>Marvel’s original plan was to keep three major characters around as a "familiar umbrella" under which new heroes could grow – Chadwick Boseman’s Black Panther, Brie Larson’s Captain Marvel, and Tom Holland’s Spider-Man. At one point during the filming of AVENGERS: ENDGAME, the trio sat together and said aloud, "Look at us, the future of the MCU." Unfortunately, this didn’t work out as intended, with Boseman passing away, Larson not connecting with enough fans, and Holland caught in a contract war between Marvel Studios and Sony Pictures. The authors finish the panel by saying the MCU is still looking for their new "face", having joked earlier, "Is there a dump truck with enough money to dump in front of Robert Downey Jr.'s house and ask for him back?"
https://thestreamr.com/2023/10/13/mcu-the-reign-of-marvel-studios-nycc-2023-panel-breakdown/
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
how fricking delusional do you have to be to think captain marvel would have been the future of the MCU after that shitty movie
It still made 1 billion dollars at the box office, and numbers are all that matters.
clearly not given the current situation
I almost hope the new Marvels underperforms, Chuds desperately need a win. It would console their hopeless lives.
At least you Carolgays are finally accepting that her first film's financial success was a fluke.
CM came out between IF and endgame at the height of the mcu
It was forced hype marketing and full of delusional of the reality of how stupid and boring the film was along with her shitty acting.
She was a better actor when she was younger which is strange.
The movie was great and she was fantastic in it and only incels think otherwise.
And if the new movie crashes at the box office, will you you blame the incels?
Let's be honest; if it makes $1 less than the first one half of Cinemaphile will be posting endless OHNONONONONO threads, and it's a hard road surpass the peak year MCU movies (of which Cpt Marvel was one). Really only NWH managed it, with the cast of half a dozen movies.
You're only half right. There will be box office shills/shitposters/tv frickheads posting that garbage no matter what the results are. We know what the actual organic interest in carol, kamala and photon are, from the generals, and the storytimes, which is to say, pretty fricking weak support here.
Loved her in 21 Jump Street but yeah she is just boring nowadays
>people kept flooding in after day 1 where everyone knew what the movie was about
At this point I believe the theories that Marrl bought out theaters to hype the film up because I have never heard anyone ever talk about it exceptthe occasional guy shitting on it.
I sat in a pretty full theater watching it, everything Marvel that year was filling up theaters.
Disney had the best year in theaters that any studio has ever, ever had, they had something like 40% of total worldwide box office which is unheard of.
I absolutely do not believe that
But it ONLY made ONE billlion at a time when the "Marvel Studios" logo was a near-guarantee of TWICE that much.
But it filtered a lot of gaygets like
And they use their mommies credit card to buy merchandise so they have a voice
bought their own tickets
>It still made 1 billion dollars at the box office, and numbers are all that matters.
Captain Marvel came out when Disney was purchasing 20th Century Fox thru a stock swap.
If Captain Marvel had “bombed”, the stock price of Disney would have lowered, resulting in Disney having to turn over more stock, and a larger amount of control, to the owners of 20th Century Fox.
The conspiracy theories about Disney buying out theaters to boost ticket sales, could quite possibly be true.(or maybe one or more large Disney shareholders).
I presume the Fox shareholders were also pulling their own schemes to lower Disney stock prices.
It was before the shitty movie
The movie was a huge hit and got an A cinemascore.
So did Ant Man and the Wasp and that bombed
>So did Ant Man and the Wasp and that bombed
Bombed hard enough to have the two characters lead the first big event film of phase 4. Makes you think.
>that bombed
No, it didn't.
>Anons spend every chance they can screaming that CM bombed
>When the same thing is said about a movie that made LESS than CM, they go "Nuh-uh."
Frickin' love this place. Captain Marvel was a boring ass movie but you homosexuals act like it nearly killed the MCU
but CM bombed in my head, remember all the youtubers seething when it came out, surely it didn't make more than a billion dollars
I know right? Surely a vocal minority is more important than whatever number multiple goddamn sites are telling me.
>Why is anon talking to him
>ACTIVATED MY TRAP CARD!
>once from my pc
>and once from my phone!
I never said Captain Marvel bombed, though.
Nobody is saying the Captain Marvel movie bombed, we all know it made a billion dollars. We're saying it was a bad movie and that the character of Carol Danvers is ill suited to replace Tony Stark as the face of the MCU. You're welcome to argue those points.
I think I heard they wanted Carol Danvers to be like a female Tony Stark but they forgot to give her his charisma. She's like Stark if he had no sense of humor basically. If she'd been more outgoing she might've gone over better. Instead she's standoffish and stoic on top of not being particularly well developed. But was Brie ever good casting for that type of character? I think Feige's first mistake was casting her, and he was the one that personally picked her which doesn't normally happen in the MCU and it's gone pretty badly.
Not to say that the character couldn't have been salvaged but they've literally done nothing with her since Endgame. And even that was a cameo pretty much.
>I think I heard they wanted Carol Danvers to be like a female Tony Stark
They wanted everyone to be "a Tony Stark", let's be honest. WB started turning Batman into Tony Stark in an attempt to salvage the DCEU. They even made The Flash his "Iron Boy".
Everyone wanted that RDjr mojo.
That's definitely true with Doctor Strange. I like the character from the comics, I'm not sure if he should carry a movie as the MC or if he does it should be in more of a Doc Brown/Doctor Who role where he has more mystique. But instead they made him magic Tony Stark. I personally would've skipped for the origin for him. They could've explored it down the line through the eyes of his student like Zelma/Casey or whoever his sidekick POV character would be.
They've pushed Strange pretty hard after Endgame since they can use him as a vehicle for multiverse stories and he's the only character who went over well that Marvel fully own, excluding Black Panther for obvious reasons. Because Captain Marvel didn't connect and Spider-Man isn't fully theirs. So he is the closest thing to their Tony Stark right now.
It helps that while they have broadly similar origin stories - a genius but also a narcissist who suffers a terrible accident and has to relearn to connect with people - they still end up going different directions. Tony began as and stayed as a jokester, though would get serious when needed. Strange began as a stick in the mud who acted like considering anyone else's point of view was actual poison to him, but became more sociable while still being serious all the time. He'll mock someone occasionally, but it's more in the vein of "you're an idiot and you fricked up" than how Tony snarks just for the sake of being a wiseass.
The thing about Strange is that he’s portrayed as a know-it-all where as as Stark still had plenty of room to make mistakes that humble him.
I did like Strange's arc in the original film. I actually think the movie is a little underrated but it doesn't get as much attention bc it's not as joke heavy (there's some forced MCU humor imo) but still not a ton of gags that stand out. I was disappointed they didn't go more esoteric and weird though. Raimi brought a little of the vibe I'd been missing from the first movie but then the trade off there was that we didn't really get a legit Doctor Strange story.
I'd like a Strange movie where Raimi has more creative control. Derrikson is okay but I think he's more modern horror. And I like Raimi's style more for Strange since I think it should have more of retro b-movie feel.
My only issue with the movie is that the lady was still skeptical after she saw magic.
>forgot to give her his charisma
They also forgot to give her his vulnerability. The appealing part of Tony Stark is not that he's just "le funny man" but also the fact that he walks a nice balanced line between being an invincible death machine and being incredibly fragile. Tony Stark was someone who could effortlessly fight an army of armed men one second and get fricked up by a villain with an appropriate tech (Obadiah, Vanko, etc) so he has to actually struggle.
There was nothing like that in Carol, she's everything people who never read Superman meme about Superman being boring.
They also forgot to give her humanizing moments where she gets pushed around, because she's not good enough, as a person and as a superhero and needs to improve.
>So did Ant Man and the Wasp and that bombed
It did not bomb but Ant-Man and Wasp was not marketed in any special way, Captain Marvel was being marketed as if she was important to Endgame. The reality is Ant-Man and Wasp was the important movie, and Captain Marvel was fricking NOTHING.
Apparently they thought Quantumania would be a hit.
Imagine if Thanos was introduced by jobbing to ANTS. People were already sort of making fun of Thanos for not doing jack shit while other people went and grabbed the Infinity Stones with no practical reprisal from him, personally. But at least on his proper debut he made a good WWE-style reference.
ANTS were so powerful that they had to be written out of Endgame's final battle because they would have won the entire thing with zero casualties lmao
DUBS
DUBS
DUBS
CHECK EM
Ant-Sama have mercy
AAAAAIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEE ANT-SAMA PLEASEEEE HAVE MERCY
IIRC Ant-Man & The Wasp underperformed due to a staggered international release, so it wouldn't overlap with some other big Disney release, and to delay it until after the soccer World Cup in some territories. This meant that leaks, spoilers and pirated clips were all over the internet for weeks before it's release in some nations.
b-but the future is female?
They could have gone with Wanda, but they have pretty much ruined her.
they made her hot as an evil b***h, which is all that matters
I don't get how they thought it would work, regardless of the quality of the movie.
She has no connection to the other characters, she comes off as an isolationist. How was she supposed to be the phase of a bunch of heroes she didn't interact with in her own movie, just met as a minor cameo in End Game, then never saw again?
because she has Marvel in her name.
Even in the new movie, she seems the least interesting of the main cast.
