The Marvel Cinematic Universe: The Avengers, etc.

[Bruinsfan]

But that's what I'm saying, regardless of how they're doing it, I don't want it. I don't want Spider-Man in the Avengers, because I don't think there's room, and I don't think he's a good fit for this Avengers team in this Marvel Universe. I especially don't want him in Captain America 3, taking time away from the characters I'm interested in.

The thing is, they've committed to doing Civil War as the third Cap movie, and Spider-Man is almost as important to that story as Cap and Iron Man are. He's the fulcrum point between their two extremes, and as such his reaction to the conflict is what drives much of the drama.

 

Now if they had made the civil war about Cap trying to rehabilitate Bucky and Tony wanting him brought to justice that could be interesting (he probably killed Tony's parents remember). Especially since I am not sure how MCU Tony feels about the death penalty.

Well, he's killed his enemies in all three of his solo movies, and loaded his armors full of missiles and laser beams rather than tear gas and tasers, so I think there might be a hint or two about his stand on that particular issue.

[Kromm]

The thing is, they've committed to doing Civil War as the third Cap movie, and Spider-Man is almost as important to that story as Cap and Iron Man are. He's the fulcrum point between their two extremes, and as such his reaction to the conflict is what drives much of the drama.

Except they can't unmask him, because they don't have a magic demon to undo it in the MCU.  If Spider-Man is relevant, it's for the lesser reason that he's the best example of someone who's life could be destroyed most totally by being officially government registered.  Even if the MCU movies haven't acknowledged Spidey, there's no version of that story that doesn't include J. Jonah Jameson making Spider-Man out to be Public Enemy #1 in the press for a few years before Civil War.  There's no version where he's not a fairly young man with an elderly aunt, a girlfriend or wife, and a circle of other friends all ready to be mass slaughtered by the three or four dozen villains who want to destroy him.  Whereas Tony Stark and his confidants all live behind Stark Tech security, and Cap's friends are pretty much all Secret Agents or Superheroes themselves.  Peter Parker is the Everyman.  But.. the plotline can't and won't have him actually unmask. We all know that.

[stealinghome]

The thing is, they've committed to doing Civil War as the third Cap movie, and Spider-Man is almost as important to that story as Cap and Iron Man are. He's the fulcrum point between their two extremes, and as such his reaction to the conflict is what drives much of the drama.

Except they can't unmask him, because they don't have a magic demon to undo it in the MCU.  If Spider-Man is relevant, it's for the lesser reason that he's the best example of someone who's life could be destroyed most totally by being officially government registered.

Also, in the same way that the Steve/Tony conflict isn't going to have 1% of the emotional weight it does in the comics because they have spent 92% of their screentime together at odds already, Spiderman facing the question of whether to unmask isn't going to carry that much weight because we haven't met him or any of his friends/family before.

 

They'll have to shake things up if they want to stay relevant - I think they'd be better off focusing more on the uniqueness of each setting the individual characters provide. CA:TWS was best when they treated it as a political thriller, and became dull when they refocused on the action. The Thor movies should be actual scifi movies.

This. The Marvel movies work best when they're a mixture of action/superhero movie and some other genre. CA:TWS worked because it was a political thriller/spy movie. Thor worked because it was a Shakespearean tragedy. Guardians of the Galaxy worked because it was Star Wars mixed with a heist movie. Even the less successful films--thinking particularly of Cap 1 here--have often achieved their more modest success by embracing a different genre. Which is why I find it concerning that Marvel seems to be making the movies more and more generic superhero, not less.

[Kromm]

Also, in the same way that the Steve/Tony conflict isn't going to have 1% of the emotional weight it does in the comics because they have spent 92% of their screentime together at odds already, Spiderman facing the question of whether to unmask isn't going to carry that much weight because we haven't met him or any of his friends/family before.

 

This. The Marvel movies work best when they're a mixture of action/superhero movie and some other genre. CA:TWS worked because it was a political thriller/spy movie. Thor worked because it was a Shakespearean tragedy. Guardians of the Galaxy worked because it was Star Wars mixed with a heist movie. Even the less successful films--thinking particularly of Cap 1 here--have often achieved their more modest success by embracing a different genre. Which is why I find it concerning that Marvel seems to be making the movies more and more generic superhero, not less.

