Marvel Cinematic Universe - General Thread

Saw ep3 and 4.

Ep3 - it's a standalone like ep2 but this is more fun. I think the main character is detestable but still engaging. The guest star is an awesome surprise.

Ep4 - holy cow! The premise isn't new but the ending had me flabbergasted. I guess that's why the title is Eyes of Wakanda, because of the checking part. Didn't know that Hordak is part of the Marvel U, haha

Don't want to spoil but if any of you guys are MCU fans, watch the 4th ep. I wasn't paying attention so the last part floored me!

Um, what's up with the RDJ vs stunt double or vs Ryan Reynolds? Is the movie in trouble?

Fero McPigletron said:

Um, what's up with the RDJ vs stunt double or vs Ryan Reynolds? Is the movie in trouble?

Click to expand...

I heard that RDJ and Reynolds got into it. I don't think the movie's in trouble, Marvel has too much riding on this. They'll pay everyone off to work together to finish shooting and then stick the two on opposite ends of the promotional tour.

But I can't see Marvel or Disney letting this just torpedo the whole thing.

Haven't heard anything new. Hope all is going smoothly.

I glanced around a little bit - looked like it was a rumor, nothing more.

Musing I had on Discord the other day...

Sometimes I wonder if the MCU would have worked out for Marvel without Disney buying the whole thing.

LBD Nytetrayn said:

Musing I had on Discord the other day...

Sometimes I wonder if the MCU would have worked out for Marvel without Disney buying the whole thing.

Click to expand...

I could see it getting through the Phase 1 movies, at least. The true test would be how well the Phase 2 films would have done without Disney's money to support them, but remember that Phase 2 got off to a very rocky start with Iron Man 3 and Thor: The Dark World. Winter Soldier might have saved it enough to get to Guardians 1 and Age of Ultron, but Ant-Man might have been more of a gamble than it originally was. Phase 3 is where the MCU might have lived or died, but I also don't see Sony letting the MCU borrow Spider-Man in this alternate Disney-less version of the MCU, so his appearance in Civil War and the Home trilogy probably wouldn't have happened.

Likewise, the expansion from films into television and streaming series might not have happened. No Agents of SHIELD, Agent Carter, or Inhumans on ABC, no Runaways or Helstrom on Hulu, no Cloak & Dagger on Freeform, and no Disney Plus shows. Netflix might have still been interested, but they probably would have only made it to The Defenders or Season 1 of The Punisher.

Best case scenario in this hypothetical, the MCU might have reached the end of Phase 3 and gone out on a high note with Endgame, since no Spider-Man means no Far From Home to end Phase 3, with Endgame now giving Phase 3 a stronger finale. With Endgame coming along right before the Pandemic, the MCU would then take a break to ride high on its success and let nostalgia bloom for a few years before possibly trying to bring it back with a follow-up film or two. The actual Phase 4 we got under Disney was a real mixed bag, so I can see the same being the case in this scenario. Maybe we'd get Black Widow and the next Thor, Doctor Strange, or Black Panther (despite Chadwick Boseman's passing, like what actually happened), but I imagine it would be more of a mess than the actual Phase 4 was. So much so that Phase 5 and 6 might not have happened at all. The MCU might have gone on hiatus again before someone comes along to try again and course correct after the less than stellar performance of this version of Phase 4.

But, it might get to the point where people just wish it had all stayed concluded with Endgame so that the MCU could be remembered more fondly as one complete package of 21 films (remember, no Spider-Man, so no Homecoming or Far From Home, so Phase 3 would be only 9 films instead of 11). Then those 21 films (or at least the best ones) could be milked for all their worth with special edition DVD and Blu-Ray releases, anniversary releases, and deals with whichever streaming services wanted to carry them either individually or altogether.

But, I'm just spit-balling. What do I really know?

The reason I'm intrigued by a Disney-less MCU is because I feel Disney may have put a clampdown on potentially serious topics that could have made for great stories.

Iron Man 2, for example, was shaping up to be the Demon in a Bottle movie, but in the actual film Tony's alcoholism is played for a comedic "he pissed in the suit" gag and that's it. I remember going into Iron Man 2 thinking "we're going to see what Disney will let them do" and I came out thinking "ok Disney is going to play it super safe," and nothing that's happened since has really dissuaded me.

Maybe some Paramount/Marvel Studios heads still get a bit nervous about stuff like that without Disney, but being bought and led by the leaders in sanitized "wholesome" entertainment certainly didn't help.

LordGigaIce said:

The reason I'm intrigued by a Disney-less MCU is because I feel Disney may have put a clampdown on potentially serious topics that could have made for great stories.

