The Marvel Cinematic Universe: The Avengers, etc.

[HoodlumSheep]

I wish they'd move Black Panther and Captain Marvel up a few years from 2018. Although they probably have a whole timeline worked out, so maybe their movies wouldn't work debuting sooner. if they just happened to be origin stories (that didn't really affect the timeline of their mcu), I don't see why we couldn't see BP or CM before Dr. strange for instance. heck, I'd be fine with pushing back the next Thor, etc. in favor of the new character movies rather than the sequels.

[benteen]

I don't have how Marvel ended up choosing Ant-Man of all characters to do a movie about.  Maybe do to the character's status as a founding Avenger.  I suspect Scott Lang got the nod over Hank because of the "Hank punched Janet" storyline.  But I'm glad they did Ant-Man because they did a great job with it.

 

Guardians of the Galaxy is obscure too but I can buy them choosing to do it because they could make a big space epic out of it.  Again, I'm glad they did because it was great.

 

But yes, they've done their big characters and now Marvel is in a position to pick and choose what kind of properties they want to portray on the big screen.  How they come to that process, I couldn't say.

 

As stated before, the Wasp was never a solo character so starting her off as a solo characte wouldn't have made much sense.  I think it's valid to question why she wasn't in the first Avengers movie, given her importance in the history of the team as a founding member and occassional leader (who also came up with the team name).

 

LOL on the Spider-Man movie that nobody wants.  I agree with you on that.

Edited July 20, 2015 by benteen

[VCRTracking]

It was Edgar Wright who had the idea of doing an Ant-Man movie and developed it for years.

 

In May 2000, Artisan Entertainment announced a deal with Marvel to coproduce, finance and distribute a film based on Ant-Man.[56] In 2003, Edgar Wright and his writing partner Joe Cornish wrote a treatment for Artisan, with Wright explaining, "We wrote this treatment revolving around the Scott Lang character, who was a burglar, so he could have gone slightly in the Elmore Leonard route, and they came back saying, 'Oh, we wanted to do something that was like a family thing'. I don't think it ever got sent to Marvel."[57] A year later, the duo pitched the film to Marvel Studios' then head of production, Kevin Feige.[9] In April 2006, Marvel Studios hired Wright to direct Ant-Man as part of the company's first slate of independently produced films, buoyed by a $525 million revolving film-financing facility. Wright also signed to co-write the screenplay with Cornish, based on a comic book series about an electronics expert who can shrink to the size of an insect and communicate with ants via a telepathic / cybernetic helmet, and to co-produce the film with his Big Talk Productions partner, Nira Park.[58]

Wright said of why he wanted to make Ant-Man:

 

"The thing I like about Ant-Man is that it's not like a secret power, there's no supernatural element or it's not a genetic thing. There's no gamma rays. It's just like the suit and the gas, so in that sense, it really appealed to me in terms that we could do something high-concept, really visual, cross-genre, sort of an action and special effects bonanza, but funny as well."

 

 

As much as I like Natasha Romanoff as a character, there's nothing really new about her in terms of a film. La Femme Nikita and the American remake Point of No Return pretty much covered everything a Black Widow movie would.

Edited July 20, 2015 by VCRTracking

[Trini]

... The time when we have to be sold by a title is over. The Marvel stamp and track record is now the selling point. They could paint Amy Adams green, give her CGI muscles, and call her She Hulk in an Ally McBealish romantic comedy and it will work at this point. ...

 

You say that as a joke, but...

 

... I might actually watch that; maybe not with Amy Adams. Since they're reluctant to do another Hulk solo movie, She-Hulk could be one way to go.

[CMH1981]

Trini, I thought the same thing when I read Fukui San's possible take on She-Hulk.  I would totally watch that.  It would probably work better as a Netflix series though.

 

I could have sworn that Disney/Marvel was going to three films a year at some point.  I believe it was like late Spring/late Summer/then holiday season, but of course Star Wars might have messed all that up.

 

So are the rumors from this weekend that Wright's version of Ant-Man was going to be an Ant that becomes a man/superhero not true then?  I understand if that was his true original version how Marvel might have said no to that, but then again Wright wanted to do his version of the film before the MCU even existed, so I could see where he had to change things at some point once the MCU kicked off.

 

I do know that was the reason that Hank Pam was pushed aside for Scott Lang, the slapping of Jan/the Wasp.  The stupidest part was the slap was never intended to be more than Hank waving his arms erratically and unintentionally slapping Jan, the writer wrote it in that way and the artist did his own thing and well we have what we have.  It's like in the Judy Garland version of A Star is Born when she gets slapped at the Academy Awards, it was horrible but you know he didn't do it intentionally/maliciously, it was an accident.

Edited July 20, 2015 by CMH1981

[Fukui San]

The She-Hulk as Ally McBeal thing isn't my flight of fancy, it's the angle that the most recent solo series took. An awesomely jokey Lawyer/Superhero romp. Literally, it's Ally McBeal as superhero lawyer, with goofy superhero world concepts like Comic Books being admissible evidence in courts of law in the Marvel Universe. It ran for 60 issues in the last decade.

[Zuleikha]

If they had kept that policy which movie from Phase 1 or 2 gets deleted or pushed back so that there can be a Black Widow movie? Considering that most of the movies are set up for something else, and that Avengers movies pretty much have to have an early summer release, the only movie that they could maybe lose is Thor 2.

 

I think Thor 2 is indeed the logical one, and I would happily trade it for a post-Winter Soldier Black Widow solo. IMHO, Thor 2 was a piece of crap movie that contributed nothing except some good eye candy and hysterical Darcy scenes. 

 

I'm also unclear on why they couldn't basically flip a Black Widow-in-Ant-Man's-spot and Age of Ultron. Is being a 4th of July weekend movie really that much worse than whenever Age of Ultron was? I admit I don't know much about movie tentpole timing, but it seems like Marvel is big enough at this point that it builds its own buzz. 

 

As stated before, the Wasp was never a solo character so starting her off as a solo character wouldn't have made much sense.