You have to remember that these people likely never even seen the movies, have no interest in these movies, they have no clue nor care. It's a numbers game, and the numbers are based on whatever their staff feed them.
They fricked up so badly not making a Mar-Vell movie first. It could have been original.
>fan fiction
Captain Marvel made a billion dollars and is about to make another billion
>and is about to make another billion
Not even close. It's tracking to do worse than Antman 3.
Tom is their biggest name and earner and they're still wishy-washy over renewing his contract with a buttload of money
They renewed his contract last year.
Yeah and he still had to play the "I'm not that interested in playing Spider-Man anymore" card on them to increase his negotiating ability and salary, when he should be their new RDJ
Well it can't be easy when your current top guy requires being married to Sony.
One has to think the reason the mcu trilogy is a success is because spider-man films aren't tied down to one studio. Sony and marvel seem to filter between each other where it reaches a middle ground on the direction for spider-man
>The authors finish the panel by saying the MCU is still looking for their new "face"
Who do you guys think it’ll be?
Tom according to the previous Secret War leaks
what leaks
A long hiatus
Brie of course
Brie failed. She's getting a pity sequel that only exists to prop up her diversity replacements.
Reed.
Who do they really have right now that can carry it? Tom can't be their go to guy from a business perspective. Could maybe do Strange but I don't know if the actor would be in on it. Reed is too far out and I don't know if his actor can pull it off. We already saw how Sam and Bucky fair, and no way in hell they would even attempt John Walker. Marc won't work, Loki won't work, Thor no. Just not a good line up.
Brie can and will.
It still can be Tom, They have him signed for an entire whole triology and the next big team up events. Thats more than enough time for him to be the face and then pass it on to another hero. Spider-man is like the last thing I care about in the MCU.
If they were smart enough to go by what characters fans responded to, it would have been Scarlet Witch and, to a lesser extent, Vision but they decisively screwed the pooch on that that, and Olsen is pretty ambivalent about continuing as Wanda.
Wanda was popular after WandaVision but it made her controversial too. She has her "stans" that love everything she does but then a lot of people think she got off too easy to Westview and then her going full villain in Multiverse of Madness made that worse. As cool as she was in that film as a villain at times I think for the sake of her character she should've been an ally for Strange and tried to atone which I think was the original plot at one point. Now if Wanda does come back she has to make up for Westview and her Darkhold bs.
At this point I kind of only expect her to return in a supporting role capacity for Wiccan's and White Vision's stories and then maybe she does something heroic in Kang Dynasty/Secret Wars. But I think the ship has sailed on a Wanda movie or another series about her. Plus they're giving her redemption arc story to Agatha really. Which is WandaVision S2 in all but name.
To a degree, it's the consequences of them having an unintended hit that became a bigger and more popular than they ever expected or planned for, and stubbornly refusing to change course. But they'd have known how audience's responded to Wanda's big moment in Endgame, so they have no excuse for not figuring out people liked her. Just doing some kind of redemption arc story for her after WandaVision would have silenced most of the haters outside of the ones who just seem to have carried over their hatred of the comic character to the movies, or hate the actress for some reason.
As it is, nobody seems to be aware they made a mistake, and the longer they leave things without doing any kind of damage control, the harder it'll be to get that audience back. I'm not sure what sort of audience there is for WandaVision sequels and spinoffs without the lead character, with nobody knowing if she'll even be back, and the fanbase still angry at what happened to her.
Yeah I fully believe they sleepwalked into the Wanda thing. They didn't know WandaVision was going to be such a hit and she'd take off like that. I think the pandemic had a role in them not course correcting quicker. The MCU was always less planning like some believe and more about leaving the door open wide enough so that they can change their mind about things while making it seem to the audience like it's going to plan. And I feel like after WV had the MCU been firing on all cylinders they wouldn't have done what they did to her in MoM.
But like I said the weird thing is she was an ally in the earlier versions of DS2. It was going to be more of a team-up film. So I didn't get that change. Plus Nightmare would've been a better villain. Shame they threw out all of Derrikson's ideas. Raimi did do some good stuff in DS2 but I think a lot of it was guided more by Feige and the Marvel machine. Much like Captain America 3 morphed into a mini-Avengers movie aka civil war because of Batman v Superman, Doctor Strange's sequel became this weird multiverse event thing. tbh I'm surprised it had as much Strange and Christine stuff in in it as it did.
>They didn't know WandaVision was going to be such a hit and she'd take off like that.
Even before that they had to have known people liked her and wouldn't respond well to her being turned into a villain. But it seems like Feige was 100% committed to that from the moment she was introduced "because it happened in the comics" like he's incapable of discerning which comic stories are good and worth adapting.
It's hard to believe they thought having a heroine turn bad because she went baby crazy would actually fly with 2020s audiences.
tbh I never thought she was a big deal to fans prior to Phase 4. She'd always been on the sideliines in the Avengers movies and Civil War. Her romance with Vision wasn't that well developed. She was essentially an X-Men character who'd been shoehorned into the Avengers-verse and they couldn't settle on whether she used magic or something else. It wasn't until WandaVision that her character really blew up I think. It recontextualized her role in the MCU. People realized how tragic her backstory was and they finally leaned into the magical aspect. Gave her a stronger identity instead of red telekinesis lady on the Avengers.
And i don't mind them taking some inspiration from the comics there with her having mental health issues and PTSD but they didn't have to go full villain with her just because that was the comics. And the comics hadn't treated her well for years anyway. Feirge's blind irreverence to the comics let him down there. Which is weird because he usually changes so much.
>I never thought she was a big deal to fans prior to Phase 4.
She'd been a supporting character, but one audiences liked, and she got a big crowd-pleasing moment in Endgame.
>Her romance with Vision wasn't that well developed.
Them both being underused meant a lot of it happened off-panel, but by Civil War and Infinity War fans were clearly responding to it well.
>She was essentially an X-Men character who'd been shoehorned into the Avengers-verse
Oh come on. She was an X-Men character in the comics for five issues, then an Avengers character ever since, from 1965 onwards. The MCU adapting her successfully showed how unimportant and irrelevant her pre-Avengers comic history really is. It's as important to her as debuting in a Hulk story is to Wolverine, despite Marvel's current writers and editors perverse fixation on it.
You're right that things really blew up with WandaVision, it took her from a popular supporting character to one of their most popular characters. And then they sabotaged her.
>it took her from a popular supporting character to one of their most popular characters. And then they sabotaged her.
>there seemed to be alot of momentum for a solo Scarlet Witch movie, but MoM seems to have killed that stone dead.
Personally, I blame Bendis for this
In the comics, sure. But this happening in the MCU is 100% on Feige. He treated a comic story like Hydra Cap with the respect it deserved in Endgame, there's zero reason for him to be planning to sabotage and wreck Wanda "because it happened in the comics", and be planning it from the moment Whedon brought her in.
Even before WandaVision they should have known this was a bad idea, it very much seems like the man in charge wanted it, so nobody dared actually tell him this was moronic.
My mind went completely blank about her being one of the og Avengers for some reason , you're right. And they already cut Wasp from the first Avengers movie (Zoe Deschanel?) so they could've played up Wanda as a leading female Avenger after Black Widow and also Vision a lot more than they did before Infinity War/Endgame. But there was a lot going on in Civil War so they didn't get as much time do heroics outside of the ending to Age of Ultron where they were introduced. They never quite felt part of the team to me. Wanda had more of a friendship with Hawkeye but that's all they had time for really.
So I think similar to Black Widow it's a shame they finally gave her a solo project but fricked it up somehow. In Black Widow's case it was too little too late and for Wanda it was more what they did afterwards. Because they could've slid right into West Coast Avengers or a bunch of things after that. Instead they kind of took her off the board.
>But there was a lot going on in Civil War
There really should have been an Avengers movie with the new team from the end of AoU before Civil War. And Civil War being a Captain America movie did limit a lot of the Avengers to smaller roles, Wanda and Vision in particular were just too OP for the story that was being told.
I kind of feel like Disney's agreement with Sony to insert Spider-Man into Civil War, and later Infinity War ended up leeching time away that could have been spent giving other characters more to do, and instead we got all that time spent on Spider-Man being built up as Tony's surrogate son. Maybe these movies would have been better if Sony just kept making their own Spidey movies.
>Instead they kind of took her off the board.
And just like Black Widow, if they do bring her back for anything it'll be too little, too late. Or even worse, they try to pull some moronic "everything you know is wrong" retcon and try to tie her to X-Men stuff despite the character clearly working better outside of that setting.
It's funny because Civil War was a reaction to Batman v Superman which itself was a reaction to Avengers. Because originally they were supposed to make Man of Steel 2 but WB panicked and wanted to rush the DCEU along by introducing Batman and rest of the Justice League immediately. And you see a bit of that same sabotage with Civil War because Feige wanted his own BvS to combat DC but used the Captain America sequel to do it which short-changed a lot of the Avengers characters in the process. So kind of like how lost out on a legit Man of Steel sequel, I feel like we lost a legit Avengers film between AoU and IW too where the new roster introduced at the end of the last movie could've had a bigger role.
I don't know much about filmmaker courses at universities, but by now there should be some sort of case study assignment about why chasing the coattails of other movies is a terrible idea.
