TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Marvel Cinematic Universe

Go To

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.

    Original post 
Since Thor and now Captain America came out this year, I wanted to get what Tropers thought of the concept and execution of the Marvel Cinematic Universe in general. Personally I love the idea and wonder why this idea hasn't been seriously tried before. It sorta seems to me like the DCAU in movie form (And well, ummm, with Marvel), and really 'gets' the comic book feel of a shared universe while not being completely alienating.

Edited by Mrph1 on Jul 29th 2024 at 3:09:00 PM

JBC31187 Since: Jan, 2015
#64426: Oct 30th 2016 at 1:15:10 PM

What makes you think the creation of Ultron is a secret? Obviously, people know that someone created Ultron and I think people probably know it was Tony, but just creating an AI was not illegal at the time (they probably banned it later on, since over on Agents of SHIELD, Dr. Radcliffe is keeping his creation of AIDA a secret for now, citing "Ultron" as the reason why). The only secret Steve was keeping was that Hydra killed Tony's parents.

Because no one ever says it, even though it's the perfect ammunition. The woman whose son died in fighting Ultron never says, "My son died because you made a weapon you couldn't control." She says "My son died because you were careless about collateral damage." Arch-hypocrite Thunderbolt Ross never says "People are scared because you set a monster loose like what I did", he says "People are scared because you're careless and aggressive like me." Steve Rogers never mentions Tony building Ultron, even when he's calling Tony out on suddenly caring about following the rules. Tony Stark never mentions building Ultron, when he's talking about the power the Avengers can misuse.

alliterator Since: Jan, 2001
#64427: Oct 30th 2016 at 1:15:54 PM

You'd think that after bringing up the Wanda-Tony conundrum repeatedly, we'd come to an agreement.
Fans can never agree on anything.

Discar Since: Jun, 2009
#64428: Oct 30th 2016 at 1:21:03 PM

I feel like season 3 lost AOS a lot of viewers, and adding Ghost Rider to the mix isn't the kind of thing that sounds like a good fit on the face of it. I mean, I think they're pulling it off and this has been one of their better seasons, but it sounds gimmicky and desperate. Intricate storytelling can't pull in any viewers if they don't tune in in the first place to realize it's there.

A friend of mine (who loves Ghost Rider) thought the same thing. He stopped watching AoS right before the HYDRA reveal. I'm not sure he even knows about Ward. Anyway, I got him into season 4 by sending him clips of the first episode. Ghost Rider's opening scene, and then Ghost Rider vs Daisy.

Writing a post-post apocalypse LitRPG on RR. Also fanfic stuff.
Swanpride Since: Jun, 2013
#64429: Oct 30th 2016 at 1:28:10 PM

The first episodes really hunt those show...there are too many people who keep bad-mouthing it based on those early episodes. Those who stuck around usually agree that it is the best Superhero show currently on Network TV, because unlike Arrow and The Flash, it just kept getting better and better.

Actually the woman who confronts Tony doesn't say it was "collateral damage"...she just said "I blame you". It was Tony who made it about collateral damage.

edited 30th Oct '16 1:29:44 PM by Swanpride

AlleyOop Since: Oct, 2010
#64430: Oct 30th 2016 at 1:56:26 PM

Regarding the whole Wanda thing, Civil War's writers explicitly called her innocent in a podcast and said she's done nothing wrong, so the studio seems eager to brush the whole incident with her and Ultron under the rug entirely. That doesn't really help. And from what I've experienced fandom outside of Tony stans who sometimes take it too far tend to give her a Draco in Leather Pants treatment. So the Tony stans tearing her down the most viciously might be taking it so far to compensate since they feel like they're the Only Sane Man around.

As for Marvel news, apparently Cumberbatch was made to bulk up for the Dr. Strange role as is customary of most of its male leads. I always figured he seemed like the kind of character who would need it the least.

edited 30th Oct '16 2:00:42 PM by AlleyOop

hollygoolightly Since: Apr, 2012 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#64431: Oct 30th 2016 at 2:01:48 PM

[up] I'd take the stuff the writers say with a grain of salt, though. Remember all that fuss about them saying Bucky was a criminal or something like that? They actually clarified that in a later interview, and one of them had basically been flippant (the other totally ratted him out, btw). I'm not sure if the Wanda thing might not be something similar, or that they maybe just don't want to dwell on the fact that they didn't really want to iron out the mistakes of their predecessor in their own movie.

