Marvel Cinematic Universe Part II

[Albert1981]

Pretty much. It's a neo-western/superhero drama.

So I thought. Thanks for the clarification!

[Albert1981]

Heck now that you mention it why not put wolverine in the old west and literally introduce him that way? And then the you can have the other classic marvel western characters be co stars or make guest appearances within that movie. Huh. Marvel call me.

Do you think it would be even MORE expensive for Disney to make a period drama like that? I know Mad Men took place during the 1960s and it cost AMC a FORTUNE to produce. I actually think those kinds of movies set in the past could work for Marvel Studios...If they take place outside of the main MCU timeline. From what I read, the Eternals had a REALLY hard time justifying why they didn't take part in the battles between Phase One and Phase Three and failing to prevent man-made catastrophes from happening in the past seven thousand years. As I've stated MANY times before, I'm not a huge fan of the MCU's versions of time travel/multiverses, BUT I do think having "parallel timelines" gives writers some more freedom to tell stories without being tied to stories from the main MCU timeline. By the way, I always thought Gambit was more likely to star in a western than Logan to be honest.

[the illustrious mr. kenway]

I'm curious how they'll reboot/re-insert that stuff into the MCU (if you take the rumors at face-value) but it seems like they're only really invested in Daredevil right now.

Which is ironic because Luke Cage and Iron Fist need the MCU more than DD, JJ and the Punisher.

[inisideguy]

Do you think it would be even MORE expensive for Disney to make a period drama like that? I know Mad Men took place during the 1960s and it cost AMC a FORTUNE to produce. I actually think those kinds of movies set in the past could work for Marvel Studios...If they take place outside of the main MCU timeline. From what I read, the Eternals had a REALLY hard time justifying why they didn't take part in the battles between Phase One and Phase Three and failing to prevent man-made catastrophes from happening in the past seven thousand years. As I've stated MANY times before, I'm not a huge fan of the MCU's versions of time travel/multiverses, BUT I do think having "parallel timelines" gives writers some more freedom to tell stories without being tied to stories from the main MCU timeline. By the way, I always thought Gambit was more likely to star in a western than Logan to be honest.

Well honestly with a wolverine storyline set in the old west you wouldn't have to go outside the main time line. We know he is really old. We know he was around back then. It would a cool way to bring him in, and maybe some other ancient marvel characters, like one of the Iron fists, or Dracula or whatever. And of course the marvel western characters which there are like a billion of them. I personally think it would be cool. However I don't know if contemporary audiences would think so. Everything has to be bigger, badder, more spectacular. The slower stuff is probably reserved for Disney plus.


Imagine a wolverine show or movie set back then but done like the Mandalorian? Could be really cool.

[Albert1981]

Well honestly with a wolverine storyline set in the old west you wouldn't have to go outside the main time line. We know he is really old. We know he was around back then. It would a cool way to bring him in, and maybe some other ancient marvel characters, like one of the Iron fists, or Dracula or whatever. And of course the marvel western characters which there are like a billion of them. I personally think it would be cool. However I don't know if contemporary audiences would think so. Everything has to be bigger, badder, more spectacular. The slower stuff is probably reserved for Disney plus.


Imagine a wolverine show or movie set back then but done like the Mandalorian? Could be really cool.

A Wolverine show like the Mandalorian would be really cool. But if Wolverine was in the main timeline all those years ago, he would have to be like a hermit for it to make sense to me. Like, he doesn't care about what's going on in the world. He just wants to be left alone. I just think it'd be weird for him to sit out so many events otherwise.

[inisideguy]

A Wolverine show like the Mandalorian would be really cool. But if Wolverine was in the main timeline all those years ago, he would have to be like a hermit for it to make sense to me. Like, he doesn't care about what's going on in the world. He just wants to be left alone. I just think it'd be weird for him to sit out so many events otherwise.

Thats the way he was always written. In comics, in the original movies etc. He has been around for hundreds of years.

[Ascended]

Clint doesn't have to fight alien tyrants, you're right. But he HAS done the time and space travel thing, so meting out punishment to thugs engaged in drug trafficking, human trafficking, contract killings, extortion, loan sharking, prostitution, and protection rackets would seem kind of trivial in comparison to me. And I doubt Disney would even TOUCH these crimes in any meaningful way in the MCU. So I'm wondering how Marvel Studios's is gonna handle "street crime" in the future.

