Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D: To Kill a Mockingbird

[Mladen]

54 minutes ago, Annara Snow said:

Yes, because clearly Daredevil the TV show invented vigilantism. It's never been done before, and it was suddenly so new and original. It's not like a large number of comic book characters and action film characters over so many decades have been vigilantes. By that logic, everybody should have stopped doing that theme decades ago.

OK... Calm down. No one said that DD invented vigilantism, only that the theme has been done to death. I doubt that writers of AoS can bring something new to the table (I could be wrong, but experience had taught me otherwise). I spoke of DD as it is closest to the AoS Universe. Same can be said about Jessica Jones or if we expand a little bit, Arrow... And let we not get out of comic book world. 

Simply, they are trying something that won't work. It is doomed to fail. Simply, you can't be both Disney and gritty, bloody and messy at the same time.

1 hour ago, Annara Snow said:

I really couldn't care less. I like the show by itself and I want it to focus on its own characters and arcs, not bring some random MCU characters for a cameo. The interconnectiveness worked wonderfully in season 1 with the Hydra infiltration plot - but that was the only time it did. (Not counting Peggy Carter's cameo. It's always good to see Peggy.) Any other time they try to make a tie-in with the movies, it just felt redundant and like they're going through the motions. I'd prefer them to focus on their own characters and storylines, rather than randomly bring up movie stuff. The show should just stand on its own.

And Sharon Carter is less interesting and developed as a character than the majority of characters on AoS, anyway. Plus she's CIA now, not SHIELD, so there's even less reason to bring her. Maria Hill is not SHIELD either, she working for Tony Stark. I'd much rather see another Peggy Carter flashback.

Well, it is not like I care about those two a lot. It was just following the train of thought in which Director may be some MCU connection. I feel sorry for AoS, as it not only became MCU's ugly step-sister, it even lost the support it had in ABC. I would also prefer them to stand on their own feet, but they just don't want to do that.

Well, ABC played their cards right with Agent Carter so I think that Peggy ship has sailed... The best damn female character... What a pity.

[Annara Snow]

34 minutes ago, Risto said:

OK... Calm down. No one said that DD invented vigilantism, only that the theme has been done to death. I doubt that writers of AoS can bring something new to the table (I could be wrong, but experience had taught me otherwise). I spoke of DD as it is closest to the AoS Universe. Same can be said about Jessica Jones or if we expand a little bit, Arrow... And let we not get out of comic book world. 

Simply, they are trying something that won't work. It is doomed to fail. Simply, you can't be both Disney and gritty, bloody and messy at the same time.

Well, it is not like I care about those two a lot. It was just following the train of thought in which Director may be some MCU connection. I feel sorry for AoS, as it not only became MCU's ugly step-sister, it even lost the support it had in ABC. I would also prefer them to stand on their own feet, but they just don't want to do that.

Well, ABC played their cards right with Agent Carter so I think that Peggy ship has sailed... The best damn female character... What a pity.

It's already known who plays the new director, the casting was in the news, so clearly they don't consider it a spoiler.

Well, it's not like the show hasn't done dark and messed up storylines before. It's stopped being mostly lighthearted somewhere halfway through season 1. Although it has a certain schizphrenic quality to it - it often seems like they would really want to make it all complex and morally ambiguous, but then they can't really bring it to its conclusion, because it's supposed to be an MCU family show on ABC. So as a result, you get this weird mix where a bunch of messed up things happen and all the protagonists have gotten darker and more morally compromised, but in the end the show is still treating it like "well, they're still one happy family and definite good guys you should root for, and let's forget about anything else."

[The BlackBear]

5 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

Didn't you see her the season 3 finale? She obviously was/is. I would have really hated it if the show just brushed off any emotional consequences and trauma just to have characters be one-dimensionally badass.

I did, in truth I'd kind of forgotten it. It just kind of, seems to me, a very over the top reaction, :shrug:

For the record I very much enjoyed it.

I don't mind that it doesn't get referenced in the films, and I get the reasons. I just wish they took a bit more care getting their film references in, they feel like they were written with a sledgehammer.

