Morrigan2575 February 20 Share February 20 (edited) 7 hours ago, shrewd.buddha said: Just my opinion, but I feel that Deadpool was an exceptionally made movie: the direction, story structure, etc. The slow-mo opening sequence with sight-gags and sarcastic voice over was really well done. Ryan Reynolds was just a small part of that. Deadpool 2 was just a pale imitation of the first movie and did not perform as well - - not a good sign for a franchise. Some jokes get old fast and there were a lot of things that just felt like a rehash of the first movie. Totally agree, I complained about Deadpool 2 when it first came out. I worried about it before it even came out after learning that Reynolds had more creative control and pushed out Tim Miller. I'm taking a wait and see approach to Deadpool and Wolverine. I hope it's back to Deadpool quality, I worry it's Deadpool 2 or worse Love and Thunder 🙄 Edited February 20 by Morrigan2575 1 Link to comment
rmontro February 21 Share February 21 Not sure if we're supposed to discuss rumors or speculation here, so I'll put this in spoiler tags: Spoiler Rumors now are the new Fantastic Four movie will feature Galactus as its main villain. Does that mean their encounter with Rama-Tut (as previously rumored) has been dropped? Maybe because of Jonathan Majors' departure? Link to comment
arc February 22 Share February 22 Variety: How Marvel Is Quietly Retooling Amid Superhero Fatigue Quote Marvel dropped Majors hours after the conviction and is rewriting those movies, which will now either minimize the character or excise him entirely. The first of the new Avengers movies, due out in 2026, was initially titled Avengers: The Kang Dynasty but will be getting a new title to remove the character’s name, though sources say that even before Majors’ conviction, the studio was making moves to minimize the character after Quantumania underperformed, grossing $476 million. Quote Execs are not calling it a reboot, not even a soft one, but more of a creative retooling. Variety didn't get into it, but it was reported elsewhere that Marvel Studios thought Quantumania was really good: Quote "[Marvel Studios] is aware of what's happening to their brand. My understanding, having talked to some people, is that ‘Quantumania’ really shook them, and I'm sure ‘Secret Invasion’ shook them further, but ‘Quantumania’ really shook them because they felt like they had something good. Because they all internally thought, 'Everyone's gonna love this.'” […] “And then they put it out and people didn't. And then they were like, 'Oh no, our internal barometer is not attuned to what people want anymore.' With ‘Quantumania,’ they were like, 'We put out a banger.' And then that's not how a lot of people felt." So retooling here and there or cutting back on the number of projects isn't the most necessary improvement to their process. The main thing is that they need to get back in tune with their audience. (also, more broadly, a lot of would-be blockbusters fell short in 2023 even if they weren't superhero flicks. Audiences don't have superhero fatigue, they have movie fatigue.) 3 Link to comment
Kel Varnsen February 22 Share February 22 3 hours ago, arc said: So retooling here and there or cutting back on the number of projects isn't the most necessary improvement to their process. The main thing is that they need to get back in tune with their audience. I think there is something to be said for making fewer movies. Just looking at the post Infinity Saga movies, imagine how much better a position they would be in if they just hadn't made Eternals and either Wakanda Forever or Quantumania. Not only would there be fewer movies for people to complain/get tired over, but on the production side the remaining movies would have gotten more producer attention and CGI artists could have more time and workers available to make better special effects. Link to comment
Raja February 22 Share February 22 4 hours ago, arc said: Variety didn't get into it, but it was reported elsewhere that Marvel Studios thought Quantumania was really good: Quote "[Marvel Studios] is aware of what's happening to their brand. My understanding, having talked to some people, is that ‘Quantumania’ really shook them, and I'm sure ‘Secret Invasion’ shook them further, but ‘Quantumania’ really shook them because they felt like they had something good. Because they all internally thought, 'Everyone's gonna love this.'” […] “And then they put it out and people didn't. And then they were like, 'Oh no, our internal barometer is not attuned to what people want anymore.' With ‘Quantumania,’ they were like, 'We put out a banger.' And then that's not how a lot of people felt." Expand So retooling here and there or cutting back on the number of projects isn't the most necessary improvement to their process. The main thing is that they need to get back in tune with their audience. (also, more broadly, a lot of would-be blockbusters fell short in 2023 even if they weren't superhero flicks. Audiences don't have superhero fatigue, they have movie fatigue.) Maybe in a stand alone vacuum Ant-Man 3 would have been a fine 1999 movie. But as the introduction of a big bad set to be the threat for a continuation of a series of movies I don't know what they were thinking. It seemed like Paul Rudd had the Dwayne Johnson clause and could not be seen to lose a fight, lest he thinks it would damage his brand as an action star. The post production stuff was down very far from the previous standards and I think the COVID era audience would give that a pass, where as new folks watching it years later on Disney+ . And COVID just accelerated the process. Link to comment