Have they?  Cap 2 and Guardians are two of the last three Marvel movies released. And the other one is an Avengers film--which can't have the same genre-bending expectations. So the trend you're spotting isn't from released movies.  All we have with Cap 3 is speculation.  And Ant-Man actually seems like its likely to fit the "genre-bending" angle just fine, from what we've seen.  It's not generic superhero seeming in the least from what's been shown so far.  Then Doctor Strange is next.  Does that really seem superhero generic as a concept?

[stealinghome]

The counter is that the Iron Man movies have, imo, become generic superhero fare (though they were the least genre-bending to begin with) and Thor 2 was way too damn generic for a movie set in outer space in a fantasy-esque civilization. And if we can say, based on available evidence, that Ant-Man is not going to be a normal superhero movie (I wouldn't know, I watched maybe one trailer, I have less than zero interest in that movie--I think *Marvel* has zero interest in that movie too), I do think it's fair to say that Cap 3 looks to be Avengers 2.5, and therefore pretty generically superhero, yes, which undoes some of the genre-bending that Cap 2 did.

[JessePinkman]

But I greatly dislike political correctness, which Marvel is currently catering, and a company that's number one priority is political correctness is never a good thing.  I also think the "informed" critics of Marvel's lack of diversity don't realize how difficult it is to sell brand-new characters and make them popular.  It's almost impossible for a new superhero to crack the top echelon of established populer superheroes (and villains) that have been around for decades.  I think the most recent ones to do it has been Deadpool for Marvel and Harley Quinn (a supervillain who started off as a one-shot cartoon character) in DC.

 

Political correctness? The movies are literally littered with straight white males. Just an endless parade of them. There wasn't a woman of color as an actual character in any of the movies until Age of Ultron and does anyone even remember her name? Does no one else find this troubling? I think we're so used to whiteness being the default that anything that veers away from it disturbs some sort of internal matrix, like it does not compute and makes us think too much about how lopsided entertainment is in who they choose to showcase.

 

The fact that we're getting an ANT-MAN movie (seriously, there are maybe 10 fanboys who would claim Ant-Man as their favorite hero) says so much. 

 

Re: Civil War, we have no idea what the movie will be about and it can't follow the comic book storyline because Tony and Steve simply do not have the history their comic counterparts do and Spider-Man is a non-entity in the MCU. I think they've likely just taken the title and the general idea of hero registration.

[KatWay]

 

Have they?  Cap 2 and Guardians are two of the last three Marvel movies released. And the other one is an Avengers film--which can't have the same genre-bending expectations. So the trend you're spotting isn't from released movies.  All we have with Cap 3 is speculation.

Cap 2 started out as genre-bending, but the last third was the usual standard superhero fare. Guardians did it better, because they twisted things again with the "dance-off".

 

From what I've heard, wasn't Ant Man supposed to be a different genre, but the Marvel bosses stepped in and wanted it to conform more to the success formula?

[nobodyyoucare]

 

There wasn't a woman of color as an actual character in any of the movies until Age of Ultron and does anyone even remember her name?

What woman of color? There wasn't one that was named or spoke. There was an Asian woman who was the female scientist. 

 

There were two males of color one was War Machine, the other the Falcon. 

[Joe]

Her name was, purely from memory, Dr Helen something. She was Korean, because they're interested in the Asian market these days.

[nobodyyoucare]

Her name was, purely from memory, Dr Helen something. She was Korean, because they're interested in the Asian market these days.

Cho. Helen Cho is the mother of Amadeus Cho https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadeus_Cho

[Raja]

What woman of color? There wasn't one that was named or spoke. There was an Asian woman who was the female scientist. 

 

There were two males of color one was War Machine, the other the Falcon. 

"people of color" is code for not considered "white" in America and includes white Latinos. It gets tricky because Arabs were considered white in America and many Arab actors play white but the culture seems to be now transitioning to considering Arabs as People of color like many Europeans do. I doubt if you can win a diversity argument as then we start getting into craziness like 9 out of every hundred films has to start a self identified African American and then one of those has to be an out of the closet gay. Two out of a hundred have to self identify as Muslim or Jew.... until the MCU, the X-Men, Mission Impossible... (Bond is British so their percentages will be different) meets what the US Census Bureau or PEW researchers says the correct diversity number is.

