Marvel Cinematic Universe Part II

[MindofShadow]

I'm quite aware of that. I meant the plan in general for the MCU.

Because Edgar's project held up any chance of ant-man or wasp getting into the first avengers.

That movie was thought up way back in 2003, and was signed to start developing in 2006.

It then hit development hell. Iron man came out in 2008 btw.

The MCU was not a well oiled machine back then. It isn't like it is now, not even close.

So, AM/Wasp in some fashion just missed the window to be in the first Avengers and then they adapted from there.

[Panic]

Ok. Then i wonder why editorial doesn't care much for her.

Jan was originally written as a flighty, rich-girl airhead. Then when Shooter wrote the infamous Trial of Yellowjacket stuff that broke her away from Hank Pym, they (I think it was probably Stern, but I can't remember who started it) they reimagined her character by making her leader of the Avengers, so her character was someone who appeared to be a flighty, rich-girl airhead, but in fact underneath was a tough, decisive leader. So the great leader thing subverted the airhead stuff to a certain extent, and that was her thing . Trouble is, that only really works if you are willing to have her as leader of the Avengers. And this is where I believe there is a problem, because I'm pretty sure editorial don't want her in the leadership role.

Incidentally, the flighty Dream Girl in DC's Legion of Super-Heroes also became leader of the LSH at more or less the same time, and worked the same dynamic.

[CosmiComic]

Because Edgar's project held up any chance of ant-man or wasp getting into the first avengers.

That movie was thought up way back in 2003, and was signed to start developing in 2006.

It then hit development hell. Iron man came out in 2008 btw.

The MCU was not a well oiled machine back then. It isn't like it is now, not even close.

So, AM/Wasp in some fashion just missed the window to be in the first Avengers and then they adapted from there.

I was aware of all that. I guess it falls on Wright then.

Jan was originally written as a flighty, rich-girl airhead. Then when Shooter wrote the infamous Trial of Yellowjacket stuff that broke her away from Hank Pym, they (I think it was probably Stern, but I can't remember who started it) they reimagined her character by making her leader of the Avengers, so her character was someone who appeared to be a flighty, rich-girl airhead, but in fact underneath was a tough, decisive leader. So the great leader thing subverted the airhead stuff to a certain extent, and that was her thing . Trouble is, that only really works if you are willing to have her as leader of the Avengers. And this is where I believe there is a problem, because I'm pretty sure editorial don't want her in the leadership role.

Incidentally, the flighty Dream Girl in DC's Legion of Super-Heroes also became leader of the LSH at more or less the same time, and worked the same dynamic.

So why don't they want her as a leader?

[Frontier]

Jan was originally written as a flighty, rich-girl airhead. Then when Shooter wrote the infamous Trial of Yellowjacket stuff that broke her away from Hank Pym, they (I think it was probably Stern, but I can't remember who started it) they reimagined her character by making her leader of the Avengers, so her character was someone who appeared to be a flighty, rich-girl airhead, but in fact underneath was a tough, decisive leader. So the great leader thing subverted the airhead stuff to a certain extent, and that was her thing . Trouble is, that only really works if you are willing to have her as leader of the Avengers. And this is where I believe there is a problem, because I'm pretty sure editorial don't want her in the leadership role.

Incidentally, the flighty Dream Girl in DC's Legion of Super-Heroes also became leader of the LSH at more or less the same time, and worked the same dynamic.

I think in general editorial just doesn't really care much about classic Avengers that aren't big "names."

Look at how every classic Avenger lady gets treated versus how they treat Carol Danvers. WandaVision is a hit but Marvel barely does anything with Wanda, Vision, or even Monica.

[Panic]

I think in general editorial just doesn't really care much about classic Avengers that aren't big "names."

Look at how every classic Avenger lady gets treated versus how they treat Carol Danvers. WandaVision is a hit but Marvel barely does anything with Wanda, Vision, or even Monica.

Yeah, it's surprising that the comics didn't give much of a push to those characters whilst the show was in the works; then again, they didn't do much with Blade when he had movies out, so I guess they don't see it as the opportunity that we do. Sometimes Marvel mystifies me.

[CosmiComic]

I think in general editorial just doesn't really care much about classic Avengers that aren't big "names."

Look at how every classic Avenger lady gets treated versus how they treat Carol Danvers. WandaVision is a hit but Marvel barely does anything with Wanda, Vision, or even Monica.

It's a bit odd. The mainline Avengers recently were just mostly kicking guys or flying bricks, with the exception of Ghost Rider. These other Avengers made things more interesting. Plus, both Jan and Monica were leaders at one point. It seems not all things progress equally. I'm glad they're promoting Carol but Marvel shouldn't think of this as zero sum, especially since all these major Avengers also have their own books, unlike the ones not being used right now.

[Frontier]

Yeah, it's surprising that the comics didn't give much of a push to those characters whilst the show was in the works; then again, they didn't do much with Blade when he had movies out, so I guess they don't see it as the opportunity that we do. Sometimes Marvel mystifies me.

Well, I can at least believe editorial is pretty apathetic when it comes to Wanda. Not sure about other characters.