tv echo February 28 Share February 28 (edited) In this recent interview, Dave Bautista clarified that, when he said that he was done playing Drax, it didn't mean that he was done with Marvel... Dave Bautista on Playing a Failure and Channeling His Rage in Dune: Part Two By Germain Lussier February 26, 2024 https://gizmodo.com/dave-bautista-dune-2-character-wwe-marvel-drax-scifi-1851287353 Quote io9: Last thing is, I know you said on Guardians 3 that you were done with Marvel, but is there any way that you would come back, or have you just kind of put that part of your career aside? Bautista: No, no. When I said that I was done, I was really just done with my journey as Drax. I still have a relationship with Marvel. I’ve seen Kevin Feige again, Lou [D’Esposito] as recently as two weeks ago. And they know that I would be up for a role. I love the universe—the superhero universe, I love it. I’m a fan. So Marvel or DC, if they call, I would answer the phone. And if the role makes sense, I’d be all over it. I just would like the opportunity to do a bigger role, a different role. Maybe a deeper role. I’d love to have the opportunity to play, like an ominous villain in the superhero universe. Yeah. But never. I’m not done with it. But my journey with Drax is over. Edited February 28 by tv echo Link to comment
tv echo March 3 Share March 3 (edited) Ms. Marvel star Iman Vellani has ‘been assured’ by Marvel she’ll return to the MCU By Susana Polo Mar 1, 2024 https://www.polygon.com/24087888/iman-vellani-ms-marvel-young-avengers Quote So when Polygon sat down with Vellani in advance of this Saturday’s 2024 Anime Awards, we had to know: Have the folks behind the MCU assured her that Ms. Marvel has a place in its future? “I have been assured,” she replied, and continued, with good humor, “So that feels good, but there was no more assurance than that. [laugh] They give me breadcrumbs, and I try and make a meal out of it.” Edited March 3 by tv echo Link to comment
tv echo March 6 Share March 6 (edited) Disney CEO Bob Iger Discusses Marvel Fatigue And Quietly Cancelling Several Projects By MarkJulian - Mar 06, 2024 08:03 AM EST https://comicbookmovie.com/marvel-studios/disney-ceo-bob-iger-discusses-marvel-fatigue-and-quietly-cancelling-several-projects-a209752#gs.60w690 Quote Recently, Disney CEO Bog Iger was a keynote speaker at the Morgan Stanley Technology, Media and Telecom Conference in San Francisco. * * * "You have to kill things you no longer believe in, and that’s not easy in this business, because either you’ve gotten started, you have some sunk costs, or it’s a relationship with either your employees or with the creative community,” said Iger. He continued, “It’s not an easy thing, but you got to make those tough calls. We’ve actually made those tough calls. We’ve not been that public about it, but we’ve killed a few projects already that we just didn’t feel were strong enough.” * * * As Iger moved along in his speech, he railed against the notion that superhero fatigue may be the cause of Marvel's dismal output, post-Avengers: Endgame. “A lot of people think it’s audience fatigue, it’s not audience fatigue. They want great films. And if you build it great, they will come and there are countless examples of that. Some are ours and some are others’. Oppenheimer is a perfect example of that. Just a fantastic film,” Iger said. He continued, "Focus is really important. We reduced the output of Marvel, both number of films they make and the number of TV shows, and that really becomes critical, but I feel good about the team. I feel good about the IP we’re making. I talked about a lot of the projects. We look years ahead, really. And it’s iterative." “Not only do you look at the films you’re making, you look at every part of that process, who the directors are, who’s being cast, reading scripts, I personally watch films three to five times with the team and just create a culture of excellence and respect, which is really important with the creative community. And again, the track record speaks for itself.” Iger went on to specifically point to Deadpool & Wolverine as a sign that things are turning a corner for Marvel, adding that the Ryan Reynolds-led pic “will be one of the more successful Marvel movies we’ve had in a long time." Edited March 6 by tv echo Link to comment