[Bastard of Boston]

I don't think it's so over the top, as she was essentially mind-controlled, but worse...she wasn't acting against her will. She truly wanted to assist Hive, like a drug-addict would want a hit of something. I think she's still coming to grips with, not only the death of Lincoln, but also how she buckled at the end of the season, turning into a pretty significant headcase.

[PetyrPunkinhead]

Daisy's story line is meh for me. I did dig the look of the Ghost Rider's skull though. I'm still getting used to him in a Charger instead of on a motorcycle. I'm a 90s guy, so Danny Ketch is my true Ghost Rider, but I'll give this new guy a shot. I do like this new shakeup with the power structure shifting among the core team and the "band breaking up." LMD intro'd nicely. Also, are sexy-time Fitz/Simmons over before they really started? And is Talbot the new director of SHIELD, it kinda sounded like that when Simmons and Mae were having their spat? Oh, and get Bobbi back in this ASAP.

[Martini Sigil]

Maybe I am asking too much, but I'd like a show called "Agents of Shield" to be less about the drama of personal relationships and the cast behaving like children and more about what is supposed to be the most bad ass agency in the Marvel universe thwarting bad guys 

[red snow]

28 minutes ago, Martini Sigil said:

Maybe I am asking too much, but I'd like a show called "Agents of Shield" to be less about the drama of personal relationships and the cast behaving like children and more about what is supposed to be the most bad ass agency in the Marvel universe thwarting bad guys 

At this stage in the show what is it actually about? Are they still SHIELD agents? What is their remit? Why do they get arcs with Ghost Rider yet ignore super people in Hell's kitchen and Harlem?

I ask as I haven't seen the show since end of Season 1. Much like comics, I find I can follow most aspects from news items and i like to have a general idea for the MCU (even if it seems AOS is a one way street in terms of connectiveness).

[PetyrPunkinhead]

2 hours ago, Martini Sigil said:

Maybe I am asking too much, but I'd like a show called "Agents of Shield" to be less about the drama of personal relationships and the cast behaving like children and more about what is supposed to be the most bad ass agency in the Marvel universe thwarting bad guys 

Yup, remember when Marvel used to do the special "One Shot" short films with each new DVD/BR release? There was one called "Item 47" that was just so well done, and it introduced the Titus Welliver agent. (Member.) I'd like to see more of those kinds of episodes where it's a self contained little story that shows the scope and reach of SHIELD in the MCU. it'd be great if we only got like three or four of those per season, but I don't think we'll ever really get that. This is after all a pseudo-Joss Whedon TV series, so it's always gonna focus on the interpersonal relationships of our core group. I just don't really find the whole Coulson/Daisy dynamic all that interesting. Fitz/Simmons has potential for good drama this season with her new position on Leo taking to develop LMD's. Mae and her new special teams unit look like they'll just be used for some more action stuff. 

[Annara Snow]

3 hours ago, PetyrPunkinhead said:

Daisy's story line is meh for me. I did dig the look of the Ghost Rider's skull though. I'm still getting used to him in a Charger instead of on a motorcycle. I'm a 90s guy, so Danny Ketch is my true Ghost Rider, but I'll give this new guy a shot. I do like this new shakeup with the power structure shifting among the core team and the "band breaking up." LMD intro'd nicely. Also, are sexy-time Fitz/Simmons over before they really started? And is Talbot the new director of SHIELD, it kinda sounded like that when Simmons and Mae were having their spat? Oh, and get Bobbi back in this ASAP.

No.

The new director is

 

a new character played by Jason O'Mara, and he's supposed to be someone "with MCU ties that go back to 1940s."

Not really much of a spoiler, since it's been in the news, but just in case, since not everyone has seen it, I'm putting it in spoiler tags.

[Annara Snow]

2 hours ago, red snow said:

At this stage in the show what is it actually about? Are they still SHIELD agents? What is their remit? Why do they get arcs with Ghost Rider yet ignore super people in Hell's kitchen and Harlem?.

A better question would be, why did the Avengers (or whatever the individual Avengers and ex-Avengers are calling themselves now), Matt Murdock and everyone else ignore Hive, who was a more serious apocalyptic threat than anyone any of them have faced recently? Why didn't SHIELD call on any of them?

