The Marvel Cinematic Universe: The Avengers, etc.

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

Which would be fine, except we've already had a year and a half of complaining from people who pretend to want consequences. That a mountain may have dropped on top of Wanda and it's still not enough to get the focus off of her and on what someone else did is a preview of what would happen if she was brought back.

Those people are never going to stop complaining because it has nothing to do with Wanda. I really don’t care what they think and feel the WandaVision mostly handled her well. It’s had been a lot less time since MoM and I really hope they are reevaluating. 

23 minutes ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

I don't disagree with what you're saying, but what @Spartan Girl says is right too; Sam Raimi fucked up Wanda's character arc because he was lazy and couldn't be arsed to familiarize himself with the story as it was so far, and the fandom has chosen to remember her acts and forget those of other characters.

Oh, I’m not disagreeing either. I just get tired of Marvel “news” sites blasting rumors in headlines as though they are fact.

I have major issues with how Wanda has been handled. I’m just not going to get upset about a show we know next to nothing about and that may not even happen. Marvel completely screwed up in their handling of Wanda in large part because they rushed her through an arc without the proper consideration of her as a character. I want them to take their time deciding what to do with her next. 

[Spartan Girl]

54 minutes ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

Sam Raimi fucked up Wanda's character arc because he was lazy and couldn't be arsed to familiarize himself with the story as it was so far, and the fandom has chosen to remember her acts and forget those of other characters.

Kevin Feige deserves most of the blame too.

[swanpride]

I am still mostly upset because they basically repeated the same arc she already had in WandaVision, but worse. Just because certain fans really wanted Wanda to go crazy it doesn't mean that the story would have worked with this Wanda. I actually felt that the version they did in WandaVision was great, it perfectly handled this idea in a way which allowed understanding for people who have a mental break. And then Raimi came along and ruined it. Even though there were ways to handle it better. Off the top of my mind: If you want crazy Wanda, just use a Wanda from an universe in which Monica wasn't around and she didn't get the mental support she needed. THAT could have made a point. But nope, they had to ruin which worked perfectly well. 

[AimingforYoko]

Speaking of WandaVision spinoffs: Agatha: Coven of Chaos casts Aubrey Plaza.

Obvious casting is obvious.

[Guest]

Deadline has confirmed that the Vision series is in the works. They are saying that it will about Vision trying to regain his memories and that Wanda may be involved. It will have the same showrunner as WandaVision.

Meh. MoM really soured me on the future projects of everything WandaVision related except Monica in The Marvels. I’d much rather see a Darcy Lewis and Jimmy Woo series at the point. 

[swanpride]

Well, I would be happy if they managed to salvage Wanda somehow....

[dmeets]

I've also seen a lot of speculation that Wanda will show up in Agatha: Coven of Chaos, especially since 99% of the internet is convinced that

Spoiler

Joe Locke will be playing an aged-up Wiccan. Which probably means he'll end up being Mephisto.

[tv echo]

Ryan Reynolds on Getting Hugh Jackman Back For 'Deadpool 3' [Exclusive]
BY MATT VILLEI     PUBLISHED 2 DAYS AGO
https://collider.com/deadpool-3-ryan-reynolds-hugh-jackman-casting-comments/ 

Quote

Weintraub asked Reynolds if he was able to talk about the conversations that went into getting Jackman back for the upcoming film, to which the series star replied by saying that he doesn't really take responsibility for getting Jackman to return but did say that he had pushed heavily to have a film starring Deadpool and Wolverine.