tv echo March 11 Share March 11 Oscars 2024 gives us the Iron Man and Thor reunion we didn't know we needed Good Morning America Mar 10, 2024 Link to comment
tv echo March 13 Share March 13 Walt Disney Studios (which includes Marvel Studios) is scheduled to present its upcoming release schedule on April 11 at CinemaCon... https://cinemacon.com/schedule#horizontalTab5 Quote 11 APRIL * * * 2:30 PM - 4:30 PM * * * WALT DISNEY STUDIOS INVITES YOU TO ITS 2024 PRESENTATION HIGHLIGHTING ITS UPCOMING RELEASE SCHEDULE Link to comment
Kel Varnsen March 15 Share March 15 On 3/6/2024 at 10:08 AM, tv echo said: Disney CEO Bob Iger Discusses Marvel Fatigue And Quietly Cancelling Several Projects By MarkJulian - Mar 06, 2024 08:03 AM EST https://comicbookmovie.com/marvel-studios/disney-ceo-bob-iger-discusses-marvel-fatigue-and-quietly-cancelling-several-projects-a209752#gs.60w690 Rumours are those cancelled projects are Eternals 2, Ant-Man 4 and a sequel to The Marvels. Not that those would be any surprise to anyone, Eternals was probably the biggest Marvel misfire for me at least. Just hope that the projects they are keeping instead will be interesting. Link to comment
tv echo March 15 Share March 15 (edited) In Disney's latest investors' presentation, Avengers: The Kang Dynasty is now just referred to as Avengers 5... Related article: How Marvel Is Quietly Retooling Amid Superhero Fatigue BY BORYS KIT, AARON COUCH FEBRUARY 21, 2024 https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/marvel-fantastic-four-avengers-movies-1235830951/ Quote Marvel is also cleaning up the creative mess left in the wake of Jonathan Majors, the once-rising actor cast to play the lynchpin villain role in the next Avengers movies but who in December was found guilty of reckless assault in the third degree and harassment in a Manhattan court after a domestic incident with his ex-partner, a movement coach he met while working on Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania. Marvel dropped Majors hours after the conviction and is rewriting those movies, which will now either minimize the character or excise him entirely. The first of the new Avengers movies, due out in 2026, was initially titled Avengers: The Kang Dynasty but will be getting a new title to remove the character’s name, though sources say that even before Majors’ conviction, the studio was making moves to minimize the character after Quantumania underperformed, grossing $476 million. Edited March 15 by tv echo Link to comment
arc March 17 Share March 17 On 3/15/2024 at 7:19 AM, tv echo said: Related article: How Marvel Is Quietly Retooling Amid Superhero Fatigue BY BORYS KIT, AARON COUCH FEBRUARY 21, 2024 https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/marvel-fantastic-four-avengers-movies-1235830951/ Yes, we already talked about this article three weeks ago. It's on this very page near the top. Link to comment
tv echo March 18 Share March 18 (edited) Marvel Star Benedict Wong Teases Next MCU Project (Exclusive) By ADAM BARNHARDT - March 17, 2024 https://comicbook.com/movies/news/marvel-star-benedict-wong-teases-next-mcu-project-exclusive/ Quote Wong will soon return to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. While the red carpet premiere of his latest project—Netflix's 3 Body Problem—Benedict Wong told us there's "something looming" regarding the return of his character Wong, the current Sorcerer Supreme of the MCU. "I can't really say. It's been awhile," Wong told us of his long-awaited Marvel return. "Something's looming. Something's looming." Edited March 18 by tv echo Link to comment
Morrigan2575 March 19 Share March 19 On 3/17/2024 at 1:19 AM, arc said: Yes, we already talked about this article three weeks ago. It's on this very page near the top. And I still resent how they keep trying to frame this as superhero fatigue instead of audience rejecting crap products 3 Link to comment
Anduin March 20 Share March 20 35 minutes ago, Morrigan2575 said: And I still resent how they keep trying to frame this as superhero fatigue instead of audience rejecting crap products Absolutely. The audience won't just accept any old nonsense, there's just so much stuff out there to choose from. We're spoiled for choice. 1 Link to comment
supposebly March 20 Share March 20 2 hours ago, Morrigan2575 said: And I still resent how they keep trying to frame this as superhero fatigue instead of audience rejecting crap products Can't it be both? Personally, I am superhero-fatigued to the point that even when something good came along, I probably wouldn't watch it. The last one I enjoyed was most of Wanda Vision and the last Spiderman movie. But I watched a few movies since and I was utterly bored with them. And I skipped the possibly good second Spiderverse animated one. These days, whenever I see a CGI fight of some sort in any movie, I'm outta there. 1 Link to comment
