The Marvels , you know that new superhero movie

[VampiricLongbow]

No credit for partial answers, it's well past the point you can feed scraps and pretend it's a meal.



I don't think they need to go that far back, but much like Mar-Vell was kind of a boring character who existed for copyright purposes and was so boring they had to create most of the Comsic Marvel cosmology ,the best parts of Marvel lore fore certain, for him to bounce off of Carol kind of had nothing going for her for forever other then being a character who existed because someone has to be named Captain Marvel to keep screwing over Billy Batson (and I say this as one of the few people who actually is a Captain Mar-Vell fan, there are like five of us. We have support meetings on Tuesdays). Then they picked without a doubt out of the most WTF ways to write out of the comics ever and post that when she was kind of drifting, had some alcoholism issues, went through her whole arc in House of M and became really interesting. And then kind of lost all that in the last decade because Comic Books Suck and all characters are trapped in a perpetual purgatory doomed to repeat their character arcs for eternity but a little worse each time. But the MCU wanted to just straight to badass last 2000s Captain Marvel and had some weird idea for a character arc where she barely emotes at all all movie but gets yelled at for being emotional and then blows up the Kree while apparently committing some unintentional genocide on the side. Tee-hee-hee I guess. But her arc has been flat and shallow beyond belief and shoving two more characters into her movie in what can be best described as a screen test for her replacements did not do her any favors there. The first movie gets away with it because Marvel could do no wrong at it's height and you even went to see the bad ones, Thor 2 probably could have broken a billion in you released right before Endgame. Now the MCU is running cold and they couldn't even advertise, and yes that was a huge deal because Iman Vellani is a national treasure even if the Ms Marvel show was just average and she could almost certainly put buts in seats. Even people who hated the movie are posting positively about stuff her saying recently she has opinions about the universe designation of the MCU and if she could have done more press stuff she might have been able to connect on that.

That is just it, Carol has a lot of fun things that you can develop and mine for stories but because the X-Men are not part of the MCU, it robs her of a lot of her legacy.

In my head she was a very important part of the Mighty Avengers but... So much of what she did involved things that just do not exist in the MCU when she was first introduced (Kang, Wonder Man, a slate of powerful enough villains for Operation: Lightning Storm to be a thing), which also neuters her a little. So I kind of get why they relied so heavily on the stories taking place after Carol became Captain Marvel but even that is kind of difficult because there are not enough heroes to make a Civil War II, SWORD is only kind of a thing and she cannot even be the leader of the Avengers, since Marvel decided to not make any Avengers films for 7 years. So, yeah, she can feel kind of bland because they refuse to grab stuff from her older comics and her newer comics require a different status quo for the MCU, so I kind of understand why they are struggling to make Carol work.

Whether it was ethical or moral or not is less important than the fact that the Blip introduced an entire universe of bizarre complications that make a mess of the setting. The Falcon and The Winter Soldier was massively incoherent as a series because it was quite clear no one had a real grasp on what the consequences of the whole scenario really were, and while many subsequent Marvel entries have tried to simply elide the issue, it is a problem hanging over the whole franchise. The obvious solution was to simply undo the Snap entirely, erasing those five years from existence entirely. That wouldn't have been entirely ethical either, but it would have been simple.

It would have been simpler for the setting but it introduces complications for the heroes, unless their future-selves integrate into their past bodies... Or every major hero that came back in time has a duplicate and one of them happens to die in the big battle, I guess... Or I guess one person could have gone back in time but that feels less satisfactory. It also introduces the concept of multiple timelines... Which they did toy with in the Endgame that was produced...

Bah, the whole thing was "rule of cool" over logic.

But, yeah, undoing the Blip would have been better for the franchise as a whole. Definitely better than radically altering the setting, then never talking about what changed.

[Psyren]

Eh, the Dune universe is pretty far from ours, but I'm pretty stoked for the next round of it.

I don't mind a world different from ours. Just so long as it's an interesting one.

I don't mind a world enitrely different from ours either, but that's not really what Marvel is. The whole point of Marvel is that it takes place in our world with small differences; World War 2 happened there, Vietnam happened there, European colonization, the AIDS crisis, the moon landing, 9/11, and on and on. I have no doubt that some future version of the MCU will include Covid too (have the comics gotten around to it yet?) Thus no matter how high-tech or magical it becomes, it can't stray too far from our own history/reality - for the stories that take place on present-day Earth, anyway.