IMHO, the quality of the script determines whether a character would work as a solo character, not something intrinsic to the character. I've seen so many people claim Ms. Marvel or Miles Morales wouldn't work as solo characters because they're legacies, yet Scott Lang was a legacy character and he basically worked. People claim Black Widow wouldn't work as a solo because the stakes would have to be too small given her power set, yet the smallness of stakes in Ant-Man is consistently praised in the reviews. Janet's origin story of how she became Wasp in the first place seems like it could be easily adapted into a solo movie, with Hank Pym serving as a secondary support character/romance interest for the story.  (IMHO, the slap heard round the world is a non-factor... there are many more Marvel movie watchers than cartoon readers and the MCU isn't beholden to take Janet/Hank in that direction anyway since the MCU is its own canon.)

[Shannon L.]

But what are your general opinions about Black Widow and Bucky? Like/Don't like/Love/Loathe Entirely?I feel like i have unpopular opinions concerning these two, and I know they seem to be loved on the internet...blah.

Bucky is my favorite villain.  Tom Hiddleston does a great job as Loki and I like some of Loki's smart ass moments, so he's a close 2nd, but something about Bucky just appeals to me at many levels.  I like the look/costume they gave him-it's kick ass, I like Sebastian's portrayal, I like that there's some depth to him:  an American soldier brainwashed, drugged and abused (treated like a thing) by the enemy to do their killing, his confusion over knowing Steve, but not remembering him.  There's something raw and painful about it all.  He has depth were Loki, imo, is just a spoiled brat.  Black Widow, I really like, too and would be disappointed to see an Avengers movie without her in it.  But, then again, I was disappointed not to see Pepper in the last one because I like how RDJ and GP play off of each other. I'm also one of those people who'd like to see a movie about her history, but I'd want to see Hawkeye in it, too.

 

People on the internet seem to almost literally worship them. They're great characters and deserve lots of love, but I don't know. It kind of bugs me, probably because I don't share the same intensity of love for the characters as most people do.  It's just...I feel like the internet is what sort of turned me off a bit about their characters?

These are the times when I'm happy to be mostly unaware of what the internet universe is saying.

 

The same with all the Tony Stark hate. It's completely understandable if you dislike his character, but i feel like he gets more hate than what he deserves? I don't know.

 

Wait...Tony's hated?  Why? I mean, yeah, he can be a pain, but I don't know that I could ever hate him.

 

 

Sometimes, I'm glad I don't know anything about Marvel except from these movies because then I don't have to hate the fact that something is misrepresented or someone is left out.

Edited July 20, 2015 by Shannon L.

[benteen]

I thought Charles Soule's She-Hulk comic was great.

[Dandesun]

My guess is that this is coming from the comic books, particularly the Winter Soldier story line.  Sometimes the enthusiasm of the comic fans can be a little wearing on us non-comic fans.

 

Fandom is fandom. The Winter Soldier story line was a very good one and also a very ballsy one. Establishing Bucky and Natasha's history together and their love affair was pure comic book soap and it certainly appealed to me. That Brubaker torched it before leaving the book is an item of contention among fans. For me, I kind of get it and he wrote a rather beautifully tragic storyline for it.

 

As far as the movies go, I quite love Natasha on her own but my fondness for Bucky is all about Steve. Bucky matters to Steve and Steve matters to me. Hugely. Would I be averse to Natasha and Bucky having a little something going on? Absolutely not but I'm not counting on it, either.

 

Fandom is always something you have to wade through and there are a lot of fandom traps in the MCU alone that makes it hard at times. There are the Loki diehards who want him to be better than Thor and hate anyone who makes Loki feel Jotun-pain. Odin! Thor! Jane! Everyone! They don't love Loki enough! Natasha/Clint fans who feel betrayed and broken after Ultron. The Science Bros! fans who want Pepper GONE and aren't too happy that Natasha tried to bat her eyes at Bruce because he and Tony belong together. (Or Steve and Tony belong together...) There's... just a lot of fandom out there. I've been part of online comic fandom since the early 90s -- believe me, I've seen it. It will crash over you like a tidal wave and leave you drowning in a sea of stuff you love and yet, if you don't drag yourself out, you will surely drown in it.

 

Fandom will wear most people down. I think it actually wears everyone down eventually. Some hang on longer than others. It's okay not to be married to the idea of Bucky/Nat -- I mean, they could explain it in the movies but I don't see that being a priority. I'm not expecting for Carol Danvers to be in love with Rhodey when her movie comes around simply because that's her current relationship in the comics. (Yes, she loves him but that didn't keep her from shooting off into space for almost the entire run of her last series. He got it. You don't hold Carol back.) Nor am I expecting the 'Bitchface Triumverate' (Carol, Tony and Steve -- giving people the stink eye for reasons) to happen either. In fact, I'm not holding my breath for Carol, Tony and Steve to really interact.

 

I'd love that but her movie is so far into the future at this point I know I can't count on RDJ and CE to even be available at that point. It makes me a little sad but then I've got the comics for that.

 

All that being said, I find I'm more flexible with the MCU and the changes therein than I am with the X-Men because the X-Men were my gateway drug into comics in the first place. They matter to me a great deal. The one that matters most to me, thus far, in the MCU is Steve and I've been very happy with his treatment so far. Next... I find myself caring a lot about Jane Foster because I think she gets a raw deal from the Loki Army. And I quite like her and Thor which is rather huge given I'm a student of mythology and Thor/Sif is pretty much canon there. My feelings about Jane changed through the MCU and in some storylines in the various Thor books. And, currently, her story is pretty fucking awesome in the books (well, before the Secret Wars thing and once they return to the stories.)

 

But everyone has a contrary nature to them in some capacity. Because Jane gets such rabid rage from some fans out there, I find myself liking her more and more. That's just how things work sometimes. Fandom, what're you gonna do?

