@therealsilvermane

China, the government not the people, is the root of all evil. They seriously need to get over themselves. Too bad there isn't a Shang Chi in reality, 'cause maybe he could get rid of that jerk president over there who decided to make himself dictator for life.

As far as the comics go, I say the Stark we first met in Iron Man was a far stretch from that guy. The Tony Stark in the comics wasn't a funny slacker industrialist who just wants to party. In fact, the Tony Stark in the comics was more of an Errol Flynn-Howard Hughes type in the 60's then transitioned to more of a Tom Selleck type in the 80's and 90's and wasn't really written as a funny guy. He was kind of boring actually. But forgetting about the comics and considering the movie archetype dashing playboy billionaire and also the archetype superhero, Robert Downey Jr was not that. Robert Downey Jr made a career of playing twerps and outsiders, from Weird Science and Back to School to even the more recent Yellow Layer Cake or whatever it's called. And RDJ also wasn't on anyone's sexiest man alive lists, either. Of course, when fans heard of the RDJ casting, many first thought, of course, Downey being a drug addict he can relate to the Tony Stark Demon in a Bottle storyline which was hardly touched on in the movies, maybe like 1% in Iron Man 2 where Stark goes on a party binge because he's dying. Drug problems aside, IMO, Robert Downey Jr was still cast against type because I don't think he fit a lot of people's image of an archetype super-hero.

Great, you were confused by my last sentence there, but what did you think of the rest of my previous sentences in said post or is it all just generally confusing for you?

Yeah, I admit it's kind of a weird concept for normal folks to wrap their heads around. But it's something a film director or casting director might get...

I don't think I used the term "out of the box" in reference to Marvel's casting. I said "casting against type," which isn't as strong a term. What I mean is rather than selecting typical square jaw pretty faces that fans love to cast or other studios usually go with, Marvel cast more personality types like Robert Downey Jr, Paul Rudd, Anthony Mackie, or Simu Liu. A poll of folks on China's streets said they didn't think Simu Liu was "attractive" enough to be a super-hero, but as I said, Marvel looks past that sort of stuff because the actor's personality is so important to these MCU characters living and breathing in a fictional world for a decade or so. Even Chadwick Boseman didn't initially strike me as the "prince of Africa" type. Sure, sometimes you have to go with handsome chiseled type like Chris Evans or Hemsworth, but it helps to have that when you're introducing to the world somebody who's Mr America or a Norse god. I remember somebody once telling me they didn't think Brie Larson was that "hot." She's pretty for sure, but yeah, not really the bikini model type. It's obvious for Carol Danvers, Marvel wanted something besides that. It really seems that in a lot of the actors chosen for the MCU, Chris Hemsworth aside, there seemed to be a desire to cast actors who looked more "normal" and less "unattainably beautiful" and perhaps wanted folks who rely more on their personality or background. There might even be a slight uneasiness in casting these slightly off-center actors which gives the films a little more cinematic energy.

I didn't actually refer to Kevin Feige as being the sole genius over at Marvel Studios responsible for everything in the MCU. To clarify, as I see it, the "genius" effort over at Marvel Studios has been a collective of talented filmmakers, writers, and producers steered by Kevin Feige's leadership to create a movie franchise filled with different voices that has changed the world. The "collective" aspect is important, and while "collective genius" isn't technically a thing, it is more what I meant.

Genius isn't reserved for science genius. There's genius in the arts, too. Michaelangelo and Beethoven are considered genius. Prince is considered a genius. Gordon Ramsey can be considered a genius of the cuisine arts. Movie genius is a thing and it isn't just reserved for film school favorites like Orson Welles or Terence Malick. In the realm of blockbuster moviemaking, you can also have your geniuses who bring something that wasn't there before or reshape things in ways that weren't thought of. George Lucas could be considered such a guy. James Cameron is a genius of blockbuster moviemaking who changed the art form more recently. Similarly, the guys and gals at Marvel Studios have collectively changed blockbuster moviemaking forever. That takes talent, hard work, and yeah, genius. Imagine a world with and without the MCU. They changed it.

Well to me, the greatest out of the box casting of all time is Michael Keaton as Batman. Hordes of fans almost beat down the gates of Warner Bros in response to Tim Burton, another movie genius, casting Keaton as Bruce Wayne. I don't know about Heath Ledger or Ben Affleck as out of the box, but the thing with Chris Pratt is I think so many folks were unfamiliar with either him or Peter Quill. I myself had never watched Community or Parks and Rec or whatever that show was, and I wasn't that familiar with Star-Lord who'd had two versions: the serious 70's-80's flying guy and then the one from the 2000's Annihilation Conquest story where Keith Giffen re-imagined him as a funny guy in charge of misfits, much like the final cinema Guardians. Adding that Guardians didn't seem like a traditional super-hero flick but more of a fun outer space adventure from the trailer, I think there was maybe too much unfamiliarity there to qualify as casting against type.

