The Marvel Cinematic Universe: The Avengers, etc.

[Kel Varnsen]

3 minutes ago, scriggle said:

They haven't in the MCU. It's fanon not canon.

Agent Carter takes place in the late 40s/early 50s. According to the MCU Tony was 21 when his parents died in 1991 so he was born in 1970. It seems that sometime in those 15-20 years after the founding of SHIELD and before Tony's birth, Peggy and Howard stopped being close to each other. IIRC Tony didn't know that Howard had been involved with the founding of SHIELD. I'd guess that while Tony may have known of Peggy, he didn't know Peggy.

Well Stark was still working with SHIELD with Peggy in 1989 (as shown in Ant man) two years before his death.So i am not sure they ever stopped being close. Tony would have been 19 then. Considering how much Howard apparently liked to talk about working with Cap you would think he would mention founding SHIELD as well. 

[scriggle]

I haven't seen Ant-Man so I didn't know about that. Maybe Howard completely compartmentalized his life, SHIELD business never touching his personal life? Wasn't Tony sent to boarding school? Maybe that's why he doesn't know Peggy? But really I can't imagine Peggy would give Howard a pass on being such a shitty father unless the MCU is trying to tell us he wasn't a shitty father. I'm confused.

Marvel & their utter lack of continuity. (eg in the Smithsonian exhibit Bucky has birth years of 1916 & 1917)

[Vera]

14 hours ago, scriggle said:

I could make the obvious (political) joke.

Instead, let's go with HYDRA. (Which is pretty much what's happening in the U.S. right now.)?

You know, when this movie first came out, I remember thinking 'Now way anyone would make Ross SoD'. But after everything that has happened since,  I've got to thinking some more. Keeping aside the fact that in the MCU, the govt. is Hydra invested, in our world, if someone told me that the current U.S govt. was center stage in trying to get control of super powered individuals, I'd tell those people to run. 

 

12 hours ago, Perfect Xero said:

If Steve had gone along with Tony's plan to create Vision and said he believed in/trusted him, it would have been a minor change to AoU overall, but would have really sold the development of friendship and trust between the two and served as a better set-up for Civil War.

 

After Tony created Ultron without telling any of the rest of them? It would not have made sense for them to support Tony wanting to build another version of that. I think trying to sell Tony and Steve has friends should have been off the table. They are 'work friends' and two people who have a fairly complicated relationship. It should have been left there. Though I have to say, I didn't think the Russos were trying to sell them as close till Tony went 'So was I'. That took me out of the scene entirely. 

But I also thought that that moment was not out of character. In Avengers, Tony is already building a tower for the team, despite having just met them. In his head, they are all close. Pepper (until CACW) and Rhodey stick by Rhodey through everything Tony has pulled ( I'm actually annoyed that S:H has T/P back together. We know why they broke up, but it's from Tony's perspective. They're getting back together is the same. At no point do we actually know what Pepper is thinking). But none of the others seem remotely interested in sticking around. They have their lives to live. Thor heads back to Asgard. Clint presumably to his family and farm. Steve and Nat work for S.H.I.E.L.D in D.C. Bruce is the only one who stuck around. He's first shown to be playing quasi-therapist to Tony and while they seem to be friends, Bruce doesn't have much of a back bone when it comes to him. 

Even in CA:CW, Steve doesn't know that Tony and Pepper have split up. That scene where Tony was trying to get Steve to sign the accords, Steve decides to tell Tony how glad he is that Howard got married and had a kid and Tony says 'Oh, really? You two knew each other? He never mentioned that. Maybe only a thousand times. God, I hated you.'.  The entire conversation is so much awkwardness. It's one they know each other enough that they can have it, but not where they know each other well enough that the conversation was going to go well. Contrast this with Steve and Natasha. In AoU, Steve's definitely aware that Nat and Bruce may have been crushing on each other and tells Bruce to go for it. Tony and Nat are both on the opposite side of Steve on the subject of the accords. But it's Nat who is at Peggy's funeral because she 'didn't want him to be alone'. He calls her to see if she's ok after the bombing and she warns him about getting involved with Barnes's arrest but knows he will anyway. At the airport, he clearly doesn't want to fight her and she knows that he's not going to stop fighting, so she lets him go. You didn't have any of those sorts of beats between Steve and Tony in any of the movies.  I don't think the Russos were trying to sell Steve and Tony as close friends either, but that in Tony's head they were. 

I had to go verify this, but through the movie, Tony never calls Steve by his name (apart from the 'Don't bullshit me Rogers' at the end), it's always 'Cap'. 

 

On 9/8/2017 at 3:58 AM, Perfect Xero said:

And Tony directly tells Banner that they don't have time to open things up to a debate.

 

This is the dialogue from there,

Bruce Banner: So you're going for artificial intelligence and you don't want to tell the team.

Tony Stark: Right. That's right, you know why? because we don't have time for a city hall debate. I don't want to hear the "man was not meant to meddle" medley. I see a suit of armor around the world.

This isn't a situation of them actually not having the time. Tony wanted Ultron in case of a threat that was in that moment non-existent. Tony wanted to bypass all the legal and ethical discussions that should have come before he tried to combine the power in the scepter with the Iron Legion Protocol. 

 

Quote

While I can certainly go on about Tony's issues for ages, Steve has a whole different set of problems, that might be even more insidious than Tony's

I think this was my problem with CA:CW. I loved the movie, but it didn't feel like a Cap movie. It felt like IM:CW or A:CW if you will. It's Tony's emotions that are front and center. The movie starts with Tony talking about grief over his parents' death. We move from Tony's self-pity to his guilt over the collateral damage caused by the Avengers' activities. Tony's blindsided by grief and everyone in the movie spends the next couple hours reacting to Tony's emotions. So much so that the anti-accords side aren't really given a voice. Mrs. Spencer blames Tony for her son dying in Sokovia and he feels guilty enough that he decides all of them need to be put into check. Rhodey goes 'But it's the UN!' and I kept waiting for someone to list out that the veto power of 5 nations, Bangladesh, Bosnia, Rwanda, Syria, etc.  This, while Ross is bringing up NY, Sokovia, Lagos. Rhodey also says that Ross has a congressional medal of honor but no one points out that Alexander Pierce had a Nobel Peace Prize. Ross denies Steve, Sam and Bucky legal aid and no one seems to go 'What?'. Then we move on to Tony's grief about losing Pepper. This is all before the last act of the movie which is governed by Tony's reaction to seeing Bucky kill his parents. The movie also ends with Tony's catharsis. Steve's arc in the movie is to react to everything that happens, which is fine if he's also given the emotional ball to hold, but he's not.  I should not have have been thinking that a Captain America movie needed more Captain America.

It's not just Steve. I thought Peggy, Natasha, Sam, and Bucky were all given the shaft. Steve is barely allowed to mourn Peggy for a minute. We don't get to see why Nat or Sam picked the sides they did, which would have been a great moment to get some more backstory on those characters as well. We don't know how Bucky feels about his situation or his decision to go back under. These were characters established as important to Steve and his journey in the previous movies. I would have like more on them rather than another movie where we deal with Tony's issues.

 

On 9/8/2017 at 10:30 AM, stealinghome said:

Funny how mileage varies--I didn't think it was an asshole thing to say at all. If anything, I thought it was Steve (fumblingly) trying to be compassionate and reach out to Tony on a personal level. I've always seen that moment as the first time Steve begins to really get Tony, and it's because he suddenly understands that a) Tony doesn't deal with loss well (in part because Tony's not accustomed to losing people, which Steve twigs to) and b) that Tony sees the world just radically differently than he does.

