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
About why China bans ghosts: They don't, they ban movies which treat Ghosts in a disrespectful manner or turn them into villains. Remember, the Chinese Ghost Stories movies were made in China...also remember than the movies are not about evil ghosts, but innocents ghosts being trapped by evil demons due to not having been laid to rest properly.
You have to remember that Chinese culture is ALL about respecting the ancestors and them being helpful spirits. For them a movie about evil ghosts hunting people or being blown up must feel the same way like, say, a Christian would feel about a movie which features Jesus as serial killer. Hence movies like Mulan (in which the ancestors are silly but helpful) or Coco (which is right in line with the Chinese view on ghost to a degree that it actively speaks to their culture) are acceptable, but Ghostbusters and the standard western ghost horror movie isn't.
I also don't think that they are THAT hung up about homosexuality...it is usually Russia which makes a fuss around that one, not China. They mostly have a problem with profanity and what they would consider damaging to their own political system.
In any case, while China is a huge market, it isn't really that profitable due to less revenue making it back to the studios. Movies which have been rescued by international box office usually also run pretty well in Europe and not just in China.
On the subject of Marvel movies and romance arcs, I say the only movies I saw that don’t do that are Captain America Winter Soldier, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 1 and 2 (at this point I know Quill and Gamora aren’t gonna bone, and its obvious that Drax and Mantis won’t either), and Thor Ragnarok (since Jane is gone, Sif is no where to be seen, and the chemistry between Brunhilde and Thor comes off platonic to me). As for said arcs used in these films they are okay as long as they work for said characters and can’t be easily written out. So here are my choices of Marvel films where the romance isn’t needed:
- Doctor Strange: For a Doctor Strange origin movie, I believe a love interest isn’t needed at that point for the characters story. They should of just waited for Clea in the sequel.
- Ant-Man: Doesn’t help that the original script didn’t really call for a love interest, let alone Hope who is an addition the studio wanted in for the sake of the Wasp character. Though my opinions of the whole Scott and Hope romance can change depending on how well written their dynamic is in the upcoming sequel. So mixed with this
- Avengers series: Generally speaking, the only romance I’ll give a fuck for in any Avengers adaptions are Hank/Janet, Wanda/Vision, and Steve/Tony. So far the films manage to do two-thirds of it, but fucked it up by introducing the pairing of Bruce/Natasha. I mean, sure, both characters have a history of being romantically involved with multiple different partners and all; but with each other, well, I wouldn’t really see them together as a couple. I mean the only shared traits between the two are their whole loner MO, but I would think that trait of theirs will have them be in a mutual friendship rather than love. If thats the case, then why the hell Marvel didn’t put out a Bara comic of Hulk and Wolverine since the two are both loners in their own right and have better chemistry with one another (good and bad thing the internet already got that cover . . . I need to stop going on Rule 34 sites).
- Black Panther: Doesn’t help that Nakia (Malice) was originally meant to be the crazy ex-girlfriend (and a super villain). I pretty much don’t care for her and T’Challa’s interaction in the film unlike literally everyone else T’Challa speaks with (T’Challa X Everest 4 Lyfe).
Floating thoughts about Age of Ultron things I've noticed ever since rewatching it on Friday.
Thought 1: There is way more "characters uniting" hype for Infinity War than there was for Age of Ultron because of how many new characters are joining and how much the status quo has changed in Phase 3. Cap's a fugitive, Tony's led a militia against him, there's a spider kid and space ruffians joining, a whole Tier 1 society was just revealed in Africa, and *everything* changed about Thor. And all the fans are having fun so far speculating on how they're going to interact and react to all these sudden changes.
Age of Ultron doesn't have that because it acts as though the status quo barely changed between it and the first Avengers. The few big game-changers, Tony's retirement and SHIELD being dismantled, are barely background elements then quickly undone. It's a movie with little consequence by beginning and then little when it ends.
Thought 2: Age of Ultron has some weird anti-technology undertones to it that read as rather, to describe it literally, conservative. It can't be completely anti-technology, because of science heroes like Tony and Bruce and Vision, but there's a few parts where it's like "your newfangled toys will never overcome good old-fashioned instincts!"
Like how the whole farm scene. Hawkeye's big secret getaway that kept him safe from HYDRA was "just some farm nobody ever noticed". Which strikes me as whiplash compared to how HYDRA appeared to have their reach in everywhere through technology in The Winter Soldier.
Or how the Avengers' circumvent Ultron deleting all their electronic files by bringing out their paper files. Which sounds clever at first, but then makes no sense as to how they simply guess the right file to choose.
Or the bit where Dr. Cho's machine is re-growing Hawkeye's tissue, which he finds creepy but she assures him is so precise "your own girlfriend won't be able to tell the difference." Then we meet his wife and, nope, she does feel a difference! Can't trump those good ol' "womanly instincts".
Or when Nick Fury at the Hawkeye house gives a speech about how they've got "nothing but our wit and our will, so stand and fight", framed around them all seated at a dinner table in a humble home.
It's all just subtext that doesn't really amount to much in defeating Ultron or proving him wrong, but it makes me wonder why Whedon suddenly felt the need to include these themes that vaguely advocate for technological regression. Ultron = bad because "mad scientist tech", but Vision = good because "mad scientist tech"??
Abouth Michael keaton....both, I mean him being vulture look ALMOST like a reaction to Batman returns, like saying the punguin is right and fully turing into a villian.
Is very intersting like that.
Also, It feel...weird to talk about spidey facing a villian after infinitive war, is like "I fight with THANOS, and now Im just against.....you" is kinda hard to not see that as let down.
"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"

The situation with the starpower argument leading to a lack of diversity is largely a feedback loop in itself. The argument usually given is that big films need A-list talent to sell them and that 9/10, A-list stars tend to be white people. But, that largely persists because actors of color have historically not been allowed to play the sorts of high profile roles that make people into A-list stars to begin with (barring a select few examples like Will Smith, Denzel Washington and Jackie Chan). So you're basically bemoaning the fact that there aren't any big stars of color without realizing you're not giving actors of color the opportunity to break out to begin with.
The other part of it is that the concept of star vehicles is basically dead anyway. The era of IP-led or concept-driven films means that in most cases the audience doesn't really care who is in the lead as long as it's marketed well or comes from a brand they trust. The best example of this is probably the controversial Ghost in the Shell; the rationale behind casting Scarlett Johansson over any actual Asian women was that there weren't any Asian women who have Scarjo's level of fame, and yet in the end, it was all for nothing because the movie bombed anyway. Then on the flipside, you have Black Panther, a black-led movie starring a talented ensemble cast but with few people who could actually be considered big names (Forest Whitaker, Angela Bassett and maybe Michael B. Jordan, after Creed) becoming a huge cultural touchstone that broke out bigger than any other solo MCU film to date.