It's a two-way street. Why should AoS bend over backwards to acknowledge what goes on in movies and other shows, when what happens in it is ignored by movies and other shows? Or, why are the Netflix shows so separated from the movies and everything else MCU that's not on Netflix? Heck, apart from one line from Rosario Dawson's character, even Daredevil and Jessica Jones are completely separated. It doesn't make sense to criticize AoS for something that the entirety of MCU is guilty of. It's time to simply acknowledge that all these are different shows and movies that deal with their own storyline. Is there any reason you specifically expect AoS to be the dumping ground for all other shows' and movies' storylines?

[felice]

6 hours ago, PetyrPunkinhead said:

I'm still getting used to him in a Charger instead of on a motorcycle.

It's a bit silly, but I guess it saves a whole bunch on special effects (they don't need to do the flaming skull when he's in the car).

[mormont]

8 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

Why should AoS bend over backwards to acknowledge what goes on in movies and other shows, when what happens in it is ignored by movies and other shows?

Because that's in the interests of their parent company?

[red snow]

21 minutes ago, mormont said:

Because that's in the interests of their parent company?

Pretty much. In terms of success and pecking order it's probably at the bottom too. Why should Netflix and the movies have to worry about a show that has to generate 22 hours of story a year? I think that's how netflix and movies view it.

8 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

 

It's a two-way street. Why should AoS bend over backwards to acknowledge what goes on in movies and other shows, when what happens in it is ignored by movies and other shows?

It should be but it's not - which is what I was stating with "one way street". Netflix has the same issue with the movies in that tv is never mentioned in film but the flms can be mentioned in tv. It must be a mandate by this point.

8 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

 Is there any reason you specifically expect AoS to be the dumping ground for all other shows' and movies' storylines?

dumping ground seems harsh. But AoS is the one property that features an organisation that monitors and polices ALL superhuman activity/threats. That isn't Daredevil or GOTG or even IM/cap's remit - so they don't really need to. It is AoS so if there was one property that should reflect and act as a hub of the MCU that should be it. It's probably due to the lack of interest (or practcalities of different production teams) that AoS hasn't been allowed to be a lynchpin of the MCU which is a shame. Luke Cage not being invited to the Civil War party, while a missed chance still doesn't undermine his show. I think it does for AOS.

 

 

[Annara Snow]

1 hour ago, mormont said:

Because that's in the interests of their parent company?

 

1 hour ago, mormont said:

Because that's in the interests of their parent company?

Clearly the parent company doesn't seem to think that way. I'd think criticizing them from a business standpoint would be the last thing a fan would do, because why do you care? And it's not like they're in trouble in that regard.

1 hour ago, red snow said:

Pretty much. In terms of success and pecking order it's probably at the bottom too. Why should Netflix and the movies have to worry about a show that has to generate 22 hours of story a year? I think that's how netflix and movies view it.

It should be but it's not - which is what I was stating with "one way street". Netflix has the same issue with the movies in that tv is never mentioned in film but the flms can be mentioned in tv. It must be a mandate by this point.

dumping ground seems harsh. But AoS is the one property that features an organisation that monitors and polices ALL superhuman activity/threats. That isn't Daredevil or GOTG or even IM/cap's remit - so they don't really need to. It is AoS so if there was one property that should reflect and act as a hub of the MCU that should be it. It's probably due to the lack of interest (or practcalities of different production teams) that AoS hasn't been allowed to be a lynchpin of the MCU which is a shame. Luke Cage not being invited to the Civil War party, while a missed chance still doesn't undermine his show. I think it does for AOS.

 

 

And the Avengers are supposed to be Earth's mightiest heroes who should logically be called on to help with apocalyptic threats. But no one in their right minds expects Thor, Cap and Iron Man to appear on TV and take over AoS. .

I'm pretty confused as to what exactly it is that you want. They are mentioning the movies on AoS. That's the extent of it, but what else did you expect? AoS season 3 to be about the conflict between Tony and Steve from Civil War? That doesn't even make sense. But the initial complaint a few posts ago was that the superpowered humans from the Netflix shows aren't featured on AoS. So how exactly  do you expect that to work? You want AoS to feature storylines about characters from Daredevil, but Daredevil to then completely ignore them? That makes even less sense.