[Bruinsfan]

I thought Dr. Cho played as big a part in the film as returning supporting characters like Nick Fury, Maria Hill, and Colonel Rhodes. None of whom, incidentally, are white males. The initial Avengers lineup itself is largely constricted by most of its iconic characters being white (or sometimes green) men who were created in the 1960s or earlier, but I think the franchise has done a fairly good job of including women and people of color in the second tier of characters where there's more freedom for casting diversity. It gives those characters agency and important supporting roles to play. And now it appears as if the next generation of Avengers is going to be quite diverse indeed, with Iron Man, Thor, and the Hulk giving way to War Machine, the Vision, the Scarlet Witch, and Falcon.

[JBC344]

The thing is, they've committed to doing Civil War as the third Cap movie, and Spider-Man is almost as important to that story as Cap and Iron Man are. He's the fulcrum point between their two extremes, and as such his reaction to the conflict is what drives much of the drama.

 

Well, he's killed his enemies in all three of his solo movies, and loaded his armors full of missiles and laser beams rather than tear gas and tasers, so I think there might be a hint or two about his stand on that particular issue.

My understanding is that Spiderman's role in Civil War will be above a cameo, because the character won't have the same storyline as in the comics.  I believe that Black Panther is the character who will be caught in the middle of Tony and Steve.  When Robert and Chris announced Chadwick as the Black Panther and he came onstage, both actors got on either side of him and began to play tug of war with him, each of them grabbing one of Chadwick's arms and trying to literally pull him to either side.  That was Marvel's hint.

[Kel Varnsen]

The thing is, they've committed to doing Civil War as the third Cap movie, and Spider-Man is almost as important to that story as Cap and Iron Man are. He's the fulcrum point between their two extremes, and as such his reaction to the conflict is what drives much of the drama.

 

Well, he's killed his enemies in all three of his solo movies, and loaded his armors full of missiles and laser beams rather than tear gas and tasers, so I think there might be a hint or two about his stand on that particular issue.

Back when I read comics, the last big Marvel event I read was Operation Galactic Storm (even though I read it about 9 years after it came out). The big plot point at the end was that a group of Avengers decide to execute their enemy as punishment for what happened in the story line. That group is led by Tony Stark and from what I remember it creates some serious divisions within the Avengers, especially between him and Cap. Something like that (with Bucky/Winter Soldier as the catalyst) seems like it would be a hell of a lot more interesting than a stupid hero registration story line.

 

Edited June 25, 2015 by Kel Varnsen

[JessePinkman]

"people of color" is code for not considered "white" in America and includes white Latinos. It gets tricky because Arabs were considered white in America and many Arab actors play white but the culture seems to be now transitioning to considering Arabs as People of color like many Europeans do. I doubt if you can win a diversity argument as then we start getting into craziness like 9 out of every hundred films has to start a self identified African American and then one of those has to be an out of the closet gay. Two out of a hundred have to self identify as Muslim or Jew.... until the MCU, the X-Men, Mission Impossible... (Bond is British so their percentages will be different) meets what the US Census Bureau or PEW researchers says the correct diversity number is.

 

Why is it that whenever anyone brings up diversity people throw out crazy stats like this? "What next? Purple people?!" Come on, I think we all know this is not what people are asking for. I would like more non-white characters (men, women and everything in-between) with purpose beyond just supporting the white male leads. I don't think that's too much to ask. 

[Raja]

Because of the seven lead characters one, the Black Panther is black along wit sidekicks Falcon and War Machine not to mention Director Fury playing the Big MF in charge of the universe. not even counting the actors of color playing lead aliens in The Guardians of the Galaxy yet there is still lack of diversity sniping

[ChelseaNH]

I'd be more impressed with GotG's diversity if the actors of color weren't playing a green woman and a CGI tree, i.e. you could tell they were actors of color.

 

I'd like to see a world more like the one in The Fifth Element, except with more variety in the primary roles as well and not just the secondary, tertiary and background roles.