I think when a company like Disney is bothering to put these elements in, in the first place, and having to edit them out to play in countries that have reestrictions on such things, that's literally the "best they can do" here. It's not like Disney can change the policies/laws of every nation around the world, just because they want to.

If nothing less than the impossible will satisfy some people, then the correct response is to not bother trying to please that group at all. If me trying to please someone, but not being able to do it perfectly/completely gets me more flack than not bothering to try at all, guess what I'm going to do? Take the "moving the chains" win where you can.

Correct.

That would be really really cool. I do get Marvel's hesitancy on this though. A couple people have touched on this already. You make things too "different", and the setting is no longer "Earth, just likes ours, but with superheroes". But that's what most people actually want in superhero stories, so you have to be careful.

I can also state, from long experience reading comic books, that moving characters into a more galactic scale, is often the kiss of death. You can certainly have some characters and stories that take place "out there" (GotG has been great about this). But I do think that most of the core stuff has to be on Earth, and about Earth. Doesn't mean you can't have galactic level stuff come to Earth. And yeah, I agree with the poster that mentioned above that the rest of the galaxy's empires should be very much aware and interested in Earth right now as a result of the Infinity Gems stuff, but we haven't seen much come of that except for the pretty darn mediocre Secret Invasion stuff.

Right again.

I also agree that a second Captain Marvel film was really really needed. Could have filled in who she was and how she fit into the wider universe a bit. I actually liked the first film. I thought it hit the points it needed to hit, and was a great "beginning/origin" for the character. But then they... didn't do anything with it. Brief bits at the beginning and the end of Endgame, and that's it. They could have used this film to actually set up other interactions between her and other characters/events in the franchise. By waiting so long, and then lumping everything together into this film instead, it left a hole where the character development could have been.

Or, as several people have also pointed out, maybe less nonsense in this film, and more time spent doing some character deep diving instead? Monica Rambeau could have used some of this too (though honestly, I felt I knew more about what motivated her from watching Wandavison than I did about Carol from her previous appearances, including an entire feature film, so there is that). And yeah, this was kind of a unique situation due to the somewhat unique nature of her origin story/film. She literally recovers from induced memory loss, and has to figure out who she is. So we literally don't know who she is when she shows up later, and then they kinda don't spend any time on that. Missed opportunity IMO.

Concur - I liked Aladna, especially as a way to show the kinds of crazy stuff Carol's been up to out in the far reaches of space, but that's the kind of thing you do after you've established the character. It was fun to see Bruce Banner's island lab where he got away from everybody to become Professor Hulk in seclusion, but the MCU earned that by showing us his character and personal struggles before that.

As Ramza rightly said, CM1 was about showing us who Carol isn't, we needed one movie in between that and this one to show who she is. Or failing that, make this movie about her not knowing who she is, so that we can get to know her at the same time that she does.

[Trixie_One]

Yeah. That scene didn't bother me at all, and I'm not sure it really bothered anyone who saw it. I think about 1000x more people were bothered by all the internet/media numskullls making such a big deal about how great it was for being in the film in the first place, than cared about it actually being there. And sure, there was a bit of cringe to the scene (cause it was so very very obviously put in exactly to get that reaction from said group of internet/media numbskulls). But no more or less cringe worthy than any of a number of silly poses, positions, statements, jokes, comments, etc, that get tossed into films like this.

Hi, I'm someone. Also pretty sure I'm not a numskull either. I'm about as pro highlighting good female fronted films as you can get it, and I still found it insultingly artificial.

It didn't annoy me for being just there to get a reaction. I don't think that was the intent, as if you're looking for that kind of lets poke the bear trolling then you're going to get something like She-Hulk.

To me it was such an unearned self congratulationary pat on the back. This from the company that up to this point had only a single female fronted superhero film, and one that came out many years after Wonder Woman had beaten them to the punch and showed that it could be successful. The company that before that had the person in charge say that female led superhero films don't sell. The company that would only bother to do something with their only lady Avenger after she was already dead.