I think we also have to factor in that Steve is weeks out of WII. In the U.S, the draft was active since 1940. For Steve, the war is a part of his reality. He is just getting out of a period where civilians were an active part of the war effort. Everyone, men, women, children were enlisted in helping. Even in CA:CW, he's only four years out of that time. When Tony talks about Wanda being under house arrest, his mind immediately jumps to the Japanese internment. 

[Perfect Xero]

7 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

Have they ever really established if Tony knew Peggy very well, if at all. I mean logically he should have, since Peggy was close to his father and to Edwin Jarvis (the person important enough to Tony to name his whole computer system after). Howard died when Tony was an adult so he should probably know her, but I don't remember him ever mentioning her.

They've never established one way or the other, though him not being at her funeral would strongly suggest that he didn't know her (or at least not well).

I just think that it's much stronger narrative sense to introduce/remind people of Steve and Howard knowing each other during the war at the funeral of their mutual friend and it would have been a chance for Steve and Tony to have a friendly scene together removed from the Accords debate.

[Wynterwolf]

4 hours ago, Vera said:

Contrast this with Steve and Natasha. In AoU, Steve's definitely aware that Nat and Bruce may have been crushing on each other and tells Bruce to go for it. Tony and Nat are both on the opposite side of Steve on the subject of the accords. But it's Nat who is at Peggy's funeral because she 'didn't want him to be alone'. He calls her to see if she's ok after the bombing and she warns him about getting involved with Barnes's arrest but knows he will anyway.

Yep, Steve and Nat bonded during WS, chasing down the origin of the flash drive and that put her on a par with Sam (who is the one person Steve met outside of the Avengers), but before that, they were just basically 'work friends' too.  And Nat seemed genuinely surprised by that, when they're having their trust conversation at Sam's.  But this kind of fits with how I see that comment by Tony about him being Steve's friend too... I think other people feel like they know Steve (because of the ubiquitous public image) and have a closer relationship to Steve than he does to them.  But the reality is, there's always an imbalance from Steve's perspective (except with Peggy and Bucky).  

 

4 hours ago, Vera said:

I had to go verify this, but through the movie, Tony never calls Steve by his name (apart from the 'Don't bullshit me Rogers' at the end), it's always 'Cap'.

I have always found this very telling too.  

[scriggle]

5 hours ago, Vera said:

I had to go verify this, but through the movie, Tony never calls Steve by his name (apart from the 'Don't bullshit me Rogers' at the end), it's always 'Cap'. 

Without going back and rewatching all the movies, I can think of only one instance where someone other than Peggy or Bucky call Steve by his name. There may be others that I'm forgetting but I'd bet we could count them on one hand. Bruce does it in The Avengers when he, Tony, and Steve are talking about Fury and he says something like "Steve, you can't tell me this doesn't smell fishy to you." The others seem to always call him "Cap" even Sam. Everyone seems to have trouble distinguishing the man from the legend/icon.

[Wynterwolf]

Just now, scriggle said:

Everyone seems to have trouble distinguishing the man from the legend/icon.

Sooo much yes!!  

[HunterHunted]

6 hours ago, scriggle said:

I haven't seen Ant-Man so I didn't know about that. Maybe Howard completely compartmentalized his life, SHIELD business never touching his personal life? Wasn't Tony sent to boarding school? Maybe that's why he doesn't know Peggy? But really I can't imagine Peggy would give Howard a pass on being such a shitty father unless the MCU is trying to tell us he wasn't a shitty father. I'm confused.

Marvel & their utter lack of continuity. (eg in the Smithsonian exhibit Bucky has birth years of 1916 & 1917)

I always imagine that Howard was a lot like some of those early O.S.S. agents like Julia Child, John Ford, Arthur Schlesinger, and Moe Berg. Their lives were super compartmentalized. And whose involvement in the O.S.S. was unknown until the records were declassified in 2008. Howard being a defense contractor has a better cover than most because he reasonably might be present in important meetings with government officials and access to all kinds of government systems. This probably how HYDRA was able to infiltrate systems as well as they did. People like Howard and Hank Pym were busy installing back doors for SHIELD not knowing that HYDRA had already infiltrated SHIELD.

[Dandesun]

3 minutes ago, scriggle said:

Without going back and rewatching all the movies, I can think of only one instance where someone other than Peggy or Bucky call Steve by his name. There may be others that I'm forgetting but I'd bet we could count them on one hand. Bruce does it in The Avengers when he, Tony, and Steve are talking about Fury and he says something like "Steve, you can't tell me this doesn't smell fishy to you." The others seem to always call him "Cap" even Sam. Everyone seems to have trouble distinguishing the man from the legend/icon.

Maria Hill does it in Winter Soldier when he gets the third chip in and tells her to shoot him down. Natasha and Sam have both graduated to first name basis. I think it's interesting that Bruce was the first one to call him Steve out of the ice but, then again, Steve was the one who said that Bruce's ability to help them find the cube was the only thing about Banner that concerned him. Meaning, obviously, that he didn't care about the giant green rage monster and all that shit. 

Tony's never called him Steve. For that matter, how often has Steve called him Tony?

But that just furthers my belief in that Tony and Steve aren't much more than adversarial work friends. The thing is, as was mentioned, Tony was working on recreating Avengers Tower after the first Avengers movie and giving everyone their own floor and all that when everyone else is actually scattering to the winds. Thor back to Asgard (because the Bifrost had not been fixed at that point), Clint and Natasha back to SHIELD, Steve... off on his motorcycle (maybe he was just going to get a burger, I don't know.) But at the same time, I could totally buy Tony thinking that they'd bonded over all of this and 'yay! I've got a whole slew of friends now who are as extraordinary as me! I'm a real boy!' I mean, Tony's life does strike me as particularly lonely despite all the glamour and glitz and awesome Stark creations. Honestly? It's just another parallel to Steve who is also obviously very lonely. I think the similarities between them heighten the differences... it makes for interesting dynamics.

(And yes, Civil War was not a Cap movie and I'm still pretty irked about that.)

[scriggle]

7 minutes ago, Dandesun said:

(And yes, Civil War was not a Cap movie and I'm still pretty irked about that.)

We should start a club. The "Stilled Pissed Cap3 Was an Avengers Movie" club.

[Perfect Xero]

I don't think that people calling him "Cap" is particularly telling. It's a long standing nickname of his in the comics that even his very best friends usually call him.

It takes up less space in a word bubble, after all.

[Kel Varnsen]

On 9/10/2017 at 10:17 AM, Spartan Girl said:

Yes, I was referring to Thunderbolt Ross. And I still don't know why he didn't get punished for all the shit he pulled with Abomination instead of getting promoted. Whatever.

I can kind of by it. I mean look at our world and how often jerks use attacks and other tragedies for their political benefit and personal gain. I am sure the same thing happens in the MCU, but instead of terrorist attacks you have: aliens invading and leveling a good chunk NYC, the Vice President of the US conspiring to have the president killed, parts of the intelligence community and government (including at least one sitting senator) being nazi's and an insane robot trying to cause a mass extinction. It wouldn't be to hard to see a scenario where after any one of those events, some asshole with political connections and motivation could get themselves a pretty sweet cabinet position.

1 hour ago, scriggle said:

Without going back and rewatching all the movies, I can think of only one instance where someone other than Peggy or Bucky call Steve by his name. There may be others that I'm forgetting but I'd bet we could count them on one hand. Bruce does it in The Avengers when he, Tony, and Steve are talking about Fury and he says something like "Steve, you can't tell me this doesn't smell fishy to you." The others seem to always call him "Cap" even Sam. Everyone seems to have trouble distinguishing the man from the legend/icon.