Edited June 25, 2015 by ChelseaNH

[benteen]

Political correctness? The movies are literally littered with straight white males. Just an endless parade of them. There wasn't a woman of color as an actual character in any of the movies until Age of Ultron and does anyone even remember her name? Does no one else find this troubling? I think we're so used to whiteness being the default that anything that veers away from it disturbs some sort of internal matrix, like it does not compute and makes us think too much about how lopsided entertainment is in who they choose to showcase.

 

The fact that we're getting an ANT-MAN movie (seriously, there are maybe 10 fanboys who would claim Ant-Man as their favorite hero) says so much. 

 

Re: Civil War, we have no idea what the movie will be about and it can't follow the comic book storyline because Tony and Steve simply do not have the history their comic counterparts do and Spider-Man is a non-entity in the MCU. I think they've likely just taken the title and the general idea of hero registration.

 

In political correctness, I was most talking about the comics.  I stated Marvel had done a good job on that topic, naming the character of Kamala Khan as a great example.  What I didn't like is that I feel Marvel Comics number one priority has become being politically correct, like many companies nowadays.  When you put PC in front of quality, the product suffers.

 

I also criticized the complaints from "informed" media critics when they complain about "another white male superhero" being portrayed onscreen.  I've seen that comment with the recent casting of Spider-Man.  Most of the estalished Marvel and DC superheroes are white.  When they are adapted for the big screen, they are more or less adapted as they are and guys like Peter Parker are white.  It has nothing to do with bringing "just another white guy" on the screen. 

 

Now that those characters have become so popular onscreen, they've opened up the doors for Marvel (and DC) to expand things by bringing in characters like Captain Marvel and the Black Panther onscreen, two characters who, while popular have never been in the top echelon of comic book characters.  Now they very well could have been part of the original Avengers movie. An even better argument can be made that the Wasp should have been in that movie.  She was one of the founding members of the Avengers.

 

My argument was also that if you're going to bring the character of Spider-Man to the big screen, it has to be Peter Parker.  Peter Parker as Spider-Man is one of the most popular and iconic characters in pop culture.  It's Peter Parker most people want to see interact with the rest of the MU.  Miles Morales definitely has a future in the MCU, I have no doubt about that.  But Peter Parker is the Spider-Man people want to see.

 

This kind of reminds me of a crazy rumor I heard years ago that they wanted to cast Vin Diesel as Luke Cage...now THAT would have truly been insulting.

I'd be more impressed with GotG's diversity if the actors of color weren't playing a green woman and a CGI tree, i.e. you could tell they were actors of color.

 

I'd like to see a world more like the one in The Fifth Element, except with more variety in the primary roles as well and not just the secondary, tertiary and background roles.

 

Dave Bautista is of Filipino descent so he can be added as another actor of color in Guardians.

Edited June 25, 2015 by benteen

[VCRTracking]

Leslie Bibb tweeted this pic her two days ago.

She was in the first 2 Iron Man movies as the Vanity Fair reporter who Tony slept with in the beginning of the first Iron Man and later accused him of still selling arms to terrorists.  I liked her and I'm hoping she continues to call Tony in out and give him a hard time in Civil War. Of course she could be used as the MCU version of for Daily Bugle reporter Sally Floyd who in the Civil War storyline was first anti and then pro-Registration and told Captain America he didn't understand America because he "didn't watch American Idol"

[Bruinsfan]

Dave Bautista is of Filipino descent so he can be added as another actor of color in Guardians.

Also covered in green body paint that obscures his actual skin color.

[DollEyes]

  I'd be more impressed with GotG's diversity if the actors of color weren't playing a green woman and a CGI tree, i.e. you could tell they were actors of color.

 

  Djimon Hounsou, who played Tauron (sp?), is African.

[benteen]

Also covered in green body paint that obscures his actual skin color.

 

That's because 80% of the Guardians were aliens.

 

As DollEyes just pointed out, Djimon Hounsou is African and his skin wasn't covered up by body paint.

[ChelseaNH]

There was also Sharif Atkins, briefly.

 

I have the impression that's supposed to demonstrate/prove something, but I'm not sure what.  "Djimon Hounsou was visibly an actor of color, so everything's fine"?

Edited June 26, 2015 by ChelseaNH

[Zuleikha]

Because of the seven lead characters one, the Black Panther is black along wit sidekicks Falcon and War Machine not to mention Director Fury playing the Big MF in charge of the universe.