"I think you're giving me too much credit. I don't believe that I'm responsible for Hugh coming back. I always wanted Hugh to come back. My first meeting with Kevin Feige when Disney bought Fox years ago, maybe three years ago, or three and a half, four years ago, I'm not sure, was about doing a movie with the two of us, a Deadpool Wolverine movie. And that was not possible at the time. And then Hugh just happened to call at that perfect moment and express that he'd be interested in coming back and doing this one more time. And the contents of that conversation, I'll let Hugh, because I know it's only inevitable that you and Hugh are going to speak at some point soon, I'm sure. I'll let Hugh answer that on his own. But he expressed interest in coming back, and then it was my job to take that to Kevin Feige one more time and sell it."
*  *  *
"It's not like adding Hugh Jackman to a movie like this is a hard sell. It's an immediate and emphatic, unqualified yes. It's a lot of moving parts and Fox and X-Men and all that kind of stuff that Marvel needs to sort through. A lot of red tape in order to make that happen. And they did it. And I'm really grateful that they did it, because for me, working with Hugh is a dream come true. But working with Logan and having Logan and Wade together in a movie is beyond any dream I would ever be audacious enough to have. So I'm really, really super fucking excited to do this film."
*  *  *
Weintraub also asked Reynolds if he was able to discuss the possible start date for the filming of Deadpool 3, saying that he had heard that the filming was set to begin in April. Unfortunately, the answer that came back from Reynolds was neither confirmation nor a denial of the proposed start month, answering with a simple "I don't know." When asked if this meant that a date was not yet decided, the response was "Start dates are negotiable." The interview ended with Reynolds saying how grateful he was to all the fans and how excited he was for the upcoming film. "They're the ones who've got Deadpool made in the first place."

Edited November 9, 2022 by tv echo

[tv echo]

It's about time...

Chris Evans Is PEOPLE's 2022 Sexiest Man Alive: 'My Mom Will Be So Happy'
By Kara Warner     November 7, 2022
https://people.com/movies/chris-evans-people-sexiest-man-alive-2022/ 

Chris answers several questions in this interview...

Chris Evans Is PEOPLE's 2022 Sexiest Man Alive: “My Mom Will Be So Happy" | PEOPLE
People   Nov 7, 2022

FYI, here are the MCU stars who have been named PEOPLE's Sexiest Man Alive:

2022 - Chris Evans
2021 - Paul Rudd
2020 - Michael B. Jordan
2018 - Idris Elba
2014 - Chris Hemsworth
2010 - Ryan Reynolds
2008 - Hugh Jackman

(source)

Edited November 9, 2022 by tv echo

[kiddo82]

Honestly surprised RDJ isn't on that list.  But yes, please, to all of them.

[Bruinsfan]

I have no disagreement with any of the names listed, nor with RDJ's absence from the list.

[tv echo]

Tom Holland Reportedly Locks In New Spider-Man Trilogy With Sony & Marvel
By Klein Felt    Novembet 11, 2022
https://thedirect.com/article/tom-holland-spider-man-trilogy-new-sony-marvel 

Quote

Speaking on The Hot Mic with Jeff Sneider and John Rocha, insider Jeff Sneider reported that he has heard Tom Holland has signed a new deal with Sony and Marvel Studios. 

Sneider stated that Holland's new set of commitments would include "another trilogy for sure."

Sneider noted that he "had heard that [Holland] had closed a deal," but that "this is not confirmed," as he didn't receive a response from Marvel Studios when he reached out for comment (The tight-lipped MCU studio rarely, if ever, answers to such news inquires, no matter if they're true or false).

[Guest]

1 hour ago, tv echo said:

Tom Holland Reportedly Locks In New Spider-Man Trilogy With Sony & Marvel
By Klein Felt    Novembet 11, 2022
https://thedirect.com/article/tom-holland-spider-man-trilogy-new-sony-marvel 

🤞it’s true. The last two big Marvel rumors from Jeff Schneider were almost immediately confirmed by the trades. 

[Enigma X]

On 11/9/2022 at 5:45 PM, kiddo82 said:

Honestly surprised RDJ isn't on that list.  But yes, please, to all of them.

I am missing RDJ.

[rmontro]

I want to say that in the early days of the MCU, the adaptations of the heroes were pretty faithful.  Iron Man looked like Iron Man from the comics, Captain America looked like Cap, Hulk looked like Hulk, Black Widow looked like Black Widow.  Hawkeye's costume was different, so he would be the biggest exception, but he wasn't a major change.  Black Panther looked like Black Panther.  Loki even looked like Loki. 

I'm bringing this up because today's Marvel Studios seem to be taking more and more liberties with their heroes.  Specifically, I don't like what they've done with Namor in the new Wakanda Forever movie.  Namor is the oldest character in the Marvel universe, and I don't see the necessity for making changes to him.  It seems you can no longer count on Marvel to make faithful film adaptations of its own characters.

[Chyromaniac]

Namor u ma'alob.

