Marvel Cinematic Universe General Discussion: The reboot

[polishgenius]

1. Cap: Winter Soldier

2. Thor 2

3. Avengers

4. Iron Man 3

5. Guardians of the Galaxy

6. Thor

7. Iron Man

8. Hulk
9. Iron Man 2

10. Cap 1

I'm hoping for as big a step up in phase 3 as phase 2 was over 1.

[protar]

To copypasta from another forum where I'm having the same discussion:

I didn't care for Guardians. There was a distinct lack of character development both in the villain (though that's nothing new for Marvel) and more importantly in the heroes. Unlike Avengers the ensemble cast just didn't click. And without any grounding in good characters, the wacky setting fell flat for me. I didn't hate it, I've liked all the Marvel films. But relative to most of the rest of them I disliked it.

To elaborate on my anticipations - I'm strangely more looking forward to IWP1, though it's very close of course. I just think it will be really interesting to see how a mostly brand new team will be handled. Will it culminate in the same levels of awesomeness as Avengers 1 and it's build up? Or will we be left wishing for more Iron Man, Thor, Cap etc?

Civil War just seems like a huge shakeup, and a central part of phase 3 going forward. It seems like it will define much of the phase. Can't not be excited.

The new properties: Inhumans, Cpt. Marvel, Strange and Black Panther all rank very highly. But I've ranked the latter two a little lower, kind of for opposite reasons. Black Panther because while I'm sure it will be a fun film, and the first black lead film, I don't know what knew avenue it's opening up for the MCU. And Strange because it's definitely opening up a new avenue, a very weird and wonderful one - magic. And as the last avenue opening film (Guardians and the cosmic avenue) fell flat for me, I'm apprehensive, but optimistic. And as Ragnarok is being sold as Phase 3's Winter Soldier, and I loved Winter Soldier, I'm ranking it above BP and Strange, even if I don't hugely care for Thor.

Spiderman, I've been excited for in the immediate presence with the news coming out that he's with Marvel. But overall, I think I've had my fill of Spidey for now. That will change in a couple of years no doubt. And Ant-man I'm kind of just waiting to see what's going to happen, and due to my relative dislike of Guardians, GotG2 comes last for me. Though of course I'm excited for them all.

[protar]

And as for my rankings of Hulk and Cap: You know it's odd, I would have thought I'd rank them much lower. But actually going through it that seems about right. And as much as I love the MCU, when I really sit down to think about it the only real gems are Winter Soldier, Avengers and the original Iron Man. There's a huge gap between them and the other films in my estimations. The Thor films have never been my favourites, so I've got to put them sort of in the low-middle. And the Iron Man sequels never really managed to touch the original. Maybe that's partly nostalgia.

Maybe that's why I like the Hulk a lot more than most as well - I remember the excitement of seeing Tony in the post-credits, speculating with my brother and sister what that might mean, and not even coming close to envisioning the future. I see it as sort of like the forgotten Marvel movie. What with the recasting and the lack of the Ross' and Abomination and Leader returning. It feels so separate and it's got a rather dark and low-key tone at odds with the fairly consistent light-hearted epicness of the future MCU films. Maybe I'd even put it above Captain America 1 with more consideration.

[Jack Bauer 24]

http://ign.com/videos/2015/02/14/should-there-be-a-fantastic-four-and-x-men-crossover-movie-the-superhero-show

Thoughts?

[protar]

http://ign.com/videos/2015/02/14/should-there-be-a-fantastic-four-and-x-men-crossover-movie-the-superhero-show

Thoughts?

I see it as a very likely possibility if F4 does well. The first film will probably have little in the ways of hinting at a shared universe - there's been a lack of faith in the F4 reboot for various reasons so I doubt Fox will be confident enough to do it right away like Marvel did. If F4 does poorly, it can be discarded with no impact on the X-men films and hopefully the F4 rights will go back to Marvel Studios. But if it does well, then a cross-over seems almost assured. It doesn't really give them the scope to do anything on the level of the MCU though, and it will always be about the X-men first, and F4 second. As always seems to be the case with the F4, the main boon they offer is not themselves but the villains. Doom, Galactus, The Skrulls - all villains who could provide a lot of fuel for the X-men films. Although Doom may be ruined by the whole antisocial blogger thing.