I always find the most hilarious thing is that no one, not even the news media ever calls him Captain America(except in First Avenger and I think when Ant-Man meets him). It is like everyone knows it is a kind of silly and dated name to be calling a real person.

[Raja]

2 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

I can kind of by it. I mean look at our world and how often jerks use attacks and other tragedies for their political benefit and personal gain. I am sure the same thing happens in the MCU, but instead of terrorist attacks you have: aliens invading and leveling a good chunk NYC, the Vice President of the US conspiring to have the president killed, parts of the intelligence community and government (including at least one sitting senator) being nazi's and an insane robot trying to cause a mass extinction. It wouldn't be to hard to see a scenario where after any one of those events, some asshole with political connections and motivation could get themselves a pretty sweet cabinet position.

I always find the most hilarious thing is that no one, not even the news media ever calls him Captain America(except in First Avenger and I think when Ant-Man meets him). It is like everyone knows it is a kind of silly and dated name to be calling a real person.

For all the "Cap" versus "Steve" discussion among soldiers, and perhaps SHIELD Agents/Avengers support personnel in this world in his role as a commander "cap" instead of "Captain" or "Sir" is the equivalent of saying Steve. I suppose you can say America, given the suit is more memorable than Rogers. Tony looking to The Captain along with the others when the aliens came to New York was because of an earned title.

Edited September 12, 2017 by Raja

[Wynterwolf]

He isn't "Cap" any more.  Now he finally gets to be Steve.  

[Raja]

2 minutes ago, Wynterwolf said:

He isn't "Cap" any more.  Now he finally gets to be Steve.  

I wonder how retirement works when he spent a lifetime under the ice missing in action. A retired Captain retains the honorarium. Sort of like President Obama retains his. Now if he were actually court martialed not just wanted by the US as a Sokovia Accords signatory the question is by who with The Avengers being separated from SHIELD, the modern day SSR , after The Winter Soldier? I guess he could have had his rank stripped

[tennisgurl]

I have to say, all this discussion really hits on what I really do love about the MCU, and why it, for all its flaws, is my favorite franchise going right now: Its characters are flawed in ways that are understandable and reletable but are still likable enough that you want to see them move past their flaws. Yeah its in an over the top superhero kind of way, but, while maybe people cant really relate to creating a killer robot that goes nuts out of a misplaced desire to save the world, or being frozen in an ice burg for 70 years and coming back just in time to find himself fighting an alien invasion, I think they can relate to feeling increasingly anxious and paranoid, and letting those feelings drive away friends and family,or feeling displaced and alone in the world. The heroes do things that are stupid or morally grey or flat out wrong, but we get why they do it, and that makes their behavior more understandable than when characters just acting like assholes because a writer thinks its cool or something. The MCU is basically a whole franchise made up of maladjusted weirdos struggling with dark pasts, traumatic incidents, poor life choices, and some SERIOUS personality flaws, but still trying to be better and do the right thing anyway damn it, and I think thats been consistently well done. 

I really do think its one of the reasons why the MCU has been so massively successful and has had such staying power in popular culture. The special effects and geek references and the action are great, but the reason people sit around arguing about character motivation isn't because the characters look cool in fights scenes, but because the audience gets invested in the story. Yeah the movies might make money on the effects and geek references, without interesting characters, people would forget about them as soon as they leave the theater, or turn their TV off. But when the audience connects with the characters, they want to come back for more, and become not just an audience member, but an actual fan. Not that every character they create is golden or anything, but they have created enough three dimensional, engaging, sympathetic characters that people keep coming back to see them. 

As for Cap vs. Steve, I think some of it is people just calling him by his rank (he actually IS a Captain in the US military), but some of it does have seem to have some connection to the Legend vs Man issue he has going on. 

Edited September 12, 2017 by tennisgurl

[Which Tyler]

55 minutes ago, tennisgurl said:

I have to say, all this discussion really hits on what I really do love about the MCU, and why it, for all its flaws, is my favorite franchise going right now

...

Absolutely this, and is why the DCEU leaves me cold

[Jazzy24]

1 hour ago, tennisgurl said:

I have to say, all this discussion really hits on what I really do love about the MCU, and why it, for all its flaws, is my favorite franchise going right now: Its characters are flawed in ways that are understandable and reletable but are still likable enough that you want to see them move past their flaws. Yeah its in an over the top superhero kind of way, but, while maybe people cant really relate to creating a killer robot that goes nuts out of a misplaced desire to save the world, or being frozen in an ice burg for 70 years and coming back just in time to find himself fighting an alien invasion, I think they can relate to feeling increasingly anxious and paranoid, and letting those feelings drive away friends and family,or feeling displaced and alone in the world. The heroes do things that are stupid or morally grey or flat out wrong, but we get why they do it, and that makes their behavior more understandable than when characters just acting like assholes because a writer thinks its cool or something. The MCU is basically a whole franchise made up of maladjusted weirdos struggling with dark pasts, traumatic incidents, poor life choices, and some SERIOUS personality flaws, but still trying to be better and do the right thing anyway damn it, and I think thats been consistently well done. 

I really do think its one of the reasons why the MCU has been so massively successful and has had such staying power in popular culture. The special effects and geek references and the action are great, but the reason people sit around arguing about character motivation isn't because the characters look cool in fights scenes, but because the audience gets invested in the story. Yeah the movies might make money on the effects and geek references, without interesting characters, people would forget about them as soon as they leave the theater, or turn their TV off. But when the audience connects with the characters, they want to come back for more, and become not just an audience member, but an actual fan. Not that every character they create is golden or anything, but they have created enough three dimensional, engaging, sympathetic characters that people keep coming back to see them. 

As for Cap vs. Steve, I think some of it is people just calling him by his rank (he actually IS a Captain in the US military), but some of it does have seem to have some connection to the Legend vs Man issue he has going on. 

This is exactly why I love Marvel/MCU so much. 

I love my superheroes as much as the next person but what makes Marvel for me is everything human about these characters. I love the relationships, the personal struggles, the interactions and how Marvel focuses on the human side. 

I can honestly say that my favorite movies in the MCU is when all the characters are together like the Avengers or GOTG. I also prefer when solo movies have supporting characters like CA:WS or Civil War. Spiderman Homecoming just might be my all time favorite Marvel/superhero movie cause of how relatable, grounded and overall human it might be. Though the 1st Avengers still have a slight edge on the top spot. 

[tennisgurl]

1 hour ago, Which Tyler said:

Absolutely this, and is why the DCEU leaves me cold

That is why the DCEU has never fully landed with me either (with the exception of Wonder Woman), or at least the biggest reason. Most of the DCEU movies have focused on special effects, geek references, and preparing for future movies, instead of writing really memorable characters or stories. They spend so much time angsting or punching or talking about why their movie is So Important, that they never seem like real people the audience can relate to or like. They're just either these towering Icons we should care about because we know who they are, or they're exposition fairies. The MCU has created really likable characters with unique personalities and character arcs. Pretty much all the good guys have angst, but they also have interests and can be funny and endearing and sympathetic. They seem like, despite being super people or aliens or whatever, real people. Wonder Woman was a step in the right direction when it comes to writing actual characters and not just Icons, and it allowed the characters to actually smile and laugh and show some damn emotions besides yelling or being stoic. Or, in the case of Suicide Squad, doing things for reasons that no human can comprehend. I know people sometimes roll their eyes at the Marvel movies constant jokes (and yes, there are times they dont always land or when they should be more serious), but humor is a way to endear a character to the audience, and make them feel real, despite them being so different then the audience. When you can laugh along with a character, you can feel more empathy for them when they go through something bad, or cheer for them when they succeed. They dont always add the jokes just to add jokes, I think there is some method to it. 

