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

KarkatTheDalek Not as angry as the name would suggest. from Somwhere in Time/Space Since: Mar, 2012 Relationship Status: You're a beautiful woman, probably
Not as angry as the name would suggest.
#66926: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:06:31 PM

I mean, I'd be perfectly fine with Zendaya playing Mary Jane - hell, I might even love it. I just dislike taking it for granted. It's certainly possible, but there are other explanations.

That said, apparently Lupita Nyong'o will be playing T'Challa's love interest, as reported by The Hollywood Reporter, so my mistake there. Of course, this is the only place that I've seen this be mentioned, so I suppose it's possible that this might not be accurate or that it could have been changed, but I have no real reason to assume that - we'll know for certain once trailers and stuff start coming out.

edited 8th Mar '17 8:07:35 PM by KarkatTheDalek

Oh God! Natural light!
LordVatek Not really a lord of anything Since: Sep, 2014
Not really a lord of anything
#66927: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:07:24 PM

I mean, disregarding all of that Michelle was described as "...very dry, awkward, intellectual and because she's so smart, she just feels like she doesn't need to talk to people..." by Zendaya which are not traits I would attach to MJ at all so... if she's not called Mary Jane and she doesn't act like MJ and she doesn't serve the same role as MJ... then is it really Mary Jane?

edited 8th Mar '17 8:08:10 PM by LordVatek

This song needs more love.
KarkatTheDalek Not as angry as the name would suggest. from Somwhere in Time/Space Since: Mar, 2012 Relationship Status: You're a beautiful woman, probably
Not as angry as the name would suggest.
#66928: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:08:31 PM

Granted, they appear to have changed people like Ned Leeds and Flash Thompson significantly.

On the other hand, they're not hiding that they are those characters...

Oh God! Natural light!
PincerMove Since: Feb, 2017
#66929: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:09:29 PM

[up][up][up][up][up]You say that like there is literally any non-overlapping portion of that circle of people who hate changes made to the older stories and people who hate recasting white roles with non-white actors.

[up][up][up][up]According to the script, to do her "Face it, tiger...you just hit the jackpot" line as the postcredits scene.

[up][up][up]And you didn't notice that all of those traits you're reading off are coming just from Zendaya in the same interview where she, if you acknowledge she is Mary Jane, you already know she is lying to us?

edited 8th Mar '17 8:11:51 PM by PincerMove

KnownUnknown Since: Jan, 2001
#66930: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:11:13 PM

Marvel's never given a shit about those people before. There's no bad publicity for something like that.

And if it were for that line, she wouldn't be credited as playing another named character - since that line is literally her introduction. She would probably be credited as playing an unnamed extra.

edited 8th Mar '17 8:11:52 PM by KnownUnknown

KarkatTheDalek Not as angry as the name would suggest. from Somwhere in Time/Space Since: Mar, 2012 Relationship Status: You're a beautiful woman, probably
Not as angry as the name would suggest.
#66931: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:11:44 PM

According to the script, to do her "Face it, tiger...you just hit the jackpot" line as the postcredits scene.

I'd really like it if you'd cite your source for that one.

Oh God! Natural light!
alliterator Since: Jan, 2001
#66932: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:11:45 PM

the characters of Lost are not in purgatory
I'm very tired of pointing this out, but the characters on Lost were, in fact, not in purgatory. Sure, the "flash sideways" verse was purgatory, but the main island and everything that happened on it? Actually happened. It was all real. None of that was purgatory.

People who try to use "They were totally in purgatory all along!" as an example of a Lying Creator are people who either didn't watch the last episode of Lost or didn't understand it.

According to the script, to do her "Face it, tiger...you just hit the jackpot" line as the postcredits scene.
Well, that sounds like a total fabrication.

In other news, this is awesome:

edited 8th Mar '17 8:13:04 PM by alliterator

AlleyOop Since: Oct, 2010
#66933: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:12:16 PM

@Thor/Valkyrie

My bad, most of the sites reporting it were sites like ComicBook.com or ScreenRant but as far as actual studio information goes the IBT indicates that even if Thor might have a little UST with Valkyrie they don't plan on having her take over Jane's role as love interest, at least not now.

Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#66934: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:12:18 PM

So is the idea that she's unnamed until the end and she's just credited as Michelle? That makes no sense.

alliterator Since: Jan, 2001
#66935: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:14:44 PM

By the way, it's entire possible Zendaya is playing a canon character.

KarkatTheDalek Not as angry as the name would suggest. from Somwhere in Time/Space Since: Mar, 2012 Relationship Status: You're a beautiful woman, probably
Not as angry as the name would suggest.
#66936: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:15:10 PM

And you didn't notice that all of those traits you're reading off are coming just from Zendaya in the same interview where she, if you acknowledge she is Mary Jane, you already know she is lying to us?

It also aptly describes what we saw of her in the trailer, so that's one point in favor of her telling the truth.

Of course, this is all being a big conspiracy on the studio's part would explain that, but again, you've provided no actual evidence - only conjecture.