[Kel Varnsen]

I think Thor 2 is indeed the logical one, and I would happily trade it for a post-Winter Soldier Black Widow solo. IMHO, Thor 2 was a piece of crap movie that contributed nothing except some good eye candy and hysterical Darcy scenes. 

 

I'm also unclear on why they couldn't basically flip a Black Widow-in-Ant-Man's-spot and Age of Ultron. Is being a 4th of July weekend movie really that much worse than whenever Age of Ultron was? I admit I don't know much about movie tentpole timing, but it seems like Marvel is big enough at this point that it builds its own buzz. 

 

IMHO, the quality of the script determines whether a character would work as a solo character, not something intrinsic to the character. I've seen so many people claim Ms. Marvel or Miles Morales wouldn't work as solo characters because they're legacies, yet Scott Lang was a legacy character and he basically worked. People claim Black Widow wouldn't work as a solo because the stakes would have to be too small given her power set, yet the smallness of stakes in Ant-Man is consistently praised in the reviews. Janet's origin story of how she became Wasp in the first place seems like it could be easily adapted into a solo movie, with Hank Pym serving as a secondary support character/romance interest for the story.  (IMHO, the slap heard round the world is a non-factor... there are many more Marvel movie watchers than cartoon readers and the MCU isn't beholden to take Janet/Hank in that direction anyway since the MCU is its own canon.)

One theory i read is that there would be no black widow movie because marvel is cheap and they would have to pay Scarlett Johansson too much. The basic idea is that she (and maybe Sam Jackson) are the only actors in the MCU that come close to the same level of star power as Robert Downey jr. RDJ made 50 million for iron man 3, and half of his scenes were just voice over while a cgi suit was on screen. With black widow there is no cgi suit ( she doesn't even wear a mask). So for her to make a widow movie its a lot more work to shoot. And in turn she could as for a higher salary than for an ensemble movie like Avengers, or a movie where she could just do voice over.

[stealinghome]

Wait...Tony's hated? Why? I mean, yeah, he can be a pain, but I don't know that I could ever hate him.

*raises hand* I'm not going to say I HATE Tony, but I have grown to detest the character a fair bit. I'd be happy if he never showed up in another movie. To me he's the poster child for spoiled immature white dude who's smarter than everyone else and because he's a spoiled smart white dude gets away with stuff no one else would ever get away with (see also the BBC Sherlock). He was sympathetic in the first Iron Man but since then it's been totally downhill. Iron Man 2, and how utterly awful he was to Pepper and Rhodey, completely turned me off him, and thanks to AoU I just can't anymore. (BTW it has nothing to do with RDJ--he's great in the role, he was clearly born to play it.)

The only times he's likeable anymore are when he's playing off of Pepper. She really humanizes him in a way the character badly needs. When she's not around, he's a trial.

[HoodlumSheep]

:( that's what a lot of people think of Tony. It's totally understandable though. he's my favorite character and that'll probably never change. He's flawed, can be likable, unlikable, makes a lot of mistakes, but it seems like he tries to do good for the most part. I've enjoyed his entire character arc. It's probably my favorite thing about the MCU.

Anyways, I just find his whole character interesting. Civil War will probably lead to even more Tony dislike/hate/bashing/annoyance or whatever you call it. You'll probably find me hiding in a corner all alone waving a Tony flag just because he's my fave (I wouldn't necessarily be siding with him on the issues though...I'd probably side with Steve depending on how they portray the issues).

Funny when I look at it, all my favorite characters in the MCU seem to stem from the first Captain America in a sense.

Tony (son of Howard), Steve, Peggy, Howard, Jarvis. I love all that history between them.

Edited July 21, 2015 by HoodlumSheep

[Shannon L.]

 

*raises hand* I'm not going to say I HATE Tony, but I have grown to detest the character a fair bit. I'd be happy if he never showed up in another movie. To me he's the poster child for spoiled immature white dude who's smarter than everyone else and because he's a spoiled smart white dude gets away with stuff no one else would ever get away with (see also the BBC Sherlock). He was sympathetic in the first Iron Man but since then it's been totally downhill. Iron Man 2, and how utterly awful he was to Pepper and Rhodey, completely turned me off him, and thanks to AoU I just can't anymore. (BTW it has nothing to do with RDJ--he's great in the role, he was clearly born to play it.)

I guess I can understand that.  It's also possible that RDJ is so great in the role that it's clouding my judgement.  I do agree that he's better with Pepper.

[Amethyst]

But what are your general opinions about Black Widow and Bucky? Like/Don't like/Love/Loathe Entirely?

I feel like i have unpopular opinions concerning these two, and I know they seem to be loved on the internet...blah.

I'll just say it. They aren't my favorite characters and I find them a bit...overrated? That's probably a terrible word and I hope I don't offend anybody.

Don't get me wrong, they are good characters (they certainly aren't my least favorite). And if you love them then good for you. It's just...I feel like the internet is what sort of turned me off a bit about their characters?

People on the internet seem to almost literally worship them. They're great characters and deserve lots of love, but I don't know. It kind of bugs me, probably because I don't share the same intensity of love for the characters as most people do. The same with all the Tony Stark hate. It's completely understandable if you dislike his character, but i feel like he gets more hate than what he deserves? I don't know.

 

I think that's just the nature of fandom these days.  And with social media, people are more vocal about what they do and don't like. Same thing happens on X-Men boards, Supernatural, Star Wars, etc.

 

WRT Black Widow and Bucky, I think people are upset because the Russo bros really knocked it out of the park with The Winter Soldier, especially with the fleshing out of those two characters, and they were hoping for more of that, and less antagonism from Capt. America and Iron Man.  That's one reason why people hate Stark so much, too.  IIRC, Robert Downey Jr. asked for more time in Civil War, so that's edging out the core characters from Winter Soldier.  As someone who surprisingly loved TWS, it doesn't look good for Civil War, because that movie is growing more crowded by the day.  I think Thor and the Hulk are the only main characters in the MCU who aren't in it.  