After dealing with Chitari and Thanos, run of the mill dealers aren't gonna feel like a legit threat to Clint, no. Not physically. But that's not the only way to write a threat.

Ever hear that quote "A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic?" Clint fighting to save all of life on earth against aliens is cool. It's big, it's bombastic, it's a spectacle. Clint fighting a local gang in an attempt to save a kid's life? That's a very different thing, and we shouldn't expect Clint to struggle against that gang after dealing with friggin space aliens. But the drama doesn't have to come from the violence.

Like, if the big crux of conflict in Hawkeye is Clint trying to get rid of the tracksuits in time to make his flight home and see his wife....that can be compelling, and Clint doesn't have to struggle to win a fight, he just has to struggle to get to the airport on time. Different problem, but one that more people will relate to.

Eh, maybe. The US war dogs were ignoring them. so he really came close to... sending some spears to Hong Kong lol

......touche.

Okay, still, I think the point stands. Killmonger was trying to change the face of the world, overthrowing every nation except Wakanda and ruling the globe. And slavery. He didn't get beyond Wakandan borders, his plot fell apart almost before it began, but it was still a global level threat, at least in attempt and concept. And as much as I love those big ideas, sometimes a story that focuses on a smaller, real problem is much more rewarding.

[Albert1981]

After dealing with Chitari and Thanos, run of the mill dealers aren't gonna feel like a legit threat to Clint, no. Not physically. But that's not the only way to write a threat.

Ever hear that quote "A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic?" Clint fighting to save all of life on earth against aliens is cool. It's big, it's bombastic, it's a spectacle. Clint fighting a local gang in an attempt to save a kid's life? That's a very different thing, and we shouldn't expect Clint to struggle against that gang after dealing with friggin space aliens. But the drama doesn't have to come from the violence.

Like, if the big crux of conflict in Hawkeye is Clint trying to get rid of the tracksuits in time to make his flight home and see his wife....that can be compelling, and Clint doesn't have to struggle to win a fight, he just has to struggle to get to the airport on time. Different problem, but one that more people will relate to.



......touche.

Okay, still, I think the point stands. Killmonger was trying to change the face of the world, overthrowing every nation except Wakanda and ruling the globe. And slavery. He didn't get beyond Wakandan borders, his plot fell apart almost before it began, but it was still a global level threat, at least in attempt and concept. And as much as I love those big ideas, sometimes a story that focuses on a smaller, real problem is much more rewarding.

You're right about the difference between saving the world and saving one person. The latter can be very compelling and have a lot of stakes as well.

[Albert1981]

Thats the way he was always written. In comics, in the original movies etc. He has been around for hundreds of years.

Yeah, but I'm not sure if Logan is gonna be on-screen in the MCU anytime soon. It'll be hard for any actor to follow in Jackman's shoes. I think it would be better if they wait on him a bit. But, for Wolverine to missed the events of the first three phases, he would have to be a sort of a loner.

[inisideguy]

Yeah, but I'm not sure if Logan is gonna be on-screen in the MCU anytime soon. It'll be hard for any actor to follow in Jackman's shoes. I think it would be better if they wait on him a bit. But, for Wolverine to missed the events of the first three phases, he would have to be a sort of a loner.

Or captured in a lab somewhere right? To me he would probably be the easiest x-man to write into the MCU timeline. You can make up whatever you want with his backstory.

[CosmiComic]

Arguably there's no better time to dig into such topics.

On the DC forums we were talking about JSA solo movies and I maintain that right now, with the opioid epidemic and legalized weed and the end of the war on drugs, that this is the perfect time to do a grounded, gritty, Vertigo flavored Hourman film. What better time to explore the topics of addiction and loss than when half the nation is hooked on drugs?

The problem with street level heroes is I don't see them dealing with this stuff. Instead they all have this attitude that cities are full of violent crime necessitating some strong man to ignore people's rights and beat them up. Yet the kinds of crimes actually underprosecuted by police aren't the ones shown in these comics or movies. It's kinda like copaganda but with vigilantes. I mean, in the US they just had a trial of a vigilante for murdering people because he wanted to 'protect against looters.' whereas more sci-fi/fantasy heroes aren't usually based around 'cities are hellholes'

Perhaps, but it's capable of knocking out a quality trilogy for Marvel and it'd be fresh and different within the context of the MCU. And it's a popular genre that, despite up's and down's in popularity, has endured for generations.

