Quicksilver: Pietro Maximoff Appreciation 2021

[Dcnewb]

If anything I would think that Pietro on his own would be something to reckon with given that his speed can make punches more painful with the added force of his full weight and speed behind it. I'm surprised that he hasn't been given more of a Flash like treatment in regard to how to use him as there is a lot you can do with his powers.

Not to forget his healing factor

[Albert1981]

Just saw that Eternals trailer with Makkari in it. I was impressed. I was NEVER a huge fan of the SUPER SLOW MOTION that speedster scenes actually cause. I liked Whedon's take on Pietro in AoU. Pietro was moving fast, BUT the people around him were generally still moving at regular speeds. The Makkari stuff looks a bit cooler though because when she runs, it looks DANGEROUS. I'm wondering will Tommy be similar.

The MCU should have introduced the Maximoff twins after AoU. The FOX/Disney situation was settled shortly thereafter and I think Pietro would have actually lived for much longer if Wanda and him debuted in another Avengers movie. Now it's too late because more speedsters are joining the MCU. Marvel Studios should have included MCU Pietro in WandaVision, even if he lasted for just the duration of that show. It was literally the best vehicle for him to appear in.

[GenericUsername]

Just saw that Eternals trailer with Makkari in it. I was impressed. I was NEVER a huge fan of the SUPER SLOW MOTION that speedster scenes actually cause. I liked Whedon's take on Pietro in AoU. Pietro was moving fast, BUT the people around him were generally still moving at regular speeds. The Makkari stuff looks a bit cooler though because when she runs, it looks DANGEROUS. I'm wondering will Tommy be similar.

The MCU should have introduced the Maximoff twins after AoU. The FOX/Disney situation was settled shortly thereafter and I think Pietro would have actually lived for much longer if Wanda and him debuted in another Avengers movie. Now it's too late because more speedsters are joining the MCU. Marvel Studios should have included MCU Pietro in WandaVision, even if he lasted for just the duration of that show. It was literally the best vehicle for him to appear in.

Fox did not have the exclusive rights. That was not the cause of anything. Neither side negotiated for the twins so either side could use them. Each side chose their preferences. But they could have brought Pietro back. They had ways of doing that. They chose to make some deaths matter. Unfortunately Pietro's life wasn't given any chance in the MCU.

[baumblume]

[baumblume]

[baumblume]

[CosmiComic]

Fox did not have the exclusive rights. That was not the cause of anything. Neither side negotiated for the twins so either side could use them. Each side chose their preferences. But they could have brought Pietro back. They had ways of doing that. They chose to make some deaths matter. Unfortunately Pietro's life wasn't given any chance in the MCU.

But his death didn't matter because we weren't really attached to him.

[Albert1981]

Fox did not have the exclusive rights. That was not the cause of anything. Neither side negotiated for the twins so either side could use them. Each side chose their preferences. But they could have brought Pietro back. They had ways of doing that. They chose to make some deaths matter. Unfortunately Pietro's life wasn't given any chance in the MCU.

What I mean to say is that I don't think FOX and Disney wanted to have two Quicksilvers existing in their universes at the same time. To the general public, these are basically all Marvel characters and I don't think the studios wanted any confusion amongst audiences who might want to see the two universes merge or anything like that. Marvel multiverses weren't even a thing until a few months ago!

[Phoenixx9]

Ah, from "The Yesterday Quest" on Wundagore Mountain.

I love this newer rendition of the Twins, relaxing and eating some good diner food! They even have the fancy straws!

[GenericUsername]

What I mean to say is that I don't think FOX and Disney wanted to have two Quicksilvers existing in their universes at the same time. To the general public, these are basically all Marvel characters and I don't think the studios wanted any confusion amongst audiences who might want to see the two universes merge or anything like that. Marvel multiverses weren't even a thing until a few months ago!

Maybe or they just let Whedon do what he does, which is kill off characters for emotional manipulation.

[GenericUsername]

But his death didn't matter because we weren't really attached to him.

In a ways yes, but to them, people staying dead makes it matter to them.

[Albert1981]

Maybe or they just let Whedon do what he does, which is kill off characters for emotional manipulation.

I guess I have a different view of Whedon. I never watched Buffy the Vampire Slayer or anything like that, but I DO know that Whedon is REALLY well-versed in American theater (he's commented on Arthur Miller's works on social media and referred to one of Eugene O'Neill's most famous plays in AoU of all places). He clearly is aware of important contemporary artists like Banksy (also name-dropped in AoU). So I appreciate Whedon inserting cultural references into superhero movies/shows. Star Trek did this too sometimes. The MCU hasn't done anything of the kind ever since Whedon left and I really don't like that. I don't agree with killing characters for shock value and emotional manipulation. But if done correctly, I think it works even in science fiction/fantasy stories. I think him killing off Coulson in Avengers 1 was an effective way to unite the team. And he thought it was important to keep people who were killed off dead: "As far as I'm concerned, in this movie (AoU), Coulson's dead," Whedon said. "If you come back in the sequel and say Coulson's alive, it's like putting fucking John Gielgud in the sequel to Arthur. It mattered that he's gone. It's a different world now. And you have to run with that." You won't get any argument from me when Whedon says stuff like that.