It's called suspension of  disbelief. Psst, it's fiction. We know how practicalities of movie and TV work. No one sane is going to stop watching the show because they don't spend 5 minutes per episode advertising the next season of Daredevil. Advertising the movies is more than enough (I could personally have done without the random reference to Ultron by Raina in season 2 as well - seriously, guys, anyone interested in MCU movies had already seen the trailers and would watch the movie whether you mentioned it on the show or not. Don't they run promos/trailers for MCU movies during the commercials during AoS on ABC anyway? At least that's what I've heard, I don't live in USA.)

In terms of success and pecking order it's probably at the bottom, too.

So then why are the more successful MCU properties supposedly (according to posters in this thread) in such a dire need of being advertised on the least successful show? That doesn't strike me as a very logical argument.

[Mladen]

9 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

A better question would be, why did the Avengers (or whatever the individual Avengers and ex-Avengers are calling themselves now), Matt Murdock and everyone else ignore Hive, who was a more serious apocalyptic threat than anyone any of them have faced recently? Why didn't SHIELD call on any of them?

Because they are not in the same Universe and the only ones that are deluding themselves are those poor souls in AoS. Plain and simple. They all know that. WE all know that. 

9 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

It's a two-way street. Why should AoS bend over backwards to acknowledge what goes on in movies and other shows, when what happens in it is ignored by movies and other shows? Or, why are the Netflix shows so separated from the movies and everything else MCU that's not on Netflix? Heck, apart from one line from Rosario Dawson's character, even Daredevil and Jessica Jones are completely separated. It doesn't make sense to criticize AoS for something that the entirety of MCU is guilty of. It's time to simply acknowledge that all these are different shows and movies that deal with their own storyline. Is there any reason you specifically expect AoS to be the dumping ground for all other shows' and movies' storylines?

Because AoS needs them, but not the other way around. AoS's "purpose" was to tie all of them and to be the connective tissue between them. It was idealistic and it wasn't working. It is not MCU's fault, it is the fault of those who created the show. They wanted something they knew at the beginning they won't get. And now they moan about that? Give me a break.

The issue is that AoS doesn't know what they want to be. They want to tackle apocalyptic events on their own and they want to be a second fiddle to Avengers. You can't have both ways. Now, I do believe that they should try to stand on their own (how successful they can be in that, one can guess) but the corporate execs will never let them go too rogue. Unless of course it brings them money. And a show on Tuesday's 22:00 slot, I wouldn't bet much money on that.

[mormont]

1 hour ago, Annara Snow said:

Clearly the parent company doesn't seem to think that way.

But... they do. That's why AoS plugs the films but the films don't plug AoS.

I've always understood that one of the things AoS had to do, from Marvel's point of view, was plug the films. It's not ever going to make Marvel the amounts of money the films do, so it has to justify itself at least partly as cross-promotion. (I can't be alone in that understanding, can I?)

For the same reason, the same is not true in reverse. The films make plenty of money and need no other reason to exist. They certainly have no reason to bother trying to promote the TV shows, which would be creatively very difficult for reasons others have already noted (principally, uncertainty due to different production schedules). I mean, it wasn't even certain AoS would get renewed for the current season at all. If you had been plugging it in, say, Civil War it could easily have turned out to be a waste of time.

[red snow]

1 hour ago, Annara Snow said:

 

 

 

 

So then why are the more successful MCU properties supposedly (according to posters in this thread) in such a dire need of being advertised on the least successful show? That doesn't strike me as a very logical argument.

I wouldn't know it's not an argument I made.

1 hour ago, Annara Snow said:

 

 

And the Avengers are supposed to be Earth's mightiest heroes who should logically be called on to help with apocalyptic threats. But no one in their right minds expects Thor, Cap and Iron Man to appear on TV and take over AoS. .

 

So why have AOS cover such apocalyptic events? From what I've gathered the "inhumans" storyline turned out pointless as the film has been dropped. That's not the show's fault but it leaves them hanging.

They could cover stories that don't need the Avengers around. Ghost Rider makes sense as I guess he's not a world ending threat that Avengers (or Dr Strange) need to check out.

