@therealsilvermane

Kate Bishop is trash? Lol. Okay.

I’d think Marvel Studios would do a SpiderWoman Disney+ show first, but if Marvel made a Spider-Woman intro film that ties in with the MCU storyline and has MCU veteran guest stars like a couple Avengers or something then I’d bet a Spider-Woman movie would do quite well, actually. Versus the most popular superhero on the planet her numbers would be a little short I’d think but I still think she’d do well. A Miles Morales Spider-Man movie might do even better.

What’s close-minded thinking is thinking that audiences won’t embrace a future Iron Man, Captain America, or Black Panther unless it’s Tony Stark, Steve Rogers, or T’Challa behind the mask. That right there is lazy thinking and is a losing mentality that says the only way forMarvel to succeed is to wash rinse and repeat because only Tony Stark and Steve Rogers matter and you can’t win without them. Wrong.

No I’m not trolling and I’m amazed so many people here think Marvel Studios is going to reboot the MCU because they’ll run out of super-heroes. I understand Disney wants to keep characters like Iron Man, Captain America, Black Widow, or Black Panther going. And the way they do that while keeping the MCU growing and not having to start over is to do what they’re doing right now, making these characters a mantle that is passed from one generation to the next. Thirty years from now, kids aren’t going to care if it’s Tony Stark or Joanie Stark behind the armor. You can continue to have a Black Panther but it can be a new and worthy king or queen of Wakanda. And if the comic story has to come first, you introduce the character in the comics and then let them make their MCU debut years later. They’re already doing it with Kamala Khan and Kate Bishop. Audiences in 2040 aren’t going to care if Clint Barton is or isn’t Hawkeye. As far as business merchandising goes, it’s the costume that sells on lunch boxes. Kids in 2035 aren’t going to say “oh I’m not buying that Black Panther backpack because he’s not T’Challa behind that mask!” I don’t get why this is so hard for you guys to grasp. The old days of a superhero trilogy then we reboot it all are over. For Marvel Studios anyway.

And I say they won't. Is Disney going to one day do Star Wars 2.0 and remake New Hope, Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi with new actors? I would hope not. That's kind of what you're saying Disney is going to do with Marvel.

I say that Marvel and Disney are confident enough in their storytelling and hype abilities to continue to tell compelling tales within the MCU without having to resurrect Tony Stark or Steve Rogers somehow. I'm not saying RDJ will never come back, but if he comes back, it's going to be as an AI, which would fit in with the continuing story of the MCU. Regarding your theory that Tony Stark will be back with a different actor...first, the Tony Stark that the world loves is Robert Downey Jr's Tony Stark. In the MCU, Stark is indelibly tied to RDJ. The MCU Stark had RDJ's mannerisms, peculiar sense of humor, timing, everything. Do you think some guy like Ryan Gosling Jr or somebody is going to come in and just become Tony Stark? It won't be anything nearly the same and would really just destroy the incredible luck Disney had with RDJ and destroy the character's legacy. It would just be some dude named Tony Stark who wouldn't stand a chance of equaling what RDJ accomplished on screen. Why would Disney do that? They won't. There will most likely continue to be an Iron Person character in the MCU (as that's what sells on the lunch boxes and school backpacks merch, not Tony Stark's goateed face), but it will be a different character. Tony Stark will continue to live on in the MCU, but as a legacy and as a Founding Father of the MCU Avengers, and maybe an AI. If Ryan Gosling Jr or whoever wants to come in and wear the Iron suit, fine, he can drive fancy cars, date fashion models, and be a genius jerk all day long, but he will have a different name. Maybe his last name will be Stark, but it won't be Tony Stark.

The Black Widow movie is going to introduce the MCU’s new Black Widow, Yelena Belova. ScarJo’s Natasha Romanoff is dead and is not being resurrected. The only reason she got a movie posthumously is because the character deserved it and to also pass the mantle to Florence Pugh’s character who is already slated for a feature role in the Hawkeye show. And years from now, Yelena will probably pass the mantle to another Black Widow, perhaps Ava Orlova or somebody else.

Tony Stark died in Avengers Endgame. If Marvel Studios recasts the character to play Iron Man again, it means a reboot or start over of the current MCU.