 

Bucky/Natasha is canon, so some viewers figured that a pairing was a natural progression for them to take, but we saw that Natasha has (or wants to) hooked up with Bruce Banner.  Personally, I'm not overly attached to either ship, but I'm more interested in seeing Bucky and Natasha interact than Natasha and Bruce.  The latter just felt less like an organic way for them to get together and more of a reason to keep them both occupied during AoU.

 

Back on topic.  One reason why I wish they had done a Black Widow movie was to take some of the pressure off of Capt. Marvel.  Black Widow being an established character would work in Marvel's favor, not against it.  There's no way that all the audience's expectations will be met for Capt. Marvel, the stakes are so high now and they're already in phase 3.  Scarlett Johansson has proven that she can lead a big budget film and there would have been more margin for error in a BW film, especially if they were already planning to have Capt. Marvel.  But with no buffer, there's going to be a lot for Capt. Marvel to shoulder being the first female superhero in the MCU.  

[Actionmage]

Something I'd like to see, and would pay cash to see if done right ( so subjective, I know): Power Pack!

 

Four kids try to help an alien Kymellian, iirc, and he in turn, bestows his powers among the four under-15 siblings. Alex (12), Julie (10), Jack (8) and Katie (5). At first,in the comics, only the Fantastic Four knew about their powers. That was cool because we got to see Reed and Sue in parental mode, as opposed to being super-heroes. Eventually, the kids told their parents, Jim and Maggie Power, about their adventures. Sue and Maggie were cool moms too.

 

From Wikipedia:

Many of the social problems of the eighties found their way into the book's storylines. Among the themes addressed were pollution,[4] drug abuse,[5] runaways,[6] kidnapping,[7] gun violence,[8] bullying,[9] orphanhood,[10] and homelessness.[6]

 

Amazing as it sounds, it worked. Also, once or twice the powers swapped kids!

 

Marvel, with the Disney promo monkeys, could do worse than enjoyable kids who save their family when they aren't meeting superheroes and hangin' with the Richards. Not that everything was hunky dory.  Envy, facing fears, dealing with their powers and the consequences of using them were explored, as well as the usual kid worries.

 

Maybe this would do better as a Netflix series. IHDK. I know I would prefer it to be Netflix, as it is a smaller scale story, as opposed to on Disney. Working around the Richards would be the only real problem, as Jim was a physicist and Sue and Maggie bonded through similar experiences.  Another venue would to be  as a limited series for ABC. Maybe when AFV takes breaks or during the summer?

 

I know it was bandied about vaguely, but if the other street-level heroes do well, I think Power Pack would be another good step;  it would widen the already pretty huge Merry Marvel Marching Society even more. 
 

[Racj82]

Tony Stark - You really aren't supposed to like him all of the time. He can be a impulsive asshole and egomaniac at the drop of the hat. But, that doesn't make me hate him. He's a flawed character and I appreciate that. Part of what makes it work is that he has people like Captain and Pepper to balance him out. He would be insufferable on his own. I do wish non Hulked out Banner had more of a backbone though. He works with him the most but is constantly a push over to Tony's antics.

 

Black Widow and the thought of lower level Marvel movies - If one has no interest in a smaller stakes movie with someone like Widow, that's great. But, even if I wasn't interested, I see no reason to personally care if they did it. If they have a actual idea for a good movie and have some good talent involved, then bring them on.

 

I'm not worried about super hero burn out. I just want them to make movies of a certain quality. That's all I'm worried about. MCU is a huge universe. Explore the big and smaller parts of it. Heroes come in many different ways.

[VCRTracking]

 

The only times he's likeable anymore are when he's playing off of Pepper. She really humanizes him in a way the character badly needs. When she's not around, he's a trial.

 

I also like Tony when he's in scenes with Bruce Banner. He's basically Ferris Bueller to his Cameron.

 

Edited July 21, 2015 by VCRTracking

[KatWay]

I really like Tony and think he's one of the most interesting characters in the MCU. He's annoying, bratty and entitled sometimes but he's such a conflicted person I just find it interesting to suss out his motivations for whatever hairbrained scheme he comes up with. But he's not a woobie bad boy (I loathe that trope) in that he's not a bad person at all, he tries to do good, he recognises good in others and that's what he'll always fight for when it comes down to it.

 

I actually find Loki an interesting character too, but fandom's woobiefication of the character is ridiculous. He's insane. He may have some legitimate beef but his reactions are waaaaay out of line for any of that and he's a destructive psychopath. The Thor/Loki interaction is one of my faves though if only because theirs is the only antagonistic relationship I ever found interesting in the MCU with its parade of bland, power hungry generic bad guys (i.e. the only people who ever actually die).

[Joe]

 

But he's not a woobie bad boy (I loathe that trope) in that he's not a bad person at all, he tries to do good, he recognises good in others and that's what he'll always fight for when it comes down to it.

 

He means well, he's just a bit of a git.

[HoodlumSheep]

He means well, he's just a bit of a git.

That's what I love about him. Same with Howard. (although whether or not he also means well is a bit sketchier).

That comparison of Tony/Bruce to Ferris/Cameron hits the nail on the head. Tony/Ferris steamroll over Bruce/Cameron and the latter just kind of take it.

Did RDJ ask for more time in CW or is that just a rumor? It's hard to keep track of what's actually happened. I feel like you hear a lot of conflicting things concerning RDJ/marvel.

Edited July 21, 2015 by HoodlumSheep

[benteen]

Power Pack is an interesting choice.  But I'd love to see the Runaways, either as a movie or a Netflix series.

[Advance35]

. I find myself caring a lot about Jane Foster because I think she gets a raw deal from the Loki Army. And I quite like her and Thor which is rather huge given I'm a student of mythology and Thor/Sif is pretty much canon there. My feelings about Jane changed through the MCU and in some storylines in the various Thor books. And, currently, her story is pretty fucking awesome in the books (well, before the Secret Wars thing and once they return to the stories.)

