Marvel Cinematic Universe Part II

[Drops Of Venus]

My two cents: I see a lot of people wondering why Captain Marvel 2 had to change its name when a movie like Captain America: Civil War didn't and, well... I can tell you right now one big difference between those two movies: only one of them is actually being directed by a woman of color. Maybe Nia DaCosta feels more strongly about promoting a movie that gives equal billing to its three female leads as opposed to using the ''Captain Marvel & her sidekicks'' treatment. Maybe she feels like elevating the women of color to have equal importance in the title of the movie is her way of giving them their due, specially for a character like Monica who's been historically sidelined despite being the first female Captain Marvel in the comics. I think a lot of people are looking at this from an anti-feminist kind of way, when in reality it's possible that the decision was actually made so the movie would look less like a white feminism kind of movie, which is a valid criticism some people had about the first one.

And for what it's worth, I believe this title is something Brie Larson would 100% support. She has always been a big champion for the inclusion of women of color in the industry, to the point where that made trolls start a hate campaign against her. I remember how she once said she doesn't believe in ''taking seats away from anyone, just creating more seats at the table'', and that's how I'm choosing to see this title change. Carol is still at the core of the movie (''Marvel'' is obviously her legacy), and she's not losing anything. She's just sharing with her fellow women, and maybe that kind of sisterhood is the feminism the movie wants to convey. I don't think it's a bad thing when you look at it this way.

[John Venus]

Is it really a far comparison between this movie and setting up the Wonder Fam in a Wonder Woman sequel when both Monica and Kamala are doing all their character development in TV shows first before appearing in this movie? It’s like teasing Donna as a little girl in WW, then giving her and Cassie their own tv shows and then have WW84 be a team film. It’s not quite the same as Bucky and Captain America , or Rhodey and Tony.

Speaking of which, I’m not sure how I feel about having to watch the TV shows to understand the movies...I guess I’ll have to wait for how it’s executed in the film...

Edit: Although I do agree about the cynical take and about how something about this movie feels disingenuous...it probably doesn’t help that the first Captain Marvel film comes off as a knee-jerk reaction to Disney learning WB was making a Wonder Woman movie and didn’t wanna look bad by comparison...

I don't want to turn this into a WW84 discussion so I will just say not introducing the Wonder Fam in WW2 was a missed opportunity and by the time they get around to it, casuals will just assume they are ripping off the Marvels. They also don't need a whole tv show to explain who they are.

You don't have to watch the shows but if you did then you have a deeper understanding and appreciation for what happened. The end of EG showed Steve passing on the shield to Sam, people who only follow the movie won't be surprised when the trailer for Cap 4 drops and it's Sam slinging the shield but if you watched the show you know why Sam is worthy of the shield.

They've also said they are filming additional scenes for Dr Strange 2 because of the distance between it and WV. Somebody, either Wong or Mordru will bring Dr Strange plus the audience up to speed on what happened to Wanda.

My two cents: I see a lot of people wondering why Captain Marvel 2 had to change its name when a movie like Captain America: Civil War didn't and, well... I can tell you right now one big difference between those two movies: only one of them is actually being directed by a woman of color. Maybe Nia DaCosta feels more strongly about promoting a movie that gives equal billing to its three female leads as opposed to using the ''Captain Marvel & her sidekicks'' treatment. Maybe she feels like elevating the women of color to have equal importance in the title of the movie is her way of giving them their due, specially for a character like Monica who's been historically sidelined despite being the first female Captain Marvel in the comics. I think a lot of people are looking at this from an anti-feminist kind of way, when in reality it's possible that the decision was actually made so the movie would look less like a white feminism kind of movie, which is a valid criticism some people had about the first one.