Also, remember, Tony Stark is only a cultural icon because Marvel Studios and Robert Downey Jr made him that. Before that, Tony Stark was just another comic book character and not even one of Marvel Comics' more interesting ones. Robert Downey Jr was lightning in a bottle. Marvel Studios just has to do it again. Thing is, they've done it over and over and over from Chris Hemsworth to Chadwick Boseman. I trust that Marvel Studios will continue to keep giving us memorable characters and stories without having to give us some reboot of Tony Stark and Steve Rogers.

Okay. Again, what Marvel Studios is doing is something completely different from what's happened before. For the past 12+ years, Marvel Studios has been creating and wants to continue to create a living breathing Cinematic Universe that has no ending. That's the goal. That's the dream. They want their Marvel Cinema Universe to span possibly hundreds of connected movies and Disney+ episodes that tell a (generally) single connected story and where you find its Chapter One in the first Iron Man movie. And if you want to tap into this story, you'll find the library on Disney+. To just scrap it all and reboot everything from scratch would destroy that continuous library that Disney/Marvel Studios wants to build. Think of the MCU like America's story. Tony Stark is like George Washington, Steve Rogers is like Thomas Jefferson, Thor is maybe Ben Franklin. These guys are the Founding Fathers of the MCU, but it doesn't end with them. New talented individuals come along to add to the story. The MCU wants to be that. A cinematic universe that continues to grow and doesn't start over. The MCU will not reboot. That's the plan anyway.

I know Incredible Hulk is part of the MCU continuity, but I think Marvel Studios kind of likes to pretend the movie doesn't exist while having to kind of acknowledge that it does, sort of like a black sheep relative or something. I mean, according to that movie, Hulk's origin is tied to the Super Soldier program. Ugh. If Incredible Hulk never makes it to Disney+ I think they'd would be okay with it. It's a horrible movie. Like I said, for me, Hulk's start in the MCU starts with Avengers. That's just me.

The George Lucas Prequel Trilogy is also junk. Junkier than the Disney Trilogy imo. I've said this before and I'll say it again, IMO there's one Star Wars. It came out in 1977 and ended in 1983. After that, everything else is either a very expensive fan film or a re-release. And Mandalorian is the only decent live action Star Wars fan film because Favreau and that Dave Fillion (sp) guy did such a great impression of the first two Star Wars movies. They understand the samurai roots of Star Wars and understand the importance of the slow burn style of filmmaking of those first movies to make it feel like we are watching a seamless continuous story of the real Star Wars.

No they won't. Who are they going to recast Tony Stark with? Some dude who does an excellent Robert Downey Jr impersonation? Is that even possible? After X-Men and Fantastic Four is Disney going to just completely scrap the twenty years of stories that's built up and just start from scratch again? You might say so, but I say that's ludicrous. You can keep telling a story about a person flying around in high tech armor without it only being about Tony Stark. As long as the person wearing that Iron suit is interesting, then the movie will be interesting. That person could be Morgan Stark, Tony Stark Jr (Morgan's imaginary son I just made up), James Rhodes' nephew, Riri Williams, anybody. As long as it's a compelling story with a cool character, people will follow it.

Besides the Incredible Hulk, the MCU hasn't really had a single miss. Even Thor 2 was somewhat a hit. With a worldwide following that's only equaled by Star Wars fandom, yes, you could say that the MCU has been kind of perfect so far in its execution. And yes, once Marvel owns that character and debuts it in the MCU, that is the final version of that character. Yes, that's correct. When Jennifer Walters debuts in She-Hulk, that will be the final version of Jen Walters in the movies. Yes. That's the way MCU is supposed to work. Now, this is all assuming that Disney doesn't implode as a company and Marvel Studios has to sell its characters off again to Warner Brothers or whoever. Then you might see reboots. But I don't see that happening. If Disney dies, you can probably consider that a sign of the end times. Think of the MCU like Star Trek. It's an ever growing universe with hundreds of characters and starships that's been non-stop since the 60's. Yes, you've got that JJ Abrams version with the young Enterprise crew, but it's still not a reboot. It's younger versions of the older characters.

