MCU Multi-thread of Marvels

[Heartofice]

48 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

As to The Boys, we'll, that's pretty far from being a "superhero" story, being it's satire.  Violent, messy, bloody satire...the superhero elements are the hook, as mormont points out.

Not sure I really understand this comment, it raises the question of what is a 'superhero' story. If that is simply about people with super powers punching each other and stopping others destroying the world, then yeah I'm not interested.
 

48 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

The point on story plotting and telling a story are legitimate, but I think you're still setting a bar too high.  The issues within most of the MCU shows isn't in the story, it's in how they've chosen to present them, usually with more story they want to tell, but not enough time to do it. Probably because the cerators never know if they're going to have more time in another season later.

I agree with this, and it's really what I'm saying, the limiting factor here is the format of 6 episodes, and possibly the things going on in production that we don't know about.

In terms of setting the bar too high, I think it's the MCU that is setting that high bar. Wandavision for instance is conceptually the bravest, most interesting thing that has ever appeared in the MCU, and mostly the execution is very good. But it fell flat and my overall impression of the show was much worse than it should be, because I think it really struggled to fill 6 episodes of story or land the ending. Thats my critique, because I see the same pattern happening over and over again.

Moon Knight also a conceptually very good show, Oscar Issac is brilliant in it. Had some good moments, but the format and production meant that on the whole it ending up being a bit of a disappointment. 

When the MCU / Disney promise all these really interesting, creative concepts, with talent behind them, but fall at the last hurdle because they railroaded into making the shows in one way, then it becomes incredibly frustrating. More frustrating than if these were just bog standard run off the mill superhero ideas.

[polishgenius]

27 minutes ago, Ran said:

I can't recall anyone ever arguing that Frank Miller's Daredevil run or his Born Again (both major sources for the Netflix series) are not actually superhero comics.

Yeah, and although it's not inspired in any specific story detail, the Netflix show is also quite close in tone and style to Brubaker's (excellent) run. I get there have been other, more showy and colourful Daredevil stories too, but the Netflix show wasn't a huge departure from at least one common way the comics presented the character. Not that Mormont is in any way obligated to like it, but I don't see a reason to believe it was about being embarrassed about the superhero trappings. 

 

 

 

[Jaxom 1974]

30 minutes ago, Ran said:

 

I can't recall anyone ever arguing that Frank Miller's Daredevil run or his Born Again (both major sources for the Netflix series) are not actually superhero comics. Daredevil's secret identity and his struggles to keep it that way, his traumas that cause his drive to do this thing of putting on a costume and fighting crime, his training by a member of a secret mystical order of ninjas, these are all... well, superhero stuff.

 

Hmmm...Miller's initial Daredevil run is a pure superhero story to me (some of my prized collection is the issues from that run I've been able to get a hold of), but his "Born Again" run is an absolute deconstruction of what it means to be a hero...Miller kinda falls into both categories for me.  For me. 

[DaveSumm]

1 hour ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

The point on story plotting and telling a story are legitimate, but I think you're still setting a bar too high.

I don’t get this at all. You’re into comic book based TV, so sorry, all you can hope for is a 7/10? Nuts to that. Disney has more money, IP’s and visual technology than anyone ever has, if I’m not gonna have high expectations from them, then who? 

[mormont]

1 hour ago, Ran said:

I can't recall anyone ever arguing that Frank Miller's Daredevil run or his Born Again (both major sources for the Netflix series) are not actually superhero comics. Daredevil's secret identity and his struggles to keep it that way, his traumas that cause his drive to do this thing of putting on a costume and fighting crime, his training by a member of a secret mystical order of ninjas, these are all... well, superhero stuff.

They are, absolutely, superhero stories and I can't see why anyone would argue otherwise. I mean DD wears his costume for most of them, fights costumed foes, heck, the Avengers make a guest appearance. 

The series was certainly inspired by these stories but the bits they ditched (or minimised) and the bits they kept (or foregrounded) are instructive. 

I can only repeat that I found Netflix DD to be somewhat ambivalent, at best, about certain elements of its roots in the way that a lot of older superhero TV/movies are. I'll allow that it was surpassed in that by the Netflix Punisher show. But one reason I like the Disney Marvel shows is that they embrace the 'sillier' aspects of their source material. Trick arrows! The Time Variance Authority! S.W.O.R.D.! Khonshu! Even Zemo in F&TWS is moved closer to his comic book version. The Disney shows celebrate the source material. 