 

Ok I absolutely love Jane Foster....well love might be too strong a word but I really like her.  I think she's a wonderful peripheral character for the MCU, coming into prominence when Thor is taking center stage.   I'm clinging to the fact that if the rumors are true and NP is finished with Marvel, then they wouldn't have taken the time in AOU to show that Thor and she are still very much together and that Thor is still in love with her, equating Thor/Jane with Tony/Pepper.

 

I think Natasha/Black Widow is awesome.  I wasn't wild about Nat/Bruce but I thought her general character work in the film was good.  It reiterated that when push comes to shove Natasha will choose heroism.  The story was written that she had a real shot at happiness without any danger or espionage and while Bruce was willing to think of himself and leave, she wasn't, I thought THAT aspect of the storyline was worthwhile for what it told us about both characters.

 

It also explained to me why Bruce is so tight with Tony.   Which is another dynamic I've been very fond of.   I think when it comes down to the wire, Bruce would/will choose heroism (I think ultimately all of the Avengers would) but he's another character that's for lack of a better word, self-involved.   He and Tony have a very good dynamic, though it's clear Tony's the top dog.

 

I like the Winter Soldier character in both Movies/Comics.  I think he's the best character to debut in the last decade.   I admit I am one of the people that would have preferred the Bucky/Nat pairing to Bruce/Nat but that's the way the cookie crumbles.   I do think Whedon is out of steam and I think it's best he won't be involved in future movies.

[Shannon L.]

 

I also like Tony when he's in scenes with Bruce Banner. He's basically Ferris Bueller to his Cameron.

Perfect comparison. 

 

 

while Bruce was willing to think of himself and leave,

Bruce would/will choose heroism (I think ultimately all of the Avengers would) but he's another character that's for lack of a better word, self-involved.

It sounds like you do like Bruce, so maybe these comments weren't meant to sound negative (although, only slightly negative), and my apologies if I'm misunderstanding what you wrote, but I think Bruce has good reason to be self involved and to only think of himself.  The Hulk is one hell of a issue to be dealing with.  And while they were able to tame--for lack of a better word-- him a little, it's clear that he can go on a destructive rampage at any time.  I, too, think he'd choose heroism because he's a good guy, but I can forgive him if he stays away whenever possible and only enters the action when push comes to shove and he's truly needed.

[Demented Daisy]

Cracked strikes again.

 

http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-ways-marvel-movies-keep-screwing-up-female-superheroes/

[OakGoblinFly]

Don't bring up Emily Blunt, it still hurts my heart that she had to turn down the Avengers because she was already attached to Gulliver's Travels (who? what? Exactly) of all things.

 

I really will never understand the desire to see a BW movie. SJ is truly awful in the role (when she's asked to emote anyway, I enjoy when she makes Steve uncomfortable) and I just don't care to know more about the character on any level.

 

 

I never found Black Widow all that interesting in the comics and less so on screen.  If there were to be a project that had more Black Widow, I would prefer something like the Winter Soldier comics

where she and Bucky hunted down sleeper Russian agents; I liked the spy-vibe to that series

. (spoiler tags - just in case)

[OakGoblinFly]

I am 100% indifferent to Bucky. I love Sebastian Stan from his role on Once Upon A Time, but I don't see a need or place for the Winter Soldier in the broader MCU outside of Captain America's movies. I do wish the next Captain America was going to be an actual Captain America with a focus on the Captain America-specific characters instead of the Avengers-in-all-but-name it appears its going to be. If it were going to be that, I'd certainly expect and be interested in more of Steve and Bucky dealing with the post-brainwashing Bucky healing. I'd also like Falcon being more central to the team and seeing specific Bucky/Natasha stuff that gets into their shared history. Winter Soldier was basically perfect to me in terms of the balance of characters and action/character development.

 

 

This is my fear too ---- I read the cast list and they're not filming Captain America 3; they're filming Avengers 2.5.  I really wish Marvel kept the Civil War story line away from a Captain America movie .... why not just call it Marvel's Civil War?

 

Though with both Hemsworth and Evans only having one more picture commitment left on their contract (after their phase 3 solo movie) I wonder what it means for Infinity Wars?

[Kel Varnsen]

Though with both Hemsworth and Evans only having one more picture commitment left on their contract (after their phase 3 solo movie) I wonder what it means for Infinity Wars?

It is not hard for me to picture someone dying in Infinity Wars. I mean they have been building up Thanos, and the power of those gems for so damn long, they are really going to have to raise the stakes to show how big of a deal it is. Killing off someone like Coulson or Quicksilver isn't going to cut it.

 

I can also see that after the battle, a character becoming so tired/disillusioned with being a super hero that they leave the avengers for awhile. Of course when they come back they will probably look different. 

[Bruinsfan]

As stated before, the Wasp was never a solo character so starting her off as a solo characte wouldn't have made much sense.  I think it's valid to question why she wasn't in the first Avengers movie, given her importance in the history of the team as a founding member and occassional leader (who also came up with the team name).

 

LOL on the Spider-Man movie that nobody wants.  I agree with you on that.

It's a bit of a sore spot to me because, as you say, the Wasp was the founding member who named the team in the first place and it rankles that she was just cut out of their history. To my thinking she and the Scarlet Witch are the two A-list superheroines in the Avengers orbit, while most of Marvel's top female characters—the Invisible Woman, Jean Grey, Storm, Kitty Pryde—are unavailable to the MCU thanks to competing movie studios.

[Amethyst]

Next... I find myself caring a lot about Jane Foster because I think she gets a raw deal from the Loki Army. And I quite like her and Thor which is rather huge given I'm a student of mythology and Thor/Sif is pretty much canon there. My feelings about Jane changed through the MCU and in some storylines in the various Thor books. And, currently, her story is pretty fucking awesome in the books (well, before the Secret Wars thing and once they return to the stories.)

