Jump to content

The MCU - Marvel Cinematic Universe


Jay

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, mstrox said:

A little bit of bad press is just what Sony needs to be a bit more pliable at the negotiation table.

 

I just read that in Bob Iger's voice. Was that intentional?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, mstrox said:

This “news” stinks of a bargaining chip to pressure Sony into signing on. I’d put money on this conversation not being over. 

 

Yes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/21/2019 at 12:14 PM, TheUlyssesian said:

I see Cap giving shield to Falcon as an empty gesture, as a cop-out. And baiting.

 

They will only have had balls if they actually make a Captain America movie with Mackie in the lead role. That is the only thing that will be meaningful.

 

If they just have Mackie's Cap in a streaming show or whatever - that doesn't cut it.

 

If Marvel fail to make a cinematic motion picture with a black Cap, then they are just a pandering PC company offering platitudes without making any real progress.

 

Seems like I was right. The passing of the Shield was even more of an empty pandering gesture than previously imagined. 

 

Mackie is and will remain the Falcon. 

 

In that case what was even the point of including that bit in Avengers Endgame?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/9/2019 at 10:50 AM, Thekthithm said:

They're resurrecting these shielas from earlier in the franchise, Peggy, Jane, etc. Next they'll give Pepper her own series!

 

Gwyneth Paltrow is semi-retired from the industry and running her Goop empire full time. The only reason she's doing that Netflix show is because she's married to one of the show runners. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Gistech said:

Seems like there's no going back: Feige confirms Spidey is out of the MCU. Tom Holland says he is to carry on despite this.

Feige says they “told the story they wanted to tell,” but that’s not really true, is it? Far from Home was all about spider-man picking up the iron man torch. The movie clearly left the plot line open for future spider-man chapters in an MCU-driven world. (Plus, if they got the story told, why the back-and-forth between the two studios?)

 

I’ll bet this falling-out has badly disrupted plans for the next MCU phase. But that doesn’t mean Sony has it any easier. Now they’re going to have to move Spider-Man forward untethered to any of the MCU stories, which means—what, another reboot?

 

In the last 17 years, we’ve seen two good Spider-Man films followed by a lame second sequel, followed by a decent reboot followed by a craptastic sequel, followed by an excellent Tom Holland reboot for several films now forced into an early demise by an unnecessary dead-end. Let’s get ready for reboot cycle #3!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can continue the Spider-man series without any further involvement of Marvel and the MCU.  The post-credits scene opens up a nice big door for them to explore new personal stories for Peter and MJ that don't involve SHIELD, the Avengers, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will take away the context from Holland's Spiderman. There is a very specific context to how his Spiderman even came to be, developed, matured, etc. etc. That's all gone now.

 

It is a bigger writing problem than you think.

 

What it does is it suddenly shrinks the world of Spiderman considerably with regards to the scope of the events it can cover, the breath of characters it can access, the richness of the tapestry that it can tap into. That is all gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s not like the first two movies have been erased. That context still exists even if he just wallops We’re-Wolf the Man Wolf in the next one without mentioning Tony Stark’s name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The context will never materialize again. Always the audience had the understanding that beyond the confines of this frame, beyond the confines of this movie exists a much larger world, a world with many other superheroes, many other worlds and beings, many other powers and entities and organizations. 

 

That would be gone now. It reduces the scopes of the world.

 

The audience will now see a teenager fighting some bad guys. And that will be it. There will be nothing more to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, mstrox said:

They can continue the Spider-man series without any further involvement of Marvel and the MCU.  The post-credits scene opens up a nice big door for them to explore new personal stories for Peter and MJ that don't involve SHIELD, the Avengers, etc.

 

That's true. Sony has writers Chris McKenna & Erik Summers returning to write the third film, so if the studio is careful about the direction they go in (sans Marvel Studios) -- they could do an adequate third Holland movie. But considering the studio's history otherwise... I don't know.

 

But another factor is... will Jon Watts return to direct? He has a good relationship with Feige and Marvel, and he may be reluctant to return given he won't have Feige to support him. Sony is being run by former Fox exec Tom Rothman (tightwad and creative suppressor), so if you're a director and don't have a big profitable film to your name -- he will run all over you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Bayesian said:

Feige says they “told the story they wanted to tell,” but that’s not really true, is it? Far from Home was all about spider-man picking up the iron man torch. The movie clearly left the plot line open for future spider-man chapters in an MCU-driven world. (Plus, if they got the story told, why the back-and-forth between the two studios?)

 

Wrong!

 

The film deals with Peter's realization that he won't and can't be the 'next Iron Man' just as much as Giacchino can't be the 'next John Williams'. He's something different, and fuck, I can't evenimagine the state of the MCU ten or fifteen years from now where he could ever fill Stark's shoes - and I hope this series is well and truly over by then and we're not still on this ferris wheel of reboots and sequels.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Saw a poll and apparently the Russo brothers are the most popular Marvel directors of all time:

 

1. The Avengers: Infinity War

2. The Avengers: Endgame

3. Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Stefancos said:

The Winter Soldier is their best film. Its possibly the best MCU film.

 

Hmmm, interesting choice. I guess it depends on what you see MCU films for. The Winter Soldier may well be their best attempt at earnst storytelling. But I don't think Marvel have really ever done earnstness and gritty realism particularly well. If I want an earnst superhero film, I'd sooner turn to Raimi's Spiderman or Nolan's Batman than to The Winter Soldier.