[Jaxom 1974]

37 minutes ago, DaveSumm said:

I don’t get this at all. You’re into comic book based TV, so sorry, all you can hope for is a 7/10? Nuts to that. Disney has more money, IP’s and visual technology than anyone ever has, if I’m not gonna have high expectations from them, then who? 

Then we're talking about different, individual bars.  I still get the impression that HoI won't be satisfied with MCU shows unless they're at the level to challenge The Wire or Breaking Bad for positions in the top spots of all time.  

I don't need that. Or sure, it'd be nice if they did, but I'm not going to set my expectations that way.  To do that is to never enjoy anything. I think starting from a more reasonable expectation allows for seeing things in a better light. 

Loki, Hawkeye, WandaVision...even Moon Knight (which I liked less than some others), were all really good. Really enjoyable.  I think Ms. Marvel is setting the bar above them all at the moment.  

Disney can, and should, be giving these shows their best.  I also belive that, even if they are giving their best, there is still opportunities to do more, or different, or even better.

 

[Heartofice]

12 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

Then we're talking about different, individual bars.  I still get the impression that HoI won't be satisfied with MCU shows unless they're at the level to challenge The Wire or Breaking Bad for positions in the top spots of all time.

Then you are getting the wrong impression. I think there are other comic book tv shows that are able to tell a coherent and consistent story, and all I want is for MCU tv shows to be able to do the same. As I said, Boys and Umbrella Academy , stuff like Invincible etc I’d say were better written and put together tv shows than any of the marvel offerings.

Because for me, I’m less bothered about seeing flashy superhero stuff, I want to be told a good story, and it’s the one quality Marvel are falling down on. 

[SpaceChampion]

 

[DaveSumm]

23 minutes ago, SpaceChampion said:

 

“Here’s why we think the change was made” (TLDR; they just make the exact same guesses anyone would, they don’t know).

It’s interesting though, a pretty pointless move if you don’t have something in mind.

[karaddin]

On 7/1/2022 at 11:42 PM, Jaxom 1974 said:

The point on story plotting and telling a story are legitimate, but I think you're still setting a bar too high. 

On 7/2/2022 at 12:29 AM, Heartofice said:

In terms of setting the bar too high, I think it's the MCU that is setting that high bar. Wandavision for instance is conceptually the bravest, most interesting thing that has ever appeared in the MCU, and mostly the execution is very good. But it fell flat and my overall impression of the show was much worse than it should be, because I think it really struggled to fill 6 episodes of story or land the ending. Thats my critique, because I see the same pattern happening over and over again.

I'm with HoI on this, I think the bar that the series are ultimately falling short of is the one they set with some excellent story set up that they're not fully delivering on. I don't think I'd agree that my primary issue would be in the episode 2-5 range, it's mostly just the need to fall back to a typical flashy battle for the finale. And you can say I need to adjust my expectations because they're always going to be that, but I'm only letting my hopes rise because that isn't how they're setting up the stories - just how they're finishing them.

I don't think this criticism really applies to Loki, there was enough flashiness there without it needing to feel like it was falling back to that approach. I'd probably rank them in this order from most to least effected by the finale not matching the series for me

1. WandaVision
2. FatWS
3. Moon Knight
4. Hawkeye
5. Loki

With the first 2 having the good parts undercut by the ending, 3 and 4 not focusing on what I was really enjoying but not feeling like it undercut the parts I enjoyed and Loki being fine.

Ms Marvel has felt at its strongest when its exploring Kamala and her family/community, including her figuring out when to user her powers, but the fights with the antagonists have felt shoe horned in from a different story. 

HoI - If you still haven't watched 4 I thought it was a step up from 3 again, it does have fights in it but the rest of the episode is much more character focused even though its a different city with most of the characters not present.

On 7/2/2022 at 12:05 AM, Ran said:

The Boys is absolutely a superhero story. It's a satire, yes, but it cannot work without the superheroes at all. The superheroes are mostly the thing being satired, after all!

While I agree with your overall point I actually disagree that the superheroes are the primary thing being satirized - the impression I have is that that is true of the comic, but for the show at least I'd say the target is a mix of rainbow capitalism, America, the idea of celebrity and heroes, and toxic masculinity all ahead of superheroes as a concept. Superheroes are the framing device for the rest.

[Heartofice]

Thinking about it more, I think the issues are not just to do with the endings, and the 6 episode format, though that all plays a part, the major problem for all the Marvel properties is that they can't just tell a good story, they need to feed in all the other threads from other movies / shows, past and present and incorporate a number of elements for commercial reasons, and somehow find a way to still tell a good story.