Edited November 13, 2022 by Chyromaniac
Better translation

[Raja]

3 hours ago, rmontro said:

I want to say that in the early days of the MCU, the adaptations of the heroes were pretty faithful.  Iron Man looked like Iron Man from the comics, Captain America looked like Cap, Hulk looked like Hulk, Black Widow looked like Black Widow.  Hawkeye's costume was different, so he would be the biggest exception, but he wasn't a major change.  Black Panther looked like Black Panther.  Loki even looked like Loki. 

I'm bringing this up because today's Marvel Studios seem to be taking more and more liberties with their heroes.  Specifically, I don't like what they've done with Namor in the new Wakanda Forever movie.  Namor is the oldest character in the Marvel universe, and I don't see the necessity for making changes to him.  It seems you can no longer count on Marvel to make faithful film adaptations of its own characters.

Judging by Nick Fury later comics editions will conform with the movie versions of characters

[rmontro]

4 minutes ago, Raja said:

Judging by Nick Fury later comics editions will conform with the movie versions of characters

Nick Fury was actually modeled off of the comics.  Not the original Nick Fury, but there was an Ultimate version of the Marvel universe, an alternate reboot of sorts.  In that, they modeled Nick Fury off of Samuel L. Jackson.  Then later, when the MCU started, they actually got Samuel L. Jackson to play him.  So Fury looks identical to the comic book character.  

They've since moved that version to the main Marvel 616 universe, as he's currently the most popular version.

[Tenshinhan]

5 hours ago, rmontro said:

Namor is the oldest character in the Marvel universe, and I don't see the necessity for making changes to him. 

There doesn't have to be any kind of necessity when taking liberties with established characters.  If the writers and director want to take a new and different approach to a character, then that's all that's required.  It all comes down to what best serves the story and filmmakers' vision.

5 hours ago, rmontro said:

It seems you can no longer count on Marvel to make faithful film adaptations of its own characters.

I hadn't realized that Namor's characterization in the film was somehow unfaithful to the comic books.  Or are you referring to the character's costume and design?  Because in my view there's a lot more to being a faithful film adaptation than just a character's appearance.

[swanpride]

Plus, the MCU was never "faithful"...it was always their take on the comics. And that is a good thing, because otherwise, you could just read the comics. 

[rmontro]

1 hour ago, Tenshinhan said:

There doesn't have to be any kind of necessity when taking liberties with established characters.  If the writers and director want to take a new and different approach to a character, then that's all that's required.  It all comes down to what best serves the story and filmmakers' vision.

True, but there's no denying the success of Marvel's earlier phases, when they were more faithful to the source material.  The reason for that success was because that's what fans wanted, they wanted to see their comic book heroes onscreen.  Obviously there will always be changes made adapting to the screen, but the earlier movies were more faithful, you surely can see what I'm saying here.  

Don't get too hung up on Namor, he's just an example.  But to be clear, Namor wasn't Nah-more, he wasn't Aztec, he was king of Atlantis, not Talocan.  These are comic book characters people want to see on the screen, I don't care what sort of message the directors want to make, let them write movies with their own characters.  They didn't make Iron Man a Mayan, or change Thor from Norse mythology to Egyptian.

[Tenshinhan]

4 hours ago, rmontro said:

But to be clear, Namor wasn't Nah-more, he wasn't Aztec, he was king of Atlantis, not Talocan.  These are comic book characters people want to see on the screen, I don't care what sort of message the directors want to make, let them write movies with their own characters.

He was from Atlantis in the comic books.  The thing is, the movies are not the comic books.  They are only based on the comic books.  There are many different ways to approach an adaptation, not just recreating the same story for another medium. You can also take the original story and re-imagine it into another form. 

I can understand how some fans would want to see the original versions of these characters on film, but movies and film are about much more than that.  Filmmakers are artists, and they may have their own ideas and visions that they wish to express when taking on a project.  That's part of the power and opportunity of making art.

4 hours ago, rmontro said:

They didn't make Iron Man a Mayan, or change Thor from Norse mythology to Egyptian.

True, but Namor in the comic books is no Iron Man or Thor.  He doesn't carry the same weight as those characters within the publication history, despite having appeared during the Golden Age.

Additionally, Greco-Roman mythology and particularly Atlantis are played out.  We don't need to be beaten over the head with it over and over again.  Especially when there is so much mythology to be found outside of Western cultures that has yet to be explored.