And for what it's worth, I believe this title is something Brie Larson would 100% support. She has always been a big champion for the inclusion of women of color in the industry, to the point where that made trolls start a hate campaign against her. I remember how she once said she doesn't believe in ''taking seats away from anyone, just creating more seats at the table'', and that's how I'm choosing to see this title change. Carol is still at the core of the movie (''Marvel'' is obviously her legacy), and she's not losing anything. She's just sharing with her fellow women, and maybe that kind of sisterhood is the feminism the movie wants to convey. I don't think it's a bad thing when you look at it this way.

Said it better that I could have.

[rpmaluki]

My two cents: I see a lot of people wondering why Captain Marvel 2 had to change its name when a movie like Captain America: Civil War didn't and, well... I can tell you right now one big difference between those two movies: only one of them is actually being directed by a woman of color. Maybe Nia DaCosta feels more strongly about promoting a movie that gives equal billing to its three female leads as opposed to using the ''Captain Marvel & her sidekicks'' treatment. Maybe she feels like elevating the women of color to have equal importance in the title of the movie is her way of giving them their due, specially for a character like Monica who's been historically sidelined despite being the first female Captain Marvel in the comics. I think a lot of people are looking at this from an anti-feminist kind of way, when in reality it's possible that the decision was actually made so the movie would look less like a white feminism kind of movie, which is a valid criticism some people had about the first one.

And for what it's worth, I believe this title is something Brie Larson would 100% support. She has always been a big champion for the inclusion of women of color in the industry, to the point where that made trolls start a hate campaign against her. I remember how she once said she doesn't believe in ''taking seats away from anyone, just creating more seats at the table'', and that's how I'm choosing to see this title change. Carol is still at the core of the movie (''Marvel'' is obviously her legacy), and she's not losing anything. She's just sharing with her fellow women, and maybe that kind of sisterhood is the feminism the movie wants to convey. I don't think it's a bad thing when you look at it this way.

Which is why I have no issues with the name change.

Absolutely.

[I'm a Fish]

I don't want to turn this into a WW84 discussion so I will just say not introducing the Wonder Fam in WW2 was a missed opportunity and by the time they get around to it, casuals will just assume they are ripping off the Marvels. They also don't need a whole tv show to explain who they are.

Yeah, sorry I shouldn’t have said anything. This is about Marvel movies.

You don't have to watch the shows but if you did then you have a deeper understanding and appreciation for what happened. The end of EG showed Steve passing on the shield to Sam, people who only follow the movie won't be surprised when the trailer for Cap 4 drops and it's Sam slinging the shield but if you watched the show you know why Sam is worthy of the shield.

They've also said they are filming additional scenes for Dr Strange 2 because of the distance between it and WV. Somebody, either Wong or Mordru will bring Dr Strange plus the audience up to speed on what happened to Wanda.

But what about Monica? She got her powers in WandaVision. If you didn’t see the show, last time you saw her she was 10 years old, now her she’s and adult with superpowers. I’m guessing the reason they didn’t go into detail about it in WV was so that they could for the movie, since she brushed it off so quickly in WV.

As for Kamala, I can totally see them just plopping her in the movie and not needing to have watched her show, since there was no real connection between her and Carol or Monica before hand.

[MindofShadow]

While. Dr Strange was gonna show up in WandaVision. Came from the big boss himself. Even had the actor sign the deal.

The scooper dude was right

Changing it so it isn't a "white dude saves the day" type of thing is kinda cringe though. It is, "the sorcerer supreme does his job." If you are going to have connected universes, you can't worry about weird political stuff like that.

The commercials were going to be Strange tryin gto communcate with Wanda. Which is so much better than... random ass commercials.

The more it hink about WV, the shittier it gets TBH

[PlatinumThorns]

While. Dr Strange was gonna show up in WandaVision. Came from the big boss himself. Even had the actor sign the deal.

The scooper dude was right

Changing it so it isn't a "white dude saves the day" type of thing is kinda cringe though. It is, "the sorcerer supreme does his job." If you are going to have connected universes, you can't worry about weird political stuff like that.