I think it would be helpful if stanning generally didn't just consist of tearing other characters down. Both Tony and Wanda made grave mistakes, but in Tony's case, more people were interested in making his guilt the backbone of a movie, while in Wanda's it got lost in the in-fighting that went on over Age of Ultron. And she is mostly a supporting character in CW, albeit an important one; I kind of get that they didn't want to give her more issues to angst about.

ETA: I suspect that signifies a shirtless Cumberbatch at some point in the movie? Maybe the Cloak scores after all.

edited 30th Oct '16 2:07:02 PM by hollygoolightly

Unsung it's a living from a tenement of clay Since: Jun, 2016
it's a living
#64432: Oct 30th 2016 at 2:06:25 PM

How old is Wanda supposed to be? Because sometimes I get the impression that the reason she's treated like a child is because she's supposed to be quite young, but Elizabeth Olsen looks like she's in her mid-twenties. Which she is.

I felt like AOS spun its wheels a lot through the first half of season 3, and as I've mentioned Hive never really clicked for me, so I could certainly understand there being people who gave up on the show.

AlleyOop Since: Oct, 2010
#64433: Oct 30th 2016 at 2:08:54 PM

They also talked about it in that same podcast, they said basically that. Wanda is in her twenties but the Avengers treat her like their kid sister and that there's some notes of condescension in it too.

hollygoolightly Since: Apr, 2012 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#64434: Oct 30th 2016 at 2:09:23 PM

[up][up] That's an interesting question. Between Steve calling her a kid, Clint telling her if she wants to mope, she can go to Highschool, and the somewhat immature way she was drawn in Ao U, I was thinking she was maybe a young 21, 22?

edited 30th Oct '16 2:09:45 PM by hollygoolightly

comicwriter Since: Sep, 2011
#64435: Oct 30th 2016 at 2:26:43 PM

I'm sure the high school remark was a joke. Also note that while they make a point of showing that Tony is trying to keep Spider-Man out of serious danger because of his age, nobody has any concern about Wanda's safety.

Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#64436: Oct 30th 2016 at 2:33:02 PM

Wanda may not be mid-twenties but she's probably at least 18. Legally she's an adult.

alliterator Since: Jan, 2001
#64437: Oct 30th 2016 at 2:57:55 PM

Regarding the whole Wanda thing, Civil War's writers explicitly called her innocent in a podcast and said she's done nothing wrong, so the studio seems eager to brush the whole incident with her and Ultron under the rug entirely.
Except Marcus and Mcfeely didn't write Age of Ultron and they also aren't in charge of the MCU.

And from what I've experienced fandom outside of Tony stans who sometimes take it too far tend to give her a Draco in Leather Pants treatment. So the Tony stans tearing her down the most viciously might be taking it so far to compensate since they feel like they're the Only Sane Man around.
Okay, neither one of those types of fans are correct. It still isn't a good thing to tear down one character in order to build up another.

How old is Wanda supposed to be?
She's 19, I believe.

MedusaStone Since: Jan, 2015
#64438: Oct 30th 2016 at 3:23:39 PM

I haven't weighed in on the Wanda situation yet, so I'm going to say this, and then leave it alone, just like I don't go on angry tirades about Tony Stark even though I despise him: anyone who says that Wanda becoming an Avenger to atone for her past wrongdoings isn't good enough and she should be in prison better be saying the same thing about the Black Widow. If Natasha is allowed to work for SHIELD/the Avengers to "wipe out the red in her ledger", why is Wanda not allowed the same? Especially since (and I say this as a Black Widow fan) Wanda hasn't spent her entire life as an assassin.

comicwriter Since: Sep, 2011
#64439: Oct 30th 2016 at 3:27:26 PM

Because Black Widow's past crimes are at least acknowledged in the film. Wanda's are glossed over and the movie treats her like an angel. If you hadn't watched Age of Ultron (though admittedly, I don't know why you'd watch CW but not the movie that directly sets it up) you'd have no idea she's a reformed supervillain who likely got a bunch of people injured or even killed. Like someone else said, Civil War having even a token mention of the shit she pulled in South Africa would have alleviated the situation.

