Probably, but I don't want to wait that long. Besides, CM did "good" Skrulls, it wouldn't be beyond reason to do the evil ones in Carol's films too. The FF have like, a billion other awesome rogues and concepts to explore and play with anyway.
Well most of the cosmic stuff doesn't get talked about outside of their franchise anyway. Thor doesn't talk about the Guardians, the Guardians don't talk about Carol, Carol doesn't talk about Asgard.The Asgardians never seemed relevant outside their own movie (even though they probably should have been). I guess Vol. 3 will probably deal with the fallout of the Nova Corps being destroyed (and set up Nova).
Asgard ruled nine systems, which is a tiny, tiny, tiny little empire compared to the likes of the Kree, and Asgard barely involved itself in the politics of its own worlds, much less the planets beyond. So it's not surprising they had no real presence in galactic politics. But Asgard seems to have a reputation; the Collector knows who they are and shows them respect, which he didn't do even for the Guardians who brought him a Stone. Korg, all the way out in the ass end of nowhere on Sakaar, knows who Asgardians are. Rocket had heard of Nidavalier. Odin may not have involved his realm in politics, but people around the galaxy still seem to know who the Asgardians are and that they're not people to F with. The fact that not *everyone* has heard of or talks about Asgard doesn't really say much; they keep to themselves and the galaxy is a big place, but the people who know, know better than to piss them off.
But what interests me is the position earth is in, now that Asgard has fallen. Think about it; on galactic maps earth was part of Asgard and picking a fight with immortal warrior gods isn't something even Thanos did without a lot of consideration, calculation, and great need. Now, Asgard is gone and earth has gotten everyone's attention by being ground zero for the Snap and the Un-Snap. Who's gonna come knocking on the door now, looking to pick a fight because Odin and Asgard are gone?
I do agree GotG3 is likely to explore the fallout of Xandar....and hopefully set up Nova, if the gods are kind.
Yeah, to a large degree it's just another unexplored plot point that has seemingly been dropped. But the story of Ant-Man & the Wasp revolved around the Accords and Scott's house arrest, odds are Black Widow is gonna deal with the Accords at least a little bit, and it was talked about a bit in a few other films like Homecoming. And we didn't have very many films set in that time period to begin with.The only relevance the Accords have really had since Civil War has been Ross being the new top cop.
I just wanna know; is it still on the books? Was it overturned after the Snap? Now that everyone is back, will they be enforced again? It's been a major plot point for two films, probably three after Widow, I feel like we deserve at least a few lines of dialogue that tell us what happened to the policy that killed the Avengers.
Last edited by Ascended; 07-06-2020 at 01:01 PM.
"We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another, as if we were one single tribe."
~ Black Panther.
I think we're more likely to see the fallout losing Asgard has on the other Realms then we do the galaxy at large.
I forget if the Accords came up in Homecoming beyond the Civil War fight. I don't know if Tony even mentioned it. The Accords just felt superfluous to me in Ant-Man and The Wasp even if stuff like Woo and the reason the Pym's are mad at Scott kind of hinged on Civil War.Yeah, to a large degree it's just another unexplored plot point that has seemingly been dropped. But the story of Ant-Man & the Wasp revolved around the Accords and Scott's house arrest, odds are Black Widow is gonna deal with the Accords at least a little bit, and it was talked about a bit in a few other films like Homecoming. And we didn't have very many films set in that time period to begin with.
I just wanna know; is it still on the books? Was it overturned after the Snap? Now that everyone is back, will they be enforced again? It's been a major plot point for two films, probably three after Widow, I feel like we deserve at least a few lines of dialogue that tell us what happened to the policy that killed the Avengers.
The Accords relevance to Black Widow probably begin and end with Ross going after Widow because she helped Team Cap.
I think an easy way to look at Thanos stories is that anything written by Jim Starlin, Ron Marz and Keith Giffen is the real Thanos while anything written by other authors should be dismissed as a Thanosi clone.
That's what I expect too.
And Marvel might not do anything with it, but the space empire earth was a part of is gone and given what earth has been up to I imagine there'd probably be a few people interested in capitalizing on it. Marvel might ignore this, or maybe it'll crop up as subplots somewhere, who knows? But it's something I'd *like* to see. I don't really mind Marvel shuffling the status quo and changing things like they do, but I wish they'd slow down some and explore a concept a little before tossing it aside and moving on.
Homecoming only mentions it off hand once, maybe twice. A gym teacher says something about how Cap's a criminal now. There's the Civil War scene told from Parker's perspective. That's probably about it, but Parker sided with Tony anyway and thus was likely exempt.The Accords just felt superfluous to me in Ant-Man and The Wasp even if stuff like Woo and the reason the Pym's are mad at Scott kind of hinged on Civil War.
The Accords relevance to Black Widow probably begin and end with Ross going after Widow because she helped Team Cap.
But the Accords were superfluous in Ant-Man & Wasp? Come now Frontier, the entire plot hinges on the Accords and Scott taking Cap's side in Germany, the Accords just weren't the *topic* of the plot, but they defined everything that happened in the film. And with Black Widow, no I don't expect the Accords will be a front and center topic of discussion, but if the plot is built around Ross hunting Nat down then that too would be based on the Accords and the film wouldn't be able to tell its story otherwise. That's pretty central.
"We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another, as if we were one single tribe."
~ Black Panther.
I think that's more difficult for a movie franchise.
About what I expected.Homecoming only mentions it off hand once, maybe twice. A gym teacher says something about how Cap's a criminal now. There's the Civil War scene told from Parker's perspective. That's probably about it, but Parker sided with Tony anyway and thus was likely exempt.