Cobalt Stargazer March 20 Share March 20 On 2/22/2024 at 6:41 AM, Raja said: Maybe in a stand alone vacuum Ant-Man 3 would have been a fine 1999 movie. But as the introduction of a big bad set to be the threat for a continuation of a series of movies I don't know what they were thinking. Perhaps, but I would say that the RL ugliness with Jonathan Majors affected things as well. Yes, they've fired him, but Ant-Man 3 was to be Kang's chance to take Thanos' place as the next big threat for this phase. Now they have to either write the character out entirely, recast, or just rework things so that there's another, bigger threat behind him. What they were thinking was that the actor they hired to be the Big Bad for the new phase was not a POS, which doesn't have anything to do with Paul Rudd. 5 hours ago, Anduin said: Absolutely. The audience won't just accept any old nonsense Because that would make us fickle, and we're not at all like that. Link to comment
Raja March 20 Share March 20 19 minutes ago, Cobalt Stargazer said: . What they were thinking was that the actor they hired to be the Big Bad for the new phase was not a POS, which doesn't have anything to do with Paul Rudd. I wasn't thinking of Majors but of Kang, the big bad, being defeated by Scott Lang who wasn't even using his quick change of size powers to defeat the big bad in a fight. And by framing the fight like that it seemed like Paul Rudd who before could have his Ant-Man lose to the Wasp in a head to head match had now gained the Dwayne Johnson and Vin Diesel clause that their characters can't lose a fight on screen 1 Link to comment
Morrigan2575 March 20 Share March 20 2 hours ago, supposebly said: Can't it be both? Personally, I am superhero-fatigued to the point that even when something good came along, I probably wouldn't watch it. It absolutely can be both but, IMO the constant repeat of Super Hero Fatigue just screams Disney/Marvel spin and since entertainment media are little more than PR machines for the Industry, all I hear is Disney trying to control the narrative...our shows/movies aren't crap, we haven't gotten lazy and, taken the audience's goodwill for granted, it's just fatigue, it happens...blah blah blah. 1 Link to comment
arc March 20 Share March 20 14 hours ago, Raja said: I wasn't thinking of Majors but of Kang, the big bad, being defeated by Scott Lang who wasn't even using his quick change of size powers to defeat the big bad in a fight. And by framing the fight like that it seemed like Paul Rudd who before could have his Ant-Man lose to the Wasp in a head to head match had now gained the Dwayne Johnson and Vin Diesel clause that their characters can't lose a fight on screen Well, the whole thing was that Kang was cut off from his powers in the Quantum Realm too. It may well be that Kang’s not particularly good at martial arts since time powers (as seen with He Who Remains) is a cheat code to life. And the story needed Ant-Man to win. If Kang escaped, then (1) Ant-man doesn’t get a win and (2) story-wise, the MCU would have to go straight into Kang’s endgame, when this was just his introduction. I really think half the reason Marvel execs thought Quantumania was a “banger” is because they were so deep in its development that they remembered all the cut or altered scenes, even when watching later cuts that took out or altered vital pieces. The broad outlines of some really compelling stuff was there, but the execution just blew. Cassie doesn’t have an arc, and Scott’s arc is there but under-executed. And the final heroic sacrifice — Scott wins a sort of Pyhrric victory by trapping Kang and himself in the QR forever — is immediately undone as the movie breaks its own rules to rescue Scott seconds later. To me, these things suggest there was a better movie in there lost in editing, though maybe in the script development stage. I don’t mean to say there’s enough shot footage to cut together a better movie as much as I mean the script had unmet potential. 3 Link to comment
Kel Varnsen March 20 Share March 20 1 hour ago, arc said: And the story needed Ant-Man to win. If Kang escaped, then (1) Ant-man doesn’t get a win and (2) story-wise, the MCU would have to go straight into Kang’s endgame, when this was just his introduction. To me it just wasn't clear why Scott couldn't just leave the quantum realm at any time by turning the controls on his belt. He did that without any problems in the first movie. Link to comment
arc March 20 Share March 20 3 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said: To me it just wasn't clear why Scott couldn't just leave the quantum realm at any time by turning the controls on his belt. He did that without any problems in the first movie. That was a one time fluke. AM1’s rules (per Hank, I know, unreliable source) we’re that the QR was inescapable. That’s why Scott’s move at the end was such a heroic sacrifice: he did the right thing at great cost to himself. Then he proved that Hank was wrong and the QR could be escaped but even so, Janet was still stuck there and she’s as smart as Hank and had the same tech. So then the modified rules in AM2 were that the QR is barely escapable under the right circumstances, which our heroes barely manage in order to save Janet. And then in AM3 the rules are further expanded to say that the QR drifts in and out of synch with the main universe, so sometimes it’s more possible than other times. It’s still difficult to escape — I forget what reverse-the-polarity nonsense justified it for Cassie, Hank, and Janet, tbh. Also, the whole thing from the end of AM2 to Endgame was that Scott couldn’t escape at will. That’s why he involuntarily rode out the five year gap in the QR. Link to comment
