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

Unsung it's a living from a tenement of clay Since: Jun, 2016
it's a living
#71376: Jun 2nd 2017 at 12:16:09 AM

It's only sometimes that the system is shown as being inherently unworkable. Often the point of superheroes is not to work against or beyond the system as it is to work in addition to it, as an extension of it. And how broken the system is seen as being is just a sign of the times, along with the particular ways in which it's broken.

edited 2nd Jun '17 12:16:37 AM by Unsung

alliterator Since: Jan, 2001
#71377: Jun 2nd 2017 at 12:17:02 AM

This is psychologically interesting but it's also relentlessly grim, so it would probably lead to Darkness-Induced Audience Apathy in a tv show (Hell it already leads to Darkness-Induced Audience Apathy in the comic, as The Handle can attest).
The showrunner for the Punisher show was also one of the main writer for Hannibal, which was a show that got super duper dark but managed to avoid Darkness-Induced Audience Apathy for the most part.

Let's not pretend that Tony and company have never killed bad guys.
There's a difference between killing bad guys in self defense (which is what all those instances were) and deliberately killing criminals who can't defend themselves (which is what Castle does).

Anomalocaris20 from Sagittarius A* Since: Sep, 2010 Relationship Status: Love blinded me (with science!)
#71378: Jun 2nd 2017 at 12:28:39 AM

They've picked a good showrunner for Punisher so I'm not too worried about his show.

That being said, I can see why he's better off as a secondary character rather than a lead. They're gonna have to do something really unique with the presentation; having him alone a lot of the time with some internal monologue would best capture his style, but would be difficult to translate into television.

You cannot firmly grasp the true form of Squidward's technique!
Unsung it's a living from a tenement of clay Since: Jun, 2016
it's a living
#71379: Jun 2nd 2017 at 12:32:20 AM

It might be hard to translate into Netflix MCU's usual arc-based storytelling. I do have confidence in them, though, and there's a lot of powerful material to be had in the Punisher.

Part of me kind of wants to see a (probably mini) series where the Punisher is the recurring antagonist and each week we spend some time getting to know the criminals he's going to murder, and then we see it happen. Kind of a horror series. The Terminator meets Columbo. Law & Punisher: Criminal Intent.

alliterator Since: Jan, 2001
#71380: Jun 2nd 2017 at 12:38:24 AM

Law & Punisher: Criminal Intent.
Where the Kingpin gets out of prison and decides to become a cop.

Unsung it's a living from a tenement of clay Since: Jun, 2016
it's a living
#71381: Jun 2nd 2017 at 12:44:07 AM

After finding a Lazarus Pit.

Tuckerscreator (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Drift compatible
#71382: Jun 2nd 2017 at 12:59:02 AM

The new Guardians of the Galaxy ride opened at Disneyland and it is amazing. Hopefully I can ride it soon. They also have a meet-and-greet show where you can dance off with Peter, Gamora, and Groot.

Among the stuff in the Collector's collection: Beta Ray Bill's hammer, Atlantean artifacts, an Ultron sentry (that talks!), Cosmo the Space Dog, a Hydra trooper's helmet, Dark Elf masks, a Nova Corps uniform, Kree spears, a Stan Lee cameo, the cocoon from the first movie that folks thought was Adam Warlock's, a Figment skeleton, yetis from the Matterhorn, a glimpse of Howard the Duck, and that contraption that Caecilius got trapped in Doctor Strange. And one more mind blowing pre-show effect that I'll leave a surprise. :D

edited 2nd Jun '17 1:00:01 AM by Tuckerscreator

windleopard from Nigeria Since: Nov, 2014 Relationship Status: Non-Canon
#71383: Jun 2nd 2017 at 1:13:10 AM

That's an incredibly limited, or at least limiting, way of looking at things.

I call it like I see it.

It's only sometimes that the system is shown as being inherently unworkable. Often the point of superheroes is not to work against or beyond the system as it is to work in addition to it, as an extension of it.

Torture, trespassing, contamination of evidence, obstruction of justice, resisting arrest and numerous other crimes all committed usually with bulletproof anonymity. You're way more optimistic that superheroes don't go beyond or against the system when this is pointed out even in-universe.

ExplosiveLion Since: Mar, 2016 Relationship Status: Armed with the Power of Love
#71384: Jun 2nd 2017 at 7:02:38 AM

Because setting a precedent where even the most heroic among us can't win without resorting to killing makes for a pretty bleak worldview? Honestly, most heroes do kill, if pressed, so what I don't get is why some fans are so determined to have it so every character must be willing to kill.

"If pressed"? I can remember at least a dozen times when some MCU hero outright killed a bad guy without actually needing to. Captain America and Iron-Man straight up murder people left and right, on screen. Hawkeye too, unless you want to assume that all his arrows are stun arrows; which, frankly, would be really grasping at straws.