[RumHam]

Why did you all leave Snakes on a Plane off your lists? You know he's just Nick Fury going under an alias in that movie. "Neville Flynn" come on. They just deleted the scene where a snake bit his eye.

[The King in Black]

Iron Man is the best. I rank it absurdly high.

[Good Guy Garlan]

I think I'm probably alone in this, but I care more about the MCU getting the rights back of the villains than of the heroes. Like, I don't really care about the F4, but I want Annihilus, Galactus, the Skrulls, and Doom (especially Doom because I need to see a live-action Latveria in my lifetime, not a fucking blog), and I care way more about Venom than Spidey

And Venom on the MCU would mean one step closer to a Thunderbolts movie, which is what I want more than anything comic related

Also, I never thought I'd agree with Kevin Smith, but I think instead of paying billions for a shaky deal with Sony to get Spidey, Marvel should've made a Jessica Drew movie. Just like how they're going to use the Inhumans as their alternative to mutants, they could've used Spider Woman instead of Spider Man

[protar]

Marvel didn't actually pay any money to get Spiderman "back." And correct me if I'm wrong but Spider Woman is pretty much a different character entirely, without much actual connection to Spiderman. Different origins, different powers. She certainly doesn't have the draw of Spiderman, so it's obvious why they did the deal.

[Good Guy Garlan]

Marvel didn't actually pay any money to get Spiderman "back." And correct me if I'm wrong but Spider Woman is pretty much a different character entirely, without much actual connection to Spiderman. Different origins, different powers. She certainly doesn't have the draw of Spiderman, so it's obvious why they did the deal.

Well, I've heard rumors that Marvel does want to pay for Spiderman eventually, because otherwise it would be kind of like fixing a broken toy just so other people can play with it (and break it again). But these are all rumors, mind you

And yep, you're right, Jessica Drew has no real connection to Spiderman (other than a terrible storyline in some bullshit Spiderverse), but it could've been a way for Marvel to earn points by making a movie with a female lead and to offer something new, because let's be real, I think everyone's suffering a bit of Spiderman fatigue lately, especially if they decide to go with yet another reboot this time around

[Nictarion]

1. Guard of the Galaxy

2. The Avengers

3. Cap Winter Soldier

4. Iron Man

Didn't care much for any of the others.

[mormont]

The problem with bringing up Jessica Drew is that it just highlights how many times Marvel have tried, over the years, to get a female Spider-Man equivalent to stick - and usually failed. Jessica Drew, Julia Carpenter, May Parker, Mattie Franklin, and now Gwen Stacy and Cindy Moon, not counting various other alternative-universe or future versions. There's nothing Marvel would like more than if they had a female Spider-character they could use that was a fraction as popular as Spider-Man, but they don't.

[protar]

Well, I've heard rumors that Marvel does want to pay for Spiderman eventually, because otherwise it would be kind of like fixing a broken toy just so other people can play with it (and break it again). But these are all rumors, mind you

And yep, you're right, Jessica Drew has no real connection to Spiderman (other than a terrible storyline in some bullshit Spiderverse), but it could've been a way for Marvel to earn points by making a movie with a female lead and to offer something new, because let's be real, I think everyone's suffering a bit of Spiderman fatigue lately, especially if they decide to go with yet another reboot this time around

Well the impression I got was that from now on, while Sony still has the rights to the Spiderman films, Marvel has to have some involvement in them - even if it is ultimately Sony who has the final creative power. And that is potentially worrying should Sony ever get back on their feet. So it may be that Marvel chooses to just outright buy Spiderman and put things to rest once and for all. But even in that case I think it will be well worth it. Spider Woman just isn't the draw that Spiderman is.

