Your Marvel-Only Controversial Opinions (2020...)

[shooshoomanjoe]

I agree with Kirkman when he said Liefeld was the Kirby of the 90s.

[your_name_here]

My opinion is that Tony Stark and Matt Murdock are the 2 most complex and compelling characters in Marvel.

Throw in Cyclops and I completely agree.

[your_name_here]

Dr Strange just hasn’t been written well for so long. He’s constantly depowered or not shown at his full capabilities, and it comes across that editorial are scared and want to put some restrictions on what he can do. I’d argue having him at his full capacity would make a far more engaging read.

[Agent Z]

Marvel superheroes are no more or less relatable than DC's and there is no fundamental difference between the two.

[PCN24454]

Marvel superheroes are no more or less relatable than DC's and there is no fundamental difference between the two.

That's mostly based on an outdated concept. Anyone who still thinks that Marvel Heroes are "relatable" has an overactive imagination.

[PCN24454]

Ok Here's my controversial opinion. I actually like Jane Foster - not as Thor - I hated that, though I don't mind her as Valkyrie. I just want her to become Thor's love interest again.

Sadly, the reason why they'll never do it is because they realize that if they do, they'll have to commit to it, and they're clearly not ready to do that.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

This is pretty much my main issue with MCU Spider-Man. And to clarify, i don't think that his movies are bad and i think that Holland is clearly putting a lot of effort into his wich i appreciate and i completly understand why people like him, but that particular change had made impossible for me to enjoy it as much as the other.

Agreed.

Sadly we are even less aware of ageism than we are of racism and sexism. You can openly make remarks about an age demographic but you would have to use coded language to do the same with a race or gender (there is a brilliant issue of Ms. Marvel that addresses this). This is unfortunately why MCU Spider-Man is normalized in a way a Wonder Woman or Black Panther equivalent to it would never be.

[Witchfan]

Marvel wants to eliminate comic book shops, and go with a digital-only and trade paperback model.

I always hated Asian Psylocke. Caucasian Psylocke is better.

Hank Pym and Janet Van Dyne were the weak links of the original Avengers. I don't miss them when they aren't with the team. The MCU was right to replace them with Hawkeye and Black Widow.

I don't believe in the X-Men concept. I don't want humans replaced with mutants.

[Agent Z]

Historically, Janet and Carol had longer and more significant ties to the Avengers. Janet has been portrayed as the heart of the Team since the Lee/Kirby era, while Carol has been a powerhouse since her Ms. Marvel days even if she only recently started getting marketed as Marvel's Wonder Woman. Black Widow on the other hand didn't become an ongoing Avenger until the 1980s, and probably wouldn't have been in the top 10 most recognizable Avengers until Millar made her a founding member of the Ultimates.

The problem with Black Widow as "one of the Main Five" is that she is too grounded of a character to be on the same mythic level as Cap, Iron Man, Thor, or Hulk. She is conceptually closer to Mockingbird or Black Canary from DC than she is to someone who can fill that void. A lot of Black Widow's female-lead status in the MCU boils down 1) Marvel playing it safe and 2) her being in the right place at the right time. Jan was off-limits due to Edgar Wright while Carol still had a lot of unknown variables at the time preventing her from being adapted, like how to reinvent her origin without Mar-Vell.

On the contrary, I'd argue Black Widow being grounded is why she fits in with the main Avengers since she brings a more human perspective as Batman (when written well) does to the Justice League.

The explanation given by the Russos and other figures of the MCU on why this Spider-Man has blind loyalty to Iron Man and the Avengers is simply that he is a kid. Given that Spider-Man was the first independent teen superhero and that he was meant to challenge ageist notions about teens, this is the equivalent of sexism in Wonder Woman.

If it means anything, Tony does turn down a position with the Avengers in Homecoming and is less enamored of Tony after Far From Home.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

On the contrary, I'd argue Black Widow being grounded is why she fits in with the main Avengers since she brings a more human perspective as Batman (when written well) does to the Justice League.

You will have to be more specific with what you mean by 'human perspective' (it is like when people use the world 'realism' to describe something in comics - it could mean a million different things).

If it means anything, Tony does turn down a position with the Avengers in Homecoming and is less enamored of Tony after Far From Home.

I wouldn't say he is less enamored with Tony after FFH, just that he stopped mourning his death.

Based on comments Watts and Feige made at the time, the ending to Homecoming was indeed trying to move Spider-Man away from Iron Man. You are probably right about that. In hindsight, though, it is no different than the Joker's line in TDK on how him and Batman were destined to do this forever. The plans clearly changed by Infinity War which retconned Peter's character arc from Homecoming and argued Peter only said 'no' to impress Mr. Stark. Endgame and FFH then doubled-down on their relationship some more.

I suspect most-if-not-all of the problematic ideas in MCU Spider-Man come from Disney, Sony, and the Russos with Feige and Watts compromising and/or being passive towards them.