 

I personally watch Marvel films for those entries that are more inherently comedic in nature: I think that's their forte. Personally, I laugh the most during The Avengers. The Whedon banter cracks me up, and Downey Jr is a force to be reckoned with. It may be my favourite action-comedy of all time.

 

Other than that and a handful of other films in their catalogue, their game is old, for me. I have no intention of watching any film in Phase 4 or beyond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I rewatched The Winter Soldier last week for the  first time since I saw it in theatres, and noticed The Winter Soldier is in the film for like five minutes! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very astute observation. Any other comments on it?

5 hours ago, Chen G. said:

 

Hmmm, interesting choice. I guess it depends on what you see MCU films for. The Winter Soldier may well be their best attempt at earnst storytelling. But I don't think Marvel have really ever done earnstness and gritty realism particularly well. If I want an earnst superhero film, I'd sooner turn to Raimi's Spiderman or Nolan's Batman than to The Winter Soldier.

 

I personally watch Marvel films for those entries that are more inherently comedic in nature: I think that's their forte. Personally, I laugh the most during The Avengers. The Whedon banter cracks me up, and Downey Jr is a force to be reckoned with. It may be my favourite action-comedy of all time.

 

Other than that and a handful of other films in their catalogue, their game is old, for me. I have no intention of watching any film in Phase 4 or beyond.

 

Typical Chen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Chen G. said:

 

Hmmm, interesting choice.

 

Interesting but not uncommon since it's often regarded as one of the best Marvel has put out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Arpy said:

I rewatched The Winter Soldier last week for the  first time since I saw it in theatres, and noticed The Winter Soldier is in the film for like five minutes! 

 

Worst film ever!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Alexcremers said:

Interesting but not uncommon since it's often regarded as one of the best Marvel has put out. 

 

I was about to say. If anything it's the cliche choice. What's interesting about that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Winter Soldier definitely has a cogent story and at least tries to have some character development, which is probably why it's higher rated than the rest of the bunch. 

On 9/7/2019 at 8:32 AM, Chen G. said:

If I want an earnst superhero film, I'd sooner turn to Raimi's Spiderman or Nolan's Batman than to The Winter Soldier.

 

Yes, those films feel like contained stories within their respective films without needing to view them through the larger tapestry of something like the MCU (which operates more like a fast food joint). You watch the Raimi films and can see his signature style all over them, and Nolan's Batman series feels like it was made with one visionary figurehead. Whereas the MCU is a patchwork of bland cinematography and the occasional flashes of colour and style.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, but of course. These pieces of news lay bare the risible manipulations of Avengers: Endgame that pander to the delusional suckers who see any kind of finality in any of the marvel films. Marvel will be preying on the wallets of unsuspecting movie-goers for millennia.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TheUlyssesian said:

I mean, but of course. These pieces of news lay bare the risible manipulations of Avengers: Endgame that pander to the delusional suckers who see any kind of finality in any of the marvel films. Marvel will be preying on the wallets of unsuspecting movie-goers for millennia.

 

 

 

Sure but this mountain of Disney+ Marvel shows and movies looks like such a mess waiting to happen, I doubt I'll have the time and patience to follow them all. I even gave up on the DC Arrowverse after two seasons of The Flash, one season of Supergirl, and two episodes of Legends of Tomorrow. It's all too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I see it, the overabundance of marvel shows will eventually saturate the market to the point it explodes, like a buildup of pressure. Marvel can announce all the IPs it wants but it should come down to what works and what doesn't - of which there's no guarantee. It doesn't come off as a celebration of what came before, it stinks of corporate greed.

 

Now we have the Elementals, which undoubtedly means something to the comic book fans, but to everyone else? With Thanos we had little hints of his involvement that meant you didn't have to read any comics to know who he was.  

1 hour ago, Thekthithm said:

I even gave up on the DC Arrowverse after two seasons of The Flash, one season of Supergirl, and two episodes of Legends of Tomorrow. 

From what I've seen of those shows, it at least captures of the spirit of heroism that none of the DC films have achieved. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Thekthithm said:

I even gave up on the DC Arrowverse after two seasons of The Flash, one season of Supergirl, and two episodes of Legends of Tomorrow. It's all too much.

 

 

Not exactly snob TV either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheUlyssesian said:

I mean, but of course. These pieces of news lay bare the risible manipulations of Avengers: Endgame that pander to the delusional suckers who see any kind of finality in any of the marvel films. Marvel will be preying on the wallets of unsuspecting movie-goers for millennia.

 

 

To be fair, the article suggests that Black Widow would take place prior to the events of infinity war, so it wouldn’t be like Stark is coming back from the dead. That said, if Marvel were ever to pull that kind of trick on us, it would spell the end of the franchise. What meaning would stakes have in a world where nothing was actually final?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Bayesian said:

To be fair, the article suggests that Black Widow would take place prior to the events of infinity war, so it wouldn’t be like Stark is coming back from the dead. That said, if Marvel were ever to pull that kind of trick on us, it would spell the end of the franchise. What meaning would stakes have in a world where nothing was actually final?

 

I absolutely expect them to 'undo' the end of Endgame at some stage, perhaps when RDJ needs more money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.