Stan Lee himself would take ideas from other places, and along with Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko, made magic with it. Genius doesn't always have to be creative genius. Sometimes it can be taking something that's there already and shaping it and perfecting it for what's needed at the time. That's what Feige, this Maisel guy I guess, and the creators/writers at Marvel Studios have done. These cinematic versions of Marvel characters we all grew up with are, in my mind, the characters in their final perfect cinematic form. You're just not going to get any better than seeing Tony Stark and Steve Rogers staring down each other in the Civil War movie. Life isn't perfect, but Marvel Studios' casting has been (with a few hiccups in the beginning with like Hulk and stuff).

Robert Downey Jr was completely and totally an off-center casting. The guy was drug addict, a habitual offender, and not the dictionary picture of what you'd imagine a billionaire playboy super-hero looking like. But Kevin Feige and Jon Favreau cast him and fought for him, and it was brilliant. Besides Chris Hemsworth, hardly any of the heroes they cast are that perfect square jaw actor fans salivate over with their fan castings. With a couple exceptions, they cast comedians, nerds, and weirdos, and it's paid off.

So by that measure, anybody could have done what Marvel Studios has done? If Geoff Johns was the head honcho of Marvel Studios would they have pulled off the same magic? I think not. What Kevin Feige and co. have done is unique and it changed the world. I call that genius.

As I see it, geniuses come in all different shapes, sizes, and skill sets. Technically, you only need a 140 IQ to be considered "genius." But not all geniuses set the world on fire. So let's say Kevin Feige and the folks at Marvel Studios are talented movie geniuses who work their butts off and have, as a result, kinda changed the world. I hope you see the MCU as more than just clever marketing. There's been a certain brilliance to the way they've handled the whole thing, from the first Iron Man film to the Falcon and the Winter Soldier series. As I see it, part of that brilliance has been their casting. They cast actors who were all a little off-center from what you might expect in a super-hero aka they cast against type. Rather than cast some real life bad*ss or actor/underwear model with a square jaw or Mr/Miss Universe face, they chose weirdos and outcasts for the most part. Robert Downey Jr is Exhibit A of that. Scarlet Johannsen was the last person I'd have thought of when considering a super-hero spy lady, but she ended up being perfect. I'd have never thought of Paul Rudd, a traditional funny guy, as a super-hero but he's been brilliant as Ant-Man. In the beginning, Chadwick Boseman didn't fit my initial impression of what a prince of Africa might look like, but the guy is T'Challa now. Knowing that these same actors will live and grow with these roles for at least a decade, Marvel cast these actors with the idea that their personalities and traits will embody and flesh out these fictional characters. Robert Downey Jr IS Tony Stark. The sense of social justice and the optimism of Chris Evans is part of who Captain America is now. Carol Danvers as Ms. Marvel was created by Stan Lee and Gerry & Carla Conway to be not only Marvel's answer to TV's Wonder Woman, but also their appeal to the growing feminist movement. So why not cast Brie Larson who is an outspoken feminist and leader of the #MeToo Movement, a talented Oscar winning actress, and someone who played a captive rape victim just like Carol Danvers herself once was in an infamous Avengers storyline? I know some folks hate Brie for that very same activism, but you can't win battles by making friends of everyone. Elizabeth Olsen also was perfect as Wanda. I mean, she just looks like a witch even resembling Sissy Spacek's Carrie, the ultimate cinema witch. And in WandaVision, we saw that perfect casting finally pay off. I'd have never thought they'd find the perfect Thor, but they did. There's a lot of genius level things that Kevin Feige and the Marvel Studios creators did to make the MCU the biggest movie franchise in the world, but in my mind, their casting has been the most important.

Must be a darn good movie if Marvel Studios feels it hasn't needed any tweaking at all as long as it's been sitting.

Nah, Marvel Studios and Kevin Feige, geniuses that they are, got it right the first time...