It just felt super forced y'know, hey look at all our very important and respected lady superheroes, all together in a way that would be totally natural, like look there's Mantis, she's a major character right?

To me it was jarring, made me go 'you've got to be kidding' in the cinema, and took me right out of what should have been their actual triumphant climax that had been going pretty well right up to that point.

[Trafalgar]

I do not believe what Tony Stark demanded of the Avengers - they they blink everyone back, 5 years later - was entirely ethical or moral. Especially, when you start conceptualizing how many people across the entire universe were suddenly returned to life. Failing to prevent Thanos from gaining the gems is not a crime, unilaterally snapping everyone back all because 1 man did not want to lose his daughter is pretty messed up. The Avengers are absolutely guilty of crimes. As I alluded to above, societies collapsed and were barely getting back on their feet, then suddenly they have to feed, cloth, shelter trillions of new people. How many people starved because society writ large across the universe was not given the proper lead time to prepare for the return?

This si one big reason they should have ended everything at Endgame. I can think of so many weird consequences to the 5 year blip. For Example:

Life Insurance - Did half the Life Insurance policies in the world pay out at the snap? Did that crash the world economy? And did the Insurance companies try to recoup the money after everyone came back?

[Infernally Clay]

I do not believe what Tony Stark demanded of the Avengers - they they blink everyone back, 5 years later - was entirely ethical or moral. Especially, when you start conceptualizing how many people across the entire universe were suddenly returned to life. Failing to prevent Thanos from gaining the gems is not a crime, unilaterally snapping everyone back all because 1 man did not want to lose his daughter is pretty messed up. The Avengers are absolutely guilty of crimes. As I alluded to above, societies collapsed and were barely getting back on their feet, then suddenly they have to feed, cloth, shelter trillions of new people. How many people starved because society writ large across the universe was not given the proper lead time to prepare for the return?

Funnily enough I actually agree with Stark. It isn't just about his daughter, after all. He's just a stand-in for everyone that has lived the last five years. Nearly four hundred thousand babies are born on Earth alone every single day and even after Thanos killed half the population of the universe that would still translate to well over three hundred and fifty million people born on Earth during the five years before Endgame. That's more than the entire population of the USA right now, just for a sense of scale.

Thanos killed half the universe to make life more comfortable for the remaining half. How would killing one person for every ten you're bringing back to life be any better?

That's just the human cost, as well, remember. Now do it for the entire universe. Hundreds of millions of lives on every inhabited planet across a functionally infinite universe. When you consider the actual sheer size of the number of lives Thanos took with a snap of his finger, you begin to appreciate just how right Stark was. You can't undo what Thanos did. The scale is too vast, the consequences too severe. All you can do is bring back the people he killed. There is no other alternative. The people that were born in the five years after Thanos snapped his fingers are no less deserving of life than anyone that he killed with that snap.

Yeah it means there will be years, decades, even lifetimes of struggle for civilisations across the entire universe but getting back the people you lost makes it worth it. Stark was right.

[Psyren]

Hi, I'm someone. Also pretty sure I'm not a numskull either. I'm about as pro highlighting good female fronted films as you can get it, and I still found it insultingly artificial.

It didn't annoy me for being just there to get a reaction. I don't think that was the intent, as if you're looking for that kind of lets poke the bear trolling then you're going to get something like She-Hulk.

To me it was such an unearned self congratulationary pat on the back. This from the company that up to this point had only a single female fronted superhero film, and one that came out many years after Wonder Woman had beaten them to the punch and showed that it could be successful. The company that before that had the person in charge say that female led superhero films don't sell. The company that would only bother to do something with their only lady Avenger after she was already dead.

It just felt super forced y'know, hey look at all our very important and respected lady superheroes, all together in a way that would be totally natural, like look there's Mantis, she's a major character right?

To me it was jarring, made me go 'you've got to be kidding' in the cinema, and took me right out of what should have been their actual triumphant climax that had been going pretty well right up to that point.

I viewed it as a statement of intent. "Yeah we're behind on the heroine front (pay no attention to the Perlmutter who was behind the curtain), but we have a hell of a slate to draw from with the groundwork we laid, while our competitors only have 1-2."

