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 "grey" characters maybe lift the hammer: I get the feeling you might like Loki: Agent of Asgard/AXIS. There's a point where Loki's plan hinges on if he can lift the hammer while Inverted since he's "better" than he usually is
◊ or if his Inverted brother will find and kill him before he can even try.
He lifts the hammer and fights his brother but loses it the moment his Inversion ends since he's back to being his normal self.
edited 3rd May '15 1:06:39 PM by LordofLore
I don't think he's a Sue in the trope sense, but it does kind of feel both like he's Whedon's mouthpiece in the first Avengers film and that in the MCU as a whole, Tony thinks he's the greatest/coolest guy alive/G-d's gift to the human race (which is fine, since that's part of his character) and the film's show he's totally right to think that way (which is not so fine).
A major part of that is a general lack of "smart guy" characters in the MCU until very recently. It's changing now that we're getting Hank Pym and Black Panther, and Dr. Cho was of course pretty smart, but up until this point the universe was set up in such a way that sort of needed Tony's involvement for tech stuff.
As for the point about him not learning a lesson or realizing he's wrong, that's astute but I also think 100 percent intentional. I have a feeling the fact that he was proven right after Cap bitched him out for trying to create Vision is going to be important to Civil War.
edited 3rd May '15 1:06:57 PM by comicwriter
![]()
![]()
Okay, some good points in there, but they lose major points for falling back on the "we know there's no chance of Ultron's success because we know future movies exist" point.
Seriously? Does anybody go into the movie theater to see a superhero movie with any genuine expectations that the villain is going to win unless it's something like Watchmen? Every time someone uses that argument, I lose some ability to take them seriously, because that's just... dumb.
For what it's worth, with Ultron, I actually would expect him to manage to survive after seemingly being Killed Off for Real, as that's part of his shtick (that and an Oedipus Complex). However, I think it would have hurt the film if they had done so, so I'm kind of glad they seemingly killed him off for good.
Here's an article about the illusion of change by Peter David.
If you want to read a comic about change or that challenges not changing read Journey Into Mystery and experience a Loki that wants to change and a Loki that just wants to appear to have changed..
edited 3rd May '15 1:33:44 PM by LordofLore
That's the same as the "no Avenger will ever die" argument. I don't even WANT them to die. I am perfectly fine with them surviving the craziest stuff because once they are dead, I won't morn them but all the stories which won't be told without them. Dying is for me easily the least interesting consequence.
Some with "naturally the villains won't win". How often does THAT happen? Again, next to never. Because, let's be honest here, we don't want to see the villains win completely, and even if they do, we want that there is least some measure of hope left.
Its never been nailed down precisely what metric the hammer uses for worthiness.
So we have a situation where Superman is only situationally worthy because there's something more that's required than just being the big blue boyscout.
Generally a willingness to kill if necessary is brought up as a possibility since Thor comes from a warrior culture.
Forever liveblogging the AvengersBut of course MCU Cap doesn't have a problem with killing and is suggested to be a bit of a Blood Knight.
The complaining about there being more SHIELD organizations popping up also bugged me. All these secret agents going "welp, our public face is destroyed, let's just go further underground" feels like more of a natural consequence to me than their unanimously deciding Cap did the right thing and to just lie down and take it.
One of my favorite bits in Ultimate Spider-Man was one of the Bugle reporters—can't remember which—going "hey, thanks to whoever took down the Kingpin, having all these unaffiliated criminals running around and doing whatever they want is just so much fucking better."
edited 3rd May '15 2:35:56 PM by Wackd
Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.![]()
If I had to guess I'd say that's why Thor is worthy and Cap isn't. After his Character Development I think Thor understands that one day his rightful place is on the throne of Asgard ruling over the now peaceful Nine Realms. Cap seems to have trouble figuring out what his long term goal is. He just defeats one enemy and then looks around until he finds another to take on.
edited 3rd May '15 2:34:42 PM by Kostya
Oh. I agree. And I think that interpretation of Cap is in-character with what we see of Steve in Winter Soldier. Steve is brave to the point of recklessness and copes with being a "man out of time" by continuing to go on missions. It's not that Steve wouldn't want to settle down with Peggy, it's that he can't, and since he can't, he doesn't really have an interest in settling down anymore.
Maybe that's why some were pointing out how he seems to be something of a Death Seeker in The Winter Soldier.
Oh, that reminded me of one of my favorite bits in AOU:
Bruce wants to know the outcome of the battle with HYDRA and Thor replies to the effect that the underworld is filled with Bruce/Hulk's screaming enemies. Thor means this as a compliment, but then starts backtracking when he realizes Bruce doesn't like the thought of having killed lots of people.
On a longer term note, why do some people make excuses for Thanos? So far as a villain he has accomplished nothing, all of his minions have either failed or betrayed him, and the infinity stones are further out of his reach after each film. All we have are a few claims about how powerful he is supposed to be and how a few desperate (yet powerful souls) worked under him and how big and bad his comic counterpart is. This is poor setup for a villain that is supposed to be the main villain of a franchise. Yet, I constantly read people saying how "all of this is beneath him" or "he planned this all out and knew they were going to fail and betray him" when neither of which strikes me as true. He was annoyed if not outraged at Ronan's betrayal and at the end of Age of Ultron decides to do things himself.
So, why is Thanos supposed to be so scary and why are his failings so vigorously defended by some?
I get the impression from his line about how "your politics bore me" in GOTG that playing the long game isn't really his thing. What he wants to do is make a big entrance with all six Infinity Stones and immediately start wrecking shit, but doing that requires that he already have the Infinity Stones. So he'll just kinda quietly acquire them, rather than be that dickbag who's just got one cosmic weapon at a time and is constantly fighting people for other cosmic weapons. But it's rapidly becoming apparent that it's just not an option because, again, he really kinda sucks at this.
Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.Saw the movie last night, and I enjoyed it. Wanda is my fucking favorite, and Vision is absolutely amazing. Dialogue is classic Whedon, which I actually have a bit of problem with this time around, because it's like....why is Ultron is talking like a Buffy character? Why?????
Also, I hated what Whedon did to Widow's character arc in this film. I was actually looking forward to the Natasha/Bruce romance but the way Natasha was handled in this movier ruined any chance of enjoyment in a romance between them for me. Ugh. "I can't have kids so that makes it easy for me to be an monstrous assassin!" Ugh, disgusting. Not what I wanted for Widow's character at all.
Overall, it was pretty good, but I like The Avengers, Winter Soldier, and Guardians much better.
I'd rate it a 7.5/10.
edited 3rd May '15 3:09:36 PM by higherbrainpattern

The common complaint is that too many of the events of the MCU conveniently involve him (Loki needs Avengers Tower to power the Tesseract portal, he creates Ultron, ect.) and that the elements of his movies are generally more prominent in other films than those of the other Avengers. But that has less to do with Sueism and more to do with the MCU not being as lived-in as the comics, and thus him being the only real logical choice for a lot of these things.
edited 3rd May '15 12:56:17 PM by comicwriter