 

Loki is definitely in danger of being overexposed in the MCU, but I don't think he's to blame for the Jane hate, which is seriously OTT.  As you mentioned, Thor/Sif is canon and a lot of people prefer Sif to Jane.  I can't tell you how many times I've read on forums "Why can't they just kill Jane off so Thor can get with Sif already?"  "Ugh, Jane is useless, Sif is everything", and etc.  Portman's version of Jane hasn't had a warm reception, especially since she was so vocal about wanting out after Patti Jenkins left as director for The Dark World.  Which is a shame, because I like Jane a lot and she really gets a bum rap.    

 

To make matters worse, none of the Thor directors have laid the groundwork for the Thor/Sif pairing and we're already in phase 3.  At this point, Sif just looks like a girl with a crush and it's getting old.  Thor has never implied that he has romantic feelings for her, so when they finally address it in Ragnarok, they'll have to really drive it home because there's been no lead up to it.  Sif has an important role in Ragnarok, and I'm assuming her pairing with Thor is part of it.

[OakGoblinFly]

It is not hard for me to picture someone dying in Infinity Wars. I mean they have been building up Thanos, and the power of those gems for so damn long, they are really going to have to raise the stakes to show how big of a deal it is. Killing off someone like Coulson or Quicksilver isn't going to cut it.

 

I can also see that after the battle, a character becoming so tired/disillusioned with being a super hero that they leave the avengers for awhile. Of course when they come back they will probably look different. 

 

 

I keep debating on whether or not Thor and/or Captain America "die*" at the end of their phase 3 solo movie only to be resurrected in time for Infinity Wars Part 2 or whether they "die"  during Infinity Wars.

 

I am curious as to what is going to happen with Captain America and Thor (I do read the comics) especially as Hemsworth and Evans have not signed on to do additional movies.

 

 

*With "die" being relevant because The Bucky Clause.

 

EDIT: Fixed broken link.

Edited July 21, 2015 by OakGoblinFly

[OakGoblinFly]

Loki is definitely in danger of being overexposed in the MCU, but I don't think he's to blame for the Jane hate, which is seriously OTT.  As you mentioned, Thor/Sif is canon and a lot of people prefer Sif to Jane.  I can't tell you how many times I've read on forums "Why can't they just kill Jane off so Thor can get with Sif already?"  "Ugh, Jane is useless, Sif is everything", and etc.  Portman's version of Jane hasn't had a warm reception, especially since she was so vocal about wanting out after Patti Jenkins left as director for The Dark World.  Which is a shame, because I like Jane a lot and she really gets a bum rap.    

 

To make matters worse, none of the Thor directors have laid the groundwork for the Thor/Sif pairing and we're already in phase 3.  At this point, Sif just looks like a girl with a crush and it's getting old.  Thor has never implied that he has romantic feelings for her, so when they finally address it in Ragnarok, they'll have to really drive it home because there's been no lead up to it.  Sif has an important role in Ragnarok, and I'm assuming her pairing with Thor is part of it.

 

 

How is Loki in danger of being over-exposed in the MCU?  He's been in three movies (less than Black Widow), with his role in Thor 2 being reduced greatly.

 

As far as the Jane dislike, my problem with MCU Jane is how she was taken from competent nurse (than doctor) in the comics to giggly 12-year old who forgets herself as soon as a good-looking man is around (I HATE the line "Is this what you normally look like;  It's a good look."  I LIKE the idea that MCU made Jane an astrophysicist who fought for what she believed in - it's too bad that she became a whiny petulant child once Thor showed up. 

[Kel Varnsen]

I keep debating on whether or not Thor and/or Captain America "die*" at the end of their phase 3 solo movie only to be resurrected in time for Infinity Wars Part 2 or whether they "die"  during Infinity Wars.

 

I am curious as to what is going to happen with Captain America and Thor (I do read the comics) especially as Hemsworth and Evans have not signed on to do additional movies.

 

*With "die" being relevant because The Bucky Clause.

I can see someone dying in part 1 of Infinity Wars (setting up a big cliffhanger for part 2) and then coming back at some point in Phase 4, and looking strangely different. 

Edited July 21, 2015 by Kel Varnsen

[CMH1981]

I'm surprised Marvel hasn't been grooming Chris' brother Liam to take over his brother's role.  I know he isn't the best actor, but the boy just needs to bulk up, like a lot more and grow his hair out.

 

I always thought Elizabeth Olsen would have been a great actress to take over for Scarlett in the Black Widow role, but well...not now, lol.

 

I agree Kel Varnsen, I could see Steve making the sacrifice play and then we have Bucky take over the role of Captain America for awhile till they recast Chris Evans.  Then again, this being Disney, they might suck it up and keep paying the main 3, Iron Man, Captain America, and Thor the big bucks for more movies.  

 

The thing w/ the Infinity Gauntlet is 

lots of heroes died during the battle against Thanos after he completed the Infinity Gauntlet, but once he was defeated they came back to life.  If this is the last film for RDJ, CE, and CH, if they die this would be the time to replace them when they come back after death.

Edited July 21, 2015 by CMH1981

[OakGoblinFly]

I can see someone dying in part 1 of Infinity Wars (setting up a big cliffhanger for part 2) and then coming back at some point in Phase 4, and looking strangely different. 

 

 

Perhaps.  

 

Also, I wonder when the final two Infinity Stones will make their MCU appearance - Dr. Strange seems like the perfect place for the Soul Stone and I guess the Time Stone can show up in Captain America 3.  Would it make sense to hold it back to Thor 3?

[JBC344]

I've said this before, but I'm assuming at the end of Infinity Wars, there will be a "changing of the guard" so to speak.  We will have a new set of Avengers and some of the current Avengers will retire, be killed off, etc.  AOU was probably the last time we will see those specific Avengers as a whole team.

[Kel Varnsen]

Also, I wonder when the final two Infinity Stones will make their MCU appearance - Dr. Strange seems like the perfect place for the Soul Stone and I guess the Time Stone can show up in Captain America 3.  Would it make sense to hold it back to Thor 3?

We also have a second Guardians movie coming out before the Infinity Wars.

 

 

I've said this before, but I'm assuming at the end of Infinity Wars, there will be a "changing of the guard" so to speak.

