Marvel Cinematic Universe thread v3 (no recent spoilers)

[bosk1]

In my opinion one of the key things that made the MCU phases 1-3 so good was the character development and the surprisingly coherent and consistent writing/buildup. Even the stinkers, such as Thor 1 to 2, had a solid arc for Thor and Loki, that ultimately was used very well. It is really missing in this phase.

YES!  That's pretty much what I have been saying.  For the core six original Avengers, they spent time letting us get to know and really like those characters.  Most people really liked most of the original core six.  And as other characters were introduced and slowly added in, the MCU continued to develop those original six.  The character development in phase 4 has been significantly less developed and the writing has been significantly less consistent/cohesive.  Too many characters now that people are unsure of because they aren't developed nearly as well, that people are indifferent toward (for similar reasons), or just don't like. 

[lordxizor]

I'm genuinely curious behind the scenes at Marvel how the drop in quality is happening. Shoddy CGI can be explained by rushed post-production schedules and overworked artists as there are only so many CGI studios out there and they put out a ton on content in phase 4. But the sub-par writing is more of a head scratcher to me. Is the writing process being rushed as well? Are they not giving the scripts time to breath and to be tweaked/improved before starting filming? Are all the good writers refusing to work with Marvel? Was the one person (Feige?) who was closely overseeing the scripts who is being pulled in too many directions to give it the same attention? The noticeable drop in quality is just odd. It's not like it's a completely different leadership team or creative team putting out these movies/shows than it was previously.

[ZirconBlue]

The big names in popularity at the time, both among comic book readers and especially the general public, were Spider-Man and the X-Men.  Not even close.

The first Iron Man film was a HUGE risk.  DC always kept a lid on their biggest characters for films, since they were owned by an entertainment company (Warner Brothers), but Marvel had farmed out the rights to their biggest properties (Spidey, the X-Men, and even the Fantastic Four) to other studios.  Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, and the Hulk weren't unknown, but they were not in the same league as those others in the mind of the general public.  And of those, only Spider-Man could be considered to be in the same league as the biggest hitters from DC (Superman and Batman).

I don't recall the exact details, but there was a point when the film rights for X-Men, Spider-Man, Fantastic 4, and a few others were already sold off, and Marvel offered to sell the rights for the rest of their characters to, I think, Sony.  And they were basically like, "Nah, we're good."

[lonestar]

In my opinion one of the key things that made the MCU phases 1-3 so good was the character development and the surprisingly coherent and consistent writing/buildup. Even the stinkers, such as Thor 1 to 2, had a solid arc for Thor and Loki, that ultimately was used very well. It is really missing in this phase.

YES!  That's pretty much what I have been saying.  For the core six original Avengers, they spent time letting us get to know and really like those characters.  Most people really liked most of the original core six.  And as other characters were introduced and slowly added in, the MCU continued to develop those original six.  The character development in phase 4 has been significantly less developed and the writing has been significantly less consistent/cohesive.  Too many characters now that people are unsure of because they aren't developed nearly as well, that people are indifferent toward (for similar reasons), or just don't like.

Do you think it's partly a case of oversaturation? In phase one they could do it cause they only had 3 major characters with Nat, Bruce and Clint on the side basically. Now we got a bazillion characters, but they still have to keep some narrative flowing, so it just looks sloppy introducing the noobs while keeping the OGs involved. Maybe by the time Secret Wars comes around we'll see a reason to the madness, but in the midst its just madness.

[Lonk]

I'll point out that the x-men had about a decade's worth of cartoon series' under their belt.  Iron Man and Thor did not.  Thor was my fave comic book hero - I sure as hell knew him from the 80s and 90s.  But as for mainstream exposure, x-men had way more than any of the Avengers.

To Bob's point... I guess it's a regional thing maybe?

This is a big one. Spider-Man had its own shows in the 90's, and so did the X-Men. While a good chunk of MCU fans read the comics, I would bet the amount or even bigger group of people know the characters from the cartoon series.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TX7fzbsw9HM

[jingle.boy]

Multiple cartoon series'.  I was a loyal follower of Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends.  And everyone all us fogeys know the OG Spider-Man series from the 60s.

[bosk1]

In my opinion one of the key things that made the MCU phases 1-3 so good was the character development and the surprisingly coherent and consistent writing/buildup. Even the stinkers, such as Thor 1 to 2, had a solid arc for Thor and Loki, that ultimately was used very well. It is really missing in this phase.

YES!  That's pretty much what I have been saying.  For the core six original Avengers, they spent time letting us get to know and really like those characters.  Most people really liked most of the original core six.  And as other characters were introduced and slowly added in, the MCU continued to develop those original six.  The character development in phase 4 has been significantly less developed and the writing has been significantly less consistent/cohesive.  Too many characters now that people are unsure of because they aren't developed nearly as well, that people are indifferent toward (for similar reasons), or just don't like.