Edited September 12, 2017 by tennisgurl

[Kel Varnsen]

Back when i read comics that was always the big difference between Marvel  and DC products. With a Spider-Man comic the focus was on Peter Parker with Spider-Man being just one part of his life. With Batman the focus is on Batman with Bruce Wayne being one secondary part of his life. Even Stan Lee has said that back in the 60s he realized the way to hook an oldrer crowd was to tell grounded continuing stories that people could relate too. Becuse you always knew Spidey would defeat the Sandman, but you had to keep coming back to find out if he would break up with his girlfriend.

[Jazzy24]

59 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

Back when i read comics that was always the big difference between Marvel  and DC products. With a Spider-Man comic the focus was on Peter Parker with Spider-Man being just one part of his life. With Batman the focus is on Batman with Bruce Wayne being one secondary part of his life. Even Stan Lee has said that back in the 60s he realized the way to hook an oldrer crowd was to tell grounded continuing stories that people could relate too. Becuse you always knew Spidey would defeat the Sandman, but you had to keep coming back to find out if he would break up with his girlfriend.

I'm so excited for Captain Marvel for this reason. Feign said that the focus will be on Carol and her struggles as a person, that's why they wanted Brie Larson, and that her powers and the Skull/Kree war will be secondary which I'm excited for. 

[Perfect Xero]

On 9/11/2017 at 2:48 PM, Vera said:

After Tony created Ultron without telling any of the rest of them? It would not have made sense for them to support Tony wanting to build another version of that. I think trying to sell Tony and Steve has friends should have been off the table. They are 'work friends' and two people who have a fairly complicated relationship. It should have been left there. Though I have to say, I didn't think the Russos were trying to sell them as close till Tony went 'So was I'. That took me out of the scene entirely. 
 

That's why it would help establish them as friends, knowing what someone is capable of and having faith in them to come through even when there might be logical reasons to doubt them. Instead they just rehashed Avengers 1, with Steve doubting Tony and then Tony proving himself in the end. Instead of rehashing that it would have show actual growth in their relationship and then made it more meaningful. when they started fighting in Civil War (And, honestly, trusting that Tony Stark is capable of building a machine that works right is hardly a big leap of faith).

As it stands Civil War was basically the 3rd straight movie where Cap and Tony fought and then sort of made up at the end.

Quote

But I also thought that that moment was not out of character. In Avengers, Tony is already building a tower for the team, despite having just met them. In his head, they are all close. Pepper (until CACW) and Rhodey stick by Rhodey through everything Tony has pulled ( I'm actually annoyed that S:H has T/P back together. We know why they broke up, but it's from Tony's perspective. They're getting back together is the same. At no point do we actually know what Pepper is thinking). But none of the others seem remotely interested in sticking around. They have their lives to live. Thor heads back to Asgard. Clint presumably to his family and farm. Steve and Nat work for S.H.I.E.L.D in D.C. Bruce is the only one who stuck around. He's first shown to be playing quasi-therapist to Tony and while they seem to be friends, Bruce doesn't have much of a back bone when it comes to him.

Are you talking about Stark Tower? Tony built that for himself and his clean energy research, it didn't have anything to do with the Avengers.

IMO Tony and Pepper breaking up was never anything more than the Russos heaping emotional crap on Tony so they could justify having him "snap" at the end of Civil War and try to murder a man for 10 minutes straight. That's why Homecoming undid it. It was never part of a bigger plan or meant anything about either Tony or Pepper as characters. It was a manipulation to try to make the very out of character behavior exhibited by Tony feel "earned" even when it wasn't.

Heck, I'll bet that Pepper never really broke up with Tony. Zemo probably sent him a text from a blocked number as item 49 in his plan for revenge on the Avengers."

"Tony, this is Pepper, new phone."

"Ok"

"I have to take a break from us. Don't try to contact me until you're willing to accept government oversight."

[Two Weeks Later}

"Mission Report December 16, 1991"

"The day my parents died? WTH?"

"Sorry, wrong number."

Quote

This is the dialogue from there,

Bruce Banner: So you're going for artificial intelligence and you don't want to tell the team.

Tony Stark: Right. That's right, you know why? because we don't have time for a city hall debate. I don't want to hear the "man was not meant to meddle" medley. I see a suit of armor around the world.

This isn't a situation of them actually not having the time. Tony wanted Ultron in case of a threat that was in that moment non-existent. Tony wanted to bypass all the legal and ethical discussions that should have come before he tried to combine the power in the scepter with the Iron Legion Protocol.

Asgard wanted the scepter back, they were on a time crunch to examine it before Thor went back home and they couldn't create the AI without the scepter.

[ChelseaNH]

10 hours ago, Perfect Xero said:

And, honestly, trusting that Tony Stark is capable of building a machine that works right is hardly a big leap of faith

Faith is harder when he just created a sentient robot that plans to wipe out most of humanity.

10 hours ago, Perfect Xero said:

Asgard wanted the scepter back, they were on a time crunch to examine it before Thor went back home

A time crunch of something like 3 days, not 3 hours.  Time enough to at least send a memo around.

[Vera]

On 9/12/2017 at 5:44 AM, Dandesun said:

Tony's never called him Steve. For that matter, how often has Steve called him Tony?

 

It's actually the only name Steve calls him through out CA:CW. I think it starts at the end of AoU. 

Nat and Steve consistently use first names when speaking to each other.

Steve only uses Sam's first name, while Sam alternates between Steve and Cap. As does Rhodey. Vision uses 'Captain Rogers'.

On 9/12/2017 at 8:58 AM, Wynterwolf said:

He isn't "Cap" any more.  Now he finally gets to be Steve.  

I don't know. Has anyone here read the 'Captain America vs Super Patriot' comics by Mark Gruenwald? It starts at CA #332. A good part of CA:CW has been lifted from that story.  Due to Red Skull's shenanigans,  a presidential commission known as the Commission on Superhero Activities calls Steve to the Pentagon and gives him a choice: that he as Captain America he work directly for them, acting as an agent of the US government or be relieved of his role. Steve quits. One of his reasons for doing so was that he didn't think the U.S government would send him where he needed to help. He says these words ' To serve the country your way, I would have to give up my personal freedom and place myself in a position where I might have to compromise my ideals to obey your orders.' He hands in the Shield and his uniform and leaves. He spends some time under the radar, soul-searching, grows a beard. After a while, he decides to get back into the harness and carry on as a superhero. He receives a new black uniform from Demolition-man. When he asks Tony for help in him acquiring a new shield, Tony does so. But that goes south really fast (See: Armor Wars). It's T'Challa who provides Steve with the shield he would use and Steve continues superhero-ing as 'The Captain'. He even works on re-establishing the Avengers, who had split up earlier. 

The arc ends with Steve going refusing to take the old shield and uniform back. He goes 'I have learned that I can serve my ideals---the ideals of this great country--- even without that uniform' (He does don the uniform again when the commission assigned CA replacement tells him that it was better Steve wear the uniform and do a good job, than anyone else wearing it and doing a bad one). If Steve doesn't die at the end of IW (God, I hope not!), I can see him coming to that understanding at the end of it. But I don't know if we're there yet. It's possible we may get Nomad, but I think 'The Captain' may be more likely. 

