Do you think it would be even MORE expensive for Disney to make a period drama like that? I know Mad Men took place during the 1960s and it cost AMC a FORTUNE to produce. I actually think those kinds of movies set in the past could work for Marvel Studios...If they take place outside of the main MCU timeline. From what I read, the Eternals had a REALLY hard time justifying why they didn't take part in the battles between Phase One and Phase Three and failing to prevent man-made catastrophes from happening in the past seven thousand years. As I've stated MANY times before, I'm not a huge fan of the MCU's versions of time travel/multiverses, BUT I do think having "parallel timelines" gives writers some more freedom to tell stories without being tied to stories from the main MCU timeline. By the way, I always thought Gambit was more likely to star in a western than Logan to be honest.
Well honestly with a wolverine storyline set in the old west you wouldn't have to go outside the main time line. We know he is really old. We know he was around back then. It would a cool way to bring him in, and maybe some other ancient marvel characters, like one of the Iron fists, or Dracula or whatever. And of course the marvel western characters which there are like a billion of them. I personally think it would be cool. However I don't know if contemporary audiences would think so. Everything has to be bigger, badder, more spectacular. The slower stuff is probably reserved for Disney plus.
Imagine a wolverine show or movie set back then but done like the Mandalorian? Could be really cool.
Last edited by inisideguy; 11-22-2021 at 10:45 AM.
A Wolverine show like the Mandalorian would be really cool. But if Wolverine was in the main timeline all those years ago, he would have to be like a hermit for it to make sense to me. Like, he doesn't care about what's going on in the world. He just wants to be left alone. I just think it'd be weird for him to sit out so many events otherwise.
After dealing with Chitari and Thanos, run of the mill dealers aren't gonna feel like a legit threat to Clint, no. Not physically. But that's not the only way to write a threat.
Ever hear that quote "A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic?" Clint fighting to save all of life on earth against aliens is cool. It's big, it's bombastic, it's a spectacle. Clint fighting a local gang in an attempt to save a kid's life? That's a very different thing, and we shouldn't expect Clint to struggle against that gang after dealing with friggin space aliens. But the drama doesn't have to come from the violence.
Like, if the big crux of conflict in Hawkeye is Clint trying to get rid of the tracksuits in time to make his flight home and see his wife....that can be compelling, and Clint doesn't have to struggle to win a fight, he just has to struggle to get to the airport on time. Different problem, but one that more people will relate to.
......touche.
Okay, still, I think the point stands. Killmonger was trying to change the face of the world, overthrowing every nation except Wakanda and ruling the globe. And slavery. He didn't get beyond Wakandan borders, his plot fell apart almost before it began, but it was still a global level threat, at least in attempt and concept. And as much as I love those big ideas, sometimes a story that focuses on a smaller, real problem is much more rewarding.
"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.
Yeah, but I'm not sure if Logan is gonna be on-screen in the MCU anytime soon. It'll be hard for any actor to follow in Jackman's shoes. I think it would be better if they wait on him a bit. But, for Wolverine to missed the events of the first three phases, he would have to be a sort of a loner.
The problem with street level heroes is I don't see them dealing with this stuff. Instead they all have this attitude that cities are full of violent crime necessitating some strong man to ignore people's rights and beat them up. Yet the kinds of crimes actually underprosecuted by police aren't the ones shown in these comics or movies. It's kinda like copaganda but with vigilantes. I mean, in the US they just had a trial of a vigilante for murdering people because he wanted to 'protect against looters.' whereas more sci-fi/fantasy heroes aren't usually based around 'cities are hellholes'
I like some westerns but I find the era to be brutal and violent. But aside from that, if we want more story diversity (which I do), I don't think the answer is adding more tropes.
The only heroes I can really think of where the emphasis is on how bad their cities are is Batman and Daredevil in Hell's Kitchen.
What kind of crime heroes deal with usually depends on the hero, comic, or story. Usually they just go out on patrol and stop crimes in progress, target major crime assets, or even go directly to the source. But the very heart of Superheros is fighting crime as much as it is helping people.
At the end of the day it comes down to the execution, which is true for any genre.I like some westerns but I find the era to be brutal and violent. But aside from that, if we want more story diversity (which I do), I don't think the answer is adding more tropes.
The thing is, they're not really fighting crime as it is, but as some Hollywood version of it. And a lot of superheroes don't fight petty criminals anymore. Besides, things can change. That's why a lot of comments are saying 'make it a horror movie' or something like that. So why not consider whether vigilante superheroes' portrayal of urban societies is outdated and/or problematic. Not everything has to be done one way forever
I've seen a lot of moments of heroes fighting petty crime in recent stories, personally. I think it's more just that they're focusing on the more overt stuff that is easier to showcase/address.
I mean, even if you change the genre it would probably inevitably end up involving a fight with some villainous force and righting some injustice in my opinion unless the Superhero aspect took a complete backseat.
They dealt with this stuff just a few months ago with F&tWS and the white collar root problem (politicians) was directly addressed. Sam and Bucky didn't beat those guys up, but Cap and Buck attacked them in the most brutal way you can attack a politician; with words said in front of a camera.
I'd have preferred a punch, myself, but public humiliation forcing a drastic change in policy is much more effective.
Then it isn't really copaganda is it? These are people operating outside the rule of law by default. They have no legitimate authority to throw around or hide behind, and the existence of costumed vigilantes is in and of itself proof against copaganda. If superheroes believed the cops and justice system worked, they wouldn't be vigilantes in the first place.It's kinda like copaganda but with vigilantes.
And some people like that. Game of Thrones was brutal and violent. But it's a non-issue, a MCU western is going to be no more brutal and violent than what the pg13 rating will allow anyway.I like some westerns but I find the era to be brutal and violent.
Agreed. But Marvel has been dipping into other genres since the start and that does provide a degree of variety. This is just a genre you don't like.But aside from that, if we want more story diversity (which I do), I don't think the answer is adding more tropes.
Last edited by Ascended; 11-22-2021 at 06:15 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.