Marvel Cinematic Universe Part II

[CosmiComic]

I recognize their historical influence. But compared to other characters both of their time and newer, they don't hold a lot of interest, at least to me. What was new bavk then isn't today. I've tried to get into them but I don't understand the appeal. I like seeing comics evolve and bring in new people, and I never really liked their dynamic to begin with. They seem more like a legacy act kept around for nostalgic purposes. So maybe a new Reed or Sue would be a good idea.

I don't regularly follow X-comics either though, at least not the main books

[inisideguy]

I recognize their historical influence. But compared to other characters both of their time and newer, they don't hold a lot of interest, at least to me. What was new bavk then isn't today. I've tried to get into them but I don't understand the appeal. I like seeing comics evolve and bring in new people, and I never really liked their dynamic to begin with. They seem more like a legacy act kept around for nostalgic purposes. So maybe a new Reed or Sue would be a good idea.

I don't regularly follow X-comics either though, at least not the main books

Yea I get it. I totally understand this. But I will tell you what when I was growing up the run of Fantastic Four from 1 to about 200 or maybe a little after that was awesome for a kid my age. But times change.

[Frontier]

I recognize their historical influence. But compared to other characters both of their time and newer, they don't hold a lot of interest, at least to me. What was new bavk then isn't today. I've tried to get into them but I don't understand the appeal. I like seeing comics evolve and bring in new people, and I never really liked their dynamic to begin with. They seem more like a legacy act kept around for nostalgic purposes. So maybe a new Reed or Sue would be a good idea.

I don't regularly follow X-comics either though, at least not the main books

It's funny you say that because I feel like the FF was one of the first comics to really evolve, in one way or another.

[CosmiComic]

Yea I get it. I totally understand this. But I will tell you what when I was growing up the run of Fantastic Four from 1 to about 200 or maybe a little after that was awesome for a kid my age. But times change.

That's fine. I'm sure they still appeal to some people. And they did start off some ideas I like, such as dropping the secret identity trope. I just don't think they're in step with modern marvel

It's funny you say that because I feel like the FF was one of the first comics to really evolve, in one way or another.

Yeah, back in the 60s, they were ahead of the game and setting the trends. Not so much nowadays. Everyone else seems to be evolving more.

[Albert1981]

Well, I'm not a fan of Maguire and Garfield returning, so I'm not exactly jumping for joy.



That kind of silliness is good, sometimes. I'm not into retconning for the most part, but I don't want the MCU, or DCEU for that matter, to just be stuck in boring "grounded" stuff without pushing any kind of limits

I think the MCU has done stuff that's become more interesting and different in recent years. So I'm not too concerned with boring "grounded" stuff. I do think Marvel Studios is rehashing the Winter Soldier thing too much with its "espionage thrillers" though. Hopefully, they'll mix things up in the future. I think time travel/multiverse stories can be VERY interesting, but Feige and company have gotta do it in a way that's digestible and palatable to general audiences. If it's not commercially viable, then it won't work. Comic books don't seem to worry about that kind of thing, but Disney ABSOLUTELY does. I just hope "because Multiverse, now shush" doesn't become the new mantra for fans who can't come up with a decent answer for a question for the next decade. And I don't want the MCU to be about "variants of what we’ve already seen, in shows and movies that have already been set up, and that nothing will ever really change, apart from the title." That's not pushing limits at ALL to me.

In regards to Garfield and Maguire coming back, I used to be really against it. But I do feel bad for Garfield. I HATED the Amazing Spider-Man movies just as much as I despised Man of Steel and Batman v Superman. However, I think Garfield's Spider-Man movies sort of ruined his career and a lot of the problems from those films were NOT his fault. So I'm hoping he gets a decent send-off. But please, just drop the Gwen/Peter romance for ****'s sake! It was so boring!

[CosmiComic]

I think the MCU has done stuff that's become more interesting and different in recent years. So I'm not too concerned with boring "grounded" stuff. I do think Marvel Studios is rehashing the Winter Soldier thing too much with its "espionage thrillers" though. Hopefully, they'll mix things up in the future. I think time travel/multiverse stories can be VERY interesting, but Feige and company has gotta do it in a way that's digestible and palatable to general audiences. If it's not commercially viable, then it won't work. Comic books don't seem to worry about that kind of thing, but Disney ABSOLUTELY does. I just hope "because Multiverse, now shush" doesn't become the new mantra for fans who can't come up with a decent answer for a question for the next decade. And I don't want the MCU to be about "variants of what we’ve already seen, in shows and movies that have already been set up, and that nothing will ever really change, apart from the title." That's not pushing limits at ALL to me.

