Welcome to the main discussion thread for the Marvel Cinematic Universe! This pinned post is here to establish some basic guidelines. All of the Media Forum rules
still apply.
- This thread is for talking about the live-action films, TV shows, animated works, and related content that use the Marvel brand, currently owned by Disney.
- While mild digressions are okay, discussion of the comic books should go in this thread
. Extended digressions may be thumped as off-topic.
- Spoilers for new releases should not be discussed without spoiler tagging for at least two weeks. Rather, each title should have a dedicated thread where that sort of conversation is held. We can mention new releases in a general sense, but please be courteous to people who don't want to be spoiled.
If you're posting tagged spoilers, make sure that the film or series is clearly identified outside the spoiler tagging. People need to know what will be spoiled before they choose to read the post.
Edited by Mrph1 on Jul 29th 2024 at 3:09:00 PM
There's also the fact that Ant-Man tied into Avengers/Captain America stuff pretty damn quickly into his career. So his solo stuff might've been small, but he got into the big leagues in only his second appearance.
Meanwhile, Spider-Man debuted in Cap 3, had a small-stakes story, and then completely dropped them post-Infinity Saga wrap-up to make his movies as grand as possible.
"I'm Mr. Blue, woah-woah-ooh..."For both Ant-Man & wasp and Spider-Man (okay mostly Spider-Man) it is really about the evolution of the character which naturally means that they go up against increasingly bigger threats, whilst growing more in person and all that comes with it.
I think we need a more clear-cut definition of low stakes, because if a high stake is the end of the world or mass destruction, then two Iron Man movies were low stakes, Black Panther as well and so was Civil War, which had much bigger consequences on the MCU story.
If we kept characters at Low stake all the time it has the potential to get stale honestly.
Edited by SAwatching on Jul 4th 2022 at 9:00:23 PM
Sincerely S Awatching.I feel like a lot of the other supernatural ones could stay low-stakes too. Blade could just be looking for revenge on Deacon Frost (who isn't trying to ascend like the Snipes-verse one was), Ghost Rider could be looking for the same against Mephisto (or trying to stop Scarecrow, who could, at most, become some sort of lich-like being), and Elsa Bloodstone could just be hunting lower-level monsters, and then Lilith eventually comes along as the apocalyptic threat to unite them.
I still think a Wolverine movie focusing on Omega Red or Burnside killing off old Weapon X personnel could be great.
Edited by HasturHasturHastur on Jul 4th 2022 at 12:33:42 PM
I mean, they could, but we're introduced to Blade in the MCU as he's asking the Black Knight if he wants to take up the Ebony Blade to try to find a missing Eternal who's been kidnapped by a Celestial.
So, I'm not real hopeful. But maybe it'll be more of a character introduction and lower stakes? We'll see.
Dane Whitman will probably be a Captain Britain associate, which entails apocalyptic threats by default, plus the Ebony Blade is connected to Knull anyways. Blade just knows that it's an evil weapon with a corrupting effect and probably doesn't know exactly where it comes from, but knows enough to know that it's not something laymen should touch.
"In similar vein, Loki is more a show about the T V A that just happens to feature Loki."
Sorry to misrepresent the topic a bit, but when a Loki series was announced, I imagined something Agents of Asgard style.
Honestly, I hope that the T V A plot only lasts until the next season, and that from the third season onwards it will be Loki, Kid Loki or Young Loki having more normal adventures, or related to the character..
Edited by DarthNoxIsCool on Jul 4th 2022 at 2:32:44 AM
Even the Kingpin is a villain who operates on a small scale, and does his best to stay in his zone so as not to attract the attention of stronger heroes.
—-
Dreykov could have been a small-scale threat, being the leader of a group of spies, but for some strange reason the movie felt the need for his ultimate plan to take over the world, using thousands of Black Widow.
Edited by DarthNoxIsCool on Jul 4th 2022 at 2:56:26 AM
Huh I just heard an interesting reason why M'Baku can't be the Black Panther.
Because M'Baku is a believer of the white gorilla faith while the Black Panther habit has a religious role, being the avatar and high-priest of the panther God.
M'Baku becoming Black Panther would be like him switching religions.
Which is an interesting thought.
Edited by slimcoder on Jul 4th 2022 at 6:05:32 AM
"I am Alpharius. This is a lie."M'Baku probably would have just called himself the Great Gorilla if he had become King and taken the Heart-Shaped Herb.
Alternatively, he might have appointed a Black Panther to be Wakanda's protector while he ruled as King. It's tough to say how much of his desire for tradition would have impacted his rule-would he have made worshipping Hanuman the national religion of Wakanda, or insisted the Yoruba language be the official language?
I don't mind the crossovers so much as the fact that they haven't been very good at writing crossover plots that actually incorporate all the players well.
If anything, I'd say the problem now is that they're not writing crossovers. They're taking established characters and using them as vehicles for ambitious projects, vs actually giving those characters sequels. Crossovers could very well be sequels if they so choose, but they're not interested in using them that way.