1 hour ago, Annara Snow said:

 

 

I'm pretty confused as to what exactly it is that you want. They are mentioning the movies on AoS. That's the extent of it, but what else did you expect? AoS season 3 to be about the conflict between Tony and Steve from Civil War? That doesn't even make sense. But the initial complaint a few posts ago was that the superpowered humans from the Netflix shows aren't featured on AoS. So how exactly  do you expect that to work? You want AoS to feature storylines about characters from Daredevil, but Daredevil to then completely ignore them? That makes even less sense.

 

 

 

 

I've already said. AoS should feel like the hub of the MCU connecting everything. In reality it is the appendix of the MCU - something that's nice to have around but disposable. Some could argue that's sensible as viewers don't like being told what to and when. I remember people being upset about being told this episode happens after Cap2. Although I thought that was the best run of episodes in season 1.

You keep missing my point though - I want all the franchises to feel connected. I'm not intentionally singling AoS out. I think the movies and the netflix shows are losing something by not feeling connected. But AoS' premise is based around being an international taskforce for handling superhuman threats. So yes, Daredevil should maybe be worried about SHIELD knocking on his door. They should at least have a field agent drop in when there's an arcane apocalypse brewing (this'll be more of an issue for the "defenders" season). I certainly think SHIELD should have popped up when there was a guy who could tell everyone in a NYC hospital to go postal. But my point still remains that SHIELD needs this in their format while Daredevil can get by without it - afterall the question is "why aren't SHIELD on top of this" not "why hasn't Daredevil/Jones told this government agency about this threat"

I'm not trying to convince you not to like it. I'm just pointing out an issue I have with the show.

30 minutes ago, Risto said:

Because they are not in the same Universe and the only ones that are deluding themselves are those poor souls in AoS. Plain and simple. They all know that. WE all know that. 

 

It probably is better to view the show in the same light as the CW Arrow-verse shows to the Snyder movies. To highlight how fickle I can be I'd point out that the CW shows have an issue with connecting a bit too often. Although I'd put my underlying issue with the CW shows down to them being pretty bad in general - I wouldn't mind crossovers if the shows involved were all good. From what I've heard on the board most people feel AoS is the best non-netflix superhero show at the moment. So even with the identity issue they put together entertaining episodes. I'd rather have that than the show making the most out of it's premise but being crap.

[Annara Snow]

37 minutes ago, mormont said:

But... they do. That's why AoS plugs the films but the films don't plug AoS.

I've always understood that one of the things AoS had to do, from Marvel's point of view, was plug the films. It's not ever going to make Marvel the amounts of money the films do, so it has to justify itself at least partly as cross-promotion. (I can't be alone in that understanding, can I?)

For the same reason, the same is not true in reverse. The films make plenty of money and need no other reason to exist. They certainly have no reason to bother trying to promote the TV shows, which would be creatively very difficult for reasons others have already noted (principally, uncertainty due to different production schedules). I mean, it wasn't even certain AoS would get renewed for the current season at all. If you had been plugging it in, say, Civil War it could easily have turned out to be a waste of time.

Uh, the conversation started with people complaining that AoS is not referencing stuff from Daredevil. Clearly no one at the parent company thought that was necessary.

[Mladen]

5 minutes ago, Annara Snow said:

Uh, the conversation started with people complaining that AoS is not referencing stuff from Daredevil. Clearly no one at the parent company thought that was necessary.

No. It was just the question of "shared" Universe. If AoS represent the last pillar on which that idea is based, then it is expected that events from all over the Universe is being referenced and that those events impact them. So, AoS have that existential problem with themselves. They were created as the glue, and everyone abandoned them. Basically, AoS is a glue with no pieces to be glued. 

[mormont]

7 minutes ago, Annara Snow said:

Uh, the conversation started with people complaining that AoS is not referencing stuff from Daredevil. Clearly no one at the parent company thought that was necessary.

I can see the confusion, but the comment you made referenced the movies as well as the other TV shows.

I'm not seeing a problem with the lack of connectivity with the Netflix shows. They've tended to stick to plots that don't rise to the level where SHIELD would expect to become aware of them, except after the fact, perhaps: and that don't have repercussions that would require AoS to reference them. Is Coulson aware of some of the incidents in Jessica Jones, for example? Probably. You could drop in an easter egg to that effect. But it's not a problem if you don't.