I realize that, but it just felt superfluous to me compared to the other stuff. Compared to all the comics where the Registration Act was so front-and-center, the Accords just didn't seem to have the same kind of narrative weight. Heck, it didn't even have the same kind of weight for the actual Civil War conflict since it was over Bucky.But the Accords were superfluous in Ant-Man & Wasp? Come now Frontier, the entire plot hinges on the Accords and Scott taking Cap's side in Germany, the Accords just weren't the *topic* of the plot, but they defined everything that happened in the film. And with Black Widow, no I don't expect the Accords will be a front and center topic of discussion, but if the plot is built around Ross hunting Nat down then that too would be based on the Accords and the film wouldn't be able to tell its story otherwise. That's pretty central.
I guess in a grander sense it could be seen as central to Ross hunting Natasha down, but not to where I feel like it makes the Accords into a bigger deal than they actually are.
Sometimes, I'm sure it is. But sometimes I just wonder why Marvel bothered to introduce a thing and then never use it. Biggest example is probably the new Avengers post Ultron. I mean, we never get to see that whole roster in action, not even once, and the one time we get to see some of them, it's the mission that ended them.
And without Thor or Hulk, and with Tony on the sidelines, yeah you probably don't want to roll the dice on "Avengers: The B Team" as a movie. But I feel like they could've been used *somewhere* yknow?
The Accords definitely don't have the heft of the comic's SHRA. Which I'm fine with, because the SHRA kind of took over everything for a while. And in the MCU the Avengers started out as being a SHIELD project, so working under the UN isn't as big a stretch as Steve made it out to be. But still, the Accords are what broke the team (that and Bucky, but the problems with Civil War are way off topic) and that's had quite a bit of fallout since Civil War, influencing pretty much everything up to Endgame. I feel like we deserve some closure on it, instead of it just being ignored and forgotten. That's all I want; just a few lines of dialogue, a short conversation squeezed in somewhere that tells us what the state of the Accords are.I guess in a grander sense it could be seen as central to Ross hunting Natasha down, but not to where I feel like it makes the Accords into a bigger deal than they actually are.
"We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another, as if we were one single tribe."
~ Black Panther.
Again, I just think it's the problem with the movie format where every single film has to be an "event" within the context of those heroes' lives. You don't have much room for daily, standalone, adventures to build up to those events as much.
Like look at Avengers Tower. They set it up as this big deal at the end of the first movie only for it to just be in the background and be used entirely off-screen before getting trashed in the first 20 minutes of Age of Ultron and then unceremoniously sold off in Homecoming.
This is basically what Ragnarok was to the entire Thor mythos or the plots leading up to that film, only with added satire. Loki as king? Turned into a joke. The relationship with Jane? Turned into a joke.
I don't disagree but I just don't see the Accords as having had the weight the characters seemed to initially treat it with before the movie became about Bucky. Heck, Tony completely blows Ross off to go hunt down Zemo at the end of Civil War and he was the one who was pro-Accords.The Accords definitely don't have the heft of the comic's SHRA. Which I'm fine with, because the SHRA kind of took over everything for a while. And in the MCU the Avengers started out as being a SHIELD project, so working under the UN isn't as big a stretch as Steve made it out to be. But still, the Accords are what broke the team (that and Bucky, but the problems with Civil War are way off topic) and that's had quite a bit of fallout since Civil War, influencing pretty much everything up to Endgame. I feel like we deserve some closure on it, instead of it just being ignored and forgotten. That's all I want; just a few lines of dialogue, a short conversation squeezed in somewhere that tells us what the state of the Accords are.
It's like it should be this big status quo change, and they pay some lip-service being that way, but it just really isn't in the long run.
I agreed that the OGN trilogy from 2014-2016 was needed. Because too many writers (Aaron, Hickman and Bendis) were messing up Thanos' character and continuity. But i found Infinity Conflict and Ending to be underwhelming though, and i say that as a proud Starlin fan. The problem is not him using Earth's heroes as expendable red shirts or making some cosmic entity lose to the new mystical macguffin but him using the plot points of Infinity Gauntlet over and over again and have Thanos learn the same lesson.
I think an easy way to look at Thanos stories is that anything written by Jim Starlin, Ron Marz and Keith Giffen is the real Thanos while anything written by other authors should be dismissed as a Thanosi clone.
I think an easy way to look at Thanos stories is that anything written by Jim Starlin, Ron Marz and Keith Giffen is the real Thanos while anything written by other authors should be dismissed as a Thanosi clone.
problem with MCU Jane is that she was literally forgotten and shoved to the side and now she will be Thor???
she was just mentioned that she ditched Thor and that's it.
I think even the actress herself said that she didn't want to play that role again.
that's bad writing IMO.
Last edited by GodThor; 07-08-2020 at 11:21 AM.
I know, though I do think a "day in the life" film could be successful if it were handled right, though I don't think Marvel will ever try such an approach (and perhaps that's for the best even if it could be done well in theory). Which is why I want those OGN's set within the MCU. They'd sell well with a little marketing and flesh out the world and events nicely.
Get, what's his name, Salvatore Larocca? for the art. He did the NewUniversal stuff with Ellis back in the day and designed the characters after actors like Bruce Willis and the guy who played Sawyer on Lost. And he did Iron Man with Fraction, and that book was beautiful. He'd be a good choice.
There are many, many problems with the plot of Civil War.I don't disagree but I just don't see the Accords as having had the weight the characters seemed to initially treat it with before the movie became about Bucky. Heck, Tony completely blows Ross off to go hunt down Zemo at the end of Civil War and he was the one who was pro-Accords.
"We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another, as if we were one single tribe."
~ Black Panther.