[Panic]

Well, I can at least believe editorial is pretty apathetic when it comes to Wanda. Not sure about other characters.

Well, they don't like magic, they like very defined powers. Maybe she could carry an axe instead?

[CosmiComic]

Well, they don't like magic, they like very defined powers. Maybe she could carry an axe instead?

Is it that hard to make magic defined? Can't one just give a list of powers to magical characters same as with the others?

[Vegeta]

Is it that hard to make magic defined? Can't one just give a list of powers to magical characters same as with the others?

Some fans only care about FEATS, doing this would be "nerfing" said character and then there would be constant bitching and moaning about when so and so would get the full extent of their powers back.

[Sutekh]

Is it that hard to make magic defined? Can't one just give a list of powers to magical characters same as with the others?

Dr. Strange writers have attempted to give him some defined 'spells' that he would regularly go-to, and which could be used to make a very specific spellcaster with, say, eight specific 'powers' (Crimson Bands of Cytorrak, Winds of Watoomb, Images of Ikonn, etc.).

But other writers have fallen into the trap of using him (and other magic-users) as deus ex machina and being able to do anything they needed to advance the plot, and, conversely, suddenly mysteriously *not* be able to do anything that would interfere with their plot. (Hence Dr. Strange, for instance, being able to teleport the Defenders across time, space and dimensions, and even crap out a magic ring of teleporting for Nighthawk *because he was bored of being asked for teleports all the time*, and then conveniently losing the ability to teleport at all when Bendis wanted to use him as an Avenger, because Bendis wanted to have scenes where the Avengers sat around talking while on the Quinjet flying to missions, which they couldn't do if Dr. Strange just teleported them there!)

With Wanda it would be even easier than just giving her a half-dozen or so regular 'Invocations' to cast, because she originally had one simple mutant power. Bad luck bolts. She could *reliably choose* what specific bad things happened to a target, thanks to years of practice, so that she didn't have to worry about waggling her fingers and giving someone a fatal stroke, and could choose something as improbable as 'every structural support, every beam and strut, every patch of glue or spot of paint, all reaches maximum structural fatigue at the same moment and the building dies!'

It's an insanely cool and powerful ability, but apparently some writers think it's 'too hard' for readers to understand. How stupid do they think we are? Bad. Luck. Bolts. I mean, really, it's not rocket science!

[CosmiComic]

Some fans only care about FEATS, doing this would be "nerfing" said character and then there would be constant bitching and moaning about when so and so would get the full extent of their powers back.

I can kinda see why people would get annoyed at their favorite character being nerfed to make them easier to work with, as if there's no other way

Dr. Strange writers have attempted to give him some defined 'spells' that he would regularly go-to, and which could be used to make a very specific spellcaster with, say, eight specific 'powers' (Crimson Bands of Cytorrak, Winds of Watoomb, Images of Ikonn, etc.).

But other writers have fallen into the trap of using him (and other magic-users) as deus ex machina and being able to do anything they needed to advance the plot, and, conversely, suddenly mysteriously *not* be able to do anything that would interfere with their plot. (Hence Dr. Strange, for instance, being able to teleport the Defenders across time, space and dimensions, and even crap out a magic ring of teleporting for Nighthawk *because he was bored of being asked for teleports all the time*, and then conveniently losing the ability to teleport at all when Bendis wanted to use him as an Avenger, because Bendis wanted to have scenes where the Avengers sat around talking while on the Quinjet flying to missions, which they couldn't do if Dr. Strange just teleported them there!)

With Wanda it would be even easier than just giving her a half-dozen or so regular 'Invocations' to cast, because she originally had one simple mutant power. Bad luck bolts. She could *reliably choose* what specific bad things happened to a target, thanks to years of practice, so that she didn't have to worry about waggling her fingers and giving someone a fatal stroke, and could choose something as improbable as 'every structural support, every beam and strut, every patch of glue or spot of paint, all reaches maximum structural fatigue at the same moment and the building dies!'

It's an insanely cool and powerful ability, but apparently some writers think it's 'too hard' for readers to understand. How stupid do they think we are? Bad. Luck. Bolts. I mean, really, it's not rocket science!

I don't mind her getting more powers, but I can see why it might be difficult for some writers. That being said, some of the writers made it difficult in the first place. But I think Wanda getting extra abilities helps her out

Tbh, I do like seeing powers defined in a way where I know what I'm getting, or at least it's explained why a new power comes along. But I think consistency is the main thing. I don't think it's that hard to give a character a consistent power set even with magic. It's just they seem to change between writers. Of course, if the previous writer did a poor job, I can see why the following writer would want to change that

[Will Evans]

I was aware of all that. I guess it falls on Wright then.



So why don't they want her as a leader?

They want someone who has their own movie and own comic as leader. Like T’Challa, Steve, Carol, Tony, etc.

[Frontier]

Well, they don't like magic, they like very defined powers. Maybe she could carry an axe instead?

That and thanks to Bendis they now view her as a plot device and a hot potato.

[CosmiComic]

They want someone who has their own movie and own comic as leader. Like T’Challa, Steve, Carol, Tony, etc.

But those guys already have their own stuff. Why not give a chance to someone who doesn't get their own ongoing?