Everything about how out of nowhere her fixation on THESE PARTICULAR KIDS was weird for me because the movie also wanted to act like the Darkhold was corrupting her even though she behaves, well, very lucidly for someone allegedly corrupted by an eldritch tome and barely even brings up Vision amidst all this. Nor does the movie even explain who she had those kids with and what her opinion on that is.
It just seems like a wild swerve from her character arc in the show because Paul Bettany had a scheduling conflict or something.
The Darkhold wasn't possessing Wanda, it was warping her genuine emotions into something dark and twisted. She was not in a trance, she was lucid but irrational.
IIRC the filmmakers said that they viewed Civil War as Avengers 2.5 and were motivated heavily by how let down they were about AoU.
The longest scene in Civil War is between Tony and Parker. Cap has alot of scenes but they are almost all short. Stark has fewer scenes but they are longer and more "meaty".
Both Tony and Steve knew Wanda and Vision were seeing each other, only Tony really knows Parker...but in Endgame its Spidey they make the focus of Tony and Steve's reunion.
Motherfricker, dont remind me. The weird thing, is 2011 Zooey had everything to play a fun Wasp like the EMH version. But then Edgar Wright had to go, frick things up and take too long doing Ant-Man.
Wasp would have fit into OG MCU Avengers so well too, what a shame.
In Wanda's case it's also a problem of their scheduling biting them in the ass. Olsen went straight from filming Wandavision to filming MoM; by the time they got any audience feedback from WandaVision they were halfway through principal photography on MoM. Changing MoM would have required another rewrite and a massive amount of post-production refilming on a film that already had been delayed and reworked multiple times and had a set release date. So between execs believing the only thing people wanted out of Scarlet Witch was her going crazy evil and dying, and the massive costs and repercussions of reworking and delaying a MCU film, they decided the best course of action was to basically demolish something that had their fanbase genuinely excited.
>she should've been an ally for Strange and tried to atone which I think was the original plot at one point.
It wasn't. Her descend into madness was just a slower burn.
Oh nvm. But that would've been better than her immediate turn if she was tempted as it went on. At least she's trying to do good and then it goes to shit again. Instead she leaves Westview and goes right into chaos magic.
Such a slow burn we never saw it. Waldron cannot write characters, he can only write things that do and say things to move the plot.
Wanda destroying the Darkhold with zero effort and no sense of it being earned did more damage than the campy villainy.
>Wanda destroying the Darkhold with zero effort
The movie never stated the book was indestructible.
Wanda not learning anything. She doesn't figure out how to destroy the Darkhold.
There's no progression of character at all.
Her kids showing up for reals in the Agatha show is going to make her actions look even worse
Wanda realizes she is wrong and uses her power to destroy the castle that is the source of all evil. She has her heel realization and follows through with it.
> Wanda realizes she is wrong and uses her power to destroy the hex that is made of evil magic. She has her heel realization and follows through with it.
I'm glad they didn't repeat the same story.
>Her kids showing up for reals in the Agatha show
I can't believe the MCU is actually copying the comics retcons like this
>Wanda's kids are born and they're real
>Another writer retcons them into being fake
>Then someone else says yes they are real and brings them back
Unlike the comics, they likely knew there was a longer term plan to eventually bring them back, but they still went and claimed they weren't real.
Also movie and TV audiences generally have a lower tolerance of bullshit.
We really have gone from
>Hooray, they're adapting the comics faithfully
all the way to
>Oh frick no, they're adapting the comics faithfully
I never felt like they should've gone full comics accurate. My issue with the way the MCU adapts things is more that they're very wishy washy with their sources. Like how Thor Love and Thunder used up the Jane and Gorr storylines in one swoop. I think they should pick one storyline as an inspiration and loosely adapt from that instead of pulling from like 20 different sources. They've wasted a lot of material this way. They burned wasted Secret Invasion even. That could've been an Avengers movie level storyline. And what they crammed it into Captain Marvel's origin and a Nick Fury streaming show?
Lesson to pick up from it: don't adapt Bendis' shit.
In this case it's John Byrne's crap they're adapting. The OTHER guy who kept trying to wreck Wanda and Vision. He should have just stuck to drawing them, he was great at that.
But anon, a woman can't fall in love with a toaster. That would be STUPID. Comic books are serious business.
The scary thing is that Byrne isn't alone, and there are a number of vocal fans, and even people within the industry who share his strange bigotry against the concept of living, sentient, sapient humanoid AI, something which is likely to remain a fictional concept for many years. The Marvel Universe is full of so much insane crazy stuff that couldn't ever happen IRL, some of it is indeed stupid, but the one thing they draw the line on is a sweet, wholesome, heartwarming love story between a witch and an android. These people are soulless.
it's interesting how it's usually artistic types who think like this
centuries of accusing the more scientifically minded of being the heartless ones but they'd be the ones frying any AI that asks if it's alive
In the case of people like Byrne I think it was just born out of anti-shipping, just not being able to stand how one of the best waifus in all of Marvel was married to a non-human character they just couldn't bring themselves to self-insert as like everyone other guy who loved Wanda was doing.
Byrne is the guy who insists the android Human Torch is a real living being but Vision isn't, and the only real difference is one looks like a normal guy.
After WandaVision there seemed to be alot of momentum for a solo Scarlet Witch movie, but MoM seems to have killed that stone dead.
Vision Quest has been axed, and they seem to be wanting to focus on Wiccan and Agatha instead. IMHO They don't know what to do with Wanda.
If they reduce Wanda to a 5 minute "redemption arc" in Secret Wars it's going to be shit, a total fricking up of one of their best characters.
>Vision Quest has been axed
For fans who just want a Wanda/Vision reunion, this was probably a dodged bullet. If they were going to adapt the Tom King comic where Vision builds a new family, it just ends up being a big, unnecessary obstacle to any future project being able to do what the fans want to see. Which was probably the entire point in the comics, but the movies shouldn't be run by the same kind of idiots who actually want to make people angry.
>If they reduce Wanda to a 5 minute "redemption arc" in Secret Wars it's going to be shit, a total fricking up of one of their best characters.
Sadly that's likely the best we can realistically hope for. A rushed happy ending from a minor role in someone else's story.
Vision Quest and Wonder Man are both reportedly being axed. Which are both WandaVision-adjacent kind of. And Agatha aside, what are their plans for Wiccan and Speed? It's pretty insane that Young Avengers isn't even on the cards yet after they set up a bunch of these characters. I've heard Strange Academy rumors instead. But idk maybe that's where they'd put Wiccan, America and Kid Loki at least.
Didn't Wonderman already start filming before the Hollywood strike though?
As long as they don't end up trying to work him into the lives of Vision or Wanda, but the MCU seems oddly committed to adapting the rest of their worst comic stories.
It could just get reworked then. But after She-Hulk's reception they must be a bit spooked if Wonder Man is more comedic. Then again She-Hulk did do well in the ratings despite the reviews. But I think a lot of that could've the promise Daredevil and Hulk being there prop it up. Iirc Wonder Man is supposed to have a bunch of cameos but I'm not sure how much of a big deal they'll be. Like Trevor Slattery and Ralph Bohner aren't going to be a huge draw.
Wonder Man's cameos were Hollywood figures, it was otherwise very self-contained like Moon Knight.
She-Hulk's problem is not being "more comedic".
She-Hulk's problem is that the comedy is shit, and the plot is shit (it's shit on purpose XDDDD), and the characters are shit, and the action is shit, and the main villains were just fricking redditors and that instead of focusing on making a fun superhero show the writers turned it into their own group therapy session to b***h about people on the internet.
>and that instead of focusing on making a fun superhero show the writers turned it into their own group therapy session to b***h about people on the internet.
You know a lot of recent MCU output feels like someone's group therapy session. The Eternals felt like the director somehow convinced the company to write her fanfiction about taking big white wiener. Everything about Black Panther 2 weirded me out because it felt like a big budget wake for Boseman instead of, you know, a natural continuation of Wakanda's future.
Seriously how the frick is Wakanda so advanced but it's king dies of a random fricking disease? And it will never not bother me that T'challa's family immediately turn around and reverse all his reforms without acknowledging the systemic problems in Wakanda that led to him starting them in the first place. If they wind up with a Killmonger Jr because they can't stop dickwaving at the UN instead of just civilly but firmly telling them to frick off with the black ops, they fricking deserve it.
Wonder Man won't get axed, it was already being filmed when the strikes hit.
They might redevelop it like they did with Daredevil: Born Again, but it'll happen.
Agatha could be interesting if they focus on her being a power-hungry murderer pretending to be some noble hero for asspats, but you know they're not going to do that. I don't think anyone gives a shit about Wiccan, especially since he's going to be a functionally new character.
I think Carol could work if they just lean into her being an awkward, charisma black hole in-universe. Between her amnesia and spending 30 years flying around in space she has no idea how interact normally with people anymore and is actually kinda lonely and desperate.
>I think Carol could work if they just lean into her being an awkward, charisma black hole in-universe. Between her amnesia and spending 30 years flying around in space she has no idea how interact normally with people anymore and is actually kinda lonely and desperate.