And there was probably some poke the bear in there too but as mentioned, I'm okay with that.

This si one big reason they should have ended everything at Endgame. I can think of so many weird consequences to the 5 year blip. For Example:

Life Insurance - Did half the Life Insurance policies in the world pay out at the snap? Did that crash the world economy? And did the Insurance companies try to recoup the money after everyone came back?

Most insurance policies include a force majeure ("Act of God") clause - the Snap would definitely qualify. An alien god is still a god.

[Trafalgar]

Most insurance policies include a force majeure ("Act of God") clause - the Snap would definitely qualify. An alien god is still a god.

But does that mean Insurance companies didn't pay out after NY in Avengers? Because Loki caused that and he is a God.

[Infernally Clay]

But does that mean Insurance companies didn't pay out after NY in Avengers? Because Loki caused that and he is a God.

I would assume the Department for Damage Control handled that one. They went in, confiscated any Chitauri technology left behind and repaired any damage done. Given that Stark was half bankrolling it himself it was probably quite comprehensive.

[Trafalgar]

I would assume the Department for Damage Control handled that one. They went in, confiscated any Chitauri technology left behind and repaired any damage done. Given that Stark was half bankrolling it himself it was probably quite comprehensive.

These are the questions for a Marvel show that revolves around superhero law... Too bad they didn't do a good job with She Hulk.

[Lemmy]

They released a new "trailer" for The Marvels... Starring cats...

Disney really can't get enough of being embarrassed by this movie, huh...

[Ramza00]

To me it was such an unearned self congratulationary pat on the back. This from the company that up to this point had only a single female fronted superhero film, and one that came out many years after Wonder Woman had beaten them to the punch and showed that it could be successful. The company that before that had the person in charge say that female led superhero films don't sell. The company that would only bother to do something with their only lady Avenger after she was already dead.

Wonder Woman is 2017 and it takes 3 years for a movie to get made. 2 if you are pushing it.

As others have said there is a past Marvel guy, this Isaac Perlmutter who was very much the person who allowed things or not. Well we know from the Sony email leaks, for their is Sony and Marvel stuff back and forth that “Ike” was against any female superhero movie for he thought the whole thing was cursed by the 1984 Supergirl movie that happened after Superman III (1983). Then in the e-mail Ike list other female superhero movie bombs. Note all I am saying here is true, and I am omitting so much for trying to keep this as good vibes ( I have anger here, *laughs* )

They released a new "trailer" for The Marvels... Starring cats...

Disney really can't get enough of being embarrassed by this movie, huh...

Goose-night, not a sound from the spaceship
Has Captain lost her memory?
She is smiling alone
In the lamplight, the withered leaves collect at my feet
And the wind begins to moan

[Dragonus45]

Yeah yeah, I'm fully aware that you're giving no credit. We at least agree on Iman Vellani.

You see, everyone loves Iman. She's great.

That is just it, Carol has a lot of fun things that you can develop and mine for stories but because the X-Men are not part of the MCU, it robs her of a lot of her legacy.

At the end of the day, they need her to be a Strong character but with the worst kind of writing for that kind of character. It's like certain action movie stars with contracts that state their character can't be knocked down more then X number of times and if they are punched then Co-Star needs to be punched an equal number of times. (This is why The Rundown is still the best Rock movie) but even worse because it's a deliberate writing decision. If they were willing to just let her be vulnerable and get some actual character moments and flaws that would then be space for growth. Hell, they could have dropper her into the X-Men universe and had her be a depressive wreck after her rash actions fighting the Kree lead something like a trillion people dying in a long chain reaction consequences and capture that character arc of her getting back on her feet from the Claremont era stuff but without every having to go anywhere near the Avengers #200 plotline. But first, step one, a character who can never be vulnerable can never have an arc, and flat characters are boring. (And Batista is a better actor then The Rock fir exactly this reason.)

[Psyren]

They released a new "trailer" for The Marvels... Starring cats...

Disney really can't get enough of being embarrassed by this movie, huh...

At this point, why not? They might as well troll.

These are the questions for a Marvel show that revolves around superhero law... Too bad they didn't do a good job with She Hulk.

