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

Wackd Since: May, 2009
#23576: Dec 12th 2014 at 12:56:27 PM

Like, would it impact anything to know that Black Widow was bi or that Hawkeye is genderqueer?
Does it impact anything to know that Black Widow was straight or Hawkeye is male?

Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.
GeekCodeRed Since: Sep, 2010
#23577: Dec 12th 2014 at 12:58:15 PM

For all we know, Fury's gay and he just doesn't bring it up. tongue

Wackd Since: May, 2009
#23578: Dec 12th 2014 at 12:59:40 PM

I would not mind Fury/Coulson being a thing. The actors have the chemistry for it.

It would not help the problem I have getting Clark Gregg confused for Mark Evan Jackson, though.

Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.
wanderlustwarrior Role Model from Where Gods Belong Since: Jun, 2009 Relationship Status: What's love got to do with it?
Role Model
#23580: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:08:48 PM

Man, I was disappointed when they killed Hand. I liked her. Also, she was hot.

kalel94 Rascal King from Dragonstone Since: Feb, 2011
Rascal King
#23581: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:12:11 PM

While it's always a shame to kill off potentially gay characters, I was not crazy about Hand from what we saw of her.

Man, she dumb.

The last hurrah? Nah, I'd do it again.
comicwriter Since: Sep, 2011
#23582: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:16:19 PM

Yeah Hand was pretty intolerable. I can't stand characters who exist for the sole purpose of handling the Idiot Ball and Concflict Ball. Her whole job seemed to be making extremely stupid decisions just to cause drama.

But yeah. The situation with Hartley is unfortunate but I think understandable. I can totally get why they'd be wary of killing off another lesbian because of the Internet Backlash, but they probably should have just kept that information to themselves. "Well we were gonna add a gay character to the cast but we were also gonna kill her so that's why there's no LGBT people on the show" sounds bad no matter how you dress it up.

edited 12th Dec '14 1:47:19 PM by comicwriter

VeryMelon Since: Jul, 2011 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#23583: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:17:35 PM

At least Hartly didn't die simply for being a lesbian.

Wackd Since: May, 2009
#23584: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:19:26 PM

There are plenty of ways to get queer folks onto the show at this juncture, I think, but they're never gonna happen because Joss Whedon doesn't know what a bisexual is. (Or at least didn't circa 2000, but I've seen no evidence contradicting that since, so. And if he still doesn't, than the odds of us getting any pan, poly, or ace people are slim to none, and those of different gender identities slimmer still.)

edited 12th Dec '14 1:20:30 PM by Wackd

Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.
VeryMelon Since: Jul, 2011 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
TenebrousGaze Dark Eye from A Shaded Face Since: Sep, 2013 Relationship Status: Giving love a bad name
Dark Eye
#23586: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:26:06 PM

Asexual. Long story short, no sexual attraction. Pretty severely lacking in representation.

edited 12th Dec '14 1:26:56 PM by TenebrousGaze

VeryMelon Since: Jul, 2011 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#23587: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:27:29 PM

Okay. I knew what being asexual meant, I just didn't recognize the shorthand term Wack'd used.

Nohbody "In distress", my ass. from Somewhere in Dixie Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Mu
"In distress", my ass.
#23588: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:28:37 PM

Joss Whedon doesn't know what a bisexual is

Yeah, that Space Courtesan from Firefly totally didn't have a previous relationship with a female client as well as the hots for Mal, and Jayne had no reason to be in his bunk.

tongue

All your safe space are belong to Trump
Wackd Since: May, 2009
#23589: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:28:48 PM

[up][up][up]Basically correct. (Also what I am, just to be up-front.)

And though I'd intended the use of shorthands to make it so I didn't have to double up on -sexual and -romantic folk, it occurs to me that "ace" doesn't double as a shorthand for aromantic, which is "aro" apparently.

Those I'm seeing less inroads for. May's pretty much the only character never to show romantic attachment to anyone, at least on the good guy side of things. We've shown lots of folks with crushes, not so many folks with an explicit interest in banging.

[up]If I recall correctly, don't they paper over it a bit? Like, Inara's not as into it as her customer, who doesn't to my knowledge express interest in dudes. I may need to rewatch that episode, though.

edited 12th Dec '14 1:30:33 PM by Wackd

Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.
Bocaj Funny but not helpful from Here or thereabouts (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Pining for the fjords
Funny but not helpful
#23590: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:31:00 PM

May's getting an ex-husband so who knows

Forever liveblogging the Avengers
Wackd Since: May, 2009
#23591: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:31:43 PM

[up]Maybe they broke up because she realized she was aromantic?

I probably shouldn't get my hopes up.

Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.
Canid117 Since: Oct, 2010 Relationship Status: Hello, I love you
#23592: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:35:15 PM

If she was aromantic they wouldn't have gotten married in the first place.

"War without fire is like sausages without mustard." - Jean Juvénal des Ursins
Wackd Since: May, 2009
#23593: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:38:54 PM

It is possible to realize these things after the fact, especially given how little awareness there is on the subject.

I mean, I had sex when I was younger. I didn't necessarily want to nor did I enjoy it but it felt like a necessary part of my relationship. I didn't even know asexuality was a thing at the time.

So the idea that someone might date for a bit, like the guy well enough, and marry him because why not only to realize after the fact that your dissatisfaction wasn't necessarily an integral part of how these things worked doesn't seem far-fetched to me.

Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.
Nohbody "In distress", my ass. from Somewhere in Dixie Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Mu
"In distress", my ass.
#23594: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:42:52 PM

Or it could just be that she's never shown any romantic interest because it's irrelevant to the plot, not because she has none whatsoever. tongue

All your safe space are belong to Trump
Wackd Since: May, 2009
#23595: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:43:46 PM

[up]See, that seems likely, which makes me sad because there are like no aromantic characters on television.

Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.
Canid117 Since: Oct, 2010 Relationship Status: Hello, I love you
#23596: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:44:52 PM

Because thats boring.

"War without fire is like sausages without mustard." - Jean Juvénal des Ursins
Wackd Since: May, 2009
#23597: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:46:23 PM

That's your opinion. My opinion is that having the vast majority of relationships being between men and women who both enjoy sex only with the opposite gender and are capable of romantic interest is boring.

I mean, the other day I watched an episode of Days of Our Lives because I had nothing to do and was waiting for a friend to come over, and literally the only time it kept my eyes off my phone was when there was a male/male sex scene, because seeing one in a narrative context with the little NBC bug in the corner was such a novelty that it took me a few moments to process that that was what was happening.

edited 12th Dec '14 1:48:06 PM by Wackd

Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.
kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#23598: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:50:14 PM

Showing a character as aromantic seems kind of tough. On the surface it seems like it would be indistinguishable from a person that only has one night stands.

Canid117 Since: Oct, 2010 Relationship Status: Hello, I love you
#23599: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:51:37 PM

Human relations are a font of interesting situations waiting to happen. To simply cut those off and lock them out would be seen as a waste for anyone writing anything longer than a short story.

"War without fire is like sausages without mustard." - Jean Juvénal des Ursins
Wackd Since: May, 2009
#23600: Dec 12th 2014 at 1:53:58 PM

[up][up]Ignoring the fact that, as far as I'm aware, there's nothing stopping aromantic people from having sex with the same person on multiple occasions showing it seems like it'd be pretty easy? Just have them say they are on occasion, and don't show them having a significant other. There. Done.

[up]...so, are you claiming romantic relations and human relations are synonymous? Are romantically involved with everyone you interact with?

edited 12th Dec '14 1:55:29 PM by Wackd

Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.

Total posts: 186,763
Top