I sort of wish they used more of the above story and kept it as the State vs. The Avengers instead of Avengers v. Avengers. Wanda could still have been detained with Clint breaking her out. We could have still had a discussion amongst them over the Accords. Rhodey could still have been incapacitated. Bucky would still have been a factor. The same group of people would have been on the run at the end. Have Tony off the official roster of Avengers, so he doesn't need to sign (they could have just had him take it up again in IW), but still a part of the negotiating process that isn't going well. 

Spoilers:
 

Spoiler

Hawkeye may assume the alter ego 'Ronin'

This is something comics Hawkeye does after Civil War, so it's possible. Team Cap seem to all be taking over new identities. Blonde Natasha could be Yelena Belova. Of course, everyone could just be using their existing titles/names and I'm seeing comic connections where there are none!

Found this on Tumblr  

I think it's fairly plausible. The poster is a good indication, I think, of which characters are protecting which Stone, at least for a part of it. In the D23 footage, Strange is wearing the Eye of Agamotto, based on the green hue covering him, Tony and Gamora, they're probably protecting the Time stone. Thor and Loki probably have the Space stone (Blue hue). Tony, Hulk, and GotG were filming together according to set pics, so at some point, it looks like they'll end up together fighting Thanos.

Team Cap is probably up against the Black Order who are after Vision, who has the Mind stone (yellow hue). We see Steve catching Proxima Midnight's spear. My guess is that Steve, Nat, Sam, and Wanda are together. Once they've battled PM and CG, everyone on heads to Wakanda to fight alongside T'Challa and Bucky. 

 

 

 

 

34 minutes ago, ChelseaNH said:

Faith is harder when he just created a sentient robot that plans to wipe out most of humanity.

A time crunch of something like 3 days, not 3 hours.  Time enough to at least send a memo around.

1

Tony didn't want a discussion at all. He knew it was not going to sit well with the others. But he wanted it done, so that was it. 

 

11 hours ago, Perfect Xero said:

Are you talking about Stark Tower? Tony built that for himself and his clean energy research, it didn't have anything to do with the Avengers.

 

I'm talking about the new design for Stark Tower, Tony and Pepper unveil at the end. The one with the giant A on it.

 

Quote

IMO Tony and Pepper breaking up was never anything more than the Russos heaping emotional crap on Tony so they could justify having him "snap" at the end of Civil War and try to murder a man for 10 minutes straight. That's why Homecoming undid it. It was never part of a bigger plan or meant anything about either Tony or Pepper as characters. It was a manipulation to try to make the very out of character behavior exhibited by Tony feel "earned" even when it wasn't.

I don't know. For me, the problem isn't Tony and Pepper breaking up.  After the events in IM3 and AoU, I can buy Pepper calling it quits. The problem is we don't have her perspective on any of it though. We don't know how she feels about Tony being IM again or her thoughts on him creating Ultron. I would have liked her in both movies to hear her thoughts. She could have taken on the 'Rescue' mantle or even been there as CEO of Stark industries, the company funding the Avengers. It would have also meant more women in these movies. It was easy for them to do a break-up/make-up because one-half of the equation is off-screen. 

Which brings me to another point I just realized. Cap's people are either Avengers (Nat, Sam) or in the business (Bucky, Peggy, even Sharon). Rhodey aside, Tony's people are civilians. Neither Pepper or Happy have a stake in the Avengers really.  But that means that they get left off the canvas during the team ups. So you lose their perspective and that's a problem when Tony's perspective drives a lot of the narrative of these movies. It's not a prevalent problem with the other characters because, for them, they get a solo before each team up. Hope will suit up as Wasp before A4. There was one CA movie before each Avengers movie, the same with Thor (and we'll be seeing Hulk there!). But IM 1 & 2 take place before A1, then it's 3 before A2 and nothing before A3 & 4. 

Does any of that make sense? 

[Perfect Xero]

5 hours ago, ChelseaNH said:

Faith is harder when he just created a sentient robot that plans to wipe out most of humanity.

A time crunch of something like 3 days, not 3 hours.  Time enough to at least send a memo around.

Faith being harder is what would have made it meaningful as a progression of their relationship and more effectively set up the idea of the two of them being friends who are tragically at odds in Civil War.

A time crunch is a time crunch. Tony thought that it would take every minute they had to figure the scepter out, so there wasn't time for debate. He also didn't want to be told no. Which, again, I see as no different from Cap in CW. He didn't want to be told that putting the lives of Nigerians at risk to capture Rumlow wasn't worth it, so he didn't bother to loop them in.

3 hours ago, Vera said:

Tony didn't want a discussion at all. He knew it was not going to sit well with the others. But he wanted it done, so that was it. 

And Steve didn't want to be told no about his op in Nigeria.

Quote

I'm talking about the new design for Stark Tower, Tony and Pepper unveil at the end. The one with the giant A on it.

That's taking his tower that got wrecked by Loki and slapping a new logo on it so it can serve as HQ for their new team.

Quote

I don't know. For me, the problem isn't Tony and Pepper breaking up.  After the events in IM3 and AoU, I can buy Pepper calling it quits. The problem is we don't have her perspective on any of it though. We don't know how she feels about Tony being IM again or her thoughts on him creating Ultron. I would have liked her in both movies to hear her thoughts. She could have taken on the 'Rescue' mantle or even been there as CEO of Stark industries, the company funding the Avengers. It would have also meant more women in these movies. It was easy for them to do a break-up/make-up because one-half of the equation is off-screen. 

Which brings me to another point I just realized. Cap's people are either Avengers (Nat, Sam) or in the business (Bucky, Peggy, even Sharon). Rhodey aside, Tony's people are civilians. Neither Pepper or Happy have a stake in the Avengers really.  But that means that they get left off the canvas during the team ups. So you lose their perspective and that's a problem when Tony's perspective drives a lot of the narrative of these movies. It's not a prevalent problem with the other characters because, for them, they get a solo before each team up. Hope will suit up as Wasp before A4. There was one CA movie before each Avengers movie, the same with Thor (and we'll be seeing Hulk there!). But IM 1 & 2 take place before A1, then it's 3 before A2 and nothing before A3 & 4. 

Does any of that make sense?

I guess that I don't buy it. Tony and Pepper were still together in AoU, he seems to have 'quit' being an active Avenger by the end of AoU.

In Civil War he says he's an "active duty non-combatant" until they had to bring in Steve and his team in Germany.

I mean, why would Pepper break up with him if he wasn't actually doing Iron Man stuff anymore, she's upset that he's doing administrative stuff?

It was never anything other than a plot manipulation to make the end of Civil War work.

[scriggle]

18 hours ago, Perfect Xero said:

Asgard wanted the scepter back, they were on a time crunch to examine it before Thor went back home and they couldn't create the AI without the scepter.

42 minutes ago, Perfect Xero said:

A time crunch is a time crunch. Tony thought that it would take every minute they had to figure the scepter out, so there wasn't time for debate.

He was supposed to be studying the scepter not trying to use to create an AI.

58 minutes ago, Perfect Xero said:

And Steve didn't want to be told no about his op in Nigeria.

How do we know this was unilaterally Steve's decision? They were there as Avengers. To me that means the it was a mission that was agreed upon by the team. There's no evidence whatsoever that Steve decided to do the op and wouldn't listen to input from others or take no for an answer. If that was the case, the others didn't have to go to Nigeria if they disagreed.

 

48 minutes ago, Perfect Xero said:

I mean, why would Pepper break up with him if he wasn't actually doing Iron Man stuff anymore, she's upset that he's doing administrative stuff?

Tony explicitly states it: "I never stopped. Cause the truth is I don’t wanna stop. I don’t want to lose her. I thought maybe the Accords can split the difference."

49 minutes ago, Perfect Xero said:

It was never anything other than a plot manipulation to make the end of Civil War work.