If the only possible way to ever truly be considered victorious is to kill everyone who opposes you— that's what's bleak.

But pretending that letting some people survive will fix them into goodness is naïve, if not misguided and outright stupid. Of course, it's not ideal, but if I'm facing the equivalent of Kim Jong Il in a fight and I'm faced with the decision of killing him or letting him live, the fucker's not going to survive.

With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility, guys. That includes whether you let terrible maniacs live or not; if you don't kill them, if they survive, and people die for it, it should be on you.

A "no-kill" policy only means that you don't have the guts to make the hard calls, and take whatever responsibility comes with it. It's not an easy decision, and of course the hero must not be careless about it, but it's much morally correct than to pride yourself of your precious "no-kill" policy while the whole world dies around you.

That's an incredibly limited, or at least limiting, way of looking at things.

Let's put it this way. What's going to happen to Matt once all the bad dudes in New York are gone? Is he going to go to another city, and fight the crime there? Ok, maybe. But, what will happen next? What happens when he finishes all crime, all bad guys are in jail? Is he going to go after the Avengers? They've must broken a couple of laws themselves. Then what? The other supers/gifted/vigilantes?

And finally, when everyone is behind bars, is he going to turn himself in? He, sure as hell, has broken dozens of laws. What happens then?

Being a vigilante and believing you can fix the system contradict each other. You are a vigilante because, in your mind, the system doesn't work anymore, if it did at all. I mentioned that Matt had his reasons to not kill. He is a christian and, in interest of this argument, a lawyer. He believes that religiously AND legally, killing is wrong. But I never said they were good reasons, and here is why; either way, even if he doesn't kill, he's breaking his vows to religion and the law in order to do what he does. He never truly repents, because he believes he's doing what's right, he wants to fix his city.

It's the same for every other hero. They work outside the law because the law doesn't work anymore. Even Matt, a lawyer, knows this, even if he doesn't admit it.

windleopard from Nigeria Since: Nov, 2014 Relationship Status: Non-Canon
#71385: Jun 2nd 2017 at 7:12:40 AM

Can't be better said. Also why is a superhero killing a bad guy, even justifiably considered bleak but letting complete monsters run rampant with no punishment not?

Bocaj Funny but not helpful from Here or thereabouts (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Pining for the fjords
Funny but not helpful
#71386: Jun 2nd 2017 at 7:17:15 AM

Years of comics conditioning us during the comics code years

Forever liveblogging the Avengers
unknowing from somewhere.. Since: Mar, 2014
#71387: Jun 2nd 2017 at 7:43:38 AM

[up][up]even more weird is that Movies veres already break that by killing their villians all the time and even more marvel who dosent have a strong no kill policies, even chararter like strange who is a doctor or Antman who just still already kill and dosent seen bother by it.

if anything, Punisher dosent act much like superhero but more like vigilante, he does the same as many heroes but seen it dosent have the optimistic trapping of the genre it take a uncomfortable turn.

"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"
alliterator Since: Jan, 2001
#71388: Jun 2nd 2017 at 7:53:34 AM

Also why is a superhero killing a bad guy, even justifiably considered bleak but letting complete monsters run rampant with no punishment not?
Once again, there is a very big difference between killing someone in self-defense (which is considered justifiable homicide and which is the only thing we've seen the MCU heroes do) and going out with the intent to kill someone, which is first degree murder.

Let's say that Matt saw the Kingpin about to kill some kids. He could definitely shoot the Kingpin and he would be exonerated. But now let's say that he went out and killed the Kingpin in his sleep. That would not be good, because the Kingpin wasn't causing any imminent danger at the time and Matt specifically went out to kill him, so it would be first-degree murder.

Vigilantes walk a fine line in that the first type of killing is generally seen as acceptable, because, hey, it's also acceptable for regular people and cops to do it, but not the second one, because that's not acceptable for anyone to do (aside from the government).

edited 2nd Jun '17 7:58:01 AM by alliterator

Bocaj Funny but not helpful from Here or thereabouts (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Pining for the fjords
Funny but not helpful
#71389: Jun 2nd 2017 at 7:55:55 AM

The Avengers were, until Civil War, working in an officially recognized capacity with the American government specifically and varying degrees of acceptance from the UN

Mileage may vary if you think it's more okay for the government to kill than doing it pro bono and the solo movies don't have this same excuse mostly. Especially Iron Man 1.