Raja March 20 Share March 20 Kang as the story antagonist for the phase didn't need to go 0 and 2 into the Avengers movie. At least a powered up Ant-Man and the Wasp could have barely survived to fight another day against a threat not seen since Thanos. Link to comment
swanpride March 24 Share March 24 Thing is, I am not Superhero fatigued at all...I just don't appreciate that Marvel is now doing all the things I hated about the DCEU. Setting up future stories without caring about telling the story at hand, focussing on action scenes as opposed to characters, an then there is the butchering of great characters like Wanda, Dr. Strange and Thor. I would love to get something I can really enjoy again, but Marvel has been so focussed on getting bigger and bigger that they have forgotten that most of the most beloved moments in the MCU are actually quite small moments of character interaction. It REALLY bothered me that even Ant-man, which used to be the palate cleanser between the big stuff totally forgot that a story about Scott having to reconnect with his daughter after missing nearly her whole childhood after all is a way better story than any big battle they could come up with. 11 Link to comment
Makai March 26 Share March 26 On 3/24/2024 at 2:03 PM, swanpride said: Thing is, I am not Superhero fatigued at all...I just don't appreciate that Marvel is now doing all the things I hated about the DCEU. Setting up future stories without caring about telling the story at hand, focussing on action scenes as opposed to characters, an then there is the butchering of great characters like Wanda, Dr. Strange and Thor. I would love to get something I can really enjoy again, but Marvel has been so focussed on getting bigger and bigger that they have forgotten that most of the most beloved moments in the MCU are actually quite small moments of character interaction. It REALLY bothered me that even Ant-man, which used to be the palate cleanser between the big stuff totally forgot that a story about Scott having to reconnect with his daughter after missing nearly her whole childhood after all is a way better story than any big battle they could come up with. Exactly this. There are actually a lot of things that Marvel has keyed up that I would love to see but they are too focused on expanding rather than paying off existing plots. Case in point, Hawkeye set up a ton of plots but the most interesting ones with Yelena/Kate and Kate/Clint is going nowhere. Same with WandaVision. I’m actually craving good superhero movies since no one is making them right now. I have shitty superhero movie/tv fatigue. 4 Link to comment
Morrigan2575 March 26 Share March 26 On 3/24/2024 at 5:03 PM, swanpride said: Thing is, I am not Superhero fatigued at all...I just don't appreciate that Marvel is now doing all the things I hated about the DCEU I agree with this, I think Marvel spread themselves thin and it compromised the quality of each product/platform. IMO the reason is that they had too many balls in the air, desperately trying to keep a Connected Cinematic Universe while pumping out more product to fill theaters and give D+ content. 1 Link to comment
Kel Varnsen March 26 Share March 26 2 hours ago, Makai said: Exactly this. There are actually a lot of things that Marvel has keyed up that I would love to see but they are too focused on expanding rather than paying off existing plots That's a big one for me. Like I feel like it will still be years before we even find out what the 10 rings are made of. 1 Link to comment
Anduin March 26 Share March 26 It feels like they learned the wrong lessons from the comics. "We need more, and it all has to be connected." I would rather have three standalone titles, or tv or movie series, than one big connected universe. There are times when quantity is better than quality, but the MCU isn't one of those. 1 Link to comment
Brn2bwild March 29 Share March 29 They had so much momentum with WandaVision, and if they had kept returning to those characters and relationships, we could have had some really good movies. Instead we probably won't find out until 2026 whether Wanda is even alive. 1 2 Link to comment