Thats why something like The Boys or Invincible can tell a coherent, well paced story and Wandavision just collapses after a promising start.

I mean Wandavision could have been an amazing show about loss and grief, exploring the mind of Wanda, or taking other elements from Tom Kings Vision comic and explore Visions humanity. The show did that.. a bit, but also had to account for the need to turn Wanda into a villain for Dr Strange 2, the need to introduce Monica Rambeau and set her up as a minor character in future Captain Marvel properties. They needed to tell the story based on the events of previous movies. It all becomes so much harder to tell a good story. It's almost a miracle we get anything better than average.

It's just the same old complaint about Disney really, they have the facade of creativity and the promise of newness, but only within the constraints of making a Disney Marvel thing, with all the limitations that are set up. 

[DMC]

4 hours ago, karaddin said:

1. WandaVision
2. FatWS
3. Moon Knight
4. Hawkeye
5. Loki

With the first 2 having the good parts undercut by the ending, 3 and 4 not focusing on what I was really enjoying but not feeling like it undercut the parts I enjoyed and Loki being fine.

Agree with you on WandaVision (I think most would), but I'm not sure what you were expecting with Falcon & Winter Soldier.  First of all, it was decidedly my least favorite Marvel series (albeit I have not seen Moon Knight nor Ms. Marvel) - it was a very generic show all the way through which dabbled its feet in some very dicey racial terrain but predictably couldn't pull it off - the finale definitely didn't ruin it for me.  Second, if there's gonna be one series that follows the standard MCU format of big CGI climax, it makes perfect sense it's gonna be the one about replacing Captain America.

[Heartofice]

Reviews I've seen so far for Thor: Love and Thunder seem.. pretty mediocre. Bit of a shame. I'll still watch it eventually on Disney+ but this is just one more Phase 4 disappointment to add to the list.

[karaddin]

4 hours ago, DMC said:

Agree with you on WandaVision (I think most would), but I'm not sure what you were expecting with Falcon & Winter Soldier.  First of all, it was decidedly my least favorite Marvel series (albeit I have not seen Moon Knight nor Ms. Marvel) - it was a very generic show all the way through which dabbled its feet in some very dicey racial terrain but predictably couldn't pull it off - the finale definitely didn't ruin it for me.  Second, if there's gonna be one series that follows the standard MCU format of big CGI climax, it makes perfect sense it's gonna be the one about replacing Captain America.

It's the second oldest and least memorable so maybe that criticism doesn't fit it all well. I think in the middle I was still hoping it was going to be a better exploration of the blip and it's fall out but it really just wound up as lip service followed by an action finale i didn't find very exciting.

[DMC]

20 minutes ago, karaddin said:

think in the middle I was still hoping it was going to be a better exploration of the blip

Yeah I woulda liked to see more of that too.

[RumHam]

I don't understand why Jane Foster is referred to as "Mighty Thor" in reviews and in general. Someone else wants to be Captain America, Black Panther, or even Iron Man that makes sense. But Thor isn't a title or a mantle. It's the dude's name!

[Corvinus85]

1 hour ago, RumHam said:

I don't understand why Jane Foster is referred to as "Mighty Thor" in reviews and in general. Someone else wants to be Captain America, Black Panther, or even Iron Man that makes sense. But Thor isn't a title or a mantle. It's the dude's name!

Blame the comic books. Maybe she should be called Mjolnir after the hammer. 

[RumHam]

2 minutes ago, Corvinus85 said:

Blame the comic books. Maybe she should be called Mjolnir after the hammer. 

Mew-mew!

[Kalbear]

1 hour ago, RumHam said:

I don't understand why Jane Foster is referred to as "Mighty Thor" in reviews and in general. Someone else wants to be Captain America, Black Panther, or even Iron Man that makes sense. But Thor isn't a title or a mantle. It's the dude's name!

In the comics it is literally a title. Mjolnir reads (paraphrasing) whoever shall be worthy wields the power of Thor. 

Thor has in the comics been a dude, another dude, a woman, a frog, and a weird alien thing. 

[sifth]

1 hour ago, KalVsWade said:

In the comics it is literally a title. Mjolnir reads (paraphrasing) whoever shall be worthy wields the power of Thor. 

Thor has in the comics been a dude, another dude, a woman, a frog, and a weird alien thing. 

So what’s Thor’s “real” name? If it is in fact just a title.