Edited November 13, 2022 by Tenshinhan

[Raja]

3 minutes ago, Tenshinhan said:

He was from Atlantis in the comic books.  The thing is, the movies are not the comic books.  They are only based on the comic books.  There are many different ways to approach an adaptation, not just recreating the same story for another medium. You can also take the original story and re-imagine it into another form. 

I can understand how some fans would want to see the original versions of these characters on film, but movies and film are about much more than that.  Filmmakers are artists, and they may have their own ideas and visions that they wish to express when taking on a project.  That's part of the power and opportunity of making art.

True, but Namor in the comic books is no Iron Man or Thor.  He doesn't carry the same weight as those characters within the publication history, despite having appeared during the Golden Age.

Additionally, Greco-Roman mythology and particularly Atlantis are played out.  We don't need to be beaten over the head with it over and over again.  Especially when there is so much other mythology to be found within non-Western cultures that has yet to be explored.

Especially since the bigger American star Jason Momoa is already the character from Atlantis, even if it is a while before another appearance comes forth from the competition. I agree movies are not produced just for comic book fans, fan made shorts are.

[Guest]

9 hours ago, rmontro said:

True, but there's no denying the success of Marvel's earlier phases, when they were more faithful to the source material. 

There’s also no denying the success of Marvel’s later phases where they were less faithful to the source material. 

9 hours ago, rmontro said:

But to be clear, Namor wasn't Nah-more, he wasn't Aztec, he was king of Atlantis, not Talocan.  These are comic book characters people want to see on the screen, I don't care what sort of message the directors want to make, let them write movies with their own characters. 

These are the comic characters some people want to see on the screen. Other people want to see them evolve. Personally I care more about them being true to the spirit of the comics. I like that they centered the characters in an actual culture rather than the generically ethnic way he was drawn in the comics. 

[Kel Varnsen]

18 hours ago, rmontro said:

I want to say that in the early days of the MCU, the adaptations of the heroes were pretty faithful.  Iron Man looked like Iron Man from the comics, Captain America looked like Cap, Hulk looked like Hulk, Black Widow looked like Black Widow.  Hawkeye's costume was different, so he would be the biggest exception, but he wasn't a major change.  Black Panther looked like Black Panther.  Loki even looked like Loki. 

I'm bringing this up because today's Marvel Studios seem to be taking more and more liberties with their heroes.  Specifically, I don't like what they've done with Namor in the new Wakanda Forever movie.  Namor is the oldest character in the Marvel universe, and I don't see the necessity for making changes to him.  It seems you can no longer count on Marvel to make faithful film adaptations of its own characters.

Marvel comics has essentially been around for over 80 years, with most of the major movie characters having been around since the 1960's. Even within the comics themselves you would pressed to find a character that has maintained consistent characterization for their entire run. So if the movies want to change the characters I am not sure I really care considering how much the comics characters have changed over th years.

[swanpride]

I guess there are always some bullet points which remain unchanged. But those are really hard to mess up. Especially when it comes to Namor, whose character has been kind of fluid. (No pun intended)

[rmontro]

3 hours ago, Dani said:

There’s also no denying the success of Marvel’s later phases where they were less faithful to the source material. 

I'm sure they're raking in cash hand over fist.  But I've seen a lot of complaints about the current Marvel Phase.  The current phase doesn't have the buzz the older movies did, and what success they're having now owes a lot to the foundation set by the earlier movies.  

8 hours ago, Raja said:

Especially since the bigger American star Jason Momoa is already the character from Atlantis

The Sub-Mariner predates Aquaman by a few years, as a comic book character, so there's no reason Marvel should defer to DC in that department.

[Raja]

Just now, rmontro said:

I'm sure they're raking in cash hand over fist.  But I've seen a lot of complaints about the current Marvel Phase.  The current phase doesn't have the buzz the older movies did, and what success they're having now owes a lot to the foundation set by the earlier movies.  

The Sub-Mariner predates Aquaman by a few years, as a comic book character, so there's no reason Marvel should defer to DC in that department.

Irreverent we are not reading books, we are watching movies. Over on Black Adam I think Dr. Fate worked better but to the audience it doesn't matter they have already seen all that he did from a more flamboyant Dr. Strange. It doesn't matter which was in a book before.