Marvel espionage is a bit lame IMO. Captain America-type heroes don't seem like espionage to me, yet that's what Marvel seems to think

And I'm not sure why people are jumping to the idea of variants of existing heroes being the main focus. And even at that, is that necessarily bad? Not IMO

Making things palatable for thr ga can be good, but isn't making these movies too basic thr thing the MCU gets bashed for in the first place?

[Albert1981]

Marvel espionage is a bit lame IMO. Captain America-type heroes don't seem like espionage to me, yet that's what Marvel seems to think

And I'm not sure why people are jumping to the idea of variants of existing heroes being the main focus. And even at that, is that necessarily bad? Not IMO

Making things palatable for thr ga can be good, but isn't making these movies too basic thr thing the MCU gets bashed for in the first place?

Aren't Mission Impossible and James Bond "better" espionage franchises? They set the template and most people seem to think so.

In my view, if not meticulously planned out, time travel and multiverses just become messy tropes. I'm not sure if seeing fifty versions of the same characters will actually make viewers care MORE about those characters. But that's just me. I just don't think comic book logic always work so well with the live-action stuff. And I think it will be TOUGH to match the success of the Infinity Saga. Having so many Spider-Men, Supermen and Batmen has definitely reduced my love for those heroes (which used to be my all-time favorites. I still love 'em though). I think Marvel Studios will be bashed if they make their products too complicated. I don't think kids watching Loki were thrilled to witness minutes upon minutes of exposition in the final episode of Loki. And I bet plenty of their parents feel the same way too.

[CTTT]

Aren't Mission Impossible and James Bond "better" espionage franchises? They set the template and most people seem to think so.

In my view, if not meticulously planned out, time travel and multiverses just become messy tropes. I'm not sure if seeing fifty versions of the same characters will actually make viewers care MORE about those characters. But that's just me. I just don't think comic book logic always work so well with the live-action stuff. And I think it will be TOUGH to match the success of the Infinity Saga. Having so many Spider-Men, Supermen and Batmen has definitely reduced my love for those heroes (which used to be my all-time favorites. I still love 'em though). I think Marvel Studios will be bashed if they make their products too complicated. I don't think kids watching Loki were thrilled to witness minutes upon minutes of exposition in the final episode of Loki. And I bet plenty of their parents feel the same way too.

Who cares about the kids and parents? Just put them in a room and watch Finding Nemo on D+. If they don't like exposition, then let the adults enjoy it. Exposition is fine as long as you can present it in an interesting way. Also, lot of whiners on this board. The multiverse will not become a permanent thing with the MCU. I think it will be a piece of an overarching story. Just like with Infinity Saga slowly over time introducing the stones and their impprtance. What's wrong with branching out and trying new things. I don't understand why after Endgame, people are clamoring for the next Endgame type movie. It's waaaaay too soon for that. Why try to top the Infinity Saga? There's no need for that. Just try different things.

[chamber-music]

In regards to Garfield and Maguire coming back, I used to be really against it. But I do feel bad for Garfield. I HATED the Amazing Spider-Man movies just as much as I despised Man of Steel and Batman v Superman. However, I think Garfield's Spider-Man movies sort of ruined his career and a lot of the problems from those films were NOT his fault. So I'm hoping he gets a decent send-off. But please, just drop the Gwen/Peter romance for ****'s sake! It was so boring!

Garfield's post Amazing Spider-Man career has been pretty solid in my opinion. Not every actor is into doing big budget tentpole franchise stuff.

Hacksaw Ridge, Under The Silver Lake, Martin Scorsese's Silence, Gia Coppola's Mainstream and some theatre productions of stuff like Angels In America. Garfield has given different interesting performances in each of these projects.

Garfield was nominated for an Academy Award, Golden Globe and SAG for his role in Hacksaw Ridge. He was nominated Laurence Olivier Award and Tony for his role in Angels In America.