We both know that they aren't going to do that. The problem is that Marvel is simultaneously trying to push Carol as this space savior, and also very delicately having to write around her never having actually done shit in any of the space crises events. Even the ones that she SHOULD logically have been keeping an eye on or at least go talk to the other characters to demand answers about, like Ronan getting an Infinity Stone, or the ones that affected everywhere at once like Ego's expansion.
What If, Shang-Chi and The Marvels have all embraced Carol as being a stick-in-the-mud and bit rude.
I'm not sure I agree. She is blunt and a stick in the mud yeah, but from how it came across it feels more like they're trying to make her a "hardass space cop" type character rather than one with in-universe social problems. A take charge, go-getter type of female character that Drinker would probably piss and moan about that unintentionally rather than intentionally comes across as a huge b***h; I wouldn't take Party Thor's words at face value too much considering he is literally Thor gone full moron.
It's so annoying the algorithm keeps linking me to Drinker. It's not even that the guy is necessarily wrong but he's a huge, dramatic crybaby over shit he clearly wouldn't be watching if it didn't give him massive views. Like fricking hell it's somewhat commendable he throws in constructive criticism sometimes but that HURR DURR ME DRUNK facade just feels to forced and tiresome to maintain. Literally the youtube version of old man yells at cloud
Youtube has gotten even worse than usual lately. I've noticed the algorithm keeps recommending not massive channels but lots of smaller hateclick channels instead. But it's still all negativity driven. I don't even watch those kinds of videos but whenever I watch a review of any kind that's the stuff that ends up in my feed as recommended.
>youtube spends about 3 months pitching me Illuminaughtii videos last year
>has been pitching me videos about Illuminaughtii getting cancelled since last week
90% of my youtube history is cooking and car restoration videos, where the frick is this coming from?
>Horror/true crime fan No, I'm not a woman. Stop fricking asking.
>Youtube keeps recommending me some gay eceleb drama a la "moistcritikal destroyed this narcissistic homosexual"
Just why?
>Horror/true crime fan
breasts or gtfo.
I made the mistake of watching a video about that hunger games movie with Rachel Zegler, not even a critique or something like that, just someone talking about how it links to the original hunger games story.
My fricking feed since then has been the same clickbaity videos mentioning Rachel Zegler getting fired, how apparently Bob Iger tans her hide every two days, and a barrage of how Gal Gadot turned on her and why she's being cancelled and vetoed on an apparent single basis. Fun shit, I havent even watched any of those, but they keep popping up.
The hatred against this Zegler girl feels so manufactured. Everyone has made jokes about the Prince being creepy for kissing a dead/comatose girl, but when she does it, it's ABSOLUTELY HARAM.
You have a point on the scale of the hatred for her, but promoting a remake movie by talking trash about the beloved original is always a recipe for disaster. Even if she didn't know this, her handlers should have.
She may have been only joking but saying the prince might get cut from the film rubbed me the wrong way and is pretty disrespectful to her co-star. Also shitting the original film like that is just bad PR. Now for a lot of people she's made a bad first impression and the hateclick channels will be on her like they were Brie Larson.
He's complaining about adverts portraying men as inept at household stuff was pants on head stupid.
That's been in ads since the 1950s, ffs. It's not a new thing.
Yeah, has this scottish homie never even seen the Simpsons or American Dad? Way he talks you'd think every show from the 80s was an unironic Gigachad meme instead of
>bumbling dad
>perky and loving but world-wise mom
>smart girl
>dumb but fun-loving boy
Agreed.
Based.
I think The Marvels will embrace that which was the whole point of making it an ensemble movie. Kamala and Monica are supposed to balance Carol out, challenge her and defrost her a bit.
The best explanation for everything would be that no on trusts Carol because everyone thinks she's still a Kree agent. They'll thank her politely when she shows up shooting their enemies then equally politely insinuate she needs to frick off.
>"I'm not actually a Kree operative," says woman who looks exactly like a Kree while wearing a Kree military uniform.
I feel like if people thought Carol was a Kree agent, this would have come up in Endgame or Fury would've said something to the rest of the team.
Although honestly, it's pretty fricking stupid Fury didn't call back Carol during Malekith's invasion. Guy shows up on Earth with a goddamn Infinity Stone implanted in his chest and that STILL isn't enough to get her back? Malekith unironically might have been able to take Thanos with no stones in a 1v1 when he had the Aether
Malekith's invasion lasted two hours tops, Carol would've taken weeks to reach Earth.
Carol's flight speed feels wildly inconsistent. She showed up at the Endgame battle in less than two hours at a time when she was supposedly running ragged helping other planets, and I doubt the Endgame battle even lasted two hours.
Even discounting Malekith, allowing Ronan to advanced his plans that far when he was part of her origin story feels like a massive, incompetent oversight. I'd add the High Evolutionary too but Guardians 3's treatment of the High Evolutionary's rep was really weird. It's handwaved that he has good rep as a philanthropist but nobody seems particularly crestfallen or surprised he turns out to be a psycho either.
It's either that or some rando's 1:30 clipart music video, but yeah ironically for a platform so focused on "positivity" the hate channels get shoved straight in your face.
It is amusing that they can't actually do anything about my adblockers other than show me the stern pop-up I can just click away, with a NWA song copypasted into the feedback box for good measure. FRICK DA POLICE
>She showed up at the Endgame battle in less than two hours at a time when she was supposedly running ragged helping other planets
They sent her a signal while they were still testing their time travel suits.
Malekith's invasion was on the other side of the world and lasted all of fifteen minutes. The Watsonian answer to "where was X during Y" is the climax of these films occur in, or close to, real-time.
They need to peg her arrogance down a notch, because even wienery c**ts like Stark and Tony had to be humble sometimes. Ideally, they'd need to have someone utterly beat the everliving shit out of Carol or send her in a downward spiral so she can become likable. Make her doubt, make her screw up and make her learn from her mistakes and realize she's not as hot shit as she thinks. Shit, bring Moonstone and let her mess with Carol on a way she couldn't solve by punching and blasting.
Here's few basic fixes how Carol's movie could've been salvaged
>give her a better personality than a boring girl-boss b***h. Your idea has potential.
>do away with the moronic Fury eye retcon, it's a shitty and unfunny joke anyway.
>an actual threatening villain, no one likes to watch a hero walk all over literally everyone except moronic powerlevelgays who jerk off to the idea "muh fictional daddy is stronger than yours".
Heroes having to overcome the villains is normal and a part of the appeal of the genre.
Even the powerhouses like Hulk and Thor were shown to get their asses kicked by more powerful villains and actually persevere in the end, not just effortlessly beat everyone.
It's really that easy.
It's impossible to salvage Carol's movie simply because they released it between Infinity War and Endgame. There's absolutely no way they could have introduced her into the existing continuity at that time in any effective way that made sense and allowed her to come across as someone to give a frick about. And that's shown by how nobody gave a frick about her after her movie. Bare minimum they needed to introduce her early enough that she could appear in Infinity War. Ideally they should have introduced her early enough that she had two movies and at least one other appearance in someone else's movie before Infinity War.
It made a billion dollars and was beloved by audiences.
>and was beloved by audiences.
Wild over exaggeration
I really hope Carolgays AND Briegays film their meltdowns once The Marvels crash and burn, it will be peak entertainment.
Okay maybe not "salvage" but at least make it feel more like an actual superhero movie and less like "how do you do fellow women" kind.
And yeah, putting it in Phase 1 or 2 would've helped.
While I don't think a solo movie is in the cards given that Disney is going to cancel everything vaguely risky, I don't think the Vision series is a big loss. The point of these WandaVision spinoffs was to do WandaVision-adjacent material until they were ready to bring Wanda back, whenever that is. Scrapping it makes it more likely that they actually bring back Wanda and Vision in the same project.
Wanda being fully villain could be cool. Wanda not having been a villain could also have been cool. The shit they chose, Wanda being clearly a villain, but the narrative pretending she's not, and her being redeemed for shit she does, but is not blamed for, then have the same arc again, then again.
Is beyond stupid.
They probably should've just had an evil alternate Wanda be the primary villain of MoM, with Prime Wanda being an ally but also having an arc dealing with the temptation of also resorting to her evil counterpart's plan. Eat your cake and have it too with her being a scary villain, but not ending up as an irredeemable psycho murderer afterward.
I thought that was what they were doing. There were rumors at least that it was going to be like Lore from the comics, an evil Wanda that possesses her variants and drains them to gain power.
To add one more thing to a thread that's already half Wanda: I think the MCU people have this very limited idea of what a Strong Female Character should be. You have to be a spy (Black Widow), a cop (Monica) or a soldier (Carol), and you have to be stoic and so on.
When Avengers Disassembled came out in 2004 the writer John Rogers pointed out that Wanda was portrayed as crazy "for specifically weak-ass girly reasons," and the MCU really seemed to share the idea that there's something inherently weak about a character who wants babies and marriage and a normal life. It's like they thought you can't be sexist to pre-feminist characters.
If WandaVision turned out better than expected (it was clearly just supposed to be a gift to Olsen and Bettany before they were semi-retired from the MCU) it's because Jac Schaeffer actually seemed to identify with Wanda and not condescend to her, probably because she has kids herself.
When the plot leaked I thought the similarity of MoM Wanda's "dreamwalking" to what Lore did (possessing other nexus beings in universes where she couldn't be physically present) couldn't be a coincidence. Of course either it was a coincidence, or the "possessing other versions of yourself" was in some kind of pool of comic-related story ideas.