The big objections are that they are not seemingly working towards a goal like The Avengers Initiative, or Thanos arriving that can be determined at an easy glance. Then there are the grand culture fighters with the M She U objections. Finally with the latest offering as unwitting allies of the M She U people we have the recast T'Challa folks 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, rmontro said:

I'm sure they're raking in cash hand over fist.  But I've seen a lot of complaints about the current Marvel Phase.

And I’ve seen lots of praise for the current Marvel phase. 

1 hour ago, rmontro said:

The current phase doesn't have the buzz the older movies did, and what success they're having now owes a lot to the foundation set by the earlier movies.  

That’s not surprising since those phases were building to a conclusion that as now ended. The current phase is a transition. One that is clearly designed to expand the fanbase. Some people don’t like those changes but that doesn’t mean they are doing something wrong. No movie is going to appeal to everyone. 

1 hour ago, rmontro said:

The Sub-Mariner predates Aquaman by a few years, as a comic book character, so there's no reason Marvel should defer to DC in that department.

They are deferring to mainstream audiences. 

[scarynikki12]

And mainstream audiences, unfortunately, will absolutely get confused and annoyed at two comic book movies set in Atlantis. They will also take to social media to express this confusion and make it the focus of the movie rather than the events themselves. Look how many people get mad where there's more than one character in a show/movie with the same name. I've seen people get actively upset about this even though we all went to school/worked with multiple people with the same name and were/are able to navigate without issue. It's stupid, yes, but that's what they do. 

[rmontro]

1 hour ago, Raja said:

Irreverent we are not reading books, we are watching movies. Over on Black Adam I think Dr. Fate worked better but to the audience it doesn't matter they have already seen all that he did from a more flamboyant Dr. Strange.

At least Dr. Fate looked like Dr. Fate.  He could have walked off the pages of the comic books.  Hawkman and Black Adam too.  And they didn't change him from Egyptian to Aztec.

[Raja]

31 minutes ago, rmontro said:

At least Dr. Fate looked like Dr. Fate.  He could have walked off the pages of the comic books.  Hawkman and Black Adam too.  And they didn't change him from Egyptian to Aztec.

I liked the Black Adam movie.  However the only character that I knew going in was Hawkman from childhood cartoons. 

[Guest]

37 minutes ago, rmontro said:

At least Dr. Fate looked like Dr. Fate.  He could have walked off the pages of the comic books.  Hawkman and Black Adam too.  And they didn't change him from Egyptian to Aztec.

What would a more comic accurate Namor have looked like? He didn’t have a defined ethnicity or race. I though that MCU Namor was pretty comic accurate in appearance. 

[Trini]

1 hour ago, scarynikki12 said:

And mainstream audiences, unfortunately, will absolutely get confused and annoyed at two comic book movies set in Atlantis.

I think it would be less confusion, and more complaints of "copying". Yes, despite the differences between the two characters' source material, they still very similar to those who aren't into the comics. I think in any case, the MCU would have had to make some marked changes to Namor when introducing him; especially after a very successful Aquaman film and its sequel coming soon after.

But back to the original point:

On 11/12/2022 at 8:47 PM, rmontro said:

I want to say that in the early days of the MCU, the adaptations of the heroes were pretty faithful.  [...]

I'm bringing this up because today's Marvel Studios seem to be taking more and more liberties with their heroes.

[...]  It seems you can no longer count on Marvel to make faithful film adaptations of its own characters.

Any other examples besides Namor? Because I don't know if this one character from this one movie proves that.

[rmontro]

5 minutes ago, Trini said:

I think it would be less confusion, and more complaints of "copying". Yes, despite the differences between the two characters' source material, they still very similar to those who aren't into the comics.

I don't understand why there would be any confusion between Namor and Aquaman, when the audience has bought into and followed all the multiverse storylines that Marvel has been using lately.  The Spider-verse is also popular, with multiple versions of Spider-Man from different worlds.  I don't see why two Atlantean kings, that aren't even in the same group of movies, would be a problem.

Changes other than Namor would be Ms. Marvel, she looks right, but they changed her powers.  With Shang-Chi, they changed the rings dramatically, not to mention the Mandarin.  I understand they changed some of Moon Knight's personalities, but I'm not really that familiar with him.  I thought they depicted She-Hulk about right.

Too bad Werewolf by Night wasn't that popular, I thought that was really well done.

[Raja]

1 hour ago, Trini said:

Any other examples besides Namor? Because I don't know if this one character from this one movie proves that.