Like I said, I don't know what that is but maybe I could recognize the honest attempt at it in a movie when compared to past films. Sometimes it's hard to discern it I think when it's a scene between a man and a woman as it's many times about romance or flirting. With woman to woman scenes, that can be better I think at fleshing out the experience. For instance, in the MCU: In Iron Man dir. by Jon Favreau, the first lady to lady experience is Pepper and Angie the Vanity Fair reporter kinda fighting over Tony. Not exactly a giant leap for womankind in the MCU. In GOTG Vol 1 & 2 dir by James Gunn, Gamora and Nebula really just fight with each other until they have the "I just wanted a sister" moment in Vol 2, which was sweet, but maybe a little cheesy and forced. In Ant-Man and the Wasp dir by Peyton Reed, Hope Van Dyne spends part of the movie kicking butt and part of the movie complaining and telling the guys to stop joking. She gets her moment with Janet Van Dyne but by then so much is going on that it feels rushed. In Captain Marvel co-dir. by Anna Boden, for the first time in an MCU film, I saw an attempt at real substantial interactions between women characters that took up screen time. Carol and Maria Rambeau sit down together for the first time in six years and attempt to get to know each other again. It takes up minutes of movie time and doesn't end with some silly joke. It takes itself seriously. Carol and Monica have a substantial scene where a little girl interacts with an older woman she looks up to. Even in the brief interaction Carol has with Minn-Erva as they fight, when Carol realizes that Minn-Erva knew her secret origin all along, Carol asks, "Is that why we never hung out?" to which Minn Erva replies, "No. I just didn't like you." It's humorous, a bit whimsical and brief, but it's something probably only two ladies might say to each other. I spend a lot of time around ladies and I know how important their girl time is to each other. It's not a deep example obviously, but it's unique to a woman experience, in as much as I don't think two male super adversaries would say that to each other. In Captain Marvel, I think we see for the first time in the MCU a real and honest attempt to put "life as a woman" up on the screen. Not just because the lead is a female and we follow her around space and LA, but because of these many small moments she has with her "sisters" in the film.

Well there's only ever been one Black Panther. In Marvel Comics, there have been three different characters named Captain Marvel, two Ms. Marvels, and a few other Vells scattered through the galaxy. The Marvels is a great title that honors them all. It seems like "peas in a pod" is a theme of many MCU Phase Four flicks. Black Widow will have three versions of Black Widow (past present and future), Spider-Man NWH will have at the three cinematic versions of Spider-Man allegedly, Multiverse of Madness will be all the Wizards Sorcerers and Witches in one movie. Love and Thunder will be all the Marvel Gods(Asgard and Olympus) contending with a God Killer. And The Marvels will be all the Marvel Marvels in one movie.

In Point Break, Tyler (Lori Petty's character) was really three-dimensional and we might have Kathryn Bigelow's direction to thank for that. Might. I think a guy or a gal could direct a solid action movie as action isn't a gender specific thing. But if a film also contains tiny moments of character life and living, and it's important to the story and thus want it to feel real, sometimes having a person who's lived the life of that character might be beneficial to the film's authenticity as a consultant, a writer, or a director.

I will say I am better at analyzing films than a lot of other dudes I know, yes.

Right? Mansplaining at its worst. So offensive. Unless it identifies as a woman? If so, apologies, domina! It's a fair question. I am a dude. And if it's here in the CGC boards, I believe it'd be mansplaining to other men for the most part. How about just the point of view of somebody who loves to analyze film and maybe even took a few film courses in college? Maybe film studier-splaining? Sure, as a dude, I don't know what the female experience is. But maybe I might possibly can detect it when I see it in a movie when compared to so many other films in the past made by guys, like me. I'll elaborate more on this with examples later, got to run and do life things.

I'm not sure what the context was of my post from a year and a half ago, but I'm pretty sure it was in response to somebody saying female directors suck or why get a female director or something like that. And in that response, I essentially said that as a fact in history, no solo male director has ever made a successful, much less good, solo female super-hero movie. I'm not saying James Cameron or Quentin Tarantino(maybe not) can't make a decent female superhero flick, but perhaps an advantage of Patty Jenkins helming Wonder Woman, besides being a good storyteller and knowing how to direct action, was that maybe she brought a certain woman experience to the film and perhaps added a little authenticity to when presenting us the point of view of this woman Diana discovering herself or her interactions with her Queen mother or other women in the film. There even seemed to be a subtle woman's touch in the way Dr Poison was presented to us. Again, I think there can be a great advantage and perhaps a more complex film can be had if a smart woman director is helming a woman superhero film.

I started writing then had to step away for a bit. I'm not even really talking about Captain Marvel here, but using the film as an example among many (but we're in the Captain Marvel thread) of what a female writer/director can possibly bring to a film that has a female, or females, in the lead.

Sure. At the same time, the above list of movies are pretty hardcore action flicks that kind of feature a lone woman(Thelma and Louise aside) doing hardcore action stuff. Agree, all good movies. But perhaps a female writer/director can bring a feminine experience that a male director might overlook because he's never seen life from the point of view of a woman or a sisterhood. For instance, in Captain Marvel, I'm not sure which parts of the film the directors Anna Boden or Ryan Fleck were responsible, but there were so many scenes between Carol and Maria, or Carol and Monica, and maybe even Carol and Minn-Erva, that seemed to come from a place of experience that I suspect were the result of Boden's directorial touch. Of course, any director can do a dialogue scene, but there seemed to be certain subtle touches or dialogue bits in the female to female interactions that, like I said, seemed to come from a place of experience.