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
Or so most people were predicting, but the official press release Jossed that and mentions it's another later event that finally breaks the camel's back.
![]()
From my interpretation of the synopsis of Civil War, the events of Age of Ultron might get the ball rolling on whatever the MCU equivalent of the registration act is, but it's another incident before the governments of the world decide that something has to be done RIGHT NOW. This would explain why there's a roughly year-long gap between Age of Ultron and Civil War.
edited 11th May '15 3:36:21 PM by Falrinn
x5
It could be a case where the world initially decided that with Ultron destroyed the immediate crises was over and that an ideal solution could be carefully crafted over an extended period of time. The incident in Civil War might be minor when compared with what went down in Age of Ultron, but it's enough to get the world to decide that they can't wait any longer and rush through an imperfect solution that Steve Rodgers hates and believes will lead to an even greater problem down the road. Tony Stark on the other hand believes that the new regulations are a necessary to prevent another Ultron.
edited 11th May '15 3:49:57 PM by Falrinn
I think stopping Tony Stark from being Tony Stark is the best way to prevent another Ultron.
Like his father before him, he has a bad case of Mike Nelson, Destroyer of Worlds.
edited 11th May '15 3:52:27 PM by Hodor2
Even worse: Nitro was actually jacked up on Mutant Growth Hormone to increase his powers, which he was given to by one of the executives from Damage Control. Because, for some reason, they wanted more business and giving an out of control supervillain even more damage inducing powers is a good idea?
They're slowly building up the character's profile outside of comics, but I don't think we're gonna see a significant push quite yet. Her film debut is still three years away, after all.
They might have made that figurine based off the earlier plans to include her in Age of Ultron.
Introduce her to Avengers Assemble, jerks.
And the twins.
Probably won't redeem it but maybe it'll make it more palpable. And maybe there will be more character types than "jerk", "dumb jerk" and "snarky jerk" (an exaggeration but after several episodes with Ant-Man I still have no idea about who he is as a character.)
Forever liveblogging the AvengersThat show has a whole other set of problems. I do find it so bizarre though of the potential MCU characters they could have added, they chose Ant-Man and not the Vison or the either of the Maxmimoff twins.
They did thankfully put Captain Marvel in that Disney Infinity game, as well as that Marvel LIVE stage show they did last year. So it seems like they're trying to build up at least some brand awareness for the character.
The show is 90% problems and 10% false hope.
Welp, off to go watch the new episode!
edited 11th May '15 6:08:39 PM by Bocaj
Forever liveblogging the Avengers

edited 11th May '15 3:24:38 PM by Swanpride