Do you think it's partly a case of oversaturation? In phase one they could do it cause they only had 3 major characters with Nat, Bruce and Clint on the side basically. Now we got a bazillion characters, but they still have to keep some narrative flowing, so it just looks sloppy introducing the noobs while keeping the OGs involved. Maybe by the time Secret Wars comes around we'll see a reason to the madness, but in the midst its just madness.

I think oversaturation is an issue.  But I think it's separate from the dropoff in quality of writing. 

[lonestar]

In my opinion one of the key things that made the MCU phases 1-3 so good was the character development and the surprisingly coherent and consistent writing/buildup. Even the stinkers, such as Thor 1 to 2, had a solid arc for Thor and Loki, that ultimately was used very well. It is really missing in this phase.

YES!  That's pretty much what I have been saying.  For the core six original Avengers, they spent time letting us get to know and really like those characters.  Most people really liked most of the original core six.  And as other characters were introduced and slowly added in, the MCU continued to develop those original six.  The character development in phase 4 has been significantly less developed and the writing has been significantly less consistent/cohesive.  Too many characters now that people are unsure of because they aren't developed nearly as well, that people are indifferent toward (for similar reasons), or just don't like.

Do you think it's partly a case of oversaturation? In phase one they could do it cause they only had 3 major characters with Nat, Bruce and Clint on the side basically. Now we got a bazillion characters, but they still have to keep some narrative flowing, so it just looks sloppy introducing the noobs while keeping the OGs involved. Maybe by the time Secret Wars comes around we'll see a reason to the madness, but in the midst its just madness.

I think oversaturation is an issue.  But I think it's separate from the dropoff in quality of writing.

Or in part the oversaturation is causing the drop in writing quality... Trying to juggle ten balls at once, looking like shit, instead of juggling 3 and making it look good.

[Adami]

Yea, it's definitely a lot of issues but lack of quality writing is I think key. Marvel has proven itself easily capable of hyping up unknown characters into giant blockbusters. But the writing.....yeesh.

I think there's three major things I would fix, though who knows how it would help.

1) Less stuff. Between the shows and the movies, we are getting SO much content that it's harder and harder to become invested in it. Didn't like Moon Knight? Don't worry! 2 movies and 3 other shows will be here in a few months. Giving us more meaningful movies/shows with time to really miss it might help. It also means we keep getting new characters and then having to wait years for them to do something else because they need those years to tell the stories of 30 other characters.

2) Stop leaving all of the writing to TV writers. I love Rick and Morty as much as the next nerdy 12 year old boy. I think the writing is generally brilliant....for a 22 minute show that focuses on a sense of overall meaninglessness. These are movies. They need to be written by people who truly understand how movies are written. Marvel may be one huge television show, but it doesn't actually work that way when you have 2-2.5 hour episodes and 3-5 months between each episode. So yea, move away from a TV mentality for the movies. Give us proper structures with movies focused on character and less 18 things happening to get to the other thing to get us to the last thing.

3) Get Kevin a partner. Kevin is a genius at the bigger picture, but now the picture is HUGE. I think he needs to focus on how things add up but he can get a partner or two to focus on the individual movies, make sure movie X is great as is, and also connects to storyline Y later on, but again...doesn't JUST do that.

[soupytwist]

1) Less stuff. Between the shows and the movies, we are getting SO much content that it's harder and harder to become invested in it. Didn't like Moon Knight? Don't worry! 2 movies and 3 other shows will be here in a few months. Giving us more meaningful movies/shows with time to really miss it might help. It also means we keep getting new characters and then having to wait years for them to do something else because they need those years to tell the stories of 30 other characters.

Yeah this is a major problem.  Kate Bishop was one the better characters introduced in Phase 4 - but as far as I can see she isn't in any upcoming project?  Then you have a couple of shows that honestly do enough people care about?  Echo?  House of Harkness?  even Ironheart?   
Ant-Man 3 isn't doing great at the box-office which will probably be a worry as this was the film to lead Phase 5 and kickstart the Kang storyline.  Guardian 3 will be fine, but ultimately it's probably the last time we'll see those characters.  The Marvels will be divisive as it will already have the toxic side of the internet against it.

[Lonk]

Ant-Man 3 isn't doing great at the box-office which will probably be a worry as this was the film to lead Phase 5 and kickstart the Kang storyline.

I don't understand where this comment is coming from, and it has been mentioned a few times already. Domestically, this movie is doing much better than the first two installments of the trilogy did in the first two weeks. And based on BoxOffice Mojo, it seems that it is the same internationally (Except for China, where there is big drop in revenue).

