Marvel Cinematic Universe

Him eating a bunch of spiders to psych himself up probably didn't help, either.

Anyway, let's not talk about Ultron, that was just...embarassing. I do agree villains in superhero movies should always push the hero to go beyond his limits in some way, be it physically or intellectually. Leave the comic relief to the henchmen.

That's my biggest problem with the first Avengers: there was literally no point in the entire movie where I felt Loki was even remotelly a threat at all. Perharps when he fights Cap and Thor but the coreography and camera work on those scenes is so laughably bad it's hard to appreciate it.

Loki was more an intellectual threat. The army was the physical threat.

I actually really liked Ultron, but the climax is the most baffling thing I've ever seen.

The movie takes away nearly every single thing that was granting Ultron his competence, and replaces it with nothing. He was building an ultra powerful body for himself, his ultimate form, and he had the twins enacting his schemes, and the script turns BOTH of those against him.

How is it baffling?

This sort of thing — Ultron's schemes backfiring on him — is entirely in character and consistent with his comics portrayal.

Ultron's problem is that he's incredibly immature. This leads him to always make mistakes that cost him victory.

And let's not forget that in the MCU he's based on Tony Stark instead of Hank Pym. And Tony Stark has a way of messing up.

Why do you insist on villains being uber competent and unstoppable from beginning to end?

Edited by M84 on Jul 4th 2019 at 9:57:01 PM

The bad guy has to lose,and it needs to feel satisfying and look spectacular,in Ultron's case hes so evil the twins turn against him,he couldn't comprehend why they would do that

Ultron is a pissbaby. That’s his comic persona

Ultron has always been a pissbaby.

Ultron, whether he's based on Hank Pym or Tony Stark, is basically a version of his creator sans whatever maturity or morality they might possess.

Comics Ultron for example is basically Hank Pym but without any of the moral restraints keeping him from acting on his misanthropy.

Edited by M84 on Jul 4th 2019 at 10:27:08 PM

Note also that the 80’s are the same decade Captain Planet is from.

Come on, guys. You know I don't have a problem with villains losing in the end. I'd literally never watch ANY super hero film if I did.

I'd be nice if people didn't reduce me down like that.

You aren't, but you do seem like you never want the villain to have a a spectacular defeat where the heroes get the best of them.

And it seems that you want every villain to be of a certain kind (badass and dignified), not realising that it's impossible. Not every story needs its villain/antagonist to fulfil the same role. It has to fit with the story they are trying to tell.

Edited by Nightwire on Jul 4th 2019 at 10:08:59 AM

Also the Maximoffs and The Vision have been heroes for roughly 50 years now in the comics so it was inevitable that they’d turn against Ultron. They were literally adapted for the purpose of expanding the hero roster.

My problem with Ultron specifically is that because everything that had granted him his victories up to that point had been taken away from him, there was little reason for me to personally feel invested in the extended climax and anything that was happening in it. I was just waiting for Ultron to lose, with a few scenes I liked sprinkled in here and there like his final talk with Wanda.

That's my problem with climaxes in general: I don't always complain about them, but I rarely enjoy them, because there's nothing in them for me. Maybe that's why I come off as so whiny all the time, I rarely watch a story where the ending leaves me feeling good.

Edited by GNinja on Jul 4th 2019 at 5:28:44 PM

But anyway, I've started watching Iron Fist season 2 for some reason.

I'm enjoying it so far.

Ok, maybe it has already been discussed here and I failed to notice, but I just can't get the idea out of my mind.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/legion-final-season-premiere-explained-noah-hawley-davids-time-travel-journey-1220751

In the aftermath of the 20th Century Fox buyout, Noah Hawley's pet project of a solo Doctor Doom movie could end up becoming part of the MCU (assuming he can convince Feige to greenlight it, that is).

I wouldn't say I feel conflicted about the idea, but I still feel worried somewhat. In spite of his massive popularity, Doom is still an Anti-Hero at best. Is it really possible to make Doom the "hero" of his own story without either taking too many liberties with the character and not having the audience feel like they're rooting for the wrong guy? Yes, Thanos was the Villain Protagonist in Infinity War, but at least the Avengers were there to counter-balance him. In a potential Doctor Doom movie however, he would be the most "heroic" character involved and I'm not certain making the antagonist worse will be enough to excuse some of Doom's darker aspects.

On the other hand, I can't help but be giddy at the irony of DOCTOR DOOOOOOOOOOM!!! potentially joining the MCU before the X-men and the Fantastic 4 do. It's like Marvel is sending the message that not only can they make Doom better than Fox ever did, they're actually willing to go the extra mile and give him his own freaking movie! And cherry on top: the director would be a former Fox collaborator.

So let's dicuss: do you think Noah Hawley has enough chops to make his Doctor Doom movie work inside the MCU? And who would you cast under the titular mask?

They could do it like his Astonishing Tales series and have him troll everyone.

Watching Spider-Man: Far From Home right now!

Edit: Bugger, I made a mistake. Fixed.

Edited by fredhot16 on Jul 4th 2019 at 11:20:14 AM

I definitely think someone like Hawley could do a Doom movie — perhaps based on the Doctor Doom/Doctor Strange mini-series where they save his mother from Hell.

As for who should play him — his reformed face post-Secret Wars was based on Vincent Cassel, who sounds like a great choice.

If Hawley could play up the Unreliable Narrator side of it and make it clear that our "hero" isn't quite the paragon he claims then it could work, and be quite interesting. How to pull that off is a dilemma though.

Possibly have Doom perform actually heroic acts as well as villainous ones but present him as not recognising the difference.

If people are already having problems with Thanos being Draco in Leather Pants-ed, Doom is going to be so much worse. And unlike Thanos, Doom is actual dictator of a country, something that actually exists in real life.

Doom is...complex. Remember that while being a tyrant he canonically provided a haven for Romani refugees from persecution. Also there’s the whole Doom 2099 thing where One Nation Under Doom was shown to be a good thing.

A good sympathetic villain has a dilemma worth caring about.

Doom’s got a lot of stuff going on.

From his inferiority complex to RICHARDS!!!!, to running an entire nation, & that his mother is in Hell.

Alright, I saw it!