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
I can agree with the sentiment that she wasn’t originally much of a sexualized character, in large part because under Paul Dini Harley’s innocence is by and large the most visible and predominant aspect of her character.
I can only think of one appearance amidst her many DCAU appearances that even somewhat sexualizes her behavior, Mad Love, which was itself based off of a Darker and Edgier tie-in model, but in the early days Harley was largely portrayed as someone more childlike than mature. Even the bit in Mad Love comes with the punchline that she has no idea what she’s doing, and her one attempt at being sexy falls flat.
This carried over to her earlier appearances in the comics as well -it’s why her relationships (including with Ivy) - were largely hinted at though stealth gags and sly references rather than overt risqué behavior, because that’s what worked best with the character. This included her first comic run.
It’s comics, so she was still more sexualized than before in those early appearances, but iirc her transition from “harlequin” to “sexy harlequin” didn’t really start picking up until Arkham Asylum.
I will said that is because a change of personality: in the animated show Harley is pretty much joker fangirl and cheer leader, she is 100% good and dosent really get to know what she is doing.
The comics instead have make her into a chaotic neutral wild card to pretty much a deadpool expy a times(in the comic she even parner with a deadpool expy, redtool) which rank the sexualization a bit.
"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"Man... the 70s and 80s had all the good drugs
Edited by FrozenWolf2 on Nov 25th 2018 at 6:56:13 AM
Praise be to the absolute QueenI've never heard of them but I can see merit in the idea.
One of the advantages of adaptations and reboots is that they can be created with the full intent of the story in mind from the beginning. Like, the Tesseract wasn't supposed to be the Space Gem in "The First Avenger" which is why it just generically vaporizes stuff. However, a reboot or adaptation could write it as the Space Gem from the beginning, solidifying the foreshadowing with portals between Hydra facilities and teleporting tanks and shit.
I don't think rebooting the MCU is actually a good idea, mind. Just that because many of these movies were made film by film with only a vague idea of future plans, there is room to tighten up the storytelling.
Edited by TobiasDrake on Nov 26th 2018 at 8:15:09 AM
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.You mean MCU Rewrites? Yeah, I've read them. I even successfully proposed Madame B. from the Black Widow story as a Complete Monster. I enjoyed them, but I do feel some of them have their flaws.
The Age of Ultron I think has better character moments than the film and is better paced, but I think Ultron was a very flat character in that. In the film, Ultron's motives changed on a whim and the humorous moments sometimes took away from his menace. But in the fic, while he's more serious, he's just a pawn in Thanos' scheme. I'm also disappointed the writer didn't introduce Vision here, since his scenes are my absolute favorites in Age of Ultron.
Black Widow and Ghosts of HYDRA are probably my favorites, but I wasn't a big fan of the Civil War rewrite. That's probably because I actually really liked the movie, but there were bits I think didn't work. It's more focused on the Sokovia Accords, but that means the fights are less personal. The climax isn't as emotionally driven as the film and it lacks the tragic elements that set that film apart. I also noticed there'd be a few lines that were from the film, but they make less sense in this story because they're in completely different contexts.
The stinger for Civil War definitely would've depicted a different version of Thor: Ragnarok, but I'm not sure if the series will continue.
Do we know for sure the Tesseract was never meant to be the Space Stone from the start? Sure, it was mainly used to power energy weapons, but all the Stones can do things like that.
It pretty obviously opens up some kind of portal when it beams up Red Skull, the Tesseract was set up as the major MacGuffin of the Avengers earlier in Thor's post-credits scene, and The First Avenger came out not too long before The Avengers, which made it pretty clear the Tesseract was the Space Stone. I find it hard to believe that the creative teams involved in the movies didn't confer over that and set things up in advance.
The Scepter housing the Mind Stone I'm more willing to believe was a retcon, but it at least makes sense retroactively even if it makes Thanos look like a gambling loser who acquired negative-one Stones from the attack on Earth.
Edited by Anomalocaris20 on Nov 26th 2018 at 2:30:22 PM
You cannot firmly grasp the true form of Squidward's technique!
Well, according to Joss Whedon he basically threw in Thanos at the end of Avengers.
I think it is pretty save to say that the goal of Phase 1 was simply: Introduce the heroes and then give them a reason to meet.
After Thanos was established, Phase 2 turned into: Let's introduce the Infinity Stones wherever possible.
Phase 3 then became: Let's introduce as many new heroes as possible while laying the ground for the big Thanos finale.
Also, I would mark Phase 1 the "Favreau" Phase, Phase 2 the "Whedon" Phase, and Phase 3 the "Russo" Phase. I guess Phase 4 was supposed to become the "Gunn" phase.
No, this is Once Upon a Black Panther, where Klaw returns to live in order to kidnap Fred Savage.
I certainly don't think they knew about Thanos / Infinity Gauntlet before The First Avenger, since the entire Infinity Gauntlet shows up in Thor as a background cameo.
Edited by alliterator on Nov 27th 2018 at 11:13:58 AM
Marvel's official site recently updated their character profiles and confirmed the popular theory that the scepter was influencing Loki and adding fuel to the fire.
I remember this being a huge thing for a while due to him being particularly viscous and violent in a way that we don't really see in any other movie and because of his very sickly looking state. There was also some talk by Tom Hiddleston about Loki's mind being warped, and later the Avengers DVD had a deleted scene of Loki and Selvig talking about how the scepter was speaking to them.
I'm definitely gonna be reading through the site later to see if they've dropped any other interesting details.
Edited by Zanthype on Nov 27th 2018 at 4:04:44 AM
"In 900 years of time and space I've never met anyone who wasn't important."![]()
Oh that's right, there were quite a few scenes where Hiddleston's eyes were really bright blue. A lot of fans were wondering if it was the lighting making his natural blue eyes look more prominent, some kind of accidental color editing effect, or if it was meant to be a scepter side effect like Hawkeye's.
Not every theory is Leather Pantsing. There were plenty of reasons for fans to wonder about the nature of the scepter and what it would do to its user. Good lord.
Edited by Zanthype on Nov 27th 2018 at 4:15:06 AM
"In 900 years of time and space I've never met anyone who wasn't important."It was always a pretty blatant way of whitewashing and excusing Loki's acts in the Avengers because people couldn't accept their poor misunderstood woobie could have gone full Mussolini (despite an actual act of genocide in his previous film). If you held the theory for different reasons that's on you, but that was always the root of the theory.
"All you Fascists bound to lose."

I didn't mean that Harley is the prude. I mean that part of the fun of her character is her making those sexy poses in an outfit which actually isn't sexy at all.