Hence us getting a movie that downplays Peter Parker's story in favor of using him as a vehicle to homage Sony's earlier films, a film that removes Dr. Strange from his own mythos to use him as a vehicle to introduce America Chavez and conclude Wanda's story (and, presumably, explore a bunch of mechanics that'll be more important later when Kang comes along), an upcoming film where Ant-Man is being used to introduce Kang, etc. It shows a lack of investment in the characters and concepts they actually have, which sucks because most of the characters they have on the docket right now are ones that aren't yet very firmly entrenched in the public consciousness to begin with. Characters like T'Challa and Strange need these first sequels to explore what they and their worlds are about in a way that, say, Thor 4 doesn't.
(Though granted, the one time they actually tried to write a crossover that actually combined the story of two characters (Ragnarok), they flubbed it up by making those two stories completely opposed with zero connections whatsoever, weakening both, so I guess we were screwed either way)
To note, it was absolutely possible to write all of those movies in a way that incorporated everyone's stories. Hell, for years I'd been clamoring for a Spidey / Dr. Strange crossover because the ones they have in the comics tended to be so good - it feels like I got the monkey's paw, tbh. Likewise, making the connections to Strange in Dr. Strange 2 superficial seems to have been an intentional choice, and it's not like they couldn't have connected Hela and the Grandmaster in Ragnarok if they really wanted to. They're just choosing not to.
It just hits hardest with Black Panther because Black Panther represents a fairly underepresented concept in this genre - especially in film - and it really would've been better if his sequel was about solidifying his actual mythos vs using him to introduce Namor.
But at its worst, this runs the risk of hitting the same problem Lucasfilm did with The Book of Boba Fett: where you're just superficially writing stories about X character that is actually just a sequel or pilot or etc for Y, more hype character, and the whole thing suffers for it.
Edited by KnownUnknown on Jul 4th 2022 at 8:57:33 AM
In fairness Black Panther straight-up can't anymore due to Boseman's passing. It honestly wouldn't surprise me if the reason the scope for BP 2 is feeling so big is because they already shifted to making it more of an ensemble film and at that point might as well just keep going.
On that note a lot of these chats are legit frustrating as a fan ngl. Like as a lifelong comics fan I'm absolutely down for the energy and enthusiasm that's going into all the expansion efforts, but I also definitely get a lot of the issues with how the last few movies and shows have been and how for all of the critiques the one recurring refrain is to cut down the expansion and truly reset back to like 2014 levels of scope and output. And I'll fully admit the comic nerd in me's loving the hell out of the buffet and doesn't want it to end, and then there's bigger conversations on how this can reconciled and if it even can be because it sounds like a huge issue is just comic books being comic books and so on and so on.
On the subject of the movie scopes, on one hand I do think people are overplaying how much the MCU protagonists are being shelved for universe-building, especially with NWH and MOM - generally Marvel's pretty good at at least recognizing who the actual star is supposed to be in these things and building things accordingly, and even with MOM I don't think I'd every actually say that it isn't a Dr. Strange movie, and more than just because of screentime. However on the other hand what I do get is how much Marvel is using the existing roster as vehicles to blatantly promote newer ones, something that only appears to be escalating if certain rumors of things come to pass, and I can definitely see where people can hitting a kind of fatigue from this kind of Strictly Formula.
I did find these interesting videos that delve into the problems phase 4 is undergoing.
For instance D+ is certainly not helping for one. At least before if you wanted to keep track you'd just watch a movie which are very simple to access. But now due to Disney putting on the shows on their streaming service, it means there is now effectively a paywall people may not be able to access.
And this is messing with the attempted back to basics approach Phase 4 is trying to do as its simultaneously trying be simpler but is still in full crossover mode so the mood is off.
And then there's the issue of hype culture in the movies where they are constantly advertising future movies and shows within said products. Plus the constant cameo's which in fairness is a creation from the fans themselves from their obsession with rumors and leaks, remember when everyone was saying Superior Iron Man played by Tom Cruise was gonna be in Multiverse of Madness?
This creates insane expectations for the movie that it can't reasonably attain.
Edited by slimcoder on Jul 4th 2022 at 11:21:29 AM
"I am Alpharius. This is a lie."I totally the shows being six hour pieces of Continuity Lock-Out risks, especially in regions that don’t have D+, but what is the “paywall” difference between paying for a month of D+ to catch up and buying a movie ticket in countries where it is available? It’s not like they’re behind that $30 exclusive paywall they did at the beginning of the pandemic. Is it the mental block of signing up for another streaming service? (Like I’ve heard great things about Apple TV+‘s ongoings but I don’t want to add another service to the plate?)
Probably because it's not a very family-friendly plot. The only superhero movie I can recall doing that is the recent Batman movie.
I seriously doubt Marvel is going to give a black man an alias with "gorilla" in the name.
Edited by windleopard on Jul 5th 2022 at 8:45:50 PM

The Ant-Man movies are also pretty small-scale (fittingly) and centered around tech being used for nefarious means. (Of course I think that's about to change)
This seems to be a Disney problem, except Star Wars has the opposite issue (their glut of pre/interquels means everyone's fates are mostly locked in so nothing matters).