[TheCape]

You will have to be more specific with what you mean by 'human perspective' (it is like when people use the world 'realism' to describe something in comics - it could mean a million different things).



I wouldn't say he is less enamored with Tony after FFH, just that he stopped mourning his death.

Based on comments Watts and Feige made at the time, the ending to Homecoming was indeed trying to move Spider-Man away from Iron Man. You are probably right about that. In hindsight, though, it is no different than the Joker's line in TDK on how him and Batman were destined to do this forever. The plans clearly changed by Infinity War which retconned Peter's character arc from Homecoming and argued Peter only said 'no' to impress Mr. Stark. Endgame and FFH then doubled-down on their relationship some more.

I suspect most-if-not-all of the problematic ideas in MCU Spider-Man come from Disney, Sony, and the Russos with Feige and Watts compromising and/or being passive towards them.

I think that you could argue that his participation in IW could be seen as "i'm the friendly neighbor Spider-Man if there is not neighborhood i can't fullfill my responsabilities" to explain his participation there, at least thats the reason than fans throw in the internet.

I do agreed that FFH doesn't make him less enamored of Tony, it just make him move on from his grief, but to be honest i don't think that FFH is a good sequel at all for many reasons and come across as nonsensical to me (especially the part of being Iron Man sucessor, that whole part of the movie feels contrived to me).

[Kaitou D. Kid]

I think that you could argue that his participation in IW could be seen as "i'm the friendly neighbor Spider-Man if there is not neighborhood i can't fullfill my responsabilities" to explain his participation there, at least thats the reason than fans throw in the internet.

I do agreed that FFH doesn't make him less enamored of Tony, it just make him move on from his grief, but to be honest i don't think that FFH is a good sequel at all for many reasons and come across as nonsensical to me (especially the part of being Iron Man sucessor, that whole part of the movie feels contrived to me).

Agreed on the unbolded parts. As far as Spidey appearing in Infinity War, the participation in-and-of-itself wasn't an issue (Spider-Man after all has been part of MU-Wide Events including The Infinity Gauntlet). The problematic parts were regressing their relationship to mentor-and-student/hero-and-sidekick, retconning Peter's character arc from Homecoming, and doubling down on the ageist undertone. Tony even straight-up tells Peter to zip it because the adults are talking (at least in Homecoming, Tony was portrayed as somewhat in the wrong when he said it).

[Agent Z]

You will have to be more specific with what you mean by 'human perspective' (it is like when people use the world 'realism' to describe something in comics - it could mean a million different things).

I was thinking along the lines of showing how human skills can compete with the Avengers. Either way, I don't think her being "grounded" is an issue for the Avengers who were never really all that mythic and grand when you think about it (see the Kooky Quartet era).

[Kaitou D. Kid]

I was thinking along the lines of showing how human skills can compete with the Avengers. Either way, I don't think her being "grounded" is an issue for the Avengers who were never really all that mythic and grand when you think about it (see the Kooky Quartet era).

I meant she is 'grounded' in the sense that she is a spy and uses a lot of conventional weapons i.e. ordinary pistols. Batman and even Hawkeye are less grounded than her due to their unconventional weapons and fighting styles. Also, Cap already covers a lot of the espionage and combat stuff even though he is also superhuman. None of this means she doesn't belong on the Avengers, just that it is hard to sell her as part of the "Big Four" or "Big Five" (if you include Hulk) just because the actress herself is as big as the other actors. The fact Marvel had so much enormous success with Black Widow but was ultimately never able to give her more solos or more of a leading role in other films is actually quite normal given the nature of the character and therefore cannot be attributed entirely to sexism (which I have seen people argue). If anything, the way the MCU made use of what has historically been a supporting character is quite impressive and progressive.

[Agent Z]

I meant she is 'grounded' in the sense that she is a spy and uses a lot of conventional weapons i.e. ordinary pistols. Batman and even Hawkeye are less grounded than her due to their unconventional weapons and fighting styles. Also, Cap already covers a lot of the espionage and combat stuff even though he is also superhuman. None of this means she doesn't belong on the Avengers, just that it is hard to sell her as part of the "Big Four" or "Big Five" (if you include Hulk) just because the actress herself is as big as the other actors. The fact Marvel had so much enormous success with Black Widow but was ultimately never able to give her more solos or more of a leading role in other films is actually quite normal given the nature of the character and therefore cannot be attributed entirely to sexism (which I have seen people argue). If anything, the way the MCU made use of what has historically been a supporting character is quite impressive and progressive.

Well Black Widow also has her Widow's Bite in both the comics and the movies which is not a conventional weapon. Her using pistols is actually a relatively recent development. For most of her history she didn't use them. She is also a spy in the James Bond mold which means her adventures are necessarily always grounded.

I'd say it's the Hulk who doesn't belong on the Avengers given his bad history with teams. In the original avengers he was only there for two issues before leaving. I'd have probably made his cousin a founder in place of him.