Well from the very moment Iron Man was announced a decade ago how were they possibly going to do his arch enemy the Mandarin question came to my mind.  The change up of rings on his fingers with unique powers to bracelets/rings which all ten seem to do the same thing for each wasn't the problem that I was thinking of. But that change might payoff later with Captain Marvel and Ms Marvel. 

Ms Marvel herself, now as I understand it they want to now ignore the concept of the source of her mutation, as Inhumans being a TV show means either the miniseries and/or Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. writers would get some money from the use of Inhumans due to a TV writers strike settlement. While just having a mutation and not having her be among Inhumans that emerged is a second.

Culturally changing others like say Nick Fury from a David Hasselhoff type to a Samuel L. Jackson type, even if done first after decades of comics usage, or giving Namor an actual surface ethnic group linkage I can't think of any. But then about the last storyline from my youth that was used in the MCU was touching on Tony Stark's alcoholism in Iron Man 2.

Edited November 14, 2022 by Raja

[Kel Varnsen]

30 minutes ago, Raja said:

Culturally changing others like say Nick Fury from a David Hasselhoff type to a Samuel L. Jackson type, even if done first after decades of comics usage, or giving Namor an actual surface ethnic group linkage I can't think of any. But then about the last storyline from my youth that was used in the MCU was touching on Tony Stark's alcoholism in Iron Man 2.

I have a hard time seeing original version Nick Fury working in a movie since he is such a relic of a character. The cigar chomping WWII vet would really work in a movie that comes out in 2008. So if you are going to change that much of his back story why not just completely update the character. I mean there is a reason the rest of the Howling Commandos became Cap's war buddies.

The only other big change I can think of is how Black Panther is how they basically used the Volume 3 version of the character who is richer and has even better technology than Batman and is also the head of state of a country, who has an all woman secret service (although they aren't teenaged ceremonial brides). My understanding is that before Volume 3 (which is awesome one of my favourite comics from when I was reading comics in those days) he was basically lone badass in the jungle. So in that case they ignored the original version of the character (a Lee/Kirby creation no less) and used a more modern one.

Edited November 14, 2022 by Kel Varnsen

[Guest]

2 hours ago, rmontro said:

I don't understand why there would be any confusion between Namor and Aquaman, when the audience has bought into and followed all the multiverse storylines that Marvel has been using lately.  The Spider-verse is also popular, with multiple versions of Spider-Man from different worlds.  I don't see why two Atlantean kings, that aren't even in the same group of movies, would be a problem.

For one thing the movies are trying to appeal to a wider audience that doesn’t follow closely. Many of whom couldn’t even tell you what is Marvel and what is DC. Audiences who are aware enough of the biggest characters to understand the different versions of Spider-Man or Batman but won’t make any distinction to Atlantean kings. They will compare Namor and Atlantis to Mamoa’s Aquaman. Namor may be older but he has less audience recognition than Aquaman. 

Even without confusion being a concern, another Atlantis plot just seems boring. Modifying the story and anchoring it in real world cultures adds to the richness and depth. 

57 minutes ago, Raja said:

Ms Marvel herself, now as I understand it they want to now ignore the concept of the source of her mutation, as Inhumans being a TV show means either the miniseries and/or Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. writers would get some money from the use of Inhumans due to a TV writers strike settlement. While just having a mutation and not having her be among Inhumans that emerged is a second.

That’s not why. The Inhumans were pushed in the comics and on tv because Marvel didn’t have the movie rights to the mutants. It was a plan B they no longer needed and was something Feige never wanted. 

[Raja]

1 minute ago, Dani said:

For one thing the movies are trying to appeal to a wider audience that doesn’t follow closely. Many of whom couldn’t even tell you what is Marvel and what is DC. Audiences who are aware enough of the biggest characters to understand the different versions of Spider-Man or Batman but won’t make any distinction to Atlantean kings. They will compare Namor and Atlantis to Mamoa’s Aquaman. Namor may be older but he has less audience recognition than Aquaman. 

Even without confusion being a concern, another Atlantis plot just seems boring. Modifying the story and anchoring it in real world cultures adds to the richness and depth. 

That’s not why. The Inhumans were pushed in the comics and on tv because Marvel didn’t have the movie rights to the mutants. It was a plan B they no longer needed and was something Feige never wanted. 