It could've been a coincidence tbh. Someone could come up with an idea for the MCU with no knowledge of the comics and somebody would've already probably already written it somewhere.
Also to your point about strong female characters, I thought that was obvious but the MCU has always tried to have female characters that fit that mould instead of portraying different kinds of strength. I think bc they're superhero action movies mostly and Disney bought Marvel to primarily appeal to boys in the beginning so that's why the female characters are just kind of there being badass and nothing else for a lot of the films. WandaVision was a bit of a departure from the standard Marvel action plot formula so they were allowed to do something different with Wanda.
You see it in Disney Star Wars as well. Not just the female characters but everybody in the shows is pretty stoic and you don't get too much vulnerability. It's like they're set on these things being a very specific thing and not having any drama or even romance in them anymore. SW is pretty sexless these days too. I think even the MCU had a bit of an issue there up to a point where the love interests were undercooked, generic or shoehorned, there to tick a box etc.
>SW is pretty sexless these days too.
At the rate things are going I'm honestly not going to be surprised if they try to digitally edit Leia's bikini to cover up Carrie with a photoshopped ballroom gown or something.
>I think even the MCU had a bit of an issue there up to a point where the love interests were undercooked, generic or shoehorned, there to tick a box etc.
I'd like to add to this that this includes the male ones as well as the female ones. Remember what a nothingburger Bruce and Natasha's romance was, and how they very quickly tried to avoid talking about it after reuniting? Remember the guy Sersi was dating before she got white man fever? Me neither. He was just a generic screaming normie.
The gall of Ragnarok to even acknowledge Whor aside, Jane Foster probably had the best love interest subplot across the movies. And honestly, that's kind of sad. Tony/Pepper got fricked the moment I realised they were just going to keep the vicious cycle of Tony fricking up, Pepper nagging him, Tony going sober and Tony fricking up again over and over.
...oh yeah, and poor Sif can never catch a break. Which is ironic because even though she was one of the first "strong female characters" her actress was adamant that there was something unresolved between her and Thor that Thor was too dense to even realise was there. So canonically, poor Sif is a femcel who to this day has to live with Thor fricking off into the cosmos rather than go on a date with her even after Jane is dead.
Part of me wonders if it's driven by the same weird mindset behind the Disney mascots not being allowed get married or have children. Like they think there's something marketable about fictional characters being "on the market". So a lot of them aren't fully in relationships. Even Steve for a lot of his run wasn't after First Avenger. There was this vague thing with Sharon but that was it until they finally wrapped up his arc in Endgame and gave him that ending with Peggy because they had nothing to lose at that point.
I'm not a shipping person at all but I'm not really surprised it's become so huge since I think a lot of mainstream media shies away from depicting legit relationships now.
God, what happened to Sharon after that movie bamboozles the frick out of me. So I'm supposed to believe that out of EVERYONE who suffered and lost loved ones during the Snap, by pure coincidence the woman Captain America was kinda-maybe-almost-not really dating in his second movie was the one that got disgruntled enough with her job to become a supervillain?
God, Steve dodged a bullet going back in time. Can you imagine yandere Sharon trying to convince him to rule her crime empire together or something?
Steve would have already been around for Sharon going supervillain.
Like
talks about, when we're in an age where even Disney Princess movies are having strong independent women who don't need no man as their protagonists, a comic book superheroine character who's very feminine and all she really wants out of life is to be a wife and mother, they're just incapable of seeing this as a good thing, and end up weaponizing it against her, turning her into a villain whose motivation is her desire for that normal life which in their minds, she shouldn't even want.
So when both male and female audiences really respond to this character for different reasons, neither the suits nor the creatives get why people like her, and just try to take her away and tell the audience to like the generic production line Strong Female Characters they're given.
>the greatest moment in television history
>only has a gif of it
Amateur
>Amateur
I think people responded to Wanda well in the show partly because of how much she cared about Vision and her kids but the writers wanted to have their cake and eat it so by the end of it she's this powerful loner witch too. And that might be the permanent direction for the character now if they don't plan on having her reunite with Vision and her grown up sons at least to get some kind of happy ending. But this is an issue that effects male and female characters these days I think, especially in the superhero genre. The heroes are never allowed to be happy in and a relationship and if they are it doesn't last. Case in point; Peter Parker. Or Thor even.
You'd think characters where the relationship or the family are at the very core of why people like them would be an obvious exception to this trend. It's not a good omen for Disney having any clue about how to make an FF movie, either.
If they're not bringing Wanda back for a redemption story and a reunion with her family, don't bother bringing her back.
The smart thing would have been to use Lore.
I think Loki could work, at least short term. Loki gathering the Avengers at Av 5, after being the villain of the first Avenger and having at least one Avenger from the OG team in his team too, would make for a decent thing.
Thanos but a good guy
wolverine or scott
Cyclops and Wolverine in a recreation of Iron Man and Captain America
>after years of shitting on the x-men because of sony, disney turns around and pushes them into the spotlight to save the MCU
The X-Men movies without Jackman didn't make much money. They're insane if they're pinning their hopes for the future of the MCU on characters who've previously performed on a level with the lower-tier MCU movies.
Ryan Reynolds.
Ant-Man
Quantumania was their chance and they screwed up. FRICK I'm still mad
He never had a prayer of becoming the next Tony, with his harmless aw-shucks Dad humor vibe.
He couldn't even carry his own little sub-franchise. Even Evan's Cap had more edge.
Ant-Man was never going to be the next Tony Stark (let's be real, nobody is) but Quantumania had the clear intention of making him grow and fill a bigger role than before, hence the movie using a big villain like Kang, someone that would actually push the character to his absolute limit, something that only sorta happened in the first film, because the second one has arguably lower stakes. Obviously, this didn't pan out because the writing was something between atrocious and purely functional, and that's one of Quantumania's biggest sins IMO, that such a wild premise is wasted in such a generic and safe execution.
>Ant-Man was never going to be the next Tony Stark
Pym could have, but Marvel is moronic.
>Pym could have
No, he couldn't.
Nobody. The general public is tired of Marvel
They just aren't into side-kicks and teen legacy wannabees, Strange, Spidey and Guardians all did great at theaters.
Spider -Man is a global icon. The rules don't apply.
Blade.
frick woke meta shit. give us good action
If these morons had some common sense
>Blade
Snipes was perfect but he's too old I think and Marhershshashhelalla Ali sounds like a big homosexual to work with
>Spider-Man
This one's funny because both Tobey or Garfield could've been a great Face of Marvel, but they're Sony owned and Marvel has the shitty one that still looks like a toddler and wouldn't EVER have the presence of a main face like Iron Man, Tobey can, Garfield too, not Tom
>Dr Strange
They fricked him up big time in the sequel, maybe they can save him for the third, he's their last hope he has the presence, powers, villains roster, everything
>Thor
They fricked up both Thor and Jane Thor at the same time, Jane could've been a better Thor given a good script, she's likeable, still they ruined her and killed her at the end, Hemsworth's Thor is unwatchable at this point
>Hawkeye, Pigface Widow, Carol, Kamala, Etc
Steinfeld can only dream about having the presence of ScarJo or Liz, same with every other female character at this moment, Brie ruined her chance, they turned Liz into a villain and killed her
>Sam Wilson
This guy's a joke and one of the few times that I've seen how even normies hated him in his own show and rooted for Walker more because Walker is likeable
>Daredevil
Matt could've been a great main face sadly his upcoming show sounds like a shitshow in all the leaks
Deadpool and an old Wolverine are their only real choices as being the main face of Marvel
As long as they're riding the leftist train the MCU is done for, too many problems that they refuse to fix
Partway through Wandavision it seemed obvious for her to be the face of the new MCU. And then the ending of that show happened, and then MoM happened. Just shot themselves in the face.
When they gave Wanda/Vision, Falcon/Winter Soldier their own shows I thought they were trying to build up the characters who hadn't been stars before and turn them into stars.
But it turned out the only one they wanted to push was Sam as Captain America. They did nothing to build up Bucky, and the clear intent after WandaVision was to make Wanda take a back seat to the Young Avengers (I don't know if a Children's Crusade story will happen but that's obviously what they were planning) and ignore VIsion.
Hell, Jane Foster as Thor turned out to be (probably) just a parting gift to Portman.
They had so many good under-utilized characters and they decided that they needed to introduce all these new ones and downplay the ones they already had.
She-hulk
Someone completely unexpected, so I'm betting on the actor who plays Ben Grimm.
Holland/Spidey, and Steinfeld are currently the most likable characters other than Reynolds/Daredevil, and maybe Loki and Steph, in the Wes Anderson looking Loki show.
Should've been Dr.Strange, Black Panther, and Mr.Fantastic as the main trio.
Was Captian Marvel's real problem not connecting with fans? It just seemed like Brie Larson fricked off after End Game and they missed a very important window where they needed to solidify the character as an recognizable figure that existed in the present. Instead she's just that super hero from the past who showed up that one time.
She's more popular than Strange and only eclipsed by Spider-Man so no.
Then what's the problem that OP's interview is alluding to? Or are you ignoring the context of the thread?