[The Letter M]

Ant-Man 3 isn't doing great at the box-office which will probably be a worry as this was the film to lead Phase 5 and kickstart the Kang storyline.

I don't understand where this comment is coming from, and it has been mentioned a few times already. Domestically, this movie is doing much better than the first two installments of the trilogy did in the first two weeks. And based on BoxOffice Mojo, it seems that it is the same internationally (Except for China, where there is big drop in revenue).

Yes, it's making more money, but the film cost more to produce than the first two Ant-Man films did. There were also reports over the weekend that Quantumania would see the biggest week-to-week/second-week drop in box office revenue in MCU history, with a 69-70% drop, a higher percentage than the previous record holder Black Widow. So yeah, it made money, in it's FIRST week, but it might not have the same legs its predecessors had, and with some big ticket films coming out in March (Creed III, Shazam 2, John Wick 4), it probably won't fare well in its 3rd-7th weeks.

-Marc.

[bosk1]

Yeah, it's not doing "badly" by any reasonable definition.  But I think the hopes were higher for it.  One of the "problems" with it in the abstract is just the fact that it's an "Ant Man" film that is suddenly being thrust to the forefront of the MCU as leading the charge into phases 5 and 6 by being both the literal beginning of phase 5 and the first film to set up the threat of Kang.  Ant Man just doesn't have the gravitas of an Iron Man, Cap, or Thor, so I think there's a subconscious disconnect there between a character who has seemed relatively unimportant (both as an individual and in terms of his actual movies) and a plot point that is so big and far-reaching.  Narratively, it makes perfect sense.  From a marketing standpoint, perhaps less so.

[soupytwist]

Ant-Man 3 isn't doing great at the box-office which will probably be a worry as this was the film to lead Phase 5 and kickstart the Kang storyline.

I don't understand where this comment is coming from, and it has been mentioned a few times already. Domestically, this movie is doing much better than the first two installments of the trilogy did in the first two weeks. And based on BoxOffice Mojo, it seems that it is the same internationally (Except for China, where there is big drop in revenue).

Its highly unlikely to reach the amount Ant-Man and Wasp took.  Given the importance of this movie, I stand by 'not great'. And this is the first Marvel movie to be released in China for a couple of years!  I would have thought 800 million would be acceptable, at the minute it's tracking at 600 million.

[Lonk]

So it seems we will see Frank Castle/The Punisher in the MCU again

I hope it's for a bit more than a cameo

[Adami]

So it seems we will see Frank Castle/The Punisher in the MCU again

I hope it's for a bit more than a cameo

I hope he doesn't show up making a bunch of quips.

Also ready the actor who played Foggy won't be back. I hope they don't recast him, and not featuring him at all would be odd. Honestly after just recently re-watching three seasons of DD, I have so little excitement for this new series. They just did it SO perfectly before and making it MORE Disney and MORE MCU won't do it much service, but hopefully by the time it comes out, I'll be able to judge it on its own merits and not compare it to seasons 1-3, though that'll be hard.

[lordxizor]

I'm curious if the MCU version of DD and Punisher are the same versions as the Netflix series or if they'll be considered variants in the multiverse.

[Adami]

I'm curious if the MCU version of DD and Punisher are the same versions as the Netflix series or if they'll be considered variants in the multiverse.

I think they're officially variants. The Netflix stuff is not considered prime MCU but is probably similar to the other Spider-Man movies and such.

[lonestar]

Just watched the four part series Mpower, celebrating the women of the MCU. Outstanding documentaries. Really, really well done.

[MinistroRaven]

I bet Feige is not happy this very moment:

Jonathan Majors was reportedly arrested this weekend on charges of strangulation, assault and harassment.

His rep claims “he's done nothing wrong. We look forward to clearing his name and clearing this up."

(Source: TMZ)

I sense a recast in the air.

[The Letter M]

I bet Feige is not happy this very moment:

Jonathan Majors was reportedly arrested this weekend on charges of strangulation, assault and harassment.

His rep claims “he's done nothing wrong. We look forward to clearing his name and clearing this up."

(Source: TMZ)

I sense a recast in the air.

Between this and Disney firing Victoria Alonso, things aren't looking good for Marvel Studios.

-Marc.

[Orbert]

They seem to prefer to shoot now, and (maybe) ask questions later.

[Lonk]

Things might get a bit messy for Majors if the reports are true.

[lordxizor]

Well, the great news in the multiverse is that Kang can be recast a 7 foot tall white woman and it can be easily explained away as a variant.

[ZirconBlue]

I bet Feige is not happy this very moment:

Jonathan Majors was reportedly arrested this weekend on charges of strangulation, assault and harassment.

His rep claims “he's done nothing wrong. We look forward to clearing his name and clearing this up."

(Source: TMZ)

I sense a recast in the air.

