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
I have to say I loved the Selvig-Jane-Darcy dynamic because, since I was in the middle of a Ph D at the time, I had great fun interpreting them as Ph D Advisor - Grad Student - Intern, with Thor 2 shifting to Post-Doc (Jane) - Grad Student (Darcy) - Lowly Intern (Darcy's assistant). I guess you have to be struggling with a thesis to appreciate the humour.
Whatever your favourite work is, there is a Vocal Minority that considers it the Worst. Whatever. Ever!.I doubt Whedon had a "no sidekicks rule". On the DVD commentary he sounded very happy about including Pepper at Downey's suggestion and even says "you should always, if possible, include a Gwyneth in your films". Hayley Atwell was going to return in The Avengers in a "meeting old Peggy scene" until Whedon decided most of the "Cap adjusting to the modern days" scenes belonged in his own sequel, not to mention Joss wrote her a scene for Avengers 2. With that in mind, it's plausible that Portman was intended to appear without any objections from him.
edited 12th Feb '15 2:36:46 PM by Tuckerscreator
So Jane takes Selvig's place in Avengers?
Huh, that might actually be interesting, although I wonder if Natalie Portman can pull off the whole "Brainwashed reverence of Tesseract" thing. I'll assume she can, but then I haven't seen her in much, so I wouldn't know.
That might complicate Thor's arc in the movie, though. His bits of the movie mostly concern his relationship with Loki. Throwing Jane in there - especially by making her a mind-controlled minion of Loki's - while an interesting idea, would probably require things to change considerably.
I will admit that the movie could use a stronger female presence, though.
edited 12th Feb '15 2:56:10 PM by KarkatTheDalek
Oh God! Natural light!Ah, that makes sense.
Forever liveblogging the AvengersReason 8 I'm not fond of the whole Spider-man thing.
It means getting less films as for some reason MARVEL doesn't think three MCU movies in 2017 is good for business, despite the fact that there was a spider-man film set for then anyway.
Honestly I'm grumpy that they've decided to reboot the franchises when the tone of the Amazing Spider-man films is perfect for the MCU as it is and they have otherwise ongoing contracts with great actors in great roles. Honestly I would have made the deal but kept the continuity.
APM 2's theatrical release keeps enough things ambiguous that you have got a lot of wiggle room. The film implies that Norman's death was faked (and the deleted scene with his head in a jar doesn't have to be cannon) and if you're prepared to push the sinister six movie back to where it originally was meant to be you can carry on with Harry being a monstrous if somewhat tragic Green Goblin while Norman takes the role of the magnificent bastard.
edited 12th Feb '15 2:57:23 PM by Whowho
Haha what?
This series has the best worst deleted scenes, I swear
Forever liveblogging the AvengersGiven that Thor snapped at Loki during the climax when he threatened to harm Jane, I get the feeling that having her involved would make him far less "reconcile please brother!" than he was in the film. He probably would be up there at the top of Stark Tower during the battle, trying to snap her out of her trance, when not beating the tar out of Loki.
Oh, and her telling Black Widow how to shut off the portal would mean the movie would pass the Bechdel Test.
edited 12th Feb '15 2:59:20 PM by Tuckerscreator
![]()
![]()
Um...how does it mean less films?
As for the complaint about rebooting again, the only reason Sony agreed to this in the first place is probably because ASM wasn't making them the money they wanted it to. ASM2 was the worst-performing movie they've done with the character, and the reactions to their plans for Sinister Six ranged from apathy to outright scorn. The series was an aneurysm waiting to burst.
edited 12th Feb '15 3:01:11 PM by BadWolf21
![]()
I'd like to see a scene with her and Natasha, don't get me wrong.
But yeah, Thor would probably want to be with her during the final battle, in order to help/protect her, and I think he needs to actually be fighting.
I'm also wondering how it would affect her interactions with Loki in "The Dark World".
edited 12th Feb '15 3:02:09 PM by KarkatTheDalek
Oh God! Natural light!She would double her slaps
"This is for New York and also this is for me. And what the hey have a bonus, this is for Thor"
edited 12th Feb '15 3:02:35 PM by Bocaj
Forever liveblogging the Avengers@Badwolf: I'm certain that's exactly why they took the deal.
Interested, sure, but Selvig seemed to flat-out worship the thing.
edited 12th Feb '15 3:18:14 PM by KarkatTheDalek
Oh God! Natural light!![]()
![]()
But is this because they are failing or because natural franchise decay? How does X Men's numbers compare? Or Marvel's, for that matter?
edited 12th Feb '15 3:19:05 PM by Heatth
Days of Future Past is the X-Men franchise's highest-grossing entry since X3, with The Wolverine coming in third. Meanwhile, every MCU Phase 2 film has outgrossed every MCU Phase 1 film except for The Avengers.
Spider-Man is the only one on a downward spiral.
edited 12th Feb '15 3:23:46 PM by Wackd
Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.Considering 4 of the 5 highest grossing Marvel movies are in phase 2(and the one that isn't is Avengers) I think it's safe to say that what's happening to Spiderman is not related to superhero movies suddenly underperforming. Marvel managed to make more money off of Guardians of the Galaxy than Sony did off of Spiderman. Heck, even Xmen made more money than Spiderman.
![]()
Wait, X3 was the most successful of the original trilogy? For real? While even Spider-Man 2 was behind the first one? How does that happen?
Anyway, yeah, jeez. I wasn't aware Spider-Man was struggling that much.
I was thinking about the individual franchises. Mostly Ironman and Thor. So I wasn't factoring Guardians at all.
edited 12th Feb '15 3:34:48 PM by Heatth
Not sure they could have had Natalie Portman running around naked in Dark World as a result of her mind being broken by Loki's brainwashing.
Or if they did, it probably wouldn't be Played for Laughs.
edited 12th Feb '15 3:42:43 PM by Hodor2
![]()
Would've made the movie better, though...
Sorry, I don't know what your comment was in response to. Didn't read.
Guessed as much. I liked Selvig much more than Jane. And Darcy more than Jane. and the Mighty Coathanger more than Jane. And Sif more than Jane. But I did like Jane more than Malekith.
edited 12th Feb '15 3:58:20 PM by wanderlustwarrior

...You actually got me for a second there.
I've got fanfics for Frozen, Spectacular Spider-Man, Crash Bandicoot, and Spyro the Dragon.