 

Black Panther's movie hasn't been made yet and got pushed back for Spider-Man. Meanwhile, Iron Man has led three movies, Captain America has led two with a third in production, Thor has led two with Ragnarok in production, GotG main character was a white guy, and the next two movies are being led by white guys. It is true that Marvel has done an okay job with supporting characters and diversity, but their lead line up is horrible. And IMHO, it has nothing to do with their history. None of the Marvel movie leads had mainstream recognition. They could just as easily have included some of Wasp, Captain Marvel, Black Panther, She-Hulk, Black Widow, or Scarlet Witch/Quicksilver had they wanted their movies to feature more than white guys in the leads. They made a choice not to do that. People noticed.

 

When you put PC in front of quality, the product suffers.

Fortunately, it's possible to have both a diverse line up and quality. Which is why Marvel's having such success with Spider-Gwen, Ms. Marvel, Thor, Goddess of Thunder, and others.

[DollEyes]

 

I have the impression that's supposed to demonstrate/prove something, but I'm not sure what. "Djimon Hounsou was visibly an actor of color, so everything's fine?"

 

  The only point that I was trying to make was that there's at least one actor of color in GotG who could be visibly recognized as such. As a Black woman, ITA that there could/should be more diversity in the film versions of the MCU,  I also believe that depending on the films themselves, seeing any people of color in any roles in them can be a good thing. 

[benteen]

 

Black Panther's movie hasn't been made yet and got pushed back for Spider-Man. Meanwhile, Iron Man has led three movies, Captain America has led two with a third in production, Thor has led two with Ragnarok in production, GotG main character was a white guy, and the next two movies are being led by white guys. It is true that Marvel has done an okay job with supporting characters and diversity, but their lead line up is horrible. And IMHO, it has nothing to do with their history. None of the Marvel movie leads had mainstream recognition. They could just as easily have included some of Wasp, Captain Marvel, Black Panther, She-Hulk, Black Widow, or Scarlet Witch/Quicksilver had they wanted their movies to feature more than white guys in the leads. They made a choice not to do that. People noticed.

 

 

 

Fortunately, it's possible to have both a diverse line up and quality. Which is why Marvel's having such success with Spider-Gwen, Ms. Marvel, Thor, Goddess of Thunder, and others.

 

 

Marvel's done a great job with those titles, particularly Ms. Marvel.  That's one of the best titles on the market and as I said, I think Kamala Khan is a great spiritual successor to Peter Parker.  Spider-Gwen has been a blast too.

[Raja]

I don't know how credibility they are as reviewers but the nerds under a gag order who saw the premiere of Ant-Man are saying its great.

[Rick Kitchen]

Hayley Atwell, Emily Van Camp and Scott Evans (brother of Chris Evans) singing "Survivor":

 

https://twitter.com/HayleyAtwell/status/619040842674794496

[Advance35]

I don't know how credibility they are as reviewers but the nerds under a gag order who saw the premiere of Ant-Man are saying its great.

 

I feel kind of obligated to see Ant-Man now.  Not because of any reviews but because I SWORE that the end of the Marvel Winning streak would be "Guardians of the Galaxy" I thought that was going to be the bomb of the decade (I wasn't rooting for that but I wasn't optimistic about it's box office traction) but when I went and saw the movie I thought it was awesome.  It was off the usual well-tread Marvel Hero path and I think it was all the better for it.

 

I feel like because I gave Guardians a chance I should extend the same to Ant-Man.  I may end up being pleasantly surprised again.

[frenchtoast]

Heh. I kinda figured Guardians would just be a bomb but went to see it because I figured why not. And I loved it. Before seeing it I thought it would be a good thing for Marvel to have to deal with something that failed to meet expectations. I'm starting to think that the biggest "failure" is Agents of SHIELD and Marvel seems content to let it be an advertising vehicle.

 

I'm intrigued to see how Ant-Man does, but at the very least I think I'll pass an enjoyable 2 hours.

[JessePinkman]

They're released new clips from Ant-Man featuring some of the supporting characters and to be perfectly honest...they're hilarious. I've never understood why Michael Pena gets so much work but he was without question the best part of what I saw.

