Originally Posted by
Albert1981
Here is what I read on a website when it comes to Tony and Stephen in the MCU:
"The films, Doctor Strange and Iron Man, have the most in common in terms of structure. Both stories follow a genius who is left physically impaired, irreparably changing their life. They repair themselves in the Middle East and find purpose by becoming a superhero.
Not only that, Stark and Strange are also the most similar in terms of personality. They are arrogant geniuses who think they know better than everyone else. Although their injuries humbled them somewhat, they are still prone to making bold decisions without telling anyone and underestimating their friends and enemies.
Okay, if the formula for Iron Man worked, it's not too hard to believe that Marvel would try it again. But because the franchise has earned a reputation for thinking out of the box, it's surprising they didn't try something a little more creative."
I understand and agree with some of the above criticism, but I feel this formula of a flawed person who becomes a hero in spite of his shortcomings is pretty compelling and is wildly popular. I've literally heard websites wondering if Stephen Strange is the "new" Tony Stark? And I think if the MCU goes this route, Strange is gonna appear in a LOT of films (like Tony did). I thought the Hulk was great in his own movie, the first two Avengers films, and Ragnarok. But a lot of fans did not like how he became a dabbing taco-loving goofball by the time Endgame came out. And since this is a Wanda thread, I will mention that Vision's portrayals in the films were, from what I understand, widely panned as well. Like the Hulk, he started out really strong, but by Infinity War he was pretty much seen as probably the "weakest" Avenger of them all. I think the Russos tried to make him into a character who is willing to learn and interested in growing as a person, but in the superhero movie genre, I don't think a lot of audiences have got the patience for that kind of thing and think those traits are very BORING. So I don't blame Disney for pushing the Iron Man/Dr. Strange connection. Look, Marvel Studios has got a good thing going making so MANY male characters turn into loveable man-childs (Iron Man, Dr. Strange, Spider-Man, Ant-Man, Star-Lord, and Thor). It's not particularly creative, but Marvel Studios has tried other more "serious" approaches with dudes like Hawkeye, Vision, Hulk, Falcon and War Machine with not much success. I personally like Hawkeye as a reckless womanizer, but in the world of Disney there is no such thing as womanizing. So I get why they changed Hawkeye. I DON'T get how Marvel Studios used Janet Van Dyne, however. Her character literally initiates the ENTIRE plot for Ant-Man 2, but she basically appears in that movie for five minutes. Really anti-climatic.
I suppose they will build on the whole Wanda and Vision romance in the upcoming show. As I've said before, I'm actually REALLY surprised that Disney is focusing SO much attention to this couple in a non-superhero context. I know it's based on source material that deals with life outside of superheroing, but I feel it's so tonally different from not just what the MCU has done before, but from what other superhero movies/shows have done previously as well. So the success of the trailers surprised me. And admit it, it probably surprised you too. I mean, I've often wondered who actually wants to see Vision change diapers?! I don't believe Wanda will be changed too dramatically. She'll just have a sitcom personality. Which I think is a good thing. I don't want to see her moping around. I can't believe that Wanda and Vision will do the whole family thing in the MCU before the Fantastic Four does.
I also agree that the Odd Couple/Perfect Strangers/Two and a Half Men dynamics do work well in comedy. Even thought it wasn't particularly comedic, I think Iron Man and Captain America had a bit of that.