Cobalt Stargazer March 29 Share March 29 4 hours ago, Brn2bwild said: They had so much momentum with WandaVision, and if they had kept returning to those characters and relationships, we could have had some really good movies. Instead we probably won't find out until 2026 whether Wanda is even alive. There's a piece in there where I think Jac Schaeffer wanted some consequences for what Wanda did in Westview. No, she doesn't go to jail or prison (although pfft to that anyway since FATWS has Bucky and Sam gallivanting around Europe with Helmut Zemo), but she lost Vision (for the third time) and her kids, leaving her with nothing. There was no reason outside of it being a cheat that the two Visions couldn't have been melded into one, so even if the boys did disappear he'd have still been with her in some capacity, but that's not what Schaeffer wanted to do. The big mistake was in trying to retread that story, only with less care. It was still Wanda looking for something she'd lost, only this was not the same woman who responded with a warning to the man who'd just fired on her with an armed drone. A better writer (if not Schaeffer herself, then not Michael Waldron, who should never have been allowed near that script) would have been aware that this was ground that had already been walked, would have tried something different. Anything different. On 3/26/2024 at 1:06 PM, Makai said: Case in point, Hawkeye set up a ton of plots but the most interesting ones with Yelena/Kate and Kate/Clint is going nowhere. Someone did the math, and Kate and Yelena had a little over thirteen minutes of screen time together; the scene at Kate's apartment, then the fight before Yelena's confrontation with Clint. Those thirteen minutes have spawned over 2000 fanfics, and the number is still growing, so it's crazy that it's taken them this long to bring Kate back into the action, and that's just in an end credits scene. I'm sure they have a schedule or whatever, in addition to any other demands on the actor's time, but one of the MCU"s strengths has always been those interpersonal relations. Maybe the OG Avengers were never the best of friends, and yet those interactions are what makes/made the characters so human, even outside of their world-saving. That's a piece of what's missing now, that even if the universe is connected, the characters really aren't, and its noticeable. 8 Link to comment
Kel Varnsen March 29 Share March 29 8 hours ago, Cobalt Stargazer said: it's crazy that it's taken them this long to bring Kate back into the action, and that's just in an end credits scene. I'm sure they have a schedule or whatever, in addition to any other demands on the actor's time, but one of the MCU"s strengths has always been those interpersonal relations That's one of the reasons why the idea of a Young Avengers team doesn't really work for me in the MCU. Kate is probably around 25 now. By the time a movie actually happens she will probably be close to 30 so hardly what I would call a "young" avenger. And since you don't have that sliding timeline like the comics do, since actors age,and movies take a long time to come out you only really get one shot to make a movie about young heroes since by the time you make the sequel they are just more heroes. 2 Link to comment
Raja March 29 Share March 29 6 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said: That's one of the reasons why the idea of a Young Avengers team doesn't really work for me in the MCU. Kate is probably around 25 now. By the time a movie actually happens she will probably be close to 30 so hardly what I would call a "young" avenger. And since you don't have that sliding timeline like the comics do, since actors age,and movies take a long time to come out you only really get one shot to make a movie about young heroes since by the time you make the sequel they are just more heroes. The actors, except Iman Vallani a typical 22 year old playing a teenager for child labor laws, who have already played their "Young Avengers" roles on film are already the same age or older than Scarlett Johansson and Elizabeth Olsen were in their first MCU appearance Link to comment
Spartan Girl March 29 Share March 29 8 hours ago, Cobalt Stargazer said: There's a piece in there where I think Jac Schaeffer wanted some consequences for what Wanda did in Westview. No, she doesn't go to jail or prison (although pfft to that anyway since FATWS has Bucky and Sam gallivanting around Europe with Helmut Zemo), but she lost Vision (for the third time) and her kids, leaving her with nothing. There was no reason outside of it being a cheat that the two Visions couldn't have been melded into one, so even if the boys did disappear he'd have still been with her in some capacity, but that's not what Schaeffer wanted to do. The big mistake was in trying to retread that story, only with less care. It was still Wanda looking for something she'd lost, only this was not the same woman who responded with a warning to the man who'd just fired on her with an armed drone. A better writer (if not Schaeffer herself, then not Michael Waldron, who should never have been allowed near that script) would have been aware that this was ground that had already been walked, would have tried something different. Anything different. And these were the same writers (well Waldron, anyway) that gave Loki a well-thought and nuanced redemption arc and a tragic albeit karmic ending. But please go on about how the MCU doesn’t have a woman problem or that it’s too “woke” now. 🙄 1 Link to comment
