Gatsby77

This analysis only fits if you ignore her entire Vers persona - that, just like we meet the human Danvers well into her decorated career as a fighter (and test fighter) pilot, we also meet her years into her career as a Kree space warrior. So it makes absolute sense that she'd adapt to her new powers quickly - they were a natural extension of her existing space fighting (and hand-to-hand combat) skills.

No - she has few weaknesses because, by the time we meet her, she's already a decorated Air Force fighter pilot - and one of the first women to have reached that rank. She simply exhibits all the skill, cockiness and arrogance inherent in that position - like meeting Wonder Woman in the beginning of 1984, when she's already been functioning in her superhero role for 70+ years. However, we later learn that - to get there, to reach that level of skill and confidence she has when we first meet her, Danvers endured having been put down, knocked down, belittled and told "no" throughout 90% of her journey, from her early childhood, through flight school, and even in her Vers persona during training by Yon-Rogg. And it has taken a large psychic toll, because deep down - she *still* doesn't believe she's worthy - doesn't have the true inner confidence to recognize the full extent of her powers and defeat the inhibitor chip that had been holding her back from realizing her true nature. Only once she does so does she have the ability to: a) defeat Yon-Rogg b) truly become Captain Marvel

I still disagree with the hate Brie Larson got from a lot of folks on here for her performance. Folks complained she was too arrogant, a "Mary Sue" or didn't have enough of a character arc - with growth and change. To the last point - well, then you just weren't paying attention. But to the first two points: She was a U.S. Military pilot - and (along with her partner) one of the first women to hit that rank - the arrogance is deserved. Perfect parallel: Phoenix in Top Gun: Maverick Similarly arrogant, not much of an arc - because she was introduced as one of the "best of the best" and ultimately lived up to it, despite having to ditch her jet at one point due to bird strike. Monica Barbaro played Phoenix in Top Gun: Maverick exactly as Brie Larson played Carol Danvers in Captain Marvel - yet Larson gets hate for her characterization.

Bumping this thread, as I'd love the chance to upgrade my Doctor Solar set to a solid CGC 9.4+. See here in "WTB." I'm looking for 7 books, all in CGC 9.4 or better. Will settle for CGC 9.2 as noted: # 2 # 5 # 7 # 11 (9.2 or better) # 22 # 27 (9.2 or better) # 31 (9.2 or better) Paying market or better.

? So you didn't like it because she got away? Again - they *had* to let her go, lest she simply kill them all.

Solid points, but your characterization of Wanda here (with which I largely agree) shows that she was well-drawn -- "humanized," "compelling and realistic," as it were, rather than a "buffoon." If you're going switch tacks from asking for a villain that is - rather than not simply two-dimensional and cartoonish but rather one that is truly scary and pure evil, that's a different kettle of fish. As far as comic books stories go, my answer for a recent example is easy: Kilgrave/Purple Man in Jessica Jones. The writers did him dirty in Season 2, but Season 1's portrayal of him, his powers, and his single-minded desire to destroy Jessica Jones made him truly frightening. And it started with the final scene of the very first episode - with the elevator murders. That was chilling to watch - especially after we'd been led into a false sense of security/catharsis just minutes before.

But it made perfect sense with her arc. In this scene, Monica Rambeau, the CIA, military, etc. are all perfectly aware that Wanda can simply snap at any time, killing them all. She's still insane and incredibly powerful - therefore eminently dangerous - they literally have no choice but to let her go. Also - this isn't the last scene -- the actual final scene is of her, alone in the house by the lake, studying the Darkhold, actively preparing to level up her already formidable powers - which at the time we already knew was a direct lead-in Doctor Strange 2.

Nah - a few counterpoints re. recent well-drawn villains: 1) Thanos - he had a point re. over-population - an understandable worldview - mixed with the appropriate contempt for the Avengers et. al. who he assumed (largely rightfully) were beneath him. A perfect example of this was the arrogance - and failure - of both Starlord and Thor to kill him when they had they had their respective chances - and failed to do so (er...at least Starlord's temper tantrum prevented Thanos's death). 2) Killmonger - another villain who had a point - yes - perhaps too simplistic in his playing Malcolm X to Black Panther's Martin Luther King, but he took an appropriately anti-isolationism stance for Wakanda that ultimately won out by film's end - even if not in the way Killmonger envisioned. There was nuance and complexity there - not cartoonish buffoonism. 3) Wanda - and her through-line from Infinity War through Dr. Strange 2. First, she comes close to besting Thanos in Endgame - which was even more underscored by Thanos's opening comment to her: "I don't even know who you are." Then, WandaVision was masterful - and that the ultimate villain was Wanda herself - driven mad by grief. I long said - before the show even started, that what I wanted from it was simple. To show that 1) Wanda was one of the most powerful characters in the MCU (check) and 2) that she was bat-mess f-----ng crazy (check). The series provided that in spades. And that characterization is canonical - see the House of M storyline in the comics. Which logically brings us to Dr. Strange 2 - showing Wanda at the height of her villainy, powers, and ultimately, just...broken-ness (goes back to her being absolutely insane). I don't think any of these villains were "dumbed down" for Disney audiences - nor do I think Disney is going in that direction overall. For me, a key litmus test will be the new Daredevil series - the Netflix show left a tough act to follow, but Born Again was a classic - and brutal storyline, one of the best in Daredevil's 50+ year history. Kingpin was portrayed by the Netflix series with far more depth, subtlety and empathy than I ever expected - even by the end of season 1, we understand how he came to be the man he now is, even if we can't condone it. He wasn't "dumbed down" for the audience in any way.

So...this is now on Disney+ - just two months to the day after its theatrical release? Wow... I'm old enough to remember when you had to wait 6-9 months after a film had left theaters for a VHS release.