Mormont, forgive my ignorance but when you say May Parker was Spider Woman, please tell me you're talking about I don't know, Peter's daughter named after his aunt, and not that Aunt May became spider woman? :laugh:

[Jon AS]

The problem with bringing up Jessica Drew is that it just highlights how many times Marvel have tried, over the years, to get a female Spider-Man equivalent to stick - and usually failed. Jessica Drew, Julia Carpenter, May Parker, Mattie Franklin, and now Gwen Stacy and Cindy Moon, not counting various other alternative-universe or future versions. There's nothing Marvel would like more than if they had a female Spider-character they could use that was a fraction as popular as Spider-Man, but they don't.

The alternate universe May Parker Spider-Girl had a run of more than 100 issues, that's quite a lot. Obviously not the same as Spider-Man, but how many other characters last that long in solo series, and how many female ones? Her disadvantage seemed to be that she was the only part of that universe that caught on.

[Good Guy Garlan]

Well, at this point it'd be easier to say who hasn't been Spiderman in Marvel comics (personally I prefer that fucking pig over the "Superior" Spiderman. Thanks god for the reboot), but Jessica Drew is different as she has the most fans compared to the other Spider Women, although not as much as Spiderman, obviously, due in part to her relatively recent spotlight in the Secret Invasion arc

[mormont]

protar: yes, though plotlines involving Aunt May have at times been just as silly. ;)

Jon: it's not that the characters have been failures in comic-book terms - after all, Jessica Drew has been around for thirty-odd years. It's that none succeeded in doing what Marvel really wanted, which was give them a character that had at least a proportion of the same cultural significance (and hence marketing power) of Spider-Man. (And of course, specifically in the female market.) None of the various female Spider-characters have even reached, say, Batgirl or Supergirl status.

[Good Guy Garlan]

protar: yes, though plotlines involving Aunt May have at times been just as silly. ;)

Jon: it's not that the characters have been failures in comic-book terms - after all, Jessica Drew has been around for thirty-odd years. It's that none succeeded in doing what Marvel really wanted, which was give them a character that had at least a proportion of the same cultural significance (and hence marketing power) of Spider-Man. (And of course, specifically in the female market.) None of the various female Spider-characters have even reached, say, Batgirl or Supergirl status.

Agreed, but the MCU is a way to give characters a brand name. After all, it's not like Groot was a best-selling name before the GotG, right?

[protar]

Agreed, but the MCU is a way to give characters a brand name. After all, it's not like Groot was a best-selling name before the GotG, right?

I think in that respect a Spider Woman movie would have been dragged down by Spiderman. The Guardians where an obscure team, but they could stand on their own. Spider Woman would inevitably draw cries of "where's Spiderman?" and "what a ripoff, Marvel's just making up stuff to try and compensate for not having Spider Man."

[mormont]

Agreed, but the MCU is a way to give characters a brand name. After all, it's not like Groot was a best-selling name before the GotG, right?

And even after it, he doesn't have anything like Spider-Man's brand name.

[Bastard of Boston]

The problem with bringing up Jessica Drew is that it just highlights how many times Marvel have tried, over the years, to get a female Spider-Man equivalent to stick - and usually failed. Jessica Drew, Julia Carpenter, May Parker, Mattie Franklin, and now Gwen Stacy and Cindy Moon, not counting various other alternative-universe or future versions. There's nothing Marvel would like more than if they had a female Spider-character they could use that was a fraction as popular as Spider-Man, but they don't.

I think Spider-Gwen has potential to be something pretty awesome. Her character design has been so well-received, she was a hit even before she first appeared in a comic. It'll be interesting, with the maybe-maybe not reboot/"reshuffling" of the Marvel U, to see whether she'll be inserted as a main universe version of the character, or remain an alt reality version. Keeping her as an alt reality version somewhat negates stock, as she'll never be considered "real." Then again, establishing her within the main Marvel U wipes one of the more iconic storylines in not just Spidey history, but comic history. However, I suppose if Marvel is "reshuffling" (at the least), who knows how much of their history they're maintaining, anyway.

Cindy Moon was a really weird creation. It seems like she was decided upon pre-Spider-Gwen, then Gwen became a meme and got her own book because of it, so now Silk is just...there. Ultimately, Marvel will have three spider women with ongoings in the coming months. I honestly don't see Cindy Moon lasting more than a couple arcs.