That's a cop-out. Saying since it's written badly (which it is) then what happens is excusable. We as fans have to work with what were given on screen.

And what we're given on screen are a Steve and Tony who are not close friends. They're BFFs in the comics but the comics are not MCU canon.

[Perfect Xero]

10 minutes ago, scriggle said:

He was supposed to be studying the scepter not trying to use to create an AI.

I never said otherwise.

Quote

How do we know this was unilaterally Steve's decision? They were there as Avengers. To me that means the it was a mission that was agreed upon by the team. There's no evidence whatsoever that Steve decided to do the op and wouldn't listen to input from others or take no for an answer. If that was the case, the others didn't have to go to Nigeria if they disagreed.

It doesn't matter if the rest of the team knew or not, they're not the ones who can grant permission to operate within the borders of a sovereign nation.

Quote

Tony explicitly states it: "I never stopped. Cause the truth is I don’t wanna stop. I don’t want to lose her. I thought maybe the Accords can split the difference."

And Tony also says that he's a noncombatant, and is never otherwise shown to have suited up between the end of AoU and the airport fight in Civil War, but makes a vague comment about not stopping that is otherwise not supported by what we see on screen.

Quote

That's a cop-out. Saying since it's written badly (which it is) then what happens is excusable. We as fans have to work with what were given on screen.

I'm discussing the writing and calling out bad writing.

Quote

And what we're given on screen are a Steve and Tony who are not close friends. They're BFFs in the comics but the comics are not MCU canon.

Which I'm saying makes the movie not work particularly well.

[Wynterwolf]

5 hours ago, Vera said:

Proxima Midnight's spear

Aw, I admit I'm a little disappointed by that... I was hoping that was a new toy.  

Thanks for the comic's background, Vera!  Re: Steve - I wonder if the idea of Nomad might be a little easier to create cameos for going forward (providing he doesn't die), given the contract situation?  Given the comic background, would that make sense?  I think The Captain might require a bigger commitment, story & time wise. and from the interviews I've seen, CE seems open to continue, but not to making a big commitment.  

5 hours ago, Vera said:

The problem is we don't have her perspective on any of it though.

That is what I would love to know, even if it's just a deleted scene from S:H.   

Edited September 14, 2017 by Wynterwolf

[scriggle]

45 minutes ago, Perfect Xero said:

I never said otherwise.

You did. I quoted your post:

19 hours ago, Perfect Xero said:

Asgard wanted the scepter back, they were on a time crunch to examine it before Thor went back home and they couldn't create the AI without the scepter.

 

45 minutes ago, Perfect Xero said:

It doesn't matter if the rest of the team knew or not, they're not the ones who can grant permission to operate within the borders of a sovereign nation.

It was framed as it being all on Steve. That Steve wouldn't take no for an answer. I'm simply pointing out the onus isn't solely on Steve. It's on the Avengers as a group. And that includes Tony even if he is no longer actively avengering.

 

45 minutes ago, Perfect Xero said:

And Tony also says that he's a noncombatant, and is never otherwise shown to have suited up between the end of AoU and the airport fight in Civil War, but makes a vague comment about not stopping that is otherwise not supported by what we see on screen.

He destroyed all the suits in IM3 as a way to prove himself to Pepper and yet he's suited up in AoU. He didn't go for too long before he was making suits again.

Tony admits part of his motivation for signing the Accords is to get Pepper back. It's not a vague comment.

45 minutes ago, Perfect Xero said:

Which I'm saying makes the movie not work particularly well.

Feige was so hot on doing the CW storyline as a way to one up BvS, he didn't really consider the fact that they hadn't done the work up front to make us believe Tony and Steve were any thing more than work friends who annoyed the hell out of each other and thereby Feige screwed up the final movie in the Cap trilogy.

Edited September 14, 2017 by scriggle

[Kel Varnsen]

8 hours ago, Vera said:

Commission on Superhero Activities calls Steve to the Pentagon and gives him a choice: that he as Captain America he work directly for them, acting as an agent of the US government or be relieved of his role. Steve quits. One of his reasons for doing so was that he didn't think the U.S government would send him where he needed to help. He says these words ' To serve the country your way, I would have to give up my personal freedom and place myself in a position where I might have to compromise my ideals to obey your orders.' He hands in the Shield and his uniform and leaves. 

Even that story seems like it would bug me for the same reason the accords debate did. In this case, the freedom to be a super hero/vigilante is not a real thing. It is not some basic right people have like freedom of speech.

[VCRTracking]

If Red Sparrow starring Jennifer Lawrence ends up being a hit I'm going to be so mad Marvel stalled on making a Black Widow movie:

[Vera]

I haven't read the books, but that looks like a rip-off.

[Perfect Xero]

On 9/13/2017 at 8:43 PM, scriggle said:

You did. I quoted your post:

Right, but what Tony was supposed to be doing or not doesn't change the fact that he was under a time crunch to do the thing he thought needed to be done.

Quote

He destroyed all the suits in IM3 as a way to prove himself to Pepper and yet he's suited up in AoU. He didn't go for too long before he was making suits again.

Tony admits part of his motivation for signing the Accords is to get Pepper back. It's not a vague comment.

The comment itself isn't vague (my bad), more that it's vague within the story for me. I just don't think it matches with what was actually shown at the end of AoU, for that matter it doesn't really match with Tony not being in suit in Lagos and calling himself a noncombatant in Civil War. Tony says that he can't stop, but everything else we see indicate that he had.

Quote

Feige was so hot on doing the CW storyline as a way to one up BvS, he didn't really consider the fact that they hadn't done the work up front to make us believe Tony and Steve were any thing more than work friends who annoyed the hell out of each other and thereby Feige screwed up the final movie in the Cap trilogy.

I recall that the original plan for Civil War had Tony in a much more minor role because they weren't sure that RDJr would want to do a full movie. In that case I can imagine them pulling off Steve/Sam/Buck Vs Ross/Zemo with Widow and Carter pulling the double agent thing and Panther still on his revenge quest with "The Accords" in place to explain why they don't just go to Tony or the rest of the team for help. Heck, they could have actually developed Sharron as a love interest instead of, "Oh, hey, you spied on me and are related to the woman I had a thing for back in the day? Want to make out?"

[Wynterwolf]

From this interview, it looks like there will be a lot of 1 on 1 scenes between Tony and Steve in IW.  So it sounds like IW is going to do for Tony & Steve's relationship what WS did for Nat and Steve's relationship.  Which makes me even more annoyed we didn't get more conversation between Bucky & Steve on the quinjet in CW.  And I still wonder if Steve is even going to know Bucky is out of the freezer before he eventually shows up in Wakanda (or if that might be handled in a mid/end credit scene from Black Panther).  

[scriggle]

Originally Cap3 was supposed to be a direct sequel to Cap2.

How ‘Captain America 3’ got turned on its head

Quote

When Captain America: The Winter Soldier came out, it seemed pretty obvious where its sequel was going: Steve Rogers would track down the Winter Soldier, A.K.A. Bucky Barnes.

<snip>

One year later, the cast and concept of Captain America 3 are practically unrecognizable. Starring Robert Downey Jr. and almost certainly launching Sony’s new Spider-Man as well, the freshly titled Captain America: Civil War...

<snip>

Variety reported last year that in earlier drafts of Captain America 3, Iron Man had a minor role. But Robert Downey Jr., a notorious shark when it comes to contract negotiations, demanded more screentime. Something similar happened with The Avengers, when he leveraged Iron Man’s popularity (and his own status as an irreplaceable star) to get a $50 million paycheck while at least one of his superhero co-stars got a mere $200,000. 

