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
![]()
![]()
The Ultimates had a Running Gag where everyone would yell at Quicksilver for supposedly being lazy, when in reality he was actually saving everyone's asses at superspeed. Unfortunately, it was too fast for anyone to notice.
So as this article points out, along with many Reddit commentators, Marvel is still behind the others when it comes to their villains, or at least, their character portrayal and sense of real threat.
Do you think they can improve? How so?
My problem with the villains is less their sense of threat and more that they're boring or shallow. They don't need to be intimidating to be good. Just interesting and shown to be justified in their actions, at least in their own minds. That's what separates non-Avengers Loki, Pierce, and Stane (who's not great but as someone else pointed out he's still adequate) from Ronan, Killian, and Malekith.
The article does have a point. I mean I don't like rich people either but that doesn't mean the only villains should be intergalactic monsters and rich businessmen
I'd like more diverse villains for one thing and ones that aren't dark mirrors of the hero.
Also isn't Wasp supposed to be black? I remember watching a few animated Avengers movies some years ago and Wasp was black.
edited 18th Jul '15 9:02:58 PM by Mr.Didact
Stand Fast, Stand Strong, Stand TogetherThe thing is, most of the Marvel movies really concentrate on building their heroes. A lot goes into making their heroes have character depth, which means when it comes time for the villain, a lot of the time, there isn't room for them.
Loki is the exception, in that he got a lot of depth in Thor, which continued in The Avengers and Thor: The Dark World. Unfortunately, his continued scenes in The Dark World came at a price, which was less scenes to establish Malekith (as well as the fact that Malekith was changed from his comic book trickster version, probably so he wouldn't be so similar to Loki).
The villains on the TV side have had better luck because they have had longer to establish them and show them for who they are — Wilson Fisk, Grant Ward, John Garrett, even Dottie Underwood.
However, the movie villains are still pretty good and give good performances, especially ones who really ham it up — Obadiah Stane, the Red Skull, Ultron — or the ones who play it subtly, like Robert Redford. Redford, I thought, packed a lot of menace simple because of his presence.
edited 18th Jul '15 9:04:57 PM by alliterator
I read very few works from marvel I'm mostly familiar with the animated and live action offerings.
![]()
![]()
Ah ok I thought she was light skinned black in the animation.
Well I would have liked an Asian superhero too. The marvel verse is a bit too monochromatic for my taste
edited 18th Jul '15 9:19:46 PM by Mr.Didact
Stand Fast, Stand Strong, Stand TogetherLet's see, as far as films go:
- I liked Obadiah Stane/Iron Monger
- I liked "Thunderbolt" Ross
- I liked Emil Blonsky / The Abomination
- I didn't like Ivan Vanko / Whiplash
- I didn't like Justin Hammer
- I liked Loki in Thor and The Avengers, but not in The Dark World.
- I liked Johann Schmidt / Red Skull
- I liked Arnim Zola
- I didn't like Aldrich Killian
- I didn't like Malekith
- I liked Alexander Pierce
- I liked The Winter Soldier
- I liked Ronan the Accuser
- I liked Ultron
- I liked Darren Cross / Yellowjacket
So, looks like I'm good for the most part with what we've gotten.
@Mr.Didact: No clue what to tell you. I thought that it might have been Next Avengers Heroes Of Tomorrow (which actually ended up existing as an alternate Bad Future in the comics, so it has that going for it, if not much else,) but that Wasp is actually a young white boy, which is I think is the exact opposite of what you're talking about. (He's also the son of Captain America, which makes him the offspring of an off-screen Crack Fic for all intents and purposes. The more you know...)
edited 19th Jul '15 7:48:02 AM by kkhohoho
I saw the movie and I was pleasantly surprised! It's pretty good! Scott is a pretty good Everyman and the MCU version of Hank Pym is actually pretty good,. And Hope's pretty cool. I would like to see more of Hope!Wasp in Civil War or a possible sequel though.
edited 18th Jul '15 9:50:56 PM by higherbrainpattern
Moving forward, Marvel really ought to start introducing villains who, like their heroes, exist in more than just a vacuum, as well as villains who (also like their heroes) have motives and goals that work with story rather than just prop them up against the hero - as apposed to more antagonistic plot devices like Malekith and Cross.
I'd like to see more Anti Villains, villains with fully developed personalities/goals and resources, villains whose actions effect more than just the plot they're in, villains who are written to build the universe as much as the heroes are, etc.