 

Which makes me wonder, who would people want to see step up and become a full avenger and replace some of the originals? Options include:

Scarlett Witch

Vision

War Machine

Winter Soldier

Falcon

Black Panther

Ant Man

Any of the Guardians of the Galaxy

Any of the Netflix series characters

 

Having not seen Ant Man, the only ones that really interest me are Vision, the Scarlet Witch (as long as they don't do a love story), War Machine and possibly Black Panther.

 

Edited July 21, 2015 by Kel Varnsen

[nobodyyoucare]

 

. I've seen so many people claim Ms. Marvel or Miles Morales wouldn't work as solo characters because they're legacies, yet Scott Lang was a legacy character and he basically worked.

The reason Scott Lang worked was because Henry Pym in the movie setup the ground work for him as a character. 

 

Miles Morales doesn't work as Spiderman doesn't work  unless you got Peter Parker/Spiderman setting things up for the character to take over. 

 

Carol Danvers  is in fact coming out. Nov 2, 2018 is the planned release date for Captain Marvel. 

Edited July 21, 2015 by nobodyyoucare

[OakGoblinFly]

We also have a second Guardians movie coming out before the Infinity Wars.

 

 

Ah, I forgot about that (so hard to keep the release order for all the comic movies straight - even with a handy dandy flowchart) - though with the rumored plot line about Guardians 2, I'm not sure how feasible it is to include an Infinity Stone.

 

<shrug>

[Amethyst]

How is Loki in danger of being over-exposed in the MCU?  He's been in three movies (less than Black Widow), with his role in Thor 2 being reduced greatly.

 

I'm talking about Hiddleston's exposure in the MCU, not just him playing Loki.  I'm personally thrilled at the reception because I think he did a great job and he's a sweetheart IRL, but I've read where people are sick of Loki and they don't want Marvel trying to shoehorn him in anywhere else.  

 

Loki wasn't supposed to have a huge role in TDW, anyway.  IIRC, he was actually supposed to be killed off for good.  Glad they didn't because the twist at the end of TDW made the mess of a movie worth it.  

 

As far as the Jane dislike, my problem with MCU Jane is how she was taken from competent nurse (than doctor) in the comics to giggly 12-year old who forgets herself as soon as a good-looking man is around (I HATE the line "Is this what you normally look like;  It's a good look."  I LIKE the idea that MCU made Jane an astrophysicist who fought for what she believed in - it's too bad that she became a whiny petulant child once Thor showed up.

 

How did she turn into a petulant child, though?  That line shows up at the very end, it wasn't like she spent the whole movie talking about how hot he was.  Especially since Thor acts like an arrogant ass for most of the film.   I think the first movie actually strikes a great balance of Jane being starstruck by a real alien and her professional nature of wanting to know how Thor factors into her research.  And it doesn't have to be an either/or situation; she can like the guy and still be a great scientist.

[Zuleikha]

The reason Scott Lang worked was because Henry Pym in the movie setup the ground work for him as a character.

Miles Morales doesn't work as Spiderman doesn't work  unless you got Peter Parker/Spiderman setting things up for the character to take over.

Carol Danvers  is in fact coming out. Nov 2, 2018 is the planned release date for Captain Marvel.

 

Right. So if you have a legacy character, you can include the mentor in the legacy's movie. The legacy doesn't need to have a movie first. As we saw in Ant-Man, this works fine. I would argue for Miles Morales, we don't even need Peter Parker actually included because we all know who Peter Parker's Spider-Man is (although I think some inclusion for a passing of the guard would be desirable).

 

The Ms. Marvel discussions I referenced are about the current Ms. Marvel: Kamala Khan.

[stealinghome]

How is Loki in danger of being over-exposed in the MCU?  He's been in three movies (less than Black Widow), with his role in Thor 2 being reduced greatly.

Black Widow's four movies have been spread over six years, and in the first (Iron Man 2) she basically made a glorified cameo--we got like 3 minutes of actual Black Widow--while in the two Avengers movies she shares the hero spotlight with the rest of the Avengers team. Loki did three movies in three years (!) and was the principal bad guy in the first two.

 

Also, no matter what the fangirls like to think, Loki has become a one-trick pony and doesn't have a ton of depth as a character. He's pretty played out at this point character-wise. Natasha has more depth to explore.

 

I'm very glad Marvel shelved Loki between Thor 2 and Thor 3. Hiddleston is great in the role, but Loki needed to take a break. I think I'll be able to appreciate Loki better in Thor 3 now that I've had a few years away from the character.

 

Miles Morales doesn't work as Spiderman doesn't work  unless you got Peter Parker/Spiderman setting things up for the character to take over.

I've said this before, but you don't really need Peter Parker to launch a Miles Morales film. Opening monologue: "There was a Spiderman. He died. I decided to take up his cause." Bam, that's all you need. The idea of Peter would suffice.

 

The bigger issue, as we all know, is Marvel won't ever kill off PP, so you'd have duplicate Spidermans.

 

edited because Iron Man and Iron Man 2 are definitely not the same movie, and because I can do math, I swear!

Edited July 21, 2015 by stealinghome

[benteen]

It's a bit of a sore spot to me because, as you say, the Wasp was the founding member who named the team in the first place and it rankles that she was just cut out of their history. To my thinking she and the Scarlet Witch are the two A-list superheroines in the Avengers orbit, while most of Marvel's top female characters—the Invisible Woman, Jean Grey, Storm, Kitty Pryde—are unavailable to the MCU thanks to competing movie studios.

 

Scarlet Witch was one of the strongest characters in Marvel Comics before Avengers Disassembled.  I think they did permanent damage to her character that they still haven't been able to overcome.

[ChelseaNH]

I liked Jane more in the second Thor movie -- "We have got to do that again!" after coming across the bridge was a perfect reaction -- but for all her credentials, Thor is always the one teaching her.  There's a definite power imbalance in their relationship.

 

we got like 3 minutes of actual Black Widow

 

Those 3 minutes are the reason I tune in whenever I spot the movie in the cable listings.