Between this and Disney firing Victoria Alonso, things aren't looking good for Marvel Studios.

-Marc.

I don't get why people even care about the Victoria Alonso thing.  From what's been revealed so far, she was pretty clearly in breach of her contract.  And her spending time producing a non-Marvel movie at the same time Marvel is being criticized for how they deal with the FX houses under her purview is not a good look.

[MinistroRaven]

Certainly not the best collage of images for this news, but, OK.

[Dream Team]

Oh wow he's got her trained . . . what a scumbag.

[Lonk]

The text messages released don't really help him much.

[lordxizor]

I hate these kinds of situations. For the obvious reason that a woman was likely physically abused of course. But what does Marvel do here? Fire him based on limited evidence of potential wrongdoing that the only main witness is now saying is nothing?

[Stadler]

I hate these kinds of situations. For the obvious reason that a woman was likely physically abused of course. But what does Marvel do here? Fire him based on limited evidence of potential wrongdoing that the only main witness is now saying is nothing?

We live in an age where for certain crimes - identity politics crimes, or political crimes, in particular - it's no longer "innocent until proven guilty", it's "innocent until accused".   The accusation is enough.  It's ironic that so many seem to think the way to get MORE due process is to INFRINGE due process.   

And none of this is to defend Jonathan Majors; I barely know who he is (honestly, I know him for hosting SNL more than anything) and have no idea what happened in that apartment/house/whatever, but we have a justice SYSTEM for a reason.

[lordxizor]

I hate these kinds of situations. For the obvious reason that a woman was likely physically abused of course. But what does Marvel do here? Fire him based on limited evidence of potential wrongdoing that the only main witness is now saying is nothing?

We live in an age where for certain crimes - identity politics crimes, or political crimes, in particular - it's no longer "innocent until proven guilty", it's "innocent until accused".   The accusation is enough.  It's ironic that so many seem to think the way to get MORE due process is to INFRINGE due process.   

And none of this is to defend Jonathan Majors; I barely know who he is (honestly, I know him for hosting SNL more than anything) and have no idea what happened in that apartment/house/whatever, but we have a justice SYSTEM for a reason.

Right, as far as the law goes he is innocent until proven guilty. That doesn't mean Marvel or any other studio needs to continue working with him.

[Lonk]

Given how good he has been so far as Kang, I hope they keep him around. Or at least wait until after his court appearance to make a decision.

On a side note about him, the more I think about that last episode in Loki S1, the more amazed I am at his performance. It was a bit underwhelming at first but that last episode is brilliant.

[hefdaddy42]

And he is literally the lynchpin of their storytelling for the next 3 years.  Sticking with him could be death, but getting rid of him would be enormously difficult.

For once, I'm glad I'm not wearing Kevin Feige's hat.

[Stadler]

I hate these kinds of situations. For the obvious reason that a woman was likely physically abused of course. But what does Marvel do here? Fire him based on limited evidence of potential wrongdoing that the only main witness is now saying is nothing?

We live in an age where for certain crimes - identity politics crimes, or political crimes, in particular - it's no longer "innocent until proven guilty", it's "innocent until accused".   The accusation is enough.  It's ironic that so many seem to think the way to get MORE due process is to INFRINGE due process.   

And none of this is to defend Jonathan Majors; I barely know who he is (honestly, I know him for hosting SNL more than anything) and have no idea what happened in that apartment/house/whatever, but we have a justice SYSTEM for a reason.

Right, as far as the law goes he is innocent until proven guilty. That doesn't mean Marvel or any other studio needs to continue working with him.

Of course they don't (unless there's a contract that says otherwise).   But at some point, there's a principle at stake; if the consequences aggregate high enough, it's de facto punishment, and the fact that it's not the government administering it isn't really relevant anymore.  It's just a form of street justice.   We would (hopefully) be outraged if someone walked up to Majors and knifed him in the face for his "crimes".   This is the same thing in principle, just more benign in terms of outrageousness.

Or we should just be honest with ourselves:  there are a lot of people (especially today) talking about "JUSTICE!" and "DEMOCRACY!" when it's crystal clear that those principles - hard, so very hard to implement when it's inconvenient - have taken a back seat to "VINDICITIVENESS!" and "REVENGE!" and "PUNISHMENT!".

[Stadler]

And he is literally the lynchpin of their storytelling for the next 3 years.  Sticking with him could be death, but getting rid of him would be enormously difficult.

For once, I'm glad I'm not wearing Kevin Feige's hat.

Honest question:  How many actual ticket buyers - I don't mean Twitter whores, I mean actual MCU fans - are going to say "Hmmm, I'm invested in this Marvel storyline, for which I've watched 37 movies so far.  But the new one has this guy that they say walloped his girlfriend (or whatever); yeah, think I'm going to sit this one out."?