Kel Varnsen March 29 Share March 29 23 minutes ago, Raja said: The actors, except Iman Vallani a typical 22 year old playing a teenager for child labor laws, who have already played their "Young Avengers" roles on film are already the same age or older than Scarlett Johansson and Elizabeth Olsen were in their first MCU appearance If you don't count the years in the ice, Steve Rogers was only like 28 in Avengers (same age as Natasha). So if the hook is that this new team is Avengers, but they are young it seems like it's already been done. 1 Link to comment
Raja March 29 Share March 29 6 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said: If you don't count the years in the ice, Steve Rogers was only like 28 in Avengers (same age as Natasha). So if the hook is that this new team is Avengers, but they are young it seems like it's already been done. They would really need to play up the old man Sam "I'm too old for this shit" and this is my last mission mentor role for the legacy Infinity Saga characters to make it work. Link to comment
Cobalt Stargazer March 29 Share March 29 4 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said: If you don't count the years in the ice, Steve Rogers was only like 28 in Avengers (same age as Natasha). So if the hook is that this new team is Avengers, but they are young it seems like it's already been done. Isn't Carol also 'technically' the same age she was when she got her powers? Because Monica was a kid in the first Captain Marvel movie, and now she's an adult while Carol looks more or less the same. Since Kamala seems to be taking an active role in recruiting the next team, they could always rope Carol in occasionally for the grumpy mentor spot, although I don't know how much Fury will be involved yet. As I said before, I'm sure RL scheduling has something to do with it, because on a separate but related note, someone on social media said that Zendaya is so busy now that she won't be able to do another season of Euphoria. Even that is something that happens when there's so much time between seasons, since the new one isn't supposed to start until 2025, and with that much downtime it would be strange if she wasn't pursuing other opportunities. Link to comment
baldryanr March 29 Share March 29 2 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said: If you don't count the years in the ice, Steve Rogers was only like 28 in Avengers (same age as Natasha). So if the hook is that this new team is Avengers, but they are young it seems like it's already been done. There's more to it than just biological age. Steve spent years fighting in WWII. Nat spent most of her life in the Black Widow program or running around on SHIELD missions. The new team might not be as far behind biologically but they are light years behind in life experience. 3 Link to comment
Makai March 30 Share March 30 11 hours ago, baldryanr said: There's more to it than just biological age. Steve spent years fighting in WWII. Nat spent most of her life in the Black Widow program or running around on SHIELD missions. The new team might not be as far behind biologically but they are light years behind in life experience. This is why the Young Avengers being in their twenties doesn’t bother me in the slightest. Kate’s background makes her read has far younger than Steve or Nat. Plus these are heroes that have been shaped by growing up in a world with the Avengers. It creates a very different dynamic Hailee Steinfield and Florence Pugh are only a year apart but when they were on screen together Kate and Yelena did not feel like contemporaries in the slightest. 1 Link to comment
Kel Varnsen March 30 Share March 30 9 hours ago, Makai said: Hailee Steinfield and Florence Pugh are only a year apart but when they were on screen together Kate and Yelena did not feel like contemporaries in the slightest. When we last saw them together sure, but that was 3 years ago when Kate was probably around 22 or 23. By the time any kind of Young Avengers movie or show actually comes out she will probably be almost 30 (which was my original complaint it takes them so long to follow up on things now). If she still has the same personality and still feels like a kid at that point it will be weird considering how much people generally change in those years. Plus it will absolutely make me think of Wooderson from Dazed and Confused since if she is 30 why is she hanging around with teenagers? 1 Link to comment
baldryanr March 30 Share March 30 On 3/29/2024 at 8:12 AM, Kel Varnsen said: Kate is probably around 25 now. In her Marvels cameo she explicitly says she's 23. 1 Link to comment