At one point the Captain America talks got so fractious that the CEO of Marvel Entertainment requested that Tony Stark be written out of the film, but things were eventually ironed out to everyone’s satisfaction. Downey got the lead role he wanted, and Marvel Studios president Kevin Feige (the creative head of the franchise) decided to introduce Civil War, a storyline that will impact every earthbound Marvel movie for years to come.

<snip>

Captain America 3 was planned as a conclusion to the trilogy, but it went through an abrupt transformation in late 2014. With Robert Downey Jr. pushing for a lead role, the best choice of inspiration was obviously Civil War. It was a sound business decision (Downey sells tickets), with the unfortunate side effect of completely derailing the emotional arc set up by the first two movies.

<snip>

Back in August, the Russo brothers were still saying that the next movie would be a direct sequel to The Winter Soldier, exploring Bucky Barnes’ new life as a brainwashed supersoldier.

“Is the Winter Soldier the world’s most dangerous assassin that’s ever lived or the world’s longest serving P.O.W.?” wondered Anthony Russo. “Is he responsible for his actions since he was turned into the Winter Soldier, or is he innocent by reason of insanity? Those are the really complicated relationship questions and philosophical questions and emotional questions that intrigued us moving forward.”

It’s clear from Captain America: The Winter Soldier that the filmmakers had thought long and hard about Bucky Barnes, drawing parallels between Captain America and the Winter Soldier’s lives and origin stories. Like any good pairing between hero and antagonist, they complement each other thematically—but with the added bonus that they were childhood friends. The smart money was on a third film focusing on the Winter Soldier’s rehabilitation: a redemption arc for Bucky Barnes and closure for Steve Rogers.

Then in October 2014, Robert Downey Jr. started making public appearances teasing the return of Tony Stark, first in Iron Man 4 (which is yet to be confirmed), and then in Captain America 3.  Mid-production rewrites are hardly unusual for this type of movie, but the scale of the Marvel franchise makes things decidedly more complicated. Fans knew that with Downey onboard, they were surely headed for Civil War. 

As of now, Civil War‘s cast is gargantuan. Just counting the superheroes, the movie includes the Winter Soldier, Black Widow, Falcon, Crossbones, Black Panther, Hawkeye and (almost certainly) the new Spider-Man. With that many characters onscreen, the Winter Soldier’s arc will either be recycled into a background subplot, or shunted into a later movie—most likely after Chris Evans has left the franchise. 

None of this means Civil War will be a bad film, although it does highlight something that Marvel fans would do well to remember. While Marvel Studios has earned unprecedented popularity as a Hollywood brand, its creative decisions are geared toward financial success, just like any other studio. So if Civil War turns out to be an unsatisfying conclusion to The Winter Soldier, fans have an all-too pragmatic explanation to blame: Robert Downey Jr.’s contract negotiations.

And the bolded section is why I am still pissed that Feige decided to shoehorn the Civil War storyline into the final movie of the Cap trilogy. Steve deserved his last solo movie to be just that: a solo movie. One that completed the story arc set up in the previous 2 movies.

I look at it this way. Each of the original big 3 franchises had its own supporting cast that was consistent through the series.

1. IM1 established its core cast: Pepper, Rhodey, JARVIS, and Happy. It also introduced Coulson.
2. IM2 had its core cast and introduced Natasha and Fury.
3. IM3 had its core cast.

1. Thor1 established its core cast: Loki, Jane, Selvig, and the other Asgardians plus Coulson. Also introduced Clint.
2. Thor2 had its core cast.
3. Thor3 has its core cast plus Banner.

Cap's movies are tricky because of the time jump.

1. Cap1 established its core cast: Peggy, Bucky, and the Howling Commandos plus a cameo by Fury.
2. Cap2 established its core cast Bucky, Natasha, Sam, and Sharon plus Fury and Hill.
3. Cap3 had its core cast plus Tony, Clint, Vision, Scott, Wanda, Rhodey, & Thunderbolt Ross plus introducing T'Challa, Peter, & Everett Ross. (Look at this character list. It's an Avengers movie.)

Neither Tony nor Thor had to share the lead in their final film with another of the original big 3. Steve not only had to share the lead (of his last eponymous film) with Tony, Cap3 also introduced two major characters with upcoming films.

So, still bitter.

[scriggle]

3 minutes ago, Wynterwolf said:

From this interview, it looks like there will be a lot of 1 on 1 scenes between Tony and Steve in IW.  So it sounds like IW is going to do for Tony & Steve's relationship what WS did for Nat and Steve's relationship.  Which makes me even more annoyed we didn't get more conversation between Bucky & Steve on the quinjet in CW.  And I still wonder if Steve is even going to know Bucky is out of the freezer before he eventually shows up in Wakanda (or if that might be handled in a mid/end credit scene from Black Panther).  

Color me less than thrilled.

The Russos have also said that another relationship would be central to IW.

Spoiler

The Relationship Between Captain America & Bucky Barnes Will Be Central To 'Avengers: Infinity War'

 

Quote

Spoiler

 

Anthony Russo: "The other relationship that’s still exciting to us is, again, Cap and Bucky. The wonderful thing about ['Infinity War'], which started in 'Winter Soldier,' is that Cap had a belief in him, that there’s still a human being inside the Winter Soldier that he can save and that he can reach, and he’s gone to incredible lengths now, with incredible faith, that that’s waiting for him if he goes there."

The Russos' last outing saw Steve finding the human being inside of the Winter Soldier, so what now? Of course it's not that easy, as we saw in Civil War, the Winter Soldier still exists inside that human too.

There's no easy snap back to 1942 and the camaraderie and closeness that the two had back then. Because for all intents and purposes, Bucky as we knew him in The First Avenger no longer exists.

Anthony Russo: "[Steve's] found that human being inside Bucky Barnes, but who is that guy going forward? Just because he’s found and he’s there, he’s still this crazy, bastard hybrid of who he used to be in 'The First Avenger' and this killing machine.Joe Russo: "If he’s not Bucky Barnes or The Winter Soldier, then who he is?"Anthony Russo: "He’s somebody new now. What kind of relationship will him and Cap have moving forward?"

These are the questions that Infinity War will answer. Like the Russo brothers putting a firm Captain America stamp on the Civil War arc of the comics, it looks like they're going to do something similar with Infinity War. And if it turns out half as well as Civil War did, well, we can't wait to see what happens next for the two men out of time.

 

 

Then there's this:

‘Avengers: Infinity War’: The Russo Brothers Reveal Three Relationships They Want to Explore

Quote

Spoiler

 

Anthony Russo: I would also say Captain America and Iron Man is central. Can those guys ever repair their relationship? What is their relationship ever going to be like moving forward from this?

Joe Russo: Should they repair it?

Anthony Russo: That’s as complicated as anything. The other relationship that’s still exciting to us is, again, Cap and Bucky. The wonderful thing about this movie, which started in Winter Soldier, is that Cap had a belief in him, that there’s still a human being inside the Winter Soldier that he can save and that he can reach, and he’s gone to incredible lengths now, with incredible faith, that that’s waiting for him if he goes there. He’s found that human being inside Bucky Barnes, but who is that guy going forward? Just because he’s found and he’s there, he’s still this crazy, bastard hybrid of who he used to be in The First Avenger and this killing machine.

Joe Russo: If he’s not Bucky Barnes or The Winter Soldier, then who he is?

Anthony Russo: He’s somebody new now. What kind of relationship will him and Cap have moving forward?

 

 

I will not be holding my breath waiting for anything related to the above to happen. I fully expect IW to be the Tony/Quill/Strange show.