Ironically enough Civil War reversed my stance on Tony Stark. AOU was his fault and I loathe the woobie shit that pretends it wasn't, but I find the notion that he needs to "redeem himself" for what he did in Civil War to be absurd. Someone in that situation needs to apologize, and it's not the guy who was lied to about the murder of his family because the murderer just happened to be bestest buddies with a superhero.

edited 30th Oct '16 3:30:28 PM by comicwriter

AlleyOop Since: Oct, 2010
#64440: Oct 30th 2016 at 3:29:30 PM

[up][up][up]They aren't in charge of the MCU, but they are going to be writing the next two Infinity Wars which means they have a powerful hand in shaping its future direction. Wanda's not going to be showing up in any films until then so it's unlikely they'll ever bring the issue of Wanda's guilt over Ultron back up without it feeling like Negative Continuity.

edited 30th Oct '16 3:33:08 PM by AlleyOop

kkhohoho (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#64441: Oct 30th 2016 at 3:30:54 PM

You know, if MCU!Wanda's past actions here are enough to raise a stink about whether or not she should be on the Avengers, then I do NOT want to see what will happen if they ever adapt House Of M. House Of M!Wanda makes MCU!Wanda look like a saint.

Galadriel Since: Feb, 2015
#64442: Oct 30th 2016 at 3:40:01 PM

[up][up][up] Cap didn't lie, he just held back information (re: Hydra's involvement) and he didn't know that Bucky carried out the murders. He was wrong, and he apologized in the letter.

Tony tried to murder Bucky for actions that Bucky had no control over committing, which is a far more serious wrong.

I agree that the focus on "collateral damage" papers over what Tony and Wanda have actually done. Cumulatively, Tony has likely caused far more deaths than her through his weapons trafficking. That gets at an aspect I would have liked to see included - Tony is responsible for the death of Wanda's parents (and wasn't brainwashed) and she's still working with him. That feels like a relevant parallel when it comes to Tony trying to kill Bucky.

edited 30th Oct '16 3:45:37 PM by Galadriel

comicwriter Since: Sep, 2011
#64443: Oct 30th 2016 at 3:46:35 PM

Tony tried to murder Bucky for actions that Bucky had no control over committing, which is a far more serious wrong.

He had a violent, emotional reaction to finding out that he'd been lied to and that the guy responsible for the murders was getting to be a Karma Houdini just because he's Captain America's buddy. If I just found out a guy in the same room as me strangled my mom to death and bashed my father's skull in until it looked like a broken cherry pie, and then someone I considered a friend argued he should get a free pass "Because like, he used to play Nintendo with me when we were kids," I'd probably have the same immediate reaction.

An emotional, spur of the moment gut reaction is pretty much by definition, not thinking clearly. Steve had what, two years where he could have said something? And he didn't. Even if he didn't know Bucky did it himself, he still knew HYDRA was responsible. I'd think that's something worth mentioning to a guy who is your teammate. Some friend.

Tony is responsible for the death of Wanda's parents (and wasn't brainwashed) and she's still working with him.

Tony is a businessman who sold a bomb to someone who then used it in the city Wanda is living in. That's shitty, but he didn't set out to kill her parents. Wanda did. She deliberately made the Hulk crazy and then set him loose in a populated civilian city, with the stated goal of tarnishing the Avengers and, as Ultron put it, "Tearing them apart from the inside."

edited 30th Oct '16 3:53:31 PM by comicwriter

TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#64444: Oct 30th 2016 at 3:51:00 PM

In that scene, Tony's actions were more wrong than Steve's, but also had more of a mitigating factor.

Tony was wrong in the heat of the moment. There's a term for that: temporary insanity. It's what happens when situations beyond one's control causes them to no longer be emotionally or mentally stable. In this case, Stark was so outraged by what was revealed that he was no longer capable of thinking clearly, as demonstrated when he attempts to detonate a Tank Missile at point-blank range.

Steve was knowingly, deliberately, meaningfully wrong, but his wrongness was to a much lesser extent than Tony's. He withheld information from Tony in order to protect Bucky - neither the first nor the last time his judgment has been compromised by doing whatever it takes to protect his bestie.

Tony committed an actual crime while swept up in the heat of the moment that could have gone so much worse but was guided by extreme emotional distress, while Steve is not guilty of an actual crime but knowingly and meaningfully carried out a massive betrayal of his personal relationship with Tony, which contributed to the emotional distress motivating the crime.