There's no problem, the author is delusional and Brie is the new face of the MCU.
Oh, ok.
Delusional
>Instead she's just that super hero from the past who showed up that one time.
And immediately fricked off three times now.
>was gone from the 90's to infinity war
>went away after the snap
>and went away after thanos was defeated
She really doesn't seem like she has a connection to earth.
That's literally the problem. Brie wasn't available to do shit, she didn't give any priority to the MCU so there was no time to squeeze her into anything betwee End Game and now, which actually makes most fans associate her with the earlier phase heroes, not the current ones.
>Brie wasn't available to do shit
I thought they effectively wrote her out because they realized they made her overpowered and there'd be no movie if they ever let her do anything?
No, COVID happened.
>Brie wasn't available to do shit, she didn't give any priority to the MCU
Their problem for banking on her without signing her on to a multi-movie guarantee.
I think the reality is that sex sells and when you remove that people aren't as interested. That doesn't mean she needs to be breasts out and in your face but there has to be SOME kind of sex appeal. And this is true for male heroes too, that's why Tom Holland has an underwear scene (Or sometimes MULTIPLE underwear scenes) in every Spider-Man movie or most of the other heroes have shirtless scenes except for a select few. Because it brings women to the seat. A suit that flatters her body more would have made her more memorable.
It's certainly what brought me to see Ragnarok even though I fricking hate "comedies". Despite getting on in years, despite being mostly covered up, Cate Blanchett is still the most attractive woman to be involved with the MCU.
I only watched that movie in hopes of seeing Thor shirtless again.
Well, you got your wish in Love and Thunder you homosexual/woman. Talk about monkey's paws, eh? Anyway it's not like I was ever expecting Marvel to make Hela of all people sexy. By MCU standards I consider myself to have lucked out that they got Cate for her at all.
I wasn't desperate enough to watch Love and Thunder. Did Fat Thor get a shirtless scene?
Nah, Chris got swole again and Zeus stripped him as part of a hehe naked man "comedic" scene.It's a pretty lame HEY COME LOOK AT THE DUMB NAKED MAN scene. For what it's worth while the women never get subjected to the same thing (and thank god, Tessa Thompson and current Natalie Portman do nothing for me) Thor effortlessly catches Zeus' own thunderbolt and nearly kills him with it in a single toss later when a fight scene breaks out.
...okay, that last part might actually make the whole thing worse.
How do you explain the comics needing to be rebooted 3 different times in a decade, then? People just don't give a shit about Captain Marvel.
So less than any other Marvel hero.
She just had a 50-issue run wrap up only because the writer got poached by DC.
It's not "Brie Larson isn't able to connect with Marvel fans" it's "Brie Larson is a turboc**t who kills anything she's involved with"
>Larson not connecting with enough fans
Hilarious.
Look at these poor deicisions tanking a billions dollar cinematic franchise.
Well, Spider-man's good.
RIP Boseman...
Captain marvel is not fun...
Pratt-lord is the butt of too many jokes, and too removed from Earth
Same for Ant-Man
Thor has recently gone that direction to his detriment.
Wanda is too fragile and recently villain-adjacent
Boseman is too dead
Spider-Man is too shared
Slumberpatch Strange has everything but the charm; he's just too cold to be Tony's heir
Neither Cheadle nor Stan have the screen presence for it,
Mackie doesn't have the acting talent
Even if Hulk wasn't tied up in Universal, none of the Banners have had the stuff
The various super-agents just aren't super-heroic enough
Brie just doesn't get enough exposure.
Honestly right now, the closest they have to another Tony is Hiddleston continuing his anti-villain turn. They should capitalize on that more.
i dont think universal owns the rights to hulk anymore cuz they havent done any film w him
They have the rights to distribute any film titled "Hulk", and that gives them a large chunk of cash derived thereof. There is no time limit on it.
damn marvel got ripped off
They were nearly bankrupt and did a lot of desperate contracts with any and all takers.
Namor and Hulk with Universal, X-Men/Daredevil/FF with Fox, Spidey's stuff with Sony....
yeah ik still feels kinda insane
Universal lost the distribution rights this year.
>There is no time limit on it.
How in the Hell did Marvel let Universal buy distribution rights to Hulk movies with no expiry date to those rights at all? Usually that kind of thing is time limited or dependent on movies actually being made.
X-Men/Spidey/FF were considered the prizes, I guess Universal got leeway taking lesser franchises. Hulk had really only been a low budget TV show up til that point.
Hulk was the second best-known Marvel character to normies, after Spider-Man, and far more than FF or X-Men. It was really only 90s kids who knew who the X-Men were, because of the cartoon, toys and games, nobody older really knew them, while FF was a property Marvel kept prioritizing for adaptations, but no adaptation ever really caught on.
Hulk, though, people knew who the Hulk was. This is due to that TV show being pretty successful and reruns of it having been on for decades. Both Marvel and Hollywood seemed to have hopes of Hulk movies being a Spider-Man-level success, but both times they tried, it didn't work out.
The thing about making a good Hulk movie is that most of it should be pretty depressing, then a kick-ass final action sequence, and a bittersweet ending with Banner still not finding a place in the world yet. That doesn’t really gel well with the MCU formula.
Hulk should be more psychological and body horror imo. The newer run by Al Ewing leaned into that and the lore almost felt Twin Peaks-like. But the MCU wouldn't go there.
You know what jives well with MCU formula though?
She-Hulk.
I have never seen a character who seems like they're tailor-made for MCU get fricked up this badly because of the moronic Rick and Morty writers.
Why hasn’t Universal tried to make a “Leader 1” movie yet then?
I think Universal is just happy to sit and wait for Disney to make them a cash offer for rights back.
Hulk stuff has not set the world afire at the box office.
Also, Loki has been in this from almost the very start, he's been in more movies than anyone who isn't RDjr or Sam Jackson, he's a charming favorite with fans with female appeal and edge.
He needs to come out of the series' less of a wimpy underdog and start doing more cool shit.
> Tony is Hiddleston continuing his anti-villain turn. They should capitalize on that more.
Bruh, I just walked through JFK Airport and the walls were just TV screens replaying Loki Season 2 trailers over and over again. If anything they’re selling him too hard.
Loki is good but I think his show is more niche now because of all the time travel/multiverse stuff. Idk if he has the mass appeal he once did. I think S2 has been solid so far but nobody is talking about it apparently. So Loki is getting people interested in the MCU again. Also Tom Hiddleston isn't getting any younger so his tumblr era boyish looks aren't there and the god aspect of his character has taken a backseat too. I thought that and his relationship with Thor were all part of what made him appealing and a lot of that has been stripped away now.
I think if Loki had been a more episodic adventure show from the beginning where he visited different times it might've done better, like the original pitch where he was being more villainous and manipulating Earth's history. But instead they went for this TVA, Sylvie and Kang heavy plotline in S1 and S2 is building off of that. It is rectifying some of the mistakes of S1 by giving us more Mobius and seemingly having more time travel adventuring but at this point the people who weren't sold after S1 have tuned out.
Again I like the general direction Loki has taken even with my qualms about S1. But I don't think it has the mass appeal to lead the MCU even if he can be a key player in it. Wanda could've maybe done it with Vision after their series. Marrying science and magic. But her going off the rails into full villain mode killed any chance of her leading the MCU.
Writing out Captain America was a mistake.
Evans wanted to leave like RDjr, it wouldn't have gone over with not-Evans Cap.
People connect with the actors in the MCU in a way they don't with Batman and Superman.
Hell Evans actually wanted to leave even sooner than RDJ. Dude was actually hesistant to take on the role (because of FF)
Starlord was shit on by every director that wasn't Gunn. Guardians 3 treated him with more respect while acknowledging his flaws and had him grow substantially as a character.
Where’s Mercer when you need him?
They need to stop being pussies and give us a Punisher film that’s R.
There were like 7 Disney films over a billion that year, and one well over double it if I remember correctly.
https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/world/2019/
This is complete pwnage.
>At one point during the filming of AVENGERS: ENDGAME, the trio sat together and said aloud, "Look at us, the future of the MCU."
Boseman saying that knowing he has terminal cancer
That's because he knew post ENDGAME the MCU was dead, so technically, he was right.
BA-DUMM-TSSS
Holland is their best bet at this point, people are always gonna love Spider-Man, so just get better strategy to negotiate with Sony or get a character with actor charismatic enough, because Larson fricked them up pretty bad
Sounds like bullshit, the logical next Iron Man always looked like to be Dr. Strange. It both makes sense (with multidimensional bullshit) and convenient (with Benedict Cumberbatch showing no interest in leaving the role and being excited for the next paycheck)
lmao that gay Holland kid is going to last a couple of more movies and then from there all we are going to get is Black spiderman. those spiderverse movies were a test run to see how audiences would react to peter parker getting replaced
LOL moron. These movies were made because Sony doesn't have to give 1/4 of the profits toMarvel Studios.
>Yet another Marvel thread hijacked by Wandagays
You gotta give it to them, they are passionate.
Literal armpit goblins
>d, "Look at us, the future of the MCU."
that seems unlikely given Boseman knew he was a terminal case by then, and also, the way that three real people ever don't spontaneously say the same thing aloud when considering an abstract future
"Look at us, the future of the MCU."