George R.R. Martin, author of the Game of Thrones books, has a viewpoint which is quite similar to Whedon's in my estimation (He responded to a question asking why he finds it so easy to kill off his main characters):

"It’s really irritating when you open a book, and 10 pages into it you know that the hero you met on page one or two is gonna come through unscathed, because he’s the hero. This is completely unreal, and I don’t like it. If I was a soldier going to war, I’d be pretty scared the night before a battle. It’s a scary thing. And I want my readers to feel that fear as they turn the page. I want them to feel that no one is safe — that if my character is surrounded by three people with swords, he’s in serious trouble, because he’s only one guy against three. It’s a great way to show that you’re not writing this cartoon adventure where the hero is going to slay 20 men at once with his brilliant swordsmanship and go through unscathed while making wisecracks all the way."

My issue is not with killing off characters. My problem is that Pietro was done away with so quickly. There was no need to get rid of him in such a manner. The impact of his death was EXTREMELY underwhelming and I think he at least deserved another couple of movie/television appearances and six or seven more years in the MCU before he was "taken off the board". From what I've read MCU fans were already complaining by 2015 that too many heroes were surviving MULTIPLE apocalyptic events and some of the "good guys" needed to die to add stakes in the films. I think that might have played a part in Whedon's AND Feige's decision to kill Pietro. That being said, Marvel Studios could have EASILY brought back ATJ's Pietro in WandaVision without actually reviving him. They chose not to because I guess they thought having FOX's "Fietro" appear would drive up interest in the show. I think that plan DID work, but in the long run it hurt the series. Now to a certain extent, WandaVision is known largely for the Fietro fakeout. Just like Iron Man 3 is mainly known for the Mandarin "twist".

[CosmiComic]

In a ways yes, but to them, people staying dead makes it matter to them.

I don't think it does if we didn't care enough in the first place

[GenericUsername]

I don't think it does if we didn't care enough in the first place

I'm saying it matters to Marvel. I don't think they care what fans think or they'd have brought him back.

[GenericUsername]

I guess I have a different view of Whedon. I never watched Buffy the Vampire Slayer or anything like that, but I DO know that Whedon is REALLY well-versed in American theater (he's commented on Arthur Miller's works on social media and referred to one of Eugene O'Neill's most famous plays in AoU of all places). He clearly is aware of important contemporary artists like Banksy (also name-dropped in AoU). So I appreciate Whedon inserting cultural references into superhero movies/shows. Star Trek did this too sometimes. The MCU hasn't done anything of the kind ever since Whedon left and I really don't like that. I don't agree with killing characters for shock value and emotional manipulation. But if done correctly, I think it works even in science fiction/fantasy stories. I think him killing off Coulson in Avengers 1 was an effective way to unite the team. And he thought it was important to keep people who were killed off dead: "As far as I'm concerned, in this movie (AoU), Coulson's dead," Whedon said. "If you come back in the sequel and say Coulson's alive, it's like putting fucking John Gielgud in the sequel to Arthur. It mattered that he's gone. It's a different world now. And you have to run with that." You won't get any argument from me when Whedon says stuff like that.

George R.R. Martin, author of the Game of Thrones books, has a viewpoint which is quite similar to Whedon's in my estimation (He responded to a question asking why he finds it so easy to kill off his main characters):

"It’s really irritating when you open a book, and 10 pages into it you know that the hero you met on page one or two is gonna come through unscathed, because he’s the hero. This is completely unreal, and I don’t like it. If I was a soldier going to war, I’d be pretty scared the night before a battle. It’s a scary thing. And I want my readers to feel that fear as they turn the page. I want them to feel that no one is safe — that if my character is surrounded by three people with swords, he’s in serious trouble, because he’s only one guy against three. It’s a great way to show that you’re not writing this cartoon adventure where the hero is going to slay 20 men at once with his brilliant swordsmanship and go through unscathed while making wisecracks all the way."

My issue is not with killing off characters. My problem is that Pietro was done away with so quickly. There was no need to get rid of him in such a manner. The impact of his death was EXTREMELY underwhelming and I think he at least deserved another couple of movie/television appearances and six or seven more years in the MCU before he was "taken off the board". From what I've read MCU fans were already complaining by 2015 that too many heroes were surviving MULTIPLE apocalyptic events and some of the "good guys" needed to die to add stakes in the films. I think that might have played a part in Whedon's AND Feige's decision to kill Pietro. That being said, Marvel Studios could have EASILY brought back ATJ's Pietro in WandaVision without actually reviving him. They chose not to because I guess they thought having FOX's "Fietro" appear would drive up interest in the show. I think that plan DID work, but in the long run it hurt the series. Now to a certain extent, WandaVision is known largely for the Fietro fakeout. Just like Iron Man 3 is mainly known for the Mandarin "twist".

Pietro was done dirty. Unfortunately Marvel seems happy with that. I can only hope they let him appear in cartoons or games in the future.