Chasing Amy is an incredibly good movie - and basically made Affleck a star. But Mallrats was a part of my childhood. It may not have been *good* but it had some stand-out scenes, including the the sailboat, "Brenda?," Stan Lee, and the first time I recall seeing Ben Affleck in an adult role (although my 6th grade science class watched the whole PBS miniseries "Voyage of the Mimi," featuring him at like 12 years old).

The screening here in DC is Saturday, Sep. 10. $37, but - as the above poster notes, the main draw is the post-screening Q+A with Smith afterwards.

This. Hard to argue he's not a main character when he got the 2nd-most screen-time in TFA and the 3rd-most screen-time in the second and third films. And got more screen-time in every film than Kylo Ren. Given that, the *only* legitimate gripes he can have are either: 1) Poe got one more minute of screen-time than him in The Rise of Skywalker (boo hoo!); or 2) His story was largely relegated to side quests in the second & third movies. Yes - the weird planet side quest in The Last Jedi wasn't a main part of the plot - but honestly the only thing I was truly disappointed in re. his story was how quickly the Finn/Captain Phasma battle was completed (she got <2 minutes of screen time in that film).

? I always assumed Poe was set up to be the Han Solo of the trilogy - and that seemed validated when he was reprimanded for insubordination by Adm. Holdo in TLJ. Granted - there's no perfect parallel between the 7-9 and 10-12, because the latter trilogy had more "main" characters. You go from: Luke/Leia/Han to Rey/Kylo/Poe/Finn/Rose.

If one of the stated reasons for Affleck's replacing Keaton in Aquaman 2 is because, continuity-wise, Keaton's Batman first appears in The Flash... This means the earliest they're planning to release The Flash is now 2024.

? Gaiman has said Season 2 is in doubt. That's my words - a lose, but accurate paraphrase of the screenshot @Troy.Division posted above. One person stated, on Twitter, "I don't understand why Season 2 is even a question." And Neil Himself responded: "Because Sandman is a really expensive show...So yes, we've been the top show in the world the past two weeks. That still may not be enough." He then reiterates the renewal uncertainty throughout many responses to that tweet yesterday and today. There's literally no other way to read the exchange - or the thrust of his other tweets on the subject over the last 24 hours.

Exactly. As I said initially further up the page, our highlighting that Gaiman has publicly said Season 2 is in doubt and his actively attempting to rally the fans to help ensure it becomes a reality... Isn't being negative...just realistic. For me, The Sandman didn't even start getting good until after A Doll's House - and several of my favorite stories were in the 50s. I don't need four seasons because honestly, The Kindly Ones and The Wake were weak sauce. But I absolutely want another two seasons that take us solidly through # 19-56.

Well, for one thing, an 84% audience score isn't that far off from 73%. But more importantly - both are hugely expensive shows - and as much as I hate to admit it, Mark Millar's a far more proven box office draw than Gaiman. Yes - Gaiman's the better, more celebrated writer - but Millar's work has made movie studios (Netflix aside) far more money than they've lost. Including: Wanted Kick- Kingsmen: The Secret Service Logan Captain America: Civil War The point is, Gaiman himself has said that, as of last night, Season 2 of the Sandman is still in doubt.

Again, ? Neil never compared the Sandman results to that of Jupiter's Legacy -- I did. ...Because it was also a "really expensive" comic book-based show, debuted at # 1 on Netflix and was still cancelled. Later on down the thread, Gaiman notes that if Netflix passes, it could still be picked up by another streaming service. Had nothing to do with Good Omens.

? Not negative - just realistic. And it was Gaiman himself who issued the warning. Frankly, it's not a good sign that it fell to # 2 in ~10 days, despite the episode 11 release and rebound. (But again - it's largely irrelevant - Netflix's key renewal metric is new subscriber attraction and retention - metrics that are far more complex than simply "everybody watched this.") Interestingly, in that Twitter thread he also noted: 1) Should Netflix pass on a Season 2, it would be offered to competing streamers; and 2) Even if it were renewed tomorrow, we wouldn't see Season 2 until at least 2024.

I was afraid of this. A reminder: Jupiter's Legacy was # 1 its first week of release as well. And Netflix's metrics aren't just "how many people watched" but rather "how many new subscribers watched?"

See above - with the photo of the 1989 # 1. She's been snarky for 30+ years now - and the Byrne series was clearly marked satire - taking the out of the typical superhero books (and tropes) of the day.

She-Hulk's been breaking the fourth wall since before Deadpool first appeared. Heck - she even does so on the cover of the first issue of the 1989 Byrne reboot.

Episode 11 is easily my second-favorite, after 6. Both parts were really well done - and exactly what I wanted more of - adaptations of the single-issue stories once the series was beginning to really hit its stride. Raises my overall rating for the series to B+. But it also solidifies in my mind the parallels to Black Mirror - which felt similarly uneven, with episodes ranging from mediocre to masterpiece, often back-to-back.

I'm with you. Finished this last week and have been trying to decide where I land on it since. And here it is: Uneven, and ultimately a bit disappointing. Grade B, which includes a large positive curve just for trying it at all - and hope for better episodes in future seasons. My actual grade for the season would be C+. I found episodes 1-6 to be far stronger than episodes 7-10 -- with 5+6 being the two best episodes - and only ones I've re-watched so far. Granted - I didn't really like most of the first dozen issues of Sandman - and think the series only really hit its stride with the single-issue stories that came later (including 18-20, 30, 38, 50-56). Sure, I'd be down for multi-episode arcs of Season of the Mists or A Game of You, but honestly the issues I still recall vividly 25+ years later are all single-issue stories (including 8+13, which were brilliantly combined here in episode 6). Bottom line: I hope it gets renewed for at least 2 more seasons and continues to improve.

Silvermane's back?