Lots of villains they've done so far have traces of those things, but only one or two (basically, Loki, HYDRA and maybe Ross) feel like a real active parts of the universe as apposed to a characters who momentarily get propped up in order to get knocked down.
Not that a flatter villain can't be great (Stane is possibly Marvel's most textbook antagonist, and because the plot works so well with him he still comes off as one of Marvel's best villains), but with the movies going out of their way to be more and more ambitious in terms of plot and story type, them not doing the same with their villains is starting to hurt them.
![]()
No, that kid's parents were Ant-Man and Wasp. I think the son of Captain America had Black Widow as his mom.
So...I just had an idea.
Guillermo del Toro directing The Inhumans movie.
Would you want to see that?
edited 18th Jul '15 11:44:23 PM by TargetmasterJoe
I wouldn't worry about Marvel learning to establish villains for a long run...they just did so with Nebula, didn't they? In the end, they have already offered all kinds of villains...some more complex, some not so much, and honestly the only ones I have a problem with are the ones of Iron Man (because the trope of "someone wants to take revenge on Tony because of something he or his father did in the past" was already tired by the second movie) and Malekith. Otherwise the villains reach from serviceable to an absolute delight.
Concerning the article...Mickey Rourke was in an already overcrowded movie and let's be honest here, Justin Hammer was pathetic but way more enjoyable as his character. And what is "left" of Mickey Rourke's performance didn't blow me away at all, so there is that.
Alan Tayler is imho, lucky that Marvel took his mess of a movie an inserted more Loki in it. Especially considering what he last movie in a franchise was I wouldn't trust him to direct anything without close supervision.
Does anyone know why Patty Jenkins was fired in the first place? And wouldn't Natalie Portman have contractual obligations anyway? Never mind that Marvel is certainly not forced to listen to her recommendations in the first place.
I am pretty sure that Elba's remark were about the Filming of Thor The Dark World. He was certainly not wearing a harness for the scenes in Age of Ultron.
Well, whatever went down between Whedon and Marvel, it took two movies to happen. Plus, Whedon also said that he wanted to stay involved in the MCU. It's not like he was only negative about Marvel. The press made more out of his remarks than there were. Plus, Whedon really wanted to do something original again...isn't he working on his own comic book now?
In Wright's case, I actually think that he is more to blame than Marvel. Marvel waited for years that he finally gets this project off the ground and he delayed again and again. He is the main reason why Ant-Man is only now joining the line-up despite being one of the original Avengers. And for the lack of Wasp. Marvel still gave him the credit he deserved for the movie, but I really can't blame them for giving the project to someone who finally got it done instead of risking another delay.
Norton is kind on infamous for being very difficult to work with. He didn't want to do it in the first place and he really should have stuck to the no. And Marvel was right. The Incredible Hulk is too long as it is. Maybe they could have cuts other parts than they did, but Norton is definitely not the guy to whom I would listen in those cases.
And Terrance Howard...I somewhere read that the original contract stated that he had to be the highest paid actor in the movie. I really can't blame Marvel for not wanting to pay him constantly more than RDJ. He is simply not that important. And he should have known that and renegotiated. He certainly wouldn't have gotten poor because of it. Also...wasn't Mel Gibson the one who helped RDJ out during this time? Which is the reason why RDJ is now so adamant to help out Mel Gibson in turn?
All in all...eight people are a pretty low number of complainers considering that we talking about a franchise which consists of now twelve movies, three soon to be four TV-shows and multiple one-shots.
edited 18th Jul '15 11:48:54 PM by Swanpride
Yep. As iconic and charismatic as he is, tony's had it the worst in his own movies after the first one.
obadiah stane isn't a particularly nuanced or interesting villain because the film didn't have enough time to really build him up, but jeff bridges' performance mitigated that somewhat.
ivan was a thoroughly forgettable villain, which kinda helped contribute to how underwhelming iron man 2 is. i think killian is a little better in the sense that he's actually a bit more memorable, but then again a large part of that was him being involved in a poorly executed villain twist.
what's more the latter two more or less fall into a similar archetype, i.e disgruntled scientific prodigies with a grudge against Tony.
as far as the mcu general is concerned, yeah the villains have never really been that big of a standout. i would say the best ones are loki (in the original thor, not so much in avengers) and the winter soldier, mostly because there's some more complexity on their part and there's a stronger element of tragedy to their characters. everyone else is serviceable to bleh.
edited 19th Jul '15 12:45:56 AM by wehrmacht