As far as the comic book crossover event goes, I think the Disney+ show will be Secret Invasion in name only. I think it will not resemble that comic series at all and it will be a much smaller scale. I guess I don't have to say that I also don't think the Skrulls will be the ones doing the secret invading. That aside, I am very much looking forward to this because I'm looking forward to seeing Ben Mendelhson's Talos teamed up with Sam Jackson's Fury again. They were awesome together in Captain Marvel. If anything, it's going to be hilarious.

1. Besides those two hiccups, the continuity of the MCU has been pretty continuous. Does Incredible Hulk even count anymore anyway? For me, the MCU Hulk begins with Avengers. 2. But what I've been saying for the past 5 or 6 posts is that the Batman movies are different franchises not a continuous movie story universe like the MCU and I don't feel like explaining that again... 3. Again, Hugh Jackman was Wolverine in the Fox movies. I'm talking about the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Yes, there will be a new Wolverine in the Marvel Cinematic Universe because it's a different franchise. I guess I'm not explaining myself clearly enough maybe?

Well, obviously the narrative in your head is that the Marvel Cinematic Universe will eventually run itself into the ground with a slow death after Avengers Endgame. While in the real world, Spiderman FFH made over a billion and WandaVision and FWS streamed at the top of their class with many saying WandaVision was their favorite MCU story besides the Infinity War films. Theaters and fans worldwide are anticipating the release of Black Widow and the lady who directed Eternals just swept the Oscars. I'd say the MCU's future is quite bright without Tony Stark or Steve Rogers. As I said in a post a while back, at least I don't have to listen to their constant bickering anymore.

Yes, and that return of Luke Skywalker worked out real good, didn't it? No it didn't. It ended up angering everybody including Mark Hamill himself. We saw a perfect ending to Steve Rogers and Tony Stark's stories in Endgame. The kind of perfect ending Luke Skywalker should have had if Disney had just left the Skywalker family alone and let the galaxy have its victory at the end of Return of the Jedi.

Yes, I believe that. Marvel Studios will not reboot the MCU and recast Tony Stark and Steve Rogers in the near or distant future. It's not going to happen. Their stories in the MCU are done. As far as the Iron Person legacy goes, James Rhodes and Riri Williams will take it up up for a little while. If there needs to be a continuing story to the Stark family, Marvel will give us Morgan Stark or her son or something. The only way Tony Stark/RDJ comes back is as an AI. I don't see why that's hard to believe. Well I guess I do. Recasting and doing it all over again is how it was done in the old days. This isn't the old days. This is a new kind of cinema and it's not going away. The MCU has enough characters and story combinations to last 100 years if they want. They have the Mutants, the Fantastic Four, Moon Knight, more Avengers. And if you do the character legacy story method they are using with character titles like Iron Man, Captain America, Hawkeye, and Black Widow (all being replaced in Phase Four with new characters), to paraphrase Steve Rogers, "Marvel could do this all day." Even a character like Moon Knight can be handed down from Mark Spector to another character. It's so easy and way more interesting than just recasting the part so you have to watch Mark Spector as Moon Knight until the end of time. Once the Fantastic Four actors start getting old, you let the kids take over to keep the family theme going. People can say Sam Wilson isn't their Captain America or Kate Bishop isn't their Hawkeye or Yelena Belova isn't their Black Widow until the cows come home, but the fact is these MCU mantles are being passed to a new generation of heroes and Disney is not going backwards with a reboot down the road. If you want to relive the glory days of Tony Stark as Iron Man or Steve Rogers as Cap, you have 10 years of stories in Phase 1-3 you can watch and enjoy on Disney+ where these stories will live. Plus, reboots were usually done in the old days because the franchise eventually ran itself into the ground with progressively worse sequels to the point it was all scrapped and redone with a new creative team (ie Sony Spider-Man or Burton era Batman). The MCU has not run itself into the ground but only gotten stronger over time with its evolving and connected storylines.