Bucky, meanwhile, just wanted some plums.

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
hollygoolightly Since: Apr, 2012 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#64445: Oct 30th 2016 at 3:54:42 PM

[up][up] But Bucky isn't responsible, he had no chance not to do what he was made to do, and Tony knows this. His reaction to the video may be understandable, but that doesn't make it right or okay. Being angry at Steve for not telling him his parents were murdered by HYDRA is completely understandable, trying to kill Bucky to punish Steve is neither understandable nor okay. Tony having something akin to a psychic break in the Siberian facility and not being completely in control of his actions is something I find absolutely plausible, but I still expect him to feel pretty damn shitty for what he almost did.

edited 30th Oct '16 3:55:15 PM by hollygoolightly

AlleyOop Since: Oct, 2010
#64446: Oct 30th 2016 at 3:57:04 PM

Like, overall I don't think Bucky deserves to be blamed for the murder of Tony's parents because he was basically the bomb that killed Wanda's parents. A living weapon unable to discern wrong from right, and whose capacity for thought and sapience was essentially gone at the time.

At the same time, the way the scene played out, I totally sympathize with Tony's reaction, and I don't get the Bucky stans/Tony anti-fans who demonize Tony for being a complete hypocrite and monster for doing what he did. Had the information come out earlier, such as when Black Widow leaked HYDRA/SHIELD's files, and Tony spearheaded the move to capture Bucky, after what happened with Wanda's parents, then yeah maybe it's a bit hypocritical. But he's an emotional man mad with freshly unsuppressed grief. He's wrong to blame Bucky specifically, and on some level he probably knows it, but It's the culmination of a Greek tragedy borne of both Tony and Steve's hubris.

comicwriter Since: Sep, 2011
#64447: Oct 30th 2016 at 3:57:54 PM

I never said what Tony did is okay, merely that of the two of them in the situation, I absolutely do not find him to be the one who is tarnished and need of redemption. I love Civil War, but the entire movie is basically 2 and a half hours of Steve doing stupid, morally questionable shit just to protect his friend. Bucky himself even says that it doesn't matter if it wasn't his fault, he still did those things, and people aren't exactly wrong for wanting retribution or thinking he's a threat. It's just that the specific instance that incites the plot is the result of him being framed.

Which is actually what I think makes the movie work. There's enough moral ambiguity that I can pretty much understand and see the merit of everyone involved. Even Ross, jackass as he is, wasn't wrong for wanting Bucky dead in my opinion.

edited 30th Oct '16 4:00:37 PM by comicwriter

Galadriel Since: Feb, 2015
#64448: Oct 30th 2016 at 4:00:21 PM

I agree with holly. Tony's actions were absolutely understandable, and they were absolutely wrong. Bucky has no control over what he does when brainwashed so he cannot be considered morally responsible for the things he did under brainwashing.

edited 30th Oct '16 4:01:06 PM by Galadriel

comicwriter Since: Sep, 2011
#64449: Oct 30th 2016 at 4:05:56 PM

And I'd said again, he probably wouldn't have had that little mental break had a certain someone not conveniently hidden that information from him because the killer is his ole' buddy ole' pal.

hollygoolightly Since: Apr, 2012 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#64450: Oct 30th 2016 at 4:06:35 PM

[up][up] I think both Tony and Steve fucked up during Civil War, obviously. As for Ross, he was making it pretty easy for himself - sending in what amounts to police forces - if specialized - to eliminate a superpowered, highly skilled assassin, who is both likely not in control of his facilities and a war hero they didn't realize was napped by the enemy for 70 years - it just looks like trying to avoid a media storm in the clumsiest way possible and could have easily ended in a catastrophe if Bucky had been a little more off the rocker and Steve hadn't intervened (because that would have meant T'Challa could have pounced on Bucky unhindered and might have been killed himself). So, no I don't really understand Ross other than within the limits of being an Obstructive Bureaucrat who is also kind of not really thinking things through.

[up] I really think Tony's breakdown was caused by the video, Steve not telling him just gave him a target to focus his anger. And I wouldn't deny that Steve did something wrong here (as did Natasha, admittedly, though from her, it seems less of a slap in the face), but that neither makes killing Bucky "okay" nor does it make Steve responsible for what is happening.

edited 30th Oct '16 4:13:35 PM by hollygoolightly


Total posts: 186,763
Top