> Boseman cries internally.
Who even calls it MCU irl? Normies just say Marvel.
I think it's interesting how Marvel animation kind of crashed and burned. I know What If already had a troubled production and some of the animation wasn't even finished but the delays on S2, Spider-Man Freshman Year, X-Men '97 and the disappearance of Marvel Zombies is pretty damning. I'd heard Bob Iger wasn't a fan of Star Wars having an animation division already and he nearly shut it down entirely so I wouldn't be surprised if the MCU's animated series die off even if these single seasons get made.
lol
>"Eternals are literally cosmic robot assembled at a space forge and infused with infinite cosmic energy but uh...UH...GOTTA HAVE OUR ZOMBIES!!!"
Idk who 70% of these characters are
This is the whole leak. 50% of the cast are literal whos. Team of Black Widows and a Skrull biker gang.
Okay, I get that we're talking about black widow's sis, girl hawkeye, shang chi, kamala, and black widow's dad
I'm gonna ASSUME the blue asian ninja and the girl on the end are also shang chi characters
but is the card holding asian guy... the shield agent assigned to watch ant man??
Ok, a Skrull biker gang sounds kinda fun. The rest of those teams are so chock full of literally who's that I've forgotten what they look like after minimizing the image.
Watch Shang Chi and Black Widow.
Blonde Widow
Hawkingbird
???
Shang Chi
America
Death-Dealer
Red Guardian
Awkwafina
The third guy is Jimmy Woo.
>Watch Shang Chi and Black Widow
Why would anyone do this?
>Awkwafina
Just seeing that name makes my skin crawl.
Funny enough I despise her but wasn't really bothered by her much in Shang-Chi. Then again I only saw Shang-Chi once so idk if it will feel the same again.
Unlike live action, animation takes time and its a bad idea to make last minute changes which is Marvel studio favorite cup of tea so no wonder they are having issues with that side.
Heck, they've should give 0 fricks about connecting it to the live action projects and let instead be their own universe like how the comic side did with the Ultimate universe vs the 616 one.
If they approach the animated shows the same way they were the live actions shows or how Sony handled Into the Spider-Verse then yeah I can see how the production would be a clusterfrick. But considering all the MCU animated shows aren't even part of the main timeline I'm not sure why they'd need to be micromanaged as much. I thought the whole point is that What If? and Zombies were out-of-continuity fun.
Marvel has basically run out of characters. They're big names are all used up, their B-listers either died, aren't getting any younger, got a cold reception, or is too edgy for Disney, meanwhile it's basically too late for the Fantastic 4 and X-men to join in, and finally they've exhausted all their major comic stories to make adaptations of.
The only real option they have is to do a Fantastic 4 movie that ends up rebooting the whole MCU continuity and starting fresh with new actors. Of course how the general public would react to a comic book style continuity wipe is probably not good if that Flash move is any indication.
Lastly the MCU has simply gotten too complicated. The early MCU used to be a simple to understand movie series but now there's so many side shows and other things that it's basically become the incomprehensible comic continuity that drives normies away from comic books in the first place.
tl:dr The MCU is at it's end stages of life and it's gonna die regardless of whatever Marvel tries to keep it going.
>Marvel has basically run out of characters.
They have like a gajillion comic characters. But in terms of heavy hitters that they haven't used a lot of those are in the X-Men, Fantastic Four and Spider-Man camps which they haven't been able to take full advantage of.
Fantastic Four and X-Men already had movies. They're not going to be the thing that saves the MCU, because we already know how FF and X-Men movies tend to perform, and how much audiences tend to be interested in them. Deadpool 3 is likely to be the high water mark for any of the characters they acquired from Fox.
>and finally they've exhausted all their major comic stories to make adaptations of.
What? No they haven't. If anything they've skipped over an nigh endless amount of potential to jump the gun on a bunch of modern era trash. Like seriously the Avengers didn't have two movies under their belt before we were heading off to Civil War as if that was the most defining moment in the characters 50+ year history.
The rebranding of Captain Marvel 2 into "The Marvels" and the constant delays reeks of the studio desperately trying to find a better window between better releases to prop it up, like CM1 coming out just before Endgame.
He can fix the MCU.
Quantumania Kang literally stole his shtick
He'll steal it back in Phase Six!
MCU will modernize Psycho-Man so he's a Silicon Valley type who's created a super algorithm to stoke fear, hate and doubt.
Why even do that? It'll just invite comparisons to Darkseid and anti-life.
They can still salvage this if they unJUST Hulk, Thor, and Doctor Strange. Give us Infinity War era Doctor Strange and Thor (in terms of characterization), and Ragnarok Era Hulk, and people would eat that shit up as the new "big three"
>Plays every single significant Black historical figure ever
>Beloved by all, especially children of all ages and races
>Kills the post-endgame MCU by dying
Rest in Power, CHADwick BASEDman
Jesus, Tom Holland seems like the literal human embodiment of "we should probably have a straight white man somewhere in the cast, but make him as physically unthreatening and cucked as humanly possible." I can really see the execs at Marvel patting themselves on the back for that trio as the emodbiment of exactly what they want for Western society going forward.
Boseman died and Holland is as much unassuming as you can imagine, we all know he's still around only because he's carried by the Spider-Man name. So yes, Brie will lead the MCU eventually, like it or not chuds
Boseman dying really fricked them over. He would've been the perfect straight man to Peter's antics
Hard for me to believe this when they were in no rush to put 2 of these characters in anything after Endgame. No planned BP cameos, no planned CM cameos until they got in their sequels in 2022/23. No planned teamup movie featuring all three of them until at least 2025. And they wanted them to be the faces of the MCU? ha
She was a cameo in Lady Stretch Armstrong and BP was busy doing chemo and telling Disney to frick off while doing it
it's okay no one else remembers either
Yeah I think part of the problem is that they're rushing this whole Multiverse Saga. I get it, even some Infinity Saga entry are just fillers, and that they want to rush because the old actors are getting super old, but it's clear they're shooting their foot in this race.
Captain Marvel gets a cameo at the end of Shang-Chi as one of the Avengers who talks to Shang-Chi after his adventure's over.
Not sure anyone cared about it though, since A) people don't care about Captain Marvel and B) I don't think people really cared about Shang-Chi either, except for saying it's one of the best post-Endgame MCU films simply by default
Shang-Chi would've been amazing if it weren't for the third act. Then again that's most of MCU really.
>it's another "third act descends into CGI action figures throwing coloured laser beams at each other/smashing together in front of a greenscreen" MCU film
I'd care about Shang-Chi if it was just a classic kung-fu movie that were all the rage when I were a kid. None of that magic ring shit.
>Look at us, the future of the MCU.
kek, the fools. Only Boseman had charisma, the other two can't carry shit by themselves.
Case in point: Spider-Man No Way Home (starring the other Spider-Men you actually like better than Holland) and The Marvels (aka "go watch our shit we swear it isn't all about Brie")
all the good actors in hollywood willing to be the face of the MCU already have done so
none of the actors with the presence and talent to be the "face of the MCU" actually wants a decade+ commitment that usurps literally every other acting opportunity
it's basically career suicide at this point, you'll be locked up to and linked to a character so long you wont be able to do anything serious afterwards
Elizabeth Olsen is probably the one that is vocal about it the most. Which sucks because I do want Wanda to be the face. But it's more because of Olsen than Wanda though.
frankly they got exceedingly lucky with RDJ, that they managed to snag a legit good and charismatic actor who at the same time had no good other options because of his past
and that's not something they'll be able to replicate ever again
They're going to fake a famous actor with a dead hooker and then blackmail him into being Wolverine.
>"Look at us, the future of the MCU."
You just know it was Larson who said that.
If it was Larson it would've been "Look at ME, the future of MCU"
and in a way, she was correct
Larson is exactly what the modern MCU looks like
though not in the way she imagined
let's be honest and realistic, does she look like someone who can lead the MCU?
She can and she will.
>4 pro-Carol posts in a row, likely all the same anon
>immediately followed by post reeeeing about Wanda's fans
>same anon again?
Is this a rival fanbases hate each other thing?
Are we having a waifu war now?
I did see a Twitter post the other day about Wanda stans rooting for The Marvels to flop, but I doubt it's a pervasive thing.
There is probably some resentment that Carol gets to be pushed as the MCU's number one woman hero while Wanda got character assassinated and had two projects in a row telling us, basically, that she's not cut out to be a hero.
But the MCU's treatment of women has been appalling lately in other ways (e.g. killing off Maria Hill for shock value) and eliminating "Captain Marvel" from the title of the sequel is obviously Disney showing that, for whatever reason, they don't have faith in Carol as a franchise leader.
They'd have been better off making Carol and Wanda both heroes so they can show that different types of women can be heroes, the stoic soldier and the girly-girl princess. A lot of Wanda fans complaints boil down to the MCU not understanding what they had.
>I did see a Twitter post the other day about Wanda stans rooting for The Marvels to flop, but I doubt it's a pervasive thing.
>There is probably some resentment that Carol gets to be pushed as the MCU's number one woman hero while Wanda got character assassinated and had two projects in a row telling us, basically, that she's not cut out to be a hero.
I understand that resentment, though this seems to be coming in the opposite direction, Carol fans complaining about Wanda and her fans.