She-Hulk was post-Endgame, why would there still be cases about the Battle of New York?

[Dragonus45]

She-Hulk was post-Endgame, why would there still be cases about the Battle of New York?

Oh that's easy, you bring up a similar case and cite the Battle of New York cases as a precedent. Bonus points if it was unfair in some way and She Hulk is trying to get it overturned.

[Trafalgar]

She-Hulk was post-Endgame, why would there still be cases about the Battle of New York?

The Battle of New York only happened about 6 years before Infinity War. So there were cases still in court when the snap happened. The snap would have removed half the judges, juries, attorneys, plaintiffs, defendants, etc. So any case in court at that time would have to be retried by an already overstrained legal system. Bringing everyone back would have just stretched things out more.

[Lemmy]

At this point, why not? They might as well troll.

Because "trolling" costs money... And also because it usually doesn't end well for them... But sure, why not? What matters a little extra spark for the MCU's biggest dumpster fire?

[Infernally Clay]

The Battle of New York only happened about 6 years before Infinity War. So there were cases still in court when the snap happened. The snap would have removed half the judges, juries, attorneys, plaintiffs, defendants, etc. So any case in court at that time would have to be retried by an already overstrained legal system. Bringing everyone back would have just stretched things out more.

I'm going to go out on a limb and assume, outside of very serious crimes, the courts and legal itself was put on hold due to the extenuating circumstances. Half of all life on the planet just died, y'know?

[Prime32]

It's like certain action movie stars with contracts that state their character can't be knocked down more then X number of times and if they are punched then Co-Star needs to be punched an equal number of times. (This is why The Rundown is still the best Rock movie) but even worse because it's a deliberate writing decision. If they were willing to just let her be vulnerable and get some actual character moments and flaws that would then be space for growth.

Ironically I think Captain Marvel might actually be the only female MCU character who's ever been punched by a man (Thanos in Endgame).

And that scene actually does imply consequences for her rejecting the "if you rely too much on your powers then your skills will get sloppy" idea back in her own movie. Especially since Iron Man is the one who sees that fight through; ever since the first Avengers movie he'd been training to be "more than just the suit", and aware of his smallness in the grand scheme of things to the point of neurosis. It's hard to tell if they were intentionally going for that, though; with Iron Man being the protagonist of the whole MCU it's unlikely that they'd let a latecomer steal his thunder in the finale to begin with.

[Ramza00]

Because "trolling" costs money... And also because it usually doesn't end well for them... But sure, why not? What matters a little extra spark for the MCU's biggest dumpster fire?

Their money, their grandiosity, their excess

They get to do it even if it upsets people

Their toys their MCU not ours

[Lemmy]

Their money, their grandiosity, their excess

They get to do it even if it upsets people

Their toys their MCU not ours

So? I never disputed their rights to do whatever dumb decisions they want... I'm not even upset about it. But I can still point out that dumb decisions are dumb.

[Psyren]

Because "trolling" costs money... And also because it usually doesn't end well for them... But sure, why not? What matters a little extra spark for the MCU's biggest dumpster fire?

Gosh golly oh noes, how will they ever afford it...
("Doesn't end well?" What "ending" is that?)

The Battle of New York only happened about 6 years before Infinity War. So there were cases still in court when the snap happened. The snap would have removed half the judges, juries, attorneys, plaintiffs, defendants, etc. So any case in court at that time would have to be retried by an already overstrained legal system. Bringing everyone back would have just stretched things out more.

Yeah but all of that would have been wrapped up by the Sokovia Accords, which were cited (as repealed) in She-Hulk. Presumably that body of legislation would have also covered collateral damage from sanctioned vs. unsanctioned superhero action.

But regardless, the scale of Thanos was far, far greater than the scale of the BoNY. It's possible that insurance companies would have paid out for the latter but not the former; either way, the latter showing up in She-Hulk wouldn't have meant anything.

[Dragonus45]

Ironically I think Captain Marvel might actually be the only female MCU character who's ever been punched by a man (Thanos in Endgame).