True but he wanted an Inhuman character and with no history of injustice to a mutant race an extraterrestrials on earth some aliens being responsible for a mutation, Inhumans is as easy to punch into a story as a meteor being the cause of a mutation 

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Raja said:

True but he wanted an Inhuman character and with no history of injustice to a mutant race an extraterrestrials on earth some aliens being responsible for a mutation, Inhumans is as easy to punch into a story as a meteor being the cause of a mutation 

Who is he? Feige? I’ve never read that.

I disagree that it is as easy to punch into the story. The X-Men and mutations are terms people are familiar with while the Inhumans would require more backstory. Developing both doesn’t make any sense. 

[Cobalt Stargazer]

9 hours ago, rmontro said:

I'm sure they're raking in cash hand over fist.  But I've seen a lot of complaints about the current Marvel Phase.  The current phase doesn't have the buzz the older movies did, and what success they're having now owes a lot to the foundation set by the earlier movies. 

Except we're still in the setup for this phase. Even Eternals was an introduction, no matter how many characters were involved. Endgame was the culmination of a decade of movies, the sun setting on the era of several major characters, and now we're back to Square One, more or less. The argument can be made IMO that that's why it's not necessarily a great decision to bring Wolverine back. I mean, they laid Tony Stark and Steve Rogers to rest, but they can't let Logan lay where he fell?

[Chyromaniac]

Maybe I’ve missed something in all this, but what exactly is the issue here?  All I see in the complaints about Mayan Namor is, “but, comics.”

So… is there actually anything that Marvel could have done with these characters as Atlanteans, that can’t be done now?  What is it about this flying fish man, that he must be portrayed as a mythical European, and not a mythical Mesoamerican?  Because I honestly don’t see it.  If anything, tying Namor’s backstory to the real history of post-Colombian colonization only enhances his conflict with the surface world.  But please, if there’s some great Atlantis-specific lore that we’re missing out on, let me know - I’m all pointy ears. 

[rmontro]

5 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

My understanding is that before Volume 3 (which is awesome one of my favourite comics from when I was reading comics in those days) he was basically lone badass in the jungle. So in that case they ignored the original version of the character (a Lee/Kirby creation no less) and used a more modern one.

Not true, actually.  In Black Panther's first appearance, Fantastic Four #52, T'Challa brought the FF to Wakanda, which was depicted as a highly advanced technological society.

Regarding Ms. Marvel, I can understand them wanting to change her Inhuman origins, but my objection was that they changed the powers themselves, even if she often uses them in a way to simulate what she does in the comics.

I know movies are not comics, and I do not expect them to be.  But especially for the major characters, they are popular for a reason.  If they're not broke, don't fix them.  For me there's a line not to cross, but it's hard to describe other than to say I know it if I see it.

Characters like Tony Stark and Steve Rodgers are classic characters, like Batman and Superman.  At some point they're going to be rebooted.

[Kel Varnsen]

4 hours ago, rmontro said:

know movies are not comics, and I do not expect them to be.  But especially for the major characters, they are popular for a reason.  If they're not broke, don't fix them.  For me there's a line not to cross, but it's hard to describe other than to say I know it if I see it.

While the characters are popular I would argue that comics themselves aren't, as they have a relatively small audience. If you spend $250 million (the reported budget for Wakanda Forever) to make movie that just appeals to comic book readers, you are probably going to lose money.

[Raja]

4 hours ago, rmontro said:

I know movies are not comics, and I do not expect them to be.  But especially for the major characters, they are popular for a reason.  If they're not broke, don't fix them.  For me there's a line not to cross, but it's hard to describe other than to say I know it if I see it.

Characters like Tony Stark and Steve Rodgers are classic characters, like Batman and Superman.  At some point they're going to be rebooted.

The debate comes down to was it Tony Stark or Robert Downey Jr that made it work? Similar to was it the Black Panther and T'Challa or the African super state that had folks in the culture come out of the theatre with their Wakanda Forever salute.

When another character pops will they cut that new story to blow up the then existing MCU to introduce Tony Stark, high school Peter Parker (assuming the deals stay in place) or Steve Rogers being pulled from the ice. With X-Men coming do they sacrifice the A-list bird in hand story in place hoping the B-listers in the bush can make magic again

[tv echo]

Recent comments about Captain America: New World Order and Thunderbolts...

