they have helicarriers and robots vision but people still have the same crappy cars we have. I mean Tony's arc reactor should have solved climate change which would have saved more lives than any of his super heroine (pre-endgame at least).

Within the fictional universe the characters live in, it makes sense that the more advanced tech either doesn't exist or isn't readily available to the masses. Tony's arc reactor started out as a way to keep him alive, prevent those pieces of shrapnel from stopping his heart, and he nearly died when Obadiah Stane removed it from his chest. Helen Cho's discovery of a way to literally create human skin is how Clint Barton was patched up in The Avengers, but his hearing issues persist because it would probably require the equivalent of a cochlear implant, and given the odds there's every chance something like that could be fiddled with by those with unsavory intentions.

Even the Tesseract was technology, even if it was so advanced that it might as well have been magic. That's how the wormhole that facilitated the Chitauri invasion was opened. If they had those flying cars Howard Stark talked about all those years ago, I can guarantee there'd be a lesson in there somewhere about how such inventions could be misused, that the human tendency towards messing around with things we don't always grasp is how we get into trouble. It isn't "Why don't they have cars that fly?" it's, "Could they have cars that fly without it turning into a Transformers situation?"

[Tenshinhan]

3 hours ago, rmontro said:

Pascal is white (hispanic), so that doesn't solve that particular situation, if one considers it a problem.

Whiteness is about much more than just genetic ancestry.  Being a white Spanish speaking Latino is different from being an English speaking white American or Western European etc.  

And for a major commercial studio blockbuster, casting all of the major roles with white people is definitely going to be a concern.  I don't think Pascal's casting itself is necessarily the best solution, but good on Feige for recognizing the situation and attempting to address it.

 

3 hours ago, rmontro said:

I'm sorry that Fiege doesn't approve of Stan Lee's work. 

It's not the comic book characters and readers that Feige was concerned with.  It's all of the white actors that were cast in the film roles that was the issue, along with the moviegoing audience.  Movies are not the same business as comic books.  Not only do you have to consider what's being portrayed in front of the camera, you also must consider who is being hired and employed as the portrayers.  

 

3 hours ago, rmontro said:

I don't want to see a white Miles Morales, or a white Black Adam, or a white John Stewart, or a white Sam Wilson, or a white Power Man.

This is a false equivalence.  There are different standards for non-whites than there are for whites.  Casting a white actor for a Black character is not the same as casting a Black actor for a white character. 

 

4 hours ago, rmontro said:

If Fiege made a film about the Beatles, would he race swap them?

The Beatles are real people, not fictional characters.

 

4 hours ago, rmontro said:

but when it comes to characters as iconic as the Fantastic Four, have a little respect.

Is changing a character's race somehow inherently disrespectful to the material?  What benefits are there to having a white lead actor as Reed?  Or for any of them?  Will the film and characters be somehow cheapened or lessened by casting non-white actors?

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Trini said:

It's 2024, and the filmmakers can't only cater to white American teen boys in the 60's like when these characters were first created.

Yep.

Most of these characters were created when white was the overwhelming default in media. Their skin color had very little to do with their characterization. Characters of color were/are generally created specifically to be non-white. It was a very deliberate choice so taking a non-white character and casting a white actor significantly alters the characterization in a way that does not happen if you reverse the races. 

Edited February 15 by Guest

[arc]

2 hours ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

but his hearing issues persist because it would probably require the equivalent of a cochlear implant, and given the odds there's every chance something like that could be fiddled with by those with unsavory intentions.

But Rhodey literally had a spinal cord implant or something that fixed his paralysis. (And Agent Ross also suffered paralysis that was fixed with Wakandan super tech, if memory serves. Also Benjamin Bratt’s character fixed himself with magic, at least until Mordo un-fixed him or whatever it was.) Anyways, ultimately you usually have to suspend disbelief about why super sci fi technology isn’t applied more widely than it is

2 hours ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

Tony's arc reactor started out as a way to keep him alive, prevent those pieces of shrapnel from stopping his heart, and he nearly died when Obadiah Stane removed it from his chest.

yeah, but NWH really lampshades how disappointingly little Stark and his company did with the arc reactors over the years by bringing Raimi’s Otto Octavius into the MCU to see “the power of the sun, in the palm of my hand.” That Otto, in his original movie, really was trying to change the world for the better by inventing fusion power. Stark basically has, and without any drawbacks like potentially destroying the world with a runaway reactor, and all he does with it is get into super-fights. I guess on the plus side, he also didn’t sell Iron Man tech to various militaries despite his former occupation as an arms dealer.

Again, sci fi vs superhero stories. <shrug>

 

[baldryanr]

2 hours ago, arc said:

yeah, but NWH really lampshades how disappointingly little Stark and his company did with the arc reactors over the years by bringing Raimi’s Otto Octavius into the MCU to see “the power of the sun, in the palm of my hand.” That Otto, in his original movie, really was trying to change the world for the better by inventing fusion power. Stark basically has, and without any drawbacks like potentially destroying the world with a runaway reactor, and all he does with it is get into super-fights. I guess on the plus side, he also didn’t sell Iron Man tech to various militaries despite his former occupation as an arms dealer.

Tony was always very particular about his tech - only people he trusted were allowed to use it, and he didn't trust most people. 