Makai March 31 Share March 31 (edited) 11 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said: When we last saw them together sure, but that was 3 years ago when Kate was probably around 22 or 23. By the time any kind of Young Avengers movie or show actually comes out she will probably be almost 30 (which was my original complaint it takes them so long to follow up on things now). If she still has the same personality and still feels like a kid at that point it will be weird considering how much people generally change in those years. Plus it will absolutely make me think of Wooderson from Dazed and Confused since if she is 30 why is she hanging around with teenagers? I really doubt that the character will be close to 30 when Young Avengers is finally made. MCU time has never been in line with real time and projects aren’t released linearly. It was three years between Hawkeye and Echo but only six months for the characters. Our time is only now starting to catch up with the earliest post-Endgame projects. Edited March 31 by Makai 1 Link to comment
arc April 2 Share April 2 On 3/30/2024 at 5:09 PM, Makai said: I really doubt that the character will be close to 30 when Young Avengers is finally made. MCU time has never been in line with real time and projects aren’t released linearly. Well, there was this sort of vague haze overall, but then Endgame really made things super concrete that Avengers 1 happened in 2012, and so on. @Kel Varnsen there's already a lot of precedent for actors playing younger in the MCU. Simu Liu was 30-31 at the time of filming Shang-Chi and I'm pretty sure the character is explicitly 24 in the movie. But to go back to his earliest showbiz days as a stock photo model, he didn't really age that much from his early 20s to 31. Link to comment
Raja April 2 Share April 2 Of course the blip to hide that 40 and 50 something actors were rapidly aging out was a genius move Link to comment
Kel Varnsen April 2 Share April 2 On 3/30/2024 at 8:09 PM, Makai said: I really doubt that the character will be close to 30 when Young Avengers is finally made. MCU time has never been in line with real time and projects aren’t released linearly. It was three years between Hawkeye and Echo but only six months for the characters. Our time is only now starting to catch up with the earliest post-Endgame projects. It's hard to say. There are movies in development through 2027 and 7 live action shows that haven't come out yet or are in development (plus What If season 3). With Disney saying they are going to slow down their output of Marvel stuff it could easily be 2028 before any kind of Young Avengers project happens. And at that point it will be really hard to convince people that it hasn't been years within the MCU since we last saw these characters. 3 Link to comment
Cobalt Stargazer April 2 Share April 2 5 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said: And at that point it will be really hard to convince people that it hasn't been years within the MCU since we last saw these characters. Maybe? Because there are always questions about "Where is Whoever?" The remaining Avengers while Wanda was having her crackup. Bucky during the time Erik Killmonger was trying to usurp the throne of Wakanda. Ghost after the Snap, because Scott being stuck in the Quantum Realm is because he went there to help her and I don't believe it was made clear if she was also lost. Suspending disbelief also requires knowing that the missing characters aren't put into a box and set aside until it's time to utilize them again, that we should know they're doing stuff offscreen, including Kate, who must have been coming home from patrol or a stakeout since she had her bow with her and it must have been very late. I would even argue that Kamala's apparently self-appointed duties as recruiter means she's fresh off of meeting her hero in The Marvels, and despite being significantly younger than Kate she's being trusted to handle it by Fury, even if he's keeping tabs on developments. So I could see it the other way too. 1 Link to comment
BetterButter April 3 Share April 3 ‘The Fantastic Four’: Julia Garner Joins Marvel Studios Movie As A Shalla-Bal Version Of Silver Surfer 2 Link to comment
Trini April 3 Share April 3 21 minutes ago, BetterButter said: ‘The Fantastic Four’: Julia Garner Joins Marvel Studios Movie As A Shalla-Bal Version Of Silver Surfer Skimming wikipedia, it seems like there is NOT a Shalla-Bal version of Silver Surfer, so maybe the details of this casting aren't all correct. Link to comment
baldryanr April 3 Share April 3 (edited) Looks pretty silvery to me. And I'm sure a certain segment of the fandom is getting ready to rant about not using the original (male) version of the character. Edited April 3 by baldryanr 2 1 Link to comment
Anduin April 3 Share April 3 31 minutes ago, Trini said: Skimming wikipedia, it seems like there is NOT a Shalla-Bal version of Silver Surfer, so maybe the details of this casting aren't all correct. Even if there wasn't previously, there clearly is now. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.