Iron Man 2, for example, was shaping up to be the Demon in a Bottle movie, but in the actual film Tony's alcoholism is played for a comedic "he pissed in the suit" gag and that's it. I remember going into Iron Man 2 thinking "we're going to see what Disney will let them do" and I came out thinking "ok Disney is going to play it super safe," and nothing that's happened since has really dissuaded me.

Maybe some Paramount/Marvel Studios heads still get a bit nervous about stuff like that without Disney, but being bought and led by the leaders in sanitized "wholesome" entertainment certainly didn't help.

Click to expand...

I kinda have to wonder if parents complained about the first Iron Man movie having some things in it that they didn't want their younger children seeing, like allusions to terrorism in the Middle East and Tony having a one night stand with that reporter lady at the beginning of the movie (especially since she comes out of Tony's room walking around wearing nothing but a long shirt), thinking the movie was gonna be a friendly superhero film for the whole family without having prior familiarity with what kind of character Tony/Iron Man is in the comics beforehand (yeah yeah, it's their own fault for taking small children to a PG-13 movie, but parents gonna parent in all the wrong ways).

Iron Man 2 going for a more safer route could have been not just Disney taking over but possibly also a course correction in response to said complaints about the first movie from overprotective soccer moms.

Sabrblade said:

I kinda have to wonder if parents complained about the first Iron Man movie having some things in it that they didn't want their younger children seeing, like allusions to terrorism in the Middle East and Tony having a one night stand with that reporter lady at the beginning of the movie (especially since she comes out of Tony's room walking around wearing nothing but a long shirt), thinking the movie was gonna be a friendly superhero film for the whole family without having prior familiarity with what kind of character Tony/Iron Man is in the comics beforhand (yeah yeah, it's their own fault for taking small children to a PG-13 movie, but parents gonna parent in all the wrong ways).

Iron Man 2 going for a more safer route could have been not just Disney taking over but possibly also a course correction in response to said complaints about the first movie from overprotective soccer moms.

Click to expand...

Possibly, but if people are upset about an Iron Man movie featuring Tony Stark womanizing and him dealing with terrorism, then they really don't know what Iron Man is about

Honest question - were there complaints when the Iron Man was released?

Stepwise said:

Honest question - were there complaints when the Iron Man was released?

Click to expand...

Speaking as someone who had been a fan of Iron Man since the 90s cartoon...
Not really?

RDJ basically being a pitch perfect Tony Stark, and the solid plot did a pretty good job of introducing Iron Man to the general audience sorts.

Now stuff like the villain being both disposable and having an evil version of the hero's powers and the quippy, snarky lead would get overexposed in the MCU, but Iron Man 2008 was before any of that and did so well that Marvel was comfortable running those elements into the ground elsewhere.

As for complaints about what Sabrblade brought up... I donno? I mean, I was 21 at the time and so what the suburban soccer moms were saying passed me by entirely. I don't remember hearing anything about complaints regarding the terrorism or Tony's one night stand, but that doesn't mean they weren't there.

Regardless... could the MCU have pivoted to a safe family friendly direction without Disney? Sure.
Thing is it's also exactly the sort of thing Disney would do, and it's what factually happened after Disney took over.
So all we can do is connect point A (Disney, a company known for sanitized "family friendly" entertainment) to point B (the MCU gets sanitized and family friendly after Disney buys it).

"Well maybe it still happens if everything is different" is what we in academic history circles call "counter-factuals"

So, there's a new rumor going around about Spider-Man Brand New Day. Fair warning, this may just ruin your day. Or not. Depending on how into the Spider-Man comics you are.

But he'd be perfect for what we've got in the Spider-verse so far.

Shadewing said:

Spoiler

Paul makes sense, in a world where Peter Parker "never existed". MCU tends to take controversal ideas and make something interesting out of them.

Click to expand...

Took the words right out of my mouth.

*scream*

My friend showed a pic of rumored characters appearing in Brand New Day and its one of the obscure villains I know of! If he appears, it would be soooo awesome! Even as a thug!

Wow, are they gearing for a an obscure 90s hero to appear somewhere? First from Multiverse of Madness and now maybe Brand New Day? It would be a cool stealth bit since his villains are appearing.

To me, this is akin to obscure 90s Superboy villain King Shark breaking out of D list JUST because he has a look that stands out (being a shark dude). Gail Simone plucked him from the Superboy's rogue gallery just because she used Knockout too and his appearances snowballed. The rumored villain is the only villain from that 90s series to appear as an enemy in other series JUST because of his instantly recognizable look too.

He appeared in Slott's She-Hulk and was used as a projectile. Then he was killed in one of the versions of Heroes for Hire post or during Civil War. So I don't know who this might be. Maybe they retconned his death.

Anyway, I'm excited, hehe

Marvel/Sony FINALLY dropped a frickin' trailer

I haven't looked the trailer but I saw that some of rumored villains appeared in it. Did 8 Ball?!?!