Otto's issue was ignoring everything else when pursuing his fusion goal.  The smart bionic arms (complete with inhibitor chip) is a miraculous invention that would change the world, but no one seems to care.  Oh, and he was stupid/cocky enough to run his experiment in the middle of an NYC loft.

[Raja]

At the beginning of The Avengers Stark was dropping a cable running from an arc reactor to one building right off of the coast of New York. Perhaps "free power" was just adapted to with little notice like suddenly people could talk without phone lines and the what was in my lifetime the science fiction of onscreen talking came up with so little notice. That I can't remember exactly when suddenly the ordinary Joe's were out in the middle of nowhere pointing their mobile "phone" transmitter at some wildlife to the family back in the city is telling.

[JustHereForFood]

22 hours ago, Anduin said:

Maybe they could get a Slav. Latveria is in eastern Europe.

Doctor Doom is Romani in comics (unless that was retconned), so maybe they could get a Romani actor to portray him, that almost never happens so it would be a nice change. 

[rmontro]

18 hours ago, Trini said:

It's 2024, and the filmmakers can't only cater to white American teen boys in the 60's like when these characters were first created.

When Marvel sold off the film rights of their biggest properties, they sold off the Fantastic Four, Spider-Man, and the X-Men.

The Avengers weren't race swapped, and their movies were spectacularly successful.  Spider-Man wasn't race swapped.  The X-Men weren't race swapped.  Batman wasn't race swapped.  Superman wasn't race swapped.  Because those are all iconic characters.  But Fiege looks at the Fantastic Four and all of a sudden he has a problem, "they're too white"?  You wouldn't race swap Superman or Peter Parker or Wolverine because they're iconic, and people expect them to look a certain way.  And the Fantastic Four belongs in that group of very special iconic characters.  They were the first Marvel comic, and the foundation of the Marvel universe.  Out of respect, they shouldn't be race swapped.

Now having said that, you could race swap Superman now, because there have been so many versions of him already done.  You could now do a different take on him.  But the Fantastic Four has never had a good movie done of them, so get them right first, then you can start experimenting with them.  At least when they created Miles Morales, they had the good sense to make him a  different character.

[Raja]

16 minutes ago, JustHereForFood said:

Doctor Doom is Romani in comics (unless that was retconned), so maybe they could get a Romani actor to portray him, that almost never happens so it would be a nice change. 

The problem being that while Nazis may have targeted those European minority ethnic groups it doesn't matter. For Americans looking to prove diverse casting the only "Whites" that count as adding diversity are those with Latin American roots.

[Guest]

57 minutes ago, rmontro said:

The Avengers weren't race swapped, and their movies were spectacularly successful.  Spider-Man wasn't race swapped.  The X-Men weren't race swapped.  Batman wasn't race swapped.  Superman wasn't race swapped.  Because those are all iconic characters.  But Fiege looks at the Fantastic Four and all of a sudden he has a problem, "they're too white"?  You wouldn't race swap Superman or Peter Parker or Wolverine because they're iconic, and people expect them to look a certain way.  And the Fantastic Four belongs in that group of very special iconic characters.  They were the first Marvel comic, and the foundation of the Marvel universe.  Out of respect, they shouldn't be race swapped.

My question would be why were all those characters originally white and was their whiteness an important part of their characterization? I am all for respecting the origins of characters but I don’t see how that means characters have to look the way they did when they were created.

Particularly when cultural changes often mean what challenges the status quo also changes. What was ground breaking at the time just isn’t in 2024 so elements need to change to be true to the intent behind the characters. 

Edited February 16 by Guest

[Cobalt Stargazer]

In fairness, there were rumors a few years ago of switching things up with Magneto, altering his backstory in order to cast a person of color. But even that presents a set of problems, because Erik's background as a Jewish survivor of the Holocaust is why he saw most if not all of humanity as the enemy of mutants, occasionally even including his friend Charles for wanting to peacefully co-exist rather than go to war. I know this has been discussed before, and maybe you could change it up to offer a more "modern" example, but I would not necessarily want them to mess with that randomly. Yes, it's 2024, and yet the issues that are the foundation of Erik Lehnsherr's childhood and youth are still very much present.

[Trini]

37 minutes ago, rmontro said:

You wouldn't race swap Superman or Peter Parker or Wolverine because they're iconic, and people expect them to look a certain way.  And the Fantastic Four belongs in that group of very special iconic characters.  They were the first Marvel comic, and the foundation of the Marvel universe.  Out of respect, they shouldn't be race swapped.

It's interesting that you think casting an actor of color for "iconic" characters is a demotion, or only for 'lesser' characters.

 

18 minutes ago, Dani said:

My question would be why were all those characters originally white and was their whiteness an important part of their characterization?

It probably wasn't intentional when he was originally developed, but I've heard the argument (and I agree) that for Batman (Bruce Wayne, specifically) his white privilege and generational wealth are essential to his character, so it makes sense he's white.

However, most characters that happened to colored beige in the comics don't really have any characteristics specifically tied to whiteness.

ETA: I'd totally be down for casting actors of color for Wolverine and Peter Parker. Give me an Native Logan and Asian-American Peter, which would make sense with their backstories.