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
![]()
Can you honestly look me in the eye and tell me there's nothing, nothing at all, that possibly could've been cut to make room for better representation?
Or, hell, forget cutting things—is there not a single character who could possibly have been cast with a non-white actor?
edited 19th Feb '15 9:21:17 AM by Wackd
Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.There is only one character I feel confident saying could have been a non-white actor given the roles of the supporting cast and the sensibilities of the time period, and that is Edwin Jarvis. Being a stuffy Brit is not intrinsically vital to his role in the story, and the SSR's frequent hassling of him would provide an opportunity to explore the treatment of black members of society without changing too much of the story to make room for it. However, it would come with a whole host of Unfortunate Implications if the one black character was Howard Stark's manservant.
The SSR's sensibilities are too critical to the story, and Angie could not be Peggy's neighbor or help her find housing if she had to live in a segregated area.
edited 19th Feb '15 10:04:35 AM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Maybe, but I don't think she is.
Oh God! Natural light!In segregated New York, she wouldn't have reservations about a black Angie living there; Black Angie would not be living there, because "we don't serve your kind". It's as simple as that.
edited 19th Feb '15 12:07:37 PM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.What is it about Marvel properties that causes the tumblr crowd to come out? This show is a period piece set in the 1940s. Cushy government jobs like federal law enforcement were hard to come by back then for minorities and Peggy lives in a white neighborhood because the Civil rights movement is still 9 years away from kicking into full swing and segregation is still a thing (even in the north). Like it or not the show would have to go out of its way to include the kind of diversity you are looking for which would detract from the female empowerment which is the primary theme of the show. If this had been a full series with 20+ episodes (or if it gets a second series) it can better address race relations in 1940s New York but as it stands it is choosing to use its running time on sexism.
You don't like how long it took Marvel to release a movie with a minority lead? Okay cool that is a valid criticism as it did take them nearly a decade which is legitimately troubling. Does that mean that every single property that Marvel releases post avengers has to somehow compensate for it by being as diverse as possible even when it doesn't make sense? No.
"War without fire is like sausages without mustard." - Jean Juvénal des Ursins
Troper formerly known as Nohbody
I suppose though that while [Agent Carter's landlady] being a female misogynist
Unless something extraordinary has happened in the last two episodes on which I haven't yet caught up, I think you were looking for "misandrist", which is the hatred or dislike of males.
And even then, I don't think she is, unless something came up in those two yet-unwatched episodes. The rules of the place say no guys allowed, but that's more an issue of moral attitudes about sinfulness and marriage (specifically, the lack of the latter supposedly leading to the former), not hatred of men.
Yes, she does that a lot. She also seems to think that grown women are completely lacking in self-control.
Rather dreadful person, I think.
Oh God! Natural light!And more understandably, she hates people destroying her walls.
Edit- In fairness, she does act suspiciously of men coming to see the female tenants, so it is not like she solely directs her ire against women; however, the way she humiliates and kicks out tenants caught with a man seems closer to misogyny than misandry.
edited 19th Feb '15 1:35:56 PM by Hodor2
Oh she's definitely a misogynist, i could see that clear as day "women can't control themselves", the whole "In order to get her approval we must desire to get married at some day and not wish to seek higher education", also kicking a woman out as soon as they are proven to be messing around with a dude, the landlady is clearly a huge example of a misogynist and an awful person in general.
The Blog The ArtAnd I am glad about it. It would have been wrong if the show had portrayed the sexism of the era as something which men done to woman instead of portraying it as something which was part of the society and was carried by men and woman.
What angers me about some of the criticism levelled at Agent Carter is that this show has eight episodes. In this eight (well, seven so far) episodes it portrayed the plight of the men who came home from war and got no help whatsoever, the plight of slightly disabled men, the plight of a woman in a men dominated environment and the plight of woman having to take care for herself while trying to get her break, all this while balancing a spy story and the need to tie into the larger universe....but no, that's not enough. Instead of celebrating that Marvel not only made a female lead show, but a really good, non-insulting one, we complain about everything the show isn't. Some fans seem to expect that Marvel is delivering, to borrow an expression from my language, the egg laying woolmilkpig. I mean, I might get it if Marvel had nothing in the work at all, but after Daredevil, AKA Jessica Jones and Luke Cage are set to air. And who knows, if Agent Carter gets renewed, another season might be set during the time of Martin Luther King. Shouldn't we complain about the shows which do nothing at all in this direction instead of complaining about the ones which do try something new?
And I would feel very uncomfortable with Marvel rewriting history, too. Some small things, like the Howling Commanders, can be hand-waved because, well, they served under Steve and one can assume that what Steve wanted, he got. But the basic premise of the MCU is that the history is very similar to ours, with a few additions to it.
That.....is certainly a phrase. I'm gonna guess it means something along the lines of "everything at once", but I'm legitimately curious about it now.
To be fair, this seems to be something that no one gets right. Any verse I've seen that starts off as "the world outside your window" will completely obliterate it within the first year or two. If anything, it's notable that the MCU has lasted this long without it really hitting, though that probably has to do with the slower output.
![]()
German (what else) it's "Die eierlegende Wollmilchsau". Though it is a fairly new expression, and originally meant to actually trying to create something perfect. The meaning shifted in the last years or so from "that's what we want" to "how can you expect all that at once", and by now you can buy toys which are a mix of a chicken, a sheep, a cow or goat and a pig. Nice reminder to simply say "no" once in a while.
edited 19th Feb '15 4:14:12 PM by Swanpride
On the contrary I think that's what gets people the most, that it makes an effort to address things like sexism but then is completely silent about the racism of the era when really all it'd take is even a token mention.
And I think it kinda didn't help matters that like Agents of Shield they decided to have the first villain of the show be a black guy.
So while Agent Carter is great, and I love it, I think it's okay to be upset that the causes it's advancing and the people it's advancing those causes for are also ones that are disproportionately represented in socially-conscious mass media. Especially given that, well, any MCU work with a chance at addressing intersectional issues are a ways off and were barely more than speculation a few months ago.
(There's probably a good debate to be had over whether Agents of SHIELD is intersectional—it's got lots of kickass women of color but almost no feminist social commentary to speak of but for the subtext involved with having lots of kickass women of color. Plus, y'know, the endless parade of mind-controlled dead black guys.)
edited 19th Feb '15 4:21:27 PM by Wackd
Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.

Never mind- was trying to write the hashtag Renew Agent Carter tag, but for some reason the hashtag sign isn't being picked up correctly
edited 19th Feb '15 9:20:16 AM by Hodor2