[Agent Z]

Bassam Tariq will direct the new Blade film.

https://gizmodo.com/mahershala-alis-...tor-1847321712

[Doom'nGloom]

Historically speaking FF might be the most significant title in marvel history. Although there are characters predating them, marvel universe as we know it today literally started with them in 1961. They are Stan and Jack's first baby and as Oberon pointed out a lot of characters and concepts were introduced through them. I think Hickman already showed how to modernize the team with Future Foundation and I'd love to see them eventually in the MCU. I just want to see the team on the big screen with respect and care they deserve and hopefully they play a vital role in the MCU going forward. And let's be honest, when MCU gets to Doom (they will as he's one of the biggest villains and occasional anti hero in comics, it's more of a question of when than if) you can't do him properly without the FF.

[CosmiComic]

Aren't Mission Impossible and James Bond "better" espionage franchises? They set the template and most people seem to think so.

In my view, if not meticulously planned out, time travel and multiverses just become messy tropes. I'm not sure if seeing fifty versions of the same characters will actually make viewers care MORE about those characters. But that's just me. I just don't think comic book logic always work so well with the live-action stuff. And I think it will be TOUGH to match the success of the Infinity Saga. Having so many Spider-Men, Supermen and Batmen has definitely reduced my love for those heroes (which used to be my all-time favorites. I still love 'em though). I think Marvel Studios will be bashed if they make their products too complicated. I don't think kids watching Loki were thrilled to witness minutes upon minutes of exposition in the final episode of Loki. And I bet plenty of their parents feel the same way too.

Mission Impossible/James Bond style stuff works in a more "realistic world." But in Marvel, I'd like to see a superhero with actual superpowers, like shapeshifting or invisibility

I don't really think they should make the shows too simplistic. I didn't have trouble following Loki, and "dumbing down" anything for kids isn't usually a good idea.

Historically speaking FF might be the most significant title in marvel history. Although there are characters predating them, marvel universe as we know it today literally started with them in 1961. They are Stan and Jack's first baby and as Oberon pointed out a lot of characters and concepts were introduced through them. I think Hickman already showed how to modernize the team with Future Foundation and I'd love to see them eventually in the MCU. I just want to see the team on the big screen with respect and care they deserve and hopefully they play a vital role in the MCU going forward. And let's be honest, when MCU gets to Doom (they will as he's one of the biggest villains and occasional anti hero in comics, it's more of a question of when than if) you can't do him properly without the FF.

Hasn't Doom outgrown F4 to some extent?

I haven't followed Future Foundation, but does it actually fix some of the problems with F4?

[Witchfan]

Looking forward to Doctor Strange In the Multiverse of Madness
E6kdOJAWUAImAKN.jpg

E6r-Mu-XEAYSSZr.jpg

[Oberon]

It's funny you say that because I feel like the FF was one of the first comics to really evolve, in one way or another.

There never was a comic where two main super folks married

had a child

had such tragedy.

These things were new and never done before.

but to be fair to Mik, or others, their success, their originality was all based on very classic non-comic stories.

What is Johnny and Crystal but Romeo and Juliet?

What is Thing and Alicia but a version of Beauty and the Beast (not Disney, the true classic tale)
- I think the 'blind' trope, of loving an ugly is from other classical works, so sort of a mish mash.

What is Reed and Doom but either Cain/Abel tropes or Oedipal, for sure, and this keeps going; Doom having a Sue as consort in the last Secret Wars.

So most of the FF's original stories and some of the sequels are taken from other more worthy works, perhaps.
And I can see that any informed reader would say, 'stale'!

I always remember writing instructors saying that there are only about 35 basic plots in all of literature and everything else is just finding the right 'twist' to the plot/arc.

Which means it is time to put out my personal standard disclaimer and that is that all/most serialized fiction: soap operas, penny-dreadfuls, comic books etc. etc. are mostly about

character arcs and main characters will mostly revolve or rotate through 1 of 3 main roles, not always in order or even each 'role'.

Abuser, abused - redemptionist.

So even where there is action, there will be this undercurrent/motivation to a role.

Perhaps the four have gotten stale because not enough of this applies to them.

I can see where in the comic, Alicia is becoming quite a different person and that is very cool to me.

[Toxin45]

She Hulk and Thunderbolts are one of the series i am looking foward to alongside Armor wars and ironheart. Maybe hawkeye too.