[Wynterwolf]

This article (from August 4th) has speculation on Phase 4 with a potential "new franchise" in August 2020... but they would totally make it up to me if that was a Bucky focused stand alone, with Steve (as whomever... Nomad, The Captain, Cap... I'm not picky) and Nat, Sam & T'Challa as superhero support.  (yes, I realize how unlikely that is... I can still dream.  And I want a pony.  No, not a live one, but a huggable stuffed one).  

 

eta - yeah, both of those articles are from 2016... I suspect a lot has changed.  

Edited September 15, 2017 by Wynterwolf

[scriggle]

5 minutes ago, Wynterwolf said:

This article (from August 4th) has speculation on Phase 4 with a potential "new franchise" in August 2020... but they would totally make it up to me if that was a Bucky focused stand alone, with Steve (as whomever... Nomad, The Captain, Cap... I'm not picky) and Nat, Sam & T'Challa as superhero support.  (yes, I realize how unlikely that is... I can still dream.  And I want a pony.  No, not a live one, but a huggable stuffed one).  

I think you're more likely to get the pony than a standalone Bucky movie.

I wouldn't mind a one-shot Black Widow & Hawkeye movie. I want to know what happened in Budapest.

[Wynterwolf]

Just now, scriggle said:

I wouldn't mind a one-shot Black Widow & Hawkeye movie. I want to know what happened in Budapest.

With Red Sparrow, I suspect the Black Widow boat has sailed.  

[JustaPerson]

With all that craziness, it's a miracle Civil War turned out okay and not like BvS.

[Shannon L.]

Harry Dean Stanton, the actor who played the security guard in The Avengers ("Well then, son, you've got a condition") died today at age 91.  Mark Ruffalo wrote this on his FB page along with a clip of a longer scene with Harry that was edited out.  I can't seem to link the FB page, but you are on FB and search for Mark, you can see the video.

 

Quote

I worked with him on Avengers "Assembled" which was one of those magical once in a lifetime career moments where you are standing next to a giant and a legend and sharing a frame with him and sharing your heart with him and sharing a precious moment with him.

We spent the entire day together running lines talking about the scene, talking about wanting to find something to do together in the future. Today that is no longer a possibility. These magical moments, the ones that whisper to you their importance as they are happening. The ones that jump out and tell you that you are in a rarefied space, that imprint deeper than other memories or experiences, that lock themselves in and become a part of the patch work of stories that ones calls a "Life", they are such precious things. It's easy to take for granted at the time how precious they are, one believes there will be another go at it, another chance to catch the light of a star in the palm of your hand in the span of an afternoon while working on a major motion picture, tucked off from the others, in a sacred cinematic space, where time is inconsequential and there is no camera, and their is no crew, and there are no words, there is only truth and listening and talking. That is what it was like with Harry. His humility, his commitment to acting, his generosity of spirit his kindly vulnerability were all exceptional. He was an exceptional man and I am honored to say that i got to share the screen with him albeit briefly. To date, it is still one of my favorite moments in film making. Today I treasure it even more. When we left each other that day we said, "See you again. I look forward to it." That never came to pass, but he passed away I wish we had a chance to do it all again. So long Harry Dean, thank you for the gift of your films, your music and your being. God broke the mold on you.

Rest In Peace. Poet.

Edited September 16, 2017 by Shannon L.

[Morrigan2575]

Shame about Harry Dean Stanton he was a such a Hollywood main stay, Escape from New York, Pretty in Pink, and Red Dawn (80s)

[Vera]

I think this counts as a spoiler:

 

Spoiler

Looks like CEvans and Brie Larson are filming together

 

[HunterHunted]

We've seen our first outright disaster in the Marvel universe--Inhumans. It is thankfully not particularly connected to the rest of the universe even the TV stuff. 

[Kel Varnsen]

54 minutes ago, HunterHunted said:

We've seen our first outright disaster in the Marvel universe--Inhumans. It is thankfully not particularly connected to the rest of the universe even the TV stuff. 

It seems like it was designed for disaster. They took one of the more tricky, out there marvel properties, and gave it to the show runner who was in charge of Iron Fist. Then they decide to release it in IMAX, but shoot in on a tv budget and shoot the whole thing over a span of 2 weeks.  

I really don't understand how they expected anyone to pay money to see it in a premium theatre, when the same pilot would be on tv less than a month later.

[Captain Carrot]

I'm thinking that Perlmutter was the only one that wanted it made. From everything I've heard he's the one that wants everything to be as cheap as possible, and seems to be stuck in an 80's mindset on how things work. My guess is that others like Fiege have to fight to offset Perlmutter's influence, and they didn't bother to this time. Maybe they didn't care, or maybe they want it to fail so that Disney will retire Perlmutter. (And yes this is probably just wishful thinking).

[Wynterwolf]

I admit I didn't even check it out, partly because of the bad reviews, but mostly because of how terrible it looked in the promos, and that fact that it was done by the Iron Fist guy (which I did check out and it was terrible).  I am interested to check out The Gifted tonight, though.  

[benteen]

Marvel has been trying to make the Inhumans work for a while now but they are NEVER going to replace the X-Men.

[Dandesun]

1 hour ago, benteen said:

Marvel has been trying to make the Inhumans work for a while now but they are NEVER going to replace the X-Men.

It seemed like they finally gave up on that notion in the comics. And I do think that a lot of the Inhumans push was due to Perlmutter and his idea that giving the X-Men any positive spotlight was basically Marvel writing stories that Fox could turn into money making movies. Apparently, that really got his goat.

(Never mind the sheer amount of amazing that the X-movies have absolutely squandered over the years but that's another rant for another thread.)

And I don't have anything against the Inhumans per se. There have been storylines in the past that I've quite liked. And, come on, Lockjaw. Hey, if they went with some animated version of Lockjaw and the Pet Avengers (which included Redwing - Falcon's falcon, Frog Thor - exactly how it sounds... well, more to it than that actually, Hairball - Speedball's cat, Zabu - Kazar's sabre-tooth tiger, Lockheed - Kitty Pryde's alien dragon buddy and Ms. Lion - the dog from the old Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends cartoon.) Except, you know, they wouldn't be able to use Lockheed because he's firmly entrenched in the X-Universe. Hell, that crew even went after the Infinity Stones!!

Still, the push for the Inhumans in the past decade has probably done more to damage the property than anything else. Aside from the fact that Kamala Khan is fucking AWESOME the whole idea of taking a property that Marvel fans are absolutely hardcore about (the X-Men inspire ferocious loyalty) and actively trying to replace them... no. And when they tried to meld the different aspects of the Marvel Universe in the comics that didn't work out so well because you had situations where you had to explain why Captain America and the Avengers 'Earth's Mightiest Heroes' just blithely stood by while their friends and allies were brutally marginalized by their government and its citizens. (To be fair, regular citizens of the Marvel Universe are pretty much assholes.) And it's also why I was never able to even remotely side with Tony Stark during the Civil War comic storyline because mutant registration was the catalyst to every single dystopian future the X-Men ever had (and they've got a lot of them.)

Meanwhile, the Inhumans are really really fucked up with their Terrigen Mist and their treatment of those who DON'T develop super powers because of it. It's wildly classist and there was even a question of what Lockjaw actually was for a time. At this point, he's a giant pug/bulldog with a tuning fork on his head that can teleport. He's basically a big slobbery bundle of love but the rest of them? Questionable.

So, yeah, it was never going to work and I think some of that bled over into the television show attempt. Although, to be fair, the show itself looked pretty awful from jump.

[benteen]

Kamala is awesome and the one great connection to come out of the Inhumans.