And that scene actually does imply consequences for her rejecting the "if you rely too much on your powers then your skills will get sloppy" idea back in her own movie. Especially since Iron Man is the one who sees that fight through; ever since the first Avengers movie he'd been training to be "more than just the suit", and aware of his smallness in the grand scheme of things to the point of neurosis. It's hard to tell if they were intentionally going for that, though; with Iron Man being the protagonist of the whole MCU it's unlikely that they'd let a latecomer steal his thunder in the finale to begin with.

I would give them credit for that as a potential theme if it was followed up on but instead we got... this.

[Lemmy]

Gosh golly oh noes, how will they ever afford it...
("Doesn't end well?" What "ending" is that?)

Ah, that's right... I forgot Disney is in such amazing financial conditions that they can afford to keep burning money. My mistake.

(Also, being able to afford a dumb decision doesn't make it a smart one - You can punch yourself in the face and survive just fine... Doesn't mean it isn't a stupid thing to do).

[Psyren]

Ah, that's right... I forgot Disney is in such amazing financial conditions that they can afford to keep burning money. My mistake.

On a trailer? Sure can.

(Also, being able to afford a dumb decision doesn't make it a smart one - You can punch yourself in the face and survive just fine... Doesn't mean it isn't a stupid thing to do).

They're not the ones yelling about it

[Delicious Taffy]

Alright, I'm sorry for just watching the movie and enjoying it.

[Lemmy]

They're not the ones yelling about it

Yelling? How am I yelling??? All I did was point out (yet another) dumb decision regarding this movie... And people got defensive.

[Psyren]

Yelling? How am I yelling???

I didn't say you were. What I'm saying is that if they truly "punched themselves in the face," presumably they would be the ones feeling any pain.

[Lemmy]

I didn't say you were.

You heavily implied I was. Are we going to pretend that's not what you meant?

What I'm saying is that if they truly "punched themselves in the face," presumably they would be the ones feeling any pain.

Once again you're taking an example and pretending that's the point I was making. Missing the forest for the tree... Seemingly intentionally so.

I didn't say they punched themselves in the face. I said that dumb decisions are dumb even if you can afford them. Wasting money on yet another trailer is bad decision. That's all I said.

Then here you come, implying I'm "yelling" and that I'm 'in pain" or raging against Disney or the movie, instead of simply acknowledging and pointing out their failure.

[Psyren]

Wasting money on yet another trailer is bad decision. That's all I said.

I know. Clearly they disagree.

[VampiricLongbow]

Funnily enough I actually agree with Stark. It isn't just about his daughter, after all. He's just a stand-in for everyone that has lived the last five years. Nearly four hundred thousand babies are born on Earth alone every single day and even after Thanos killed half the population of the universe that would still translate to well over three hundred and fifty million people born on Earth during the five years before Endgame. That's more than the entire population of the USA right now, just for a sense of scale.

Thanos killed half the universe to make life more comfortable for the remaining half. How would killing one person for every ten you're bringing back to life be any better?

That's just the human cost, as well, remember. Now do it for the entire universe. Hundreds of millions of lives on every inhabited planet across a functionally infinite universe. When you consider the actual sheer size of the number of lives Thanos took with a snap of his finger, you begin to appreciate just how right Stark was. You can't undo what Thanos did. The scale is too vast, the consequences too severe. All you can do is bring back the people he killed. There is no other alternative. The people that were born in the five years after Thanos snapped his fingers are no less deserving of life than anyone that he killed with that snap.

Yeah it means there will be years, decades, even lifetimes of struggle for civilisations across the entire universe but getting back the people you lost makes it worth it. Stark was right.

I do not disagree with that assessment either. It probably should have been communicated in the movie, instead of humanizing the act and centering it around one man and his daughter.

I suppose I was more approaching this from a Star Trek point of view. What happened with the snap and the timeline that was created after it was not "supposed to happen" and by going back and correcting that error you return the timeline to its proper place. Which, yeah, really is not fair to the people who would all die.

Like I said in other posts, if Marvel was intent on not engaging with what happened with the Blip and deriving new narrative avenues from it, then going with the blip is really messy as compared to the heroes just going back in time and making it so Thanos loses the battle and does not snap. Having said that, I personally much prefer the Blip idea because I, as a creative person, would have done a lot of fun and unique things with the concept.