[HoodlumSheep]

I've always found Jane a bit bland. I don't hate her or even dislike her. She's always just been kinda...there.

I haven't seen Thor:DW yet though.

I could never really get into her character. I think one of the reasons is the Thor/Jane relationship.

They're sweet together, but I always had problems with them falling in love with each other in like, 3 days (does it ever mention how much time Thor spent on earth in that first movie?)

Which kinda makes me hypocritical because I love Disney movies with those 3 day romances. The only difference is that those were fairy tales and Thor is more realistic in a certain way.

Tony and Pepper knew each other for a long time before really falling in love. Steve and Peggy knew each for a good long while.

But for Thor and Jane we get like a week or less time of interaction in the first movie so the almost insta-love connection felt less organic compared to the other relationships. It also didn't help that I thought Hemsworth and Portman had the weakest chemistry of the couples.

I also found NP to be a bit wooden in her performance.

I wish they could have switched out the physicist guy (the Skarsgard? Guy) with Jane in the Avengers. If there's a character I feel that's been over-used, it's him. She could have easily filled his role.

Maybe my opinions of Jane will change after I see the Dark World, but for now she's so-so.

Edited July 21, 2015 by HoodlumSheep

[Advance35]

It sounds like you do like Bruce, so maybe these comments weren't meant to sound negative (although, only slightly negative), and my apologies if I'm misunderstanding what you wrote, but I think Bruce has good reason to be self involved and to only think of himself.  The Hulk is one hell of a issue to be dealing with.  And while they were able to tame--for lack of a better word-- him a little, it's clear that he can go on a destructive rampage at any time.  I, too, think he'd choose heroism because he's a good guy, but I can forgive him if he stays away whenever possible and only enters the action when push comes to shove and he's truly needed.

 

I am definitely a Bruce Banner fan.  I find the character very unique among the Marvel Marque.   I like that while the others get to bask in being extrodinary, for Bruce it's very much a hinderance or scarlett letter as it were.   While I very much admired Natasha for her choice in AoU, I definitely sympathized with Bruce in that it clearly took him YEARS to become even remotely comfortable and we actually see him beginning to jell with others besides Tony but than Scarlett Witch torpedoes his sense of security and he's back to the recluse he was before the Avengers/Black Widow found him.   Which is actually kind of the reason I'm not wild about the movie version (other than her basically being a MCU version of Jean Grey),  I feel like she dealt one of the team a pretty big blow that had ramifications and got away with it.  Nobody gives her the side-eye, Banner's a fugitive again and back to running away from the world and she swans into being an Avengers Team Member.

 

I also really like the dry-humor Bruce is shown to have.   And I like that one of the most dangerous people in the world quails from any and all conflict in his civilian life.  I'm wondering what, if anything, they plan to do with his character moving forward.

 

And I wonder how the new wave of characters will be recieved.  I myself probably won't keep up with the franchise as much if/when the originals are phased out.   The characters displayed on the "B-Team" have been sufficient, I'm just not especially interested.   The Only Phase II character that caught my eye were the Guardians of the Galaxy and Winter Soldier, the rest.....meh.

[VCRTracking]

Kevin Feige on the Ant-Man post-credit scene and how it ties into Captain America: Civil War

“That is photography from that film that will play a part at a certain point in that film,” he explains vaguely.

 

 

and the upcoming film it self:.

 

“Civil War” is a “Captain America” sequel, but is jam-packed with Avengers. In addition to Captain America, Falcon and Ant-Man, it stars Iron Man, Black Widow, the Vision, Hawkeye, War Machine, Scarlet Witch, Spider-Man and Black Panther. Feige says it’s not going to feel as bursting at the seams as “Avengers: Age of Ultron” did, though.

“‘Civil War’ is a relatively simple story. ‘Ultron’ had a lot going on,” he says. “‘Civil War’ is a surprisingly grounded story about two characters that most audience members have come to know and like and admire finding themselves on different sides of a political argument, like the country does on many occasions, and how they both respond to that. That’s the story. So it’s actually a very, very simple story, and then how their personal relationships fit into that.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

More at: http://zap2it.com/2015/07/ant-man-post-credits-scene-captain-america-civil-war-not-prequel-explained/

[Shannon L.]

 

Which is actually kind of the reason I'm not wild about the movie version (other than her basically being a MCU version of Jean Grey),  I feel like she dealt one of the team a pretty big blow that had ramifications and got away with it.  Nobody gives her the side-eye, Banner's a fugitive again and back to running away from the world and she swans into being an Avengers Team Member.

That's a very good point.  Now I'm interested in what happens next for him. 

 

 

I also really like the dry-humor Bruce is shown to have.

With all of it's wonderfully humorous lines, my favorites from The Avengers come from Bruce:  "It's ok.  I wouldn't have come aboard if I couldn't handle...pointy things.",  and "Well.  This all looks...horrible." and "Thanks, but the last time I was in NY, I kind of...broke Harlem."  Mark Ruffalo is so good at portraying that wit, too. 

[VCRTracking]

 

Which is actually kind of the reason I'm not wild about the movie version (other than her basically being a MCU version of Jean Grey),  I feel like she dealt one of the team a pretty big blow that had ramifications and got away with it.  Nobody gives her the side-eye, Banner's a fugitive again and back to running away from the world and she swans into being an Avengers Team Member.

I always thought Pietro's death(while sacrificing a character with lots of potential) was kind of meant to punish Wanda for her actions. To be fair the other characters don't trust her at first when she decides to switch sides when it's clear Ultron's insane. Cap, Bruce and Clint are all pissed when they first see her later. I think fighting side by side at the end helped some of it. It is funny to though to read Tumblr and so many posts wanting Wanda and Natasha be BFFs now are completely forgetting what she did.

[Bruinsfan]

Cap got off easiest of all the people she mind-whammied, and Hawkeye wasn't affected at all, so I'd imagine they would have a much easier time learning to trust her than Black Widow or Banner.