Never mind the comics. It's print paper, ink, and color. Creators can do whatever they want with those stories with no real consequences. Peter Parker can stay forever young or they can kill Kal-El multiple times and bring him back multiple times. No big deal. It's different in the movies, especially if committed to the continuous living breathing universe of the MCU. Recasting was the obvious thing to do back in the old days of trilogies and such before the MCU was a thing. That's over as far as Marvel Studios movies go. From Iron Man on, the Marvel Movie Universe is a continuous evolving story where we grow with these heroes and this universe in real time. With that, the actors who embody these characters are as tied to them as Mark Hamill or Harrison Ford are to Luke Skywalker and Han Solo. While Chris Evans isn't really Steve Rogers, he IS Steve Rogers. There is no replacing Steve Rogers in this living breathing universe, just as they most likely won't recast T-Challa because Chadwick Boseman is T'Challa. So if you're not going to recast the role of Steve Rogers, you let another fictional human being carry on his legacy and carry the Shield and make that part of your continuing story. And in another 10 years or so, Anthony Mackie's Sam Wilson will pass the Cap mantle to another worthy hero, but there will still be a Captain America mantle. That's how it works now. I'm sorry some fans can't get the brilliance of that or won't accept it. I think it's awesome, especially since I'm part of the generation who got to experience live the MCU's greatest generation, which is who characters like Steve Rogers and Tony Stark are now. Generational heroes giving way to a new generation of heroes.

Right, it’s bad business to let a legacy character like Captain America just go away because Steve Rogers is dead or whatever. You have to keep the name going, not just for story purposes, for copyright reasons as well. Personally, I think the “lazy” thing to do, in this case, is to just recast Steve Rogers and keep everything the same as if it’s the same guy. How stale is that? I love how the MCU is a living breathing thing where heroes die and retire or grow and evolve. To me, it’s way more interesting to treat Captain America like a legacy and where a worthy hero like Sam tries to live up to that legacy. Falcon Winter Soldier was such a compelling story to me.

Shaquille O’Neal is good in one movie, William Friedkins’ Blue Chip, because he basically played himself. He has no business being in movies. He can barely carry those General commercials. It’s funny he always likened himself to Superman in the NBA, even had the “S” arm tattoo which on his planet stands for Shaq. There was one Superman in the NBA: Michael Jordan. If Shaq’s gameplay was akin to any superhero, it was the Hulk.

In the MCU, the Falcon name was Sam’s military code name as that’s the name of the wings tech. While Falcon was apparently the official Avengers name he used, nobody ever really called him that. They just called him Sam. In fact, when the banker calls him that in FWS, that’s the only instance I remember when he was called Falcon in the MCU. It’s the human being behind the suit that’s important in this universe. I would say that of all the nicknames, Captain America is the most important, and that’s why Sam taking the name was such a big deal. Such a big deal that Marvel made a TV show about it. Either way, Sam Wilson IS Captain America now. Just not your Cap, I guess. A lot of fans feel the same way, and it’s kinda cool and kinda meta how Sam even acknowledges that in Episode Six.

That was Sam Wilson's argument and why he gave up the Shield at the start of FWS. Clearly Steve Rogers thought otherwise which is why he passed that mantle/Shield to Sam. It doesn't belong to someone else. That's why it's Sam's. Especially after the MCU, I see the human beings first before the call sign anyway. For me, Stark was the important character, not the Iron Man name. Steve Rogers was the real American hero, not Captain America. They're just titles. Sam has the title now, but it's still Sam Wilson, a black guy from Louisiana, not a blonde hair blue eyed kid from Brooklyn. Besides, Captain America was a government entity anyway, not Steve's creation, in the MCU anyway.

I agree with Gatsby77. To do the sports analogy from a different angle: A Marvel legacy character or title(Iron Man, Hulk, X-Men) could be very much like a major league sports team. Comparing Iron Man, a legacy title, to the Los Angeles Lakers, when the greats like Magic Johnson or Kareem Abdul Jabbar moved on, the team owners/NBA didn't end the team, they found new great players to replace them because you don't replace a winning brand like the Los Angeles Lakers with a new name. Similarly, if Iron Man as a title is proven to be such an iconic part of pop culture and big business, when Tony Stark/Robert Downey Jr is ready to call it quits, you don't end the Iron Man name, it's too big. You replace Tony Stark with another equally interesting human being to wear the suit, or something similar to it in order to continue the legacy and the brand. I think it keeps fans involved and is a better business model for the creators/copyright owners who don't want to retire a legacy title just because the guy or gal wearing the suit or moniker dies or retires.