'Black Panther: Wakanda Forever's Producer Nate Moore on Deleted Scenes, Extended Cuts, and 'Black Panther 3’
BY TAMERA JONES    PUBLISHED 2 DAYS AGO
https://collider.com/black-panther-wakanda-forever-producer-nate-moore-interview/ 

Quote

What is your next Marvel project?
MOORE: Captain America: New World Order.

Where are you in the development?
MOORE: We are in pre-production. We start shooting next spring.
*  *  *
Can you tease?
MOORE: Well, look, Sam Wilson's Captain America, he is going to bring his own team to play. It's no secret that Samuel Sterns is making his return to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, which is fantastic because Tim Blake Nelson's the best. Harrison Ford is taking on the role of General Thaddeus "Thunderbolt" Ross, and to see Sam Wilson and Thunderbolt Ross - which if you remember actually threw him in prison at the end of Civil War because he violated the Sokovia Accords. There's going to be some natural sparks there, which I think are going to be really fun.

Thunderbolts will Change the MCU FOREVER? David Harbour Exclusive - Comicbook.com
Comicbook.com    Nov 14, 2022

Thunderbolts Will Drop a Bomb on the Marvel Cinematic Universe
ByJustin Carter and Germain Lussier    November 12, 2022
https://gizmodo.com/thunderbolts-david-harbour-mcu-movie-1849776448 

Quote

“I’ve loved Wyatt [Russell], and Sebastian and Julia’s characters throughout the universe,” [David Harbour] continued. “What [director Jake Schreier] wants to do with Florence’s character is very interesting and how I factor into how we develop our relationship is very interesting. And then when you see what Jake and Eric Pearson is trying to fashion, it’s really clever...So you have this movie that’s, you know, kind of ragtag.”

Beyond that eclectic lineup, he concluded the interview by promising some big things to come for the wider MCU with this new film. “It’ll be funny. it’ll be weird, it’ll be action. And then we’re also going to drop a bomb, which is cool.”

Edited November 14, 2022 by tv echo

[Guest]

6 hours ago, rmontro said:

But especially for the major characters, they are popular for a reason.  If they're not broke, don't fix them.  For me there's a line not to cross, but it's hard to describe other than to say I know it if I see it.

But everyone is going to have a different line. You mentioned the changes to The Mandarin and leaving him as he was would have been unacceptable for me and many others. To me, that character was broken. Marvel has to thread the line and in doing so they are going to piss of some fans with every decision. 

[Dandesun]

Namor being white isn't his primary characteristic it was just default when he was created. His primary characteristic is that he's more antagonistic and has his own kingdom that doesn't much care about the surface world until they start fucking things up for HIS people. Namor would prefer the surface world to fuck right off.

Also, he hates covering up his nips.

Steve Rogers. for example, was designed very specifically to be the Aryan Ideal once he received the Super Soldier Serum and also to personally be against everything that Hitler wanted in that Aryan Ideal. That was a purposeful design to how the character looked.

The only thing specific about Namor's skin color, to be honest, is that it isn't blue like other Atlanteans because he is mixed so he could, by rights, be ANY surface human color but blue.

And, again, showing off the nips.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Dandesun said:

Namor being white isn't his primary characteristic it was just default when he was created. His primary characteristic is that he's more antagonistic and has his own kingdom that doesn't much care about the surface world until they start fucking things up for HIS people. Namor would prefer the surface world to fuck right off.

I agree that his race isn’t integral to the character but is he supposed to be white? His features are more stereotypical Asian. 

[Dandesun]

5 minutes ago, Dani said:

I agree that his race isn’t integral to the character but is he supposed to be white? His features are more stereotypical Asian. 

Is that stereotypically Asian? He looks more like a stereotypical vampire to me. pointy ears, widow's peak, pointy eyebrows.

Given his underwater enemies have often referred to his 'pink' skin as a means of demeaning him, I always figured he was depicted as white. And the reason for his skin color is that his Atlantean mother got pregnant via a ship captain. Googling it, his father's name is Leonard McKenzie so... probably a white dude.

But again, not the prime factor of his character. Half Atlantean/half surface? Yes. Specifically white? I say no. There are a lot of captains of a lot of ships on the ocean, specifically who Namor's biological father is really isn't the point. As far as he's concerned, he is the King of Atlantis and surface dwellers (except for Sue Storm maybe) can jump up their collective asses and die.