Personally I don't need Wanda to be "the MCU's top heroine", just to have been treated better. If they just kept her in a show with Vision and their kids as a low-stakes superhero family sitcom I'd have been perfectly happy. Yes, if they'd pushed her right, maybe she could have been "the top girl" and one of the faces of the MCU, but I don't need that, just treat her better, stop trying to sabotage her, or punish her for not being the "right" kind of heroine.
I haven't watched any of the newer stuff, what happened to Maria Hill?
>I haven't watched any of the newer stuff, what happened to Maria Hill?
She was killed off in the first episode of Secret Invasion, a moment that even people who hate feminist buzzwords were calling "fridging."
Secret Invasion was basically nothing but other characters being harmed to make Fury feel bad.
Out of all the characters in the MCU, Hill seems the biggest waste. Comics Hill was a great antagonistic force towards the Avengers between New Avengers and Civil War, then had her redemption moment in Secret Invasion and Siege. Movie Hill just existed, and that was it.
And everyone else in SHIELD was unexistant or irrelevant.
Dum Dum Dugan was only in WW2, Victoria Hand was shoved aside and killed in the SHIELD show, Clay Quartermain doesn't exist at all, Quake was never canon, Jimmy Woo is a comical character and Sitwell got offed by the Winter Soldier.
And whatever the hell they're doing with Valentina, by turning her into totally not Amanda Waller.
They just used her as Fury's right hand, she's not the same character as in the comics at all. It could be worse, the MCU version of Alexander Pierce was a villain who was nothing like the comic character. Sometimes you have to wonder why they use the comic names on movie characters that are so drastically unrelated. Comic book movies never used to have a problem letting a movie-only OC just be an OC.
>Sometimes you have to wonder why they use the comic names on movie characters that are so drastically unrelated.
My bad, Hill isn't the worst offender. Taskmaster was. I was expecting someone to shittalk Scarlett and Pudge for two hours, not another Winter Soldier.
>Larson not connecting with enough fans
She's the highest grossing female hero. Try again
Her movie sold on the hype of Endgame and Infinity War making it seem like it would be vital to the next part, but the real issue comes when merch isn't moving. And hoo boy, did merch not move. Everything from T shirts to of course the toys and costumes were sub Strange levels, and her online presence didn't nearly have the rabid reddit/twitter fans they hoped. Hype for her next movie is also apparently tracking way lower than they thought, which is to be expected when you go from "Supposed lead in to one of the biggest movies of all time" to "Just another MCU flick"
Nah she sold incredibly well and you're a delusional incel captured by the outragechud bubble.
why is her sequel tracking so poorly then?
What's with you people unironically using try again, try harder and shit. It reeks of entry-level debater
she's gross alright, look at those toes
>At one point during the filming of AVENGERS: ENDGAME, the trio sat together and said aloud, "Look at us, the future of the MCU."
>Captain Fungus
>Captain b***h Face
>Captain Stinky Toes
It should've been Quicksilver
>Holland caught in a contract war between Marvel Studios and Sony Pictures.
Explain
>2014-2015
>Sony owns the film rights to Spider-Man and have their own legs to stand on, since they managed to make Spider-Man an incredibly successful movie franchise before the MCU
>Sony won't ever sell the Spider-Man rights back to Marvel unless it was for a ridiculously extortionate price that Disney would never pay, and Disney won't ever be able to buy Sony like they did Fox since it's a equally large megacorp
>after TASM 2 failed to do a billion like Sony wanted, they struck up a deal with Disney to have Spider-Man show up in the MCU starting with Civil War
>the deal is that Sony makes the movies, while Marvel Studios and Kevin Feige help with the creative process, get 5% of the revenue, and allow the new movies to be set in the MCU and connect with the wider cast in both the Spidey films and team-up films (something both sides want badly)
>Tom Holland is cast as Spider-Man, time goes by, MCU Spidey is mostly well-received
>August 2019
>the deal breaks down; Sony wants to continue with the deal as is, while Disney wants to up their part in both the production and the share of the profits to 50%
>it's announced that Spider-Man will no longer be in the MCU, and that Sony are going to take Tom Holland and put him in their own Cinematic Universe with Venom and Morbius
>fan outcry is massive
>Tom Holland is stuck in the middle and even calls both Sony and Disney himself to try and get them to work together
>over a year later
>the deal is finally back on for at least one more trilogy, with Disney co-financing No Way Home at 25% and getting that % in profits
>the deal being so precarious is why Sony has stepped up their game with their Spider-Man-less Spider-Man CU (e.g. Morbius, Keaton's Vulture randomly moving over to the Sony Universe, the Kraven movie, the fricking Madame Web movie)
>equally, the MCU is unable to rely on Spidey because they don't own him
>and Tom Holland has recently said he doesn't want to be Spidey forever
>Tom Holland has recently said he doesn't want to be Spidey forever
No one wants to play a single role forever. This isn't something that just Tom Holland thinks. Also, the MCU not being able to rely on him has been a thing since Civil War. Why is it an issue now?
Because after Avengers: Endgame, they wanted him to be one of the cornerstones of the MCU, and that simply isn't feasible when Sony can pull him out at the drop of a hat.
Was it ever said the amount that Sony was asking for to get the rights back? I know there's a bunch of corporate politics involved, but Disney is one of the largest companies in the world, so it's not like they couldn't afford it. Also, Spider-Man is one of the most popular super heroes in the world, so it's not like they wouldn't recoup the costs.
I've got this pic which is apparently from the Sony email leaks, where Amy Pascal supposedly suggests a $5 billion price for the rights. No idea how true this is, but it seems to fit because A) Sony is historically really dumb when it comes to their financial expectations, and B) Sony really can just effectively hold Spider-Man to ransom, and it would be the smartest move one could make in their position. They know that Spider-Man is incredibly valuable to Marvel and would be a major asset to the MCU if they fully owned the character. But they'd only get a short-term gain from selling the movie rights back, no matter how much they ask for, so it's better on Sony's side to simply keep Spider-Man to themselves, particularly when their live-action Spider-Man movies can comfortably break a billion when they do it right.
Plus, over the past decade and a half, Disney has already been dealing with the Lucasfilm buyout back in 2012, then the Fox buyout in 2017-9, and these days they're especially struggling with the cost of both those massive, billions-costing moves and all their financial troubles in the past couple years. As far as I'm aware, Sony holds the movie rights in perpetuity, and they won't revert back to Marvel otherwise. In every way, Sony has the upper hand here.
>Sony holds the movie rights in perpetuity, and they won't revert back to Marvel otherwise.
Not true. Sony has to make a movie roughly every 5 and a half years to keep the rights.
Ah okay, thanks for the correction. I should've checked. Found the relevant bit on wikipedia now you mentioned it:
>Sony's 1998 exclusive rights license, covering all Spider-Man universe (including 900 characters related to Spider-Man), is perpetual provided that Sony releases a new Spider-Man film at least once every 5.75 years.
Also if Sony is ever sold to anyone the rights revert back to Marvel, though I don't know if that's just Sony Pictures or the whole fricking thing
>goes from 1.5 billion
>then 2
>then 3
Amy Pascal really is a frickin moron. No wonder she got booted from Sony.
If you want to know how dumb the average Hollywood producer is, the Sony leaks are a fantastic insight into that. Pascal literally types all her emails like a 14 year old girl. Also semi-relevant is pic related, another Sony executive (Nick Shore) suggesting certain things for TASM 2. You'll note that the EDM actually made it into that movie, with Jamie Foxx's Electro playing a dubstep version of Itsy Bitsy Spider.
These are the people in charge of your entertainment.
>No idea how true this is
Its legit, just read some of the ideas that got propsoed there and how they ended up being used for projects already released
>Amazing Spiderman animated sequel proposal became Spiderverse trilogy
>The sinister six idea sorta happened in No Way Home and they are building their own sinister six crossover.
>The crossover movie with previous spidermen already happened with no way home
>Remarking Arad being relevant to the franchise, which is something they did during No Way Home credits
>The proposal for Marvel studios for a new reboot plus appearing in the following Avengers movie which was what ended up happening with Tom Holland movies
>No one wants to play a single role forever. This isn't something that just Tom Holland thinks.
I couldn't fit it all into that post, but IIRC he specifically said something along the lines of not wanting to do the role that much longer, and that he dislikes how light and fluffy his Spider-Man is written most of the time.
>Also, the MCU not being able to rely on him has been a thing since Civil War. Why is it an issue now?
Because after Endgame the MCU has lost RDJ and Chris Evans, and it's become even more problematic for them that their biggest superhero is held hostage by a rival studio they have to play nice with
Because Tom really wants to stop being Spider-Man. He only wanted to stick around until they did the big crossover with Maguire and Garfield for bragging rights. Now that he had done the biggest crossover, he is tired of playing Spider-Man and wants Peter to be killed off and Miles Morales to replace him.
He also sees Superheroes beneath him now and wants to make real art. Which is why he was in that movie where he has buttsex with a large black man.
>Because Tom really wants to stop being Spider-Man.
No, he doesn't. Stop being moronic. It's his golden ticket and he knows it.
iron spider sex
huh
Why not just use Dr. Strange and the Fantastic Four?
Because that would make sense.