The commercials were going to be Strange tryin gto communcate with Wanda. Which is so much better than... random ass commercials.

The more it hink about WV, the shittier it gets TBH

He's right, though. Having Doctor Strange just appear out of nowhere takes the spotlight from Wanda and trivializes the show.

[MindofShadow]

He's right, though. Having Doctor Strange just appear out of nowhere takes the spotlight from Wanda and trivializes the show.

Well, he didn't have to "show up out of nowhere." He could have been hinted at before.

And he techincally doesn't have to "save the day." But he could at least do SOMETHING that makes sense when a uber powerful magic being fights another magic being and is altering reality. Protect civilians, stop the hex from expanding more... something. Not saying he has to show up and insta whammy the Witch and insta stop Wanda from freaking out.

They trivialized Wanda enough by having her hop away scott free with no complications for what she did IMHO

[Frontier]

I mean, the movie is about Carol and two other women directly inspired and influenced by her. I'm not sure I'm seeing your compliant here. For all we know, it'll be a Civil War situation, where despite being a pocket Avengers film, Steve was still very much the central through line and thematic focus of the film. Or, hell, like the FoX-Men, which were actually all Wolverine movies at heart until Apocalypse. Now there you would have a genuine complaint, as those movies screwed any character not named Xavier, Magneto or Wolverine.

Also, how is this any different that changing Ant-Man 2 to Ant-Man and the Wasp? Paul Rudd was still the lead, and Scott was the central piece of the narrative. But it also elevated Hope, which worked quite well for the film. It was unquestionably an Ant-Man sequel, but it was also the start of something new. Precedent is a powerful thing.

Would you still be complaining if they called it Captain Marvel 2, because that must mean that Monica and Kamala are going to get short shrift and be glorified cameos? This feels very much like looking for something to be offended by, though I freely admit I may just not be understanding the arguments being made. These movies are not a zero sum game, where elevating one character must, by definition, come at the expense of another. We can share the stage and all get to be cool. Carol can still be the lead, and totally badass, but now she also gets to be shown to be inspiring a new generation of heroes in her wake. Which only elevates the character, in my estimation. Just as Sam becoming Cap not only boosts that character to an even greater level of prominence, but it also enlarges (or, given the context here, perhaps embiggens) Steve's legacy in the MCU. More Marvels means a bigger footprint for Carol, not a smaller one.

I, for one, can't wait for this film. Or the Ms. Marvel D+ series for that matter. I just hope they find some way to bring Annette Benning back as Mar-Vell again. Four Marvels for Phase 4 would be delightful to me.

I mean, you're basically making my point for me that they didn't need to take the lead heroes full codename out of the title in-spite of there being other focal characters, and those were for guys.

It's not like I care any less about Kamala or Monica, but it's the MCU's first solo female lead and they replace it with what I find to be a kind of generic and awkward title.

(Although the MCU has been so prone to treating other characters as sidekicks that I'm curious to see if they can do better by Kamala and Monica in relation to Carol).

The only way I see Mar-Vell coming back is to explain either his/her kids like Teddy or Genis/Phyla.

Feige already said that the general audience don't have to watch the D+ shows to understand or follow the movies. As Scorsese's favorite word the disneyplus shows are just CONTENT.

Yeah, the way these function means you really have to watch the Disney+ shows, otherwise Wanda's whole deal in MoM or stuff like Sam Wilson becoming Captain America make no sense.

My two cents: I see a lot of people wondering why Captain Marvel 2 had to change its name when a movie like Captain America: Civil War didn't and, well... I can tell you right now one big difference between those two movies: only one of them is actually being directed by a woman of color. Maybe Nia DaCosta feels more strongly about promoting a movie that gives equal billing to its three female leads as opposed to using the ''Captain Marvel & her sidekicks'' treatment. Maybe she feels like elevating the women of color to have equal importance in the title of the movie is her way of giving them their due, specially for a character like Monica who's been historically sidelined despite being the first female Captain Marvel in the comics. I think a lot of people are looking at this from an anti-feminist kind of way, when in reality it's possible that the decision was actually made so the movie would look less like a white feminism kind of movie, which is a valid criticism some people had about the first one.