 

Between that and all the excitement over the after credits sequences I'm excited? Damn you, Marvel.

[lion10]

They're released new clips from Ant-Man featuring some of the supporting characters and to be perfectly honest...they're hilarious. I've never understood why Michael Pena gets so much work but he was without question the best part of what I saw.

Between that and all the excitement over the after credits sequences I'm excited? Damn you, Marvel.

Submit to the mouse god mortal!

[LeighAnne]

From the fantastic people at Flicks and the City, here is the Deadpool panel at the 2015 San Diego Comic Con:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ze0sfeLX3as

 

And here's the X-men:  Apocalypse panel:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlAulib08E4

 

And here's the Fantastic Four panel:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HxGdRn3tkg

 

And here's Stan Lee's selfie with everyone just mentioned:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcUOY0GMYMo

 

Edited to add:

 

Here's all the panels in one video:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PysGhMhnnD4

Edited July 12, 2015 by LeighAnne

[Demented Daisy]

Just finished reading this review of Ant-Man and, I gotta say:

 

Whether he's whistling "It's a Small World," or knocking out bad guys

 

 

Disney wants to make sure we remember that they own Marvel, don't they?  (After this and Ultron singing "I've Got No Strings", I'm afraid to ask what's next.)

Edited July 15, 2015 by Demented Daisy

[CMH1981]

Well to be fair, I doubt Joss having Ultron repeat the words of "I've Got No Strings" was Disney stepping in and forcing him to synergize w/ the Disney brand. It's more Joss being a clever screenwriter and thought the parallels were creepy and what he was going for in the film.  I'm not sure about "It's a Small World" and Ant-Man yet since I haven't seen the film for context yet.

[JessePinkman]

"It's a Small World" has been used in literally dozens of movies and TV shows for anything annoying or small (or both, like children) so that doesn't bother.

 

Random thought, what is with the MCU's lack of female villains? I can only think of two that we've seen so far, Nebula and Scarlett Witch (who went good girl). We need a great villainess. Can we get Marvel's version of Michelle Pfeiffer's Catwoman? I can't think of who they'd pull from the comics though.

[Dandesun]

Tilda Swinton has been cast as The Ancient One for Dr. Strange.

 

I'm stoked. She's fucking awesome.

[Fukui San]

Here are the obvious candidates for female villains:

Captain America:

Viper/Madame Hydra (I think)- agent of Hydra

I'd personally love to see Diamondback and the Serpent Society but I think I'm the only one.

Iron Man:

Madame Masque- mask wearing mob princess/romantic rival

Thor:

Enchantress- seductive goddess of deceit

Hela- ruler of Hel, the death realm

Avengers-

Masters of Evil (includes Moonstone and Screaming Mimi, which paves the way for The Thunderbolts in 2045 or whatever.)

Of these, Enchantress and Viper are the most high profile and likely. They'd fit well in the current movie storyline. Loki and Enchantress work together as uneasy allies all the time.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Fukui San

[manbearpig]

I would love to see more of Julie Delpy's Age of Ultron character. I'll have to shut up eventually about a Black Widow movie because it will seemingly never happen, but it would have been cool to see Delpy and Johansson go head to head in a fun spy thriller, where Delpy's instructor has put a hit on Natasha, for...reasons.

[Bruinsfan]

"It's a Small World" has been used in literally dozens of movies and TV shows for anything annoying or small (or both, like children) so that doesn't bother.

Well, aside from the fact that the movie is apparently going to be earworming millions of filmgoers with the most annoying song ever written. But forewarned is forearmed—I'm going to be bringing cotton to stuff in my ears like I do to movies starring Sofía Vergara.

[anyanka323]

Here are the obvious candidates for female villains:

Captain America:

Viper/Madame Hydra (I think)- agent of Hydra

I'd personally love to see Diamondback and the Serpent Society but I think I'm the only one.

Iron Man:

Madame Masque- mask wearing mob princess/romantic rival

Thor:

Enchantress- seductive goddess of deceit

Hela- ruler of Hel, the death realm

Avengers-

Masters of Evil (includes Moonstone and Screaming Mimi, which paves the way for The Thunderbolts in 2045 or whatever.)