Forever liveblogging the Avengers
windleopard from Nigeria Since: Nov, 2014 Relationship Status: Non-Canon
#71390: Jun 2nd 2017 at 7:57:09 AM

I'm talking about heroes killing in general not the differences in killing.

alliterator Since: Jan, 2001
#71391: Jun 2nd 2017 at 8:08:39 AM

Mileage may vary if you think it's more okay for the government to kill than doing it pro bono and the solo movies don't have this same excuse mostly. Especially Iron Man 1.
In Iron Man, we see Tony take out terrorists in two scenes: the first, right after he's escaped being imprisoned by them and two, right when they are trying to kill a bunch of peaceful villagers. Both of those instances I believe are justifiable.

Captain America: Civil War is pretty much the same thing, with the "imminent danger" thing being Crossbones' trying to unleash a biological weapon. The only problem in this scenerio is that innocent lives are lost because Cap and the team let them run into an area filled with civilians.

I'm talking about heroes killing in general not the differences in killing.
So you're really asking why is Superman killing Zod unacceptable and Iron Man killing terrorists acceptable. And that's because it comes down to the type of characters both of them are. While watching a Cinema Snob Midnight Screening yesterday, I heard a good explanation of the difference between Marvel and DC characters: Marvel characters are people trying to be superheroes, while DC characters are superheroes trying to be people. The Marvel characters have always been the more "human" of the two, even in the current day — the DC characters tend to be bigger, larger than life, and have codes against killing no matter what. Despite a few stories here and there, Batman and Superman avoid killing at all costs, while a character like Captain America has to have killed, having been in, you know, World War II.

That's why for Superman, killing someone is unimaginably bleak and for Captain America, it's not.

unknowing from somewhere.. Since: Mar, 2014
#71392: Jun 2nd 2017 at 8:21:17 AM

"That would not be good, because the Kingpin wasn't causing any imminent danger at the time and Matt specifically went out to kill him, so it would be first-degree murder."

Yeah problem is with the disrearg of law to the point what killing they used come as empty gesture, if you punch guy to put someone in a coma then not killing to kill come as weird, is the same odd behivo in batman(especially in Arkham verse which matt is really close to)

"working in an officially recognized capacity with the American government specifically and varying degrees of acceptance from the UN"

which it really come glaring after ultron when tony stark is forgiven for tampering with the secpter and Wanda join same robot after been part of a nazi like organizacion and unleash hulk in a city

"he Marvel characters have always been the more "human" of the two, even in the current day — the DC characters tend to be bigger, larger than life, and have codes against killing no matter what."

yeah that just sound like "I have the lower bar" but let not turn this into THAT discussion again as some tropers here may get annoy by that.

"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"
Julep Since: Jul, 2010
#71393: Jun 2nd 2017 at 8:32:50 AM

The Marvel characters have always been the more "human" of the two, even in the current day — the DC characters tend to be bigger, larger than life, and have codes against killing no matter what. Despite a few stories here and there, Batman and Superman avoid killing at all costs, while a character like Captain America has to have killed, having been in, you know, World War II.

But the DCCU has actively tried to make its heroes more human. You cannot really bypass the fact that if you go for (slightly more) realism then casualties become an issue. It's telling that in both Superman movies the "innocent bystander" issue has been tackled, while it is usually completely ignored by both Marvel and DC.

Not sure the DCCU's choice is much worse than the MCU's which offer bigger and bigger handwaves as to why the heroes aren't causing thousands upon thousands of casualties - the fleet of remote-controlled vessels in GOTG 2 comes to mind - unless some of these are required for plot reasons (Civil War - where it's dropped on both Tony and the viewer at the same time before being ignored altogether before). It's a matter of how you deal with the WSOD, and I don't think there is a right answer to that if you want to have spectacular, superheroic fights. Ignoring them would probably be the best IMO, but now it's too late for both universes.

Beatman1 Since: Feb, 2014 Relationship Status: Gone fishin'
#71394: Jun 2nd 2017 at 8:34:05 AM

[up]To be fair, their fleet being drones was both Played for Laughs and shown as a commentary on the Soverign's narcissistic tendencies. Besides, GOTG is a space opera, different from Earth and human society based superheroes.

edited 2nd Jun '17 8:34:34 AM by Beatman1

unknowing from somewhere.. Since: Mar, 2014
#71395: Jun 2nd 2017 at 8:38:21 AM

[up][up]Yeah sokovia is the worst handle in that regard, the issue is present to guilt trip Stark and show how bad it feel and them drop after that, it get the impression the whole thing is bad because it make him feel bad, same with the whole Crossbone issue and wanda.