I'm not big on westerns myself, but it's as viable a genre as any other. At least in the States. I don't know how popular westerns are in other countries.

I like some westerns but I find the era to be brutal and violent. But aside from that, if we want more story diversity (which I do), I don't think the answer is adding more tropes.

[Frontier]

The problem with street level heroes is I don't see them dealing with this stuff. Instead they all have this attitude that cities are full of violent crime necessitating some strong man to ignore people's rights and beat them up. Yet the kinds of crimes actually underprosecuted by police aren't the ones shown in these comics or movies. It's kinda like copaganda but with vigilantes. I mean, in the US they just had a trial of a vigilante for murdering people because he wanted to 'protect against looters.' whereas more sci-fi/fantasy heroes aren't usually based around 'cities are hellholes'

The only heroes I can really think of where the emphasis is on how bad their cities are is Batman and Daredevil in Hell's Kitchen.

What kind of crime heroes deal with usually depends on the hero, comic, or story. Usually they just go out on patrol and stop crimes in progress, target major crime assets, or even go directly to the source. But the very heart of Superheros is fighting crime as much as it is helping people.

I like some westerns but I find the era to be brutal and violent. But aside from that, if we want more story diversity (which I do), I don't think the answer is adding more tropes.

At the end of the day it comes down to the execution, which is true for any genre.

[CosmiComic]

The only heroes I can really think of where the emphasis is on how bad their cities are is Batman and Daredevil in Hell's Kitchen.

What kind of crime heroes deal with usually depends on the hero, comic, or story. Usually they just go out on patrol and stop crimes in progress, target major crime assets, or even go directly to the source. But the very heart of Superheros is fighting crime as much as it is helping people.

The thing is, they're not really fighting crime as it is, but as some Hollywood version of it. And a lot of superheroes don't fight petty criminals anymore. Besides, things can change. That's why a lot of comments are saying 'make it a horror movie' or something like that. So why not consider whether vigilante superheroes' portrayal of urban societies is outdated and/or problematic. Not everything has to be done one way forever

[Frontier]

The thing is, they're not really fighting crime as it is, but as some Hollywood version of it. And a lot of superheroes don't fight petty criminals anymore. Besides, things can change. That's why a lot of comments are saying 'make it a horror movie' or something like that. So why not consider whether vigilante superheroes' portrayal of urban societies is outdated and/or problematic. Not everything has to be done one way forever

I've seen a lot of moments of heroes fighting petty crime in recent stories, personally. I think it's more just that they're focusing on the more overt stuff that is easier to showcase/address.

I mean, even if you change the genre it would probably inevitably end up involving a fight with some villainous force and righting some injustice in my opinion unless the Superhero aspect took a complete backseat.

[Ascended]

The problem with street level heroes is I don't see them dealing with this stuff. Instead they all have this attitude that cities are full of violent crime necessitating some strong man to ignore people's rights and beat them up. Yet the kinds of crimes actually underprosecuted by police aren't the ones shown in these comics or movies.

They dealt with this stuff just a few months ago with F&tWS and the white collar root problem (politicians) was directly addressed. Sam and Bucky didn't beat those guys up, but Cap and Buck attacked them in the most brutal way you can attack a politician; with words said in front of a camera.

I'd have preferred a punch, myself, but public humiliation forcing a drastic change in policy is much more effective.

It's kinda like copaganda but with vigilantes.

Then it isn't really copaganda is it? These are people operating outside the rule of law by default. They have no legitimate authority to throw around or hide behind, and the existence of costumed vigilantes is in and of itself proof against copaganda. If superheroes believed the cops and justice system worked, they wouldn't be vigilantes in the first place.

I like some westerns but I find the era to be brutal and violent.

And some people like that. Game of Thrones was brutal and violent. But it's a non-issue, a MCU western is going to be no more brutal and violent than what the pg13 rating will allow anyway.

But aside from that, if we want more story diversity (which I do), I don't think the answer is adding more tropes.

Agreed. But Marvel has been dipping into other genres since the start and that does provide a degree of variety. This is just a genre you don't like.