Of these, Enchantress and Viper are the most high profile and likely. They'd fit well in the current movie storyline. Loki and Enchantress work together as uneasy allies all the time.

Enchantress, at this point, is the most likely.  She could be a secondary villain for Thor 3 with Surtur being the main one.  It will be interesting to see how she translates visually from the comics.  More than likely, she'll be wearing more clothes than she does in the comics.  Lena Headey would be perfect for the role, especially with that smirk she employs as Cersei. 

 

Viper/Madame Hydra may not appear in the MCU due to rights issues.  Viper was the main villain in The Wolverine, but she was a mutant doctor and scientist.  No mention was made of her at the head of criminal organization.  Of course, MCU could refer to her as Madame Hydra and omit the Viper name. 

[Raja]

Just got mandatory overtime for the weekend, there goes my early tickets. Well time for me to go on message board silence until I can get to an Ant-Man showing

[lion10]

Has it been confirmed in the MCU that Natasha Romanov(a) has been given a knock-off Super Soldier serum to enhance her strength and healing abilities as in the comics? Also, is she descended from the royal Russian family or is her last name a coincidence?

And are there other graduates of the Red Room running around the MCU with the rank of Black Widow or is Natasha the last one?

[Sakura12]

On Agent Carter they showed the Red Room school, which trains young Russian girls to be killers. We met one of them, she was crazypants but had moves like Natasha. They didn't call her Black Widow though. So I don't if that's their name or if they are all named after deadly spiders. 

Edited July 16, 2015 by Sakura12

[JBC344]

Has it been confirmed in the MCU that Natasha Romanov(a) has been given a knock-off Super Soldier serum to enhance her strength and healing abilities as in the comics? Also, is she descended from the royal Russian family or is her last name a coincidence?

And are there other graduates of the Red Room running around the MCU with the rank of Black Widow or is Natasha the last one?

I don't think that it has officially been confirmed, but in Age of Ultron we did get those flashbacks of Natasha being brainwashed/sterilized/experimented on so it opens the door that it is possible that there was a serum.  They just haven't confirmed it.

[lion10]

On Agent Carter they showed the Red Room school, which trains young Russian girls to be killers. We met one of them, she was crazypants but had moves like Natasha. They didn't call her Black Widow though. So I don't if that's their name or if they are all named after deadly spiders.

IIRC, "Black Widow" is technically a rank and it means that the student has graduated successfully from the Red Room.

There was also a male version of the Red Room called the Wolf Spider Program but for some reason none of the trainees met their supervisor's standards so it was shut down. It only produced one graduate and he went nuts in some gulag.

[Zuleikha]

Has it been confirmed in the MCU that Natasha Romanov(a) has been given a knock-off Super Soldier serum to enhance her strength and healing abilities as in the comics?

To add to what others have said, for some reason the opposite seems to be assumed in fandom... that MCU Black Widow has no enhanced abilities. I don't know why. I believe that the Agent Carter portrayal of a Black Widow only makes sense if the black widows were enhanced so my fingers are still crossed that we'll get confirmation of superpowers in either a movie or TV show.

[CMH1981]

 

I believe that the Agent Carter portrayal of a Black Widow only makes sense if the black widows were enhanced so my fingers are still crossed that we'll get confirmation of superpowers in either a movie or TV show.

 

This is why Marvel is really screwing us by not giving us a Black Widow movie.  I have a feeling the only way we will get a Black Widow film is when they switch out the actress and somebody else steps into the role of Natasha Romanoff.

[calliope1975]

Just got home from Ant-Man. I think I might love it more than Avengers 2. I thought the cast was great, especially the supporting characters. Who knew a movie could get me to care about ants. I would have liked

Hank to have had a change of heart before the mid-credits scene and let Hope use the suit, but I am old and know that Hollywood will still give the straight, white dude a movie before a lady can shine.

Ah well, at least I really liked Scott/PRudd.

[Demented Daisy]

https://www.yahoo.com/tv/s/13-ant-man-easter-eggs-002500694.html-- another  Ant-Man article, another Disney mention:

 

we’re treated to an homage to the Disneyland attraction Adventures Through Inner Space

 

 

 

Another coincidence?  ;-)

 

I admit, I'm not happy that Disney bought Marvel, so it may be coloring my viewpoint.