And for what it's worth, I believe this title is something Brie Larson would 100% support. She has always been a big champion for the inclusion of women of color in the industry, to the point where that made trolls start a hate campaign against her. I remember how she once said she doesn't believe in ''taking seats away from anyone, just creating more seats at the table'', and that's how I'm choosing to see this title change. Carol is still at the core of the movie (''Marvel'' is obviously her legacy), and she's not losing anything. She's just sharing with her fellow women, and maybe that kind of sisterhood is the feminism the movie wants to convey. I don't think it's a bad thing when you look at it this way.

I can see the elevation angle and I can see Larson being fine with it herself, I just think there's reasonable optics on the other side of why it's just kind of a weird title and change for Carol's second movie.

(Also, still no modern solo female lead Superhero movies that are not period pieces).

[CosmiComic]

Tbh, I'm not sure why all the female solo movies needed to be set in the past. I don't get it.

[anyajenkins]

While. Dr Strange was gonna show up in WandaVision. Came from the big boss himself. Even had the actor sign the deal.

The scooper dude was right

Changing it so it isn't a "white dude saves the day" type of thing is kinda cringe though. It is, "the sorcerer supreme does his job." If you are going to have connected universes, you can't worry about weird political stuff like that.

The commercials were going to be Strange tryin gto communcate with Wanda. Which is so much better than... random ass commercials.

The more it hink about WV, the shittier it gets TBH

Agree with everything. The Evan peters ‘prank’ distracted from Wanda more than strange ever would have.

[Vic Vega]

Ah okay that explains it. Sounds like a weird plot choice though.

In the Peter Gillis run of Eternals, Kingo Suinen (my spelling may be off) was the Eternal that was a famous actor in Japan.
That was his cover id.

The movie version of Kingo seems to be a Bollywood actor as opposed to comic book Kingo's cover as an actor in Samurai flicks.

So the cameras in frame are intentional, the guy's day job is Actor as it was in the comics.

[MindofShadow]

Agree with everything. The Evan peters ‘prank’ distracted from Wanda more than strange ever would have.

The whole show was distraction after distraction until Agatha was revealed.

It only really "dived into Wanda" the last two episodes. Which is the genuine problem with mystery shows but still.

[MindofShadow]

I mean, you're basically making my point for me that they didn't need to take the lead heroes full codename out of the title in-spite of there being other focal characters, and those were for guys.

It's not like I care any less about Kamala or Monica, but it's the MCU's first solo female lead and they replace it with what I find to be a kind of generic and awkward title.

If you see a title and are not sure what it means, it isn't a good title. At all.

If even people who post on nerd sites go, "wait is this Carol's sequel or something else?"... the GA is gonna be ultra confused.

Yeah, the way these function means you really have to watch the Disney+ shows, otherwise Wanda's whole deal in MoM or stuff like Sam Wilson becoming Captain America make no sense.

Or how about a movie called "The Marvels" where it seems like the other two marvels (monica and kamala) are introduced on Disney+ lol?

Feigie is full of ****

[Will Evans]

Tbh, I'm not sure why all the female solo movies needed to be set in the past. I don't get it.

We’ve only had three franchises do this so far: Wonder Woman, Captain Marvel and now Black Widow.

Captain America’ a male, first film was in the past too.


As more superheroine movies come out, it won’t be a factor any more.

[CosmiComic]

We’ve only had three franchises do this so far: Wonder Woman, Captain Marvel and now Black Widow.

Captain America’ a male, first film was in the past too.


As more superheroine movies come out, it won’t be a factor any more.

That's true, it just seems to be a common thing so far. But as you've pointed out, there haven't been many solo female superhero series as a whole