[up] Also that.

edited 8th Mar '17 8:16:06 PM by KarkatTheDalek

Oh God! Natural light!
PincerMove Since: Feb, 2017
#66937: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:19:04 PM

[up][up][up][up][up][up]A version of the script that leaked early last year. They swapped out Harry Osborne for Ned Leeds, but apart from that, everything you see in that script has since been vindicated by the trailers.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Spiderman/comments/4jxbll/spoilers_spiderman_homecoming_plot_leaks/

edited 8th Mar '17 8:19:45 PM by PincerMove

alliterator Since: Jan, 2001
#66938: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:26:41 PM

Wow, even just reading the first paragraph of that, I can tell it's not real. Even if it was real, they certainly had time to change a lot of things around, so much so that they could have removed MJ from the script entirely.

edited 8th Mar '17 8:27:23 PM by alliterator

KarkatTheDalek Not as angry as the name would suggest. from Somwhere in Time/Space Since: Mar, 2012 Relationship Status: You're a beautiful woman, probably
Not as angry as the name would suggest.
#66939: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:29:09 PM

[up][up] I find that dubious: that summary mentions both J. Jonah Jameson and Norman Osborn, and I do not believe we have heard casting announcements for either of them, or indeed mentions of them at all. Now, Osborn I can picture them keeping under wraps, but Jameson they absolutely would have announced by now - I see nothing they would gain from keeping him a secret.

It also doesn't seem to have any mention of Tony in the Iron Man suit, nor does it seem to acknowledge the more intellectual approach they appear to be taking with Flash this time.

Plus, if Harry really has been replaced by Ned...well, that seems like it kind of guts the Oscorp stuff they mention.

And really, it cites 4chan. In what world is this reliable?

edited 8th Mar '17 8:30:37 PM by KarkatTheDalek

Oh God! Natural light!
KnownUnknown Since: Jan, 2001
#66940: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:29:28 PM

That looks a lot like the the plot of Amazing 1 and Sandman's story in Spider-Man 3 mashed together. And there's a lot of important content missing that would probably have still been in the movie come halfway through last year.

Some of the scenes sort of match up to the trailer scenes, but only if you're specifically trying to interpret them that way: the writer didn't hit anything on the head, a few of the things they described were just general enough to be easily appropriated.

Also, from a film writing point of view, that sort of introduction for Mary Jane is terrible - literally only being introduced as the hot reward for Peter's failed romance at the very end without lead-in beforehand? It works for the comics because it's a sequential format that can develop these things in time (and even then, it didn't exactly progress like that), so the sudden introduction is accepted right away as not all there is to the character. But a film can't do that - in a film, that would literally just be it.

edited 8th Mar '17 8:35:44 PM by KnownUnknown

TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#66941: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:32:00 PM

Yeah, there's basically no reason to believe Zendaya's playing Mary Jane, as awesome as it would be if it was true. While there's certainly no way to disprove the assertion that they're totes lying to us about everything, the same claim can be said of anything. Technically, you can't prove that Tessa Thompson isn't playing Mary Jane in Thor: Ragnarok either. But you don't have to, because there's no reason to think she would be.

And we are long past the point where it used to be considered unthinkable for MJ to get snubbed out of an adaptation.

edited 8th Mar '17 8:33:17 PM by TobiasDrake

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
alliterator Since: Jan, 2001
#66942: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:34:10 PM

Technically, you can't prove that Tessa Thompson isn't playing Mary Jane in Thor: Ragnarok either.
Tessa Thompson AS Valkyrie AS Zendaya AS Michelle AS Mary Jane Watson! WHAT A TWEEST!

Featuring such dialogue as: "Face it, Tiger, you just hit the jackpot...of female characters, I guess. Also, I think I might be Tigra."

Beatman1 Since: Feb, 2014 Relationship Status: Gone fishin'
#66943: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:35:04 PM

I'd say she's Mystique, but Fox rights and all.

Bocaj Funny but not helpful from Here or thereabouts (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Pining for the fjords
Funny but not helpful
#66944: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:41:03 PM

Has anyone ever used the face it tiger line on Tigra and if not why not??

Forever liveblogging the Avengers
Nightwire Since: Feb, 2010
#66945: Mar 8th 2017 at 8:58:52 PM

I wouldn't be surprised if Hank Pym tried it once and totally fucked it up.

alliterator Since: Jan, 2001
#66946: Mar 8th 2017 at 9:10:05 PM

"Face it, Tigra, you just hit the skrull...I MEAN JACKPOT! I'M NOT A SKRULL, I SWEAR!"

PushoverMediaCritic I'm sorry Tien, but I must go all out. from the Italy of America Since: Jul, 2015 Relationship Status: watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
I'm sorry Tien, but I must go all out.
#66947: Mar 8th 2017 at 9:27:45 PM

I could see a 'tiger, jackpot' line introducing Mary Jane being played by an as-of-yet unannounced actress for the stinger, but why would it be with someone playing a totally different character?

KarkatTheDalek Not as angry as the name would suggest. from Somwhere in Time/Space Since: Mar, 2012 Relationship Status: You're a beautiful woman, probably
Not as angry as the name would suggest.
#66948: Mar 8th 2017 at 9:31:21 PM

Oh, another thing - nothing in that "script leak" mentions MJ appearing at any time prior to the end of the movie, where this is clearly not the case with Michelle.

Oh God! Natural light!
Unsung it's a living from a tenement of clay Since: Jun, 2016
it's a living
#66949: Mar 8th 2017 at 9:44:22 PM

Face it, I just hit the Tigra. I'm Hank Pym. I think it's worth explaining for those who are unfamiliar.

...So did anyone tell Michael Douglas that part of his character before he went into the role? Because I know they can write around it, but it would kind of suck to find that out after you did the movie.

Anomalocaris20 from Sagittarius A* Since: Sep, 2010 Relationship Status: Love blinded me (with science!)
#66950: Mar 8th 2017 at 9:51:19 PM

It's why he has a mean right hook in the film. He just closes his fist for Carson and Cross.

You cannot firmly grasp the true form of Squidward's technique!

Total posts: 186,763
Top