"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"
windleopard from Nigeria Since: Nov, 2014 Relationship Status: Non-Canon
#71396: Jun 2nd 2017 at 8:44:25 AM

Marvel and DC's characters have been on the same level of "humanity" since the 70s if not further back. In fact, moving beyond the main seven of DC (cause that's who people are talking about when it comes to the "iconography" bit) you have characters like Artemis, Huntress, several Teen Titans members, Cass Cain, Steph Brown, Kyle Rayner, Ted Kord, Blue Beetle, Booster Gold, the Doom Patrol and so many others who can be considered as much people as they are superheroes. This

The Marvel characters have always been the more "human" of the two, even in the current day — the DC characters tend to be bigger, larger than life, and have codes against killing no matter what.

Is a false dichotomy that the company has long since moved on from. Christ, Wonder Woman hasn't had a rule against killing since the 80s and her recent film has her fighting in World War 1. Aquaman ditched his some time around the 90s and the G Ls abandoned theirs in the 2000s in Geoff Johns' run.

edited 2nd Jun '17 8:44:38 AM by windleopard

Bocaj Funny but not helpful from Here or thereabouts (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Pining for the fjords
Funny but not helpful
#71397: Jun 2nd 2017 at 9:03:30 AM

The MCU tends to show the heroes acting to avoid civilian casualties. Inconsistently maybe but it is there

Forever liveblogging the Avengers
Gaon Smoking Snake from Grim Up North Since: Jun, 2012 Relationship Status: Above such petty unnecessities
#71398: Jun 2nd 2017 at 9:07:33 AM

I'm surprised how people seemingly literally cannot comprehend the difference between killing someone in the heat of battle and specifically going out of your way to wipe out anyone who opposes you.

Punisher's problem isn't that he kills. It's that he refuses not to. And he isn't even killing people who would IRL be eligible for the electric chair (depending on the state). Punisher regularly mows down pickpockets and random drug dealers and pimps. The only reason Punisher's morality is even halfway acceptable is because A) He's never or rarely wrong in judging people (there's one arc he accidentally kills a undercover cop I think, and this causes a great deal of inner turmoil in him, but that's pretty much it.) B) The concept of stray bullets does not exist in the Marvel universe (pro-tip: if you bring a goddamn m134 Minigun to a suburban neighborhood for a massive shoot-out, a lot of people that you never aimed for are going to be torn apart by bullets).

"All you Fascists bound to lose."
windleopard from Nigeria Since: Nov, 2014 Relationship Status: Non-Canon
#71399: Jun 2nd 2017 at 9:10:26 AM

Pretty sure the killing of pick pockets was retconned into Jigsaw impersonating Frank.

And I don't think you can cry self defense when you actively go out of your way to get into a fight you legally should not be a part of any way.

The only reason Punisher's morality is even halfway acceptable is because A) He's never or rarely wrong in judging people (there's one arc he accidentally kills a undercover cop I think, and this causes a great deal of inner turmoil in him, but that's pretty much it.) B) The concept of stray bullets does not exist in the Marvel universe (pro-tip: if you bring a goddamn m134 Minigun to a suburban neighborhood for a massive shoot-out, a lot of people that you never aimed for are going to be torn apart by bullets).

This applies to all superheroes. Collateral damage is never an issue unless the writers want it to be one. I mean, Frank at least has that one arc where he killed an undercover cop so you can't claim Marvel isn't aware of the implications of his actions. Meanwhile, they'll have you believe the Hulk has never killed any body in any of his rampages cause super math or that the guns Batman uses on the Batmobile don't kill people either.

edited 2nd Jun '17 9:16:55 AM by windleopard

Gaon Smoking Snake from Grim Up North Since: Jun, 2012 Relationship Status: Above such petty unnecessities
#71400: Jun 2nd 2017 at 9:16:34 AM

Punisher kills any criminal that gets in his path. The fact he refuses to spare anyone is a central concept of his character. One story centers around some random small-time crook (either a thief or a smuggler, I can't recall) being forced to team alongside Castle due both being caught some kind of underground fighting ring (I think) and forging a pseudo friendship with him in the process, thinking they have reached a sort of kinship. The story ends with Castle just putting a bullet in him as he'd do with any other criminal a few weeks later. That's Frank.

The lawyerings of superheroes are fuzzy but even a novice lawyer knows there's a stark difference between killing someone who was trying to shoot a kid/construct a doomsday device and just going up to a criminal, kneecapping, then shooting him in the back of the head.

[up] The Hulk is also terrible in this regard. With most other superheroes, collateral damage is a lot more malleable, because most heroes do not hurl buildings at people (most don't have the strength to).

Punisher's a guy who tends to be introduced gunning down people in fancy mobster dinners. By all accounts, there should be several dozen casualties entirely uninvolved with crime (the caterers, the security, Hell, some mobsters could bring their wives and kids).

edited 2nd Jun '17 9:21:25 AM by Gaon

"All you Fascists bound to lose."

Total posts: 186,763
Top