BLACK WIDOW: THE MOVIE (TBD) 4 4

[chezmtghut]

3 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

Well since we are going to get completely accurate, 'jus primae noctis' (a right consummating a marriage granted to someone other than the bridegroom by the law or custom of some cultures).

For anyone to assume it never occurred in history, they need to go back and read some Medieval books and the noble class dominating people as serfs in a Feudalist society. I didn't realize until reading about it later in life people were treated as part of land when it was sold to other nobles or traded off. Supposedly not as bad as a slave, but less than a free man. Ugly!

 

I was referring to the quote in the film, which was Prima Nocta. Yes, women have been treated as property at different intervals throughout history, which isn't much different than a slave, but with greater luxury afforded to them.

[chezmtghut]

3 minutes ago, drotto said:

The other thing about the MCU that people seem to ignore is Iron man was not expected to be the big break out character.  He was crass, rude, sexist, and an alcoholic.  He was everything that was not PC.  Captain was honorable, respectful, and wholesome.  I think CA was supposed to be the leader when the MCU was first mapped out, but Tony exploded in popularity, because of RDJ, and well it turns out the public likes to root for jerks sometimes. So the writers adjusted what they were doing based on the popularity of the characters. It just proves that sometimes you can not force who takes off, and sometimes you can not predict it.  Attempting to force CM as the main character of the MCU is not the way to make her popular.  You need to give the public good stories, and good characters, and then watch what happens. Once you see what gets traction you then make adjustments. 

People tend to lean towards popular demand, to maintain demand. Sometimes these agendas work in their favor & others times it works against them.

[@therealsilvermane]

34 minutes ago, chezmtghut said:

It seems that the new agenda is to make women appear more masculine & men more feminine. I think women are already strong, but there is more to strength than physical muscles. Tony Stark has shown that with his brain power & I feel they portrayed that well with Doctor Strange, Shuri & in WandaVision as well. I really hope we don't see a buff Jane Foster in Thor 4, as that would cheaper her being worthy to wield Mjolnir in my opinion.

Kevin Feige has said on record what he wants in the MCU is a balance of super-heroes, as in race and gender. And that's what we're seeing play out right now. In a way, the trolls were right. That's not the problem though. The problem is having a problem with diversity.

[chezmtghut]

11 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

Kevin Feige has said on record what he wants in the MCU is a balance of super-heroes, as in race and gender. And that's what we're seeing play out right now. In a way, the trolls were right. That's not the problem though. The problem is having a problem with diversity.

I'm all for that, but sometimes they push these agendas to the extent that it turns people off. I guess that's something to say about their balancing act.

Edited April 6, 2021 by chezmtghut

[Bosco685]

15 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

Kevin Feige has said on record what he wants in the MCU is a balance of super-heroes, as in race and gender. And that's what we're seeing play out right now. In a way, the trolls were right. That's not the problem though. The problem is having a problem with diversity.

Sorry - in your last MCU rally event where they were handing out pamphlets concerning talking points, you failed to note Feige didn't start pushing the 'diversity message' until 2014 where this theme came up often with the casting of Chadwick Boseman and the announcement of Captain Marvel. One year before Feige then broke off from the Marvel Creative Committee (heading off the narrative oh it was all about the MCC holding him up).

2014: Chadwick Boseman Signed For 5 Films As Black Panther, Captain Marvel Bring Diversity To Superhero Slate

Then in 2020 when further calls for diversity came up more where women and minorities were on demand, supposedly Feige came close to quitting back 2015 over diversity. Yet he had already been setting up addressing diversity the year before, and the MCC break was more about creative control leading to a $250M Civil War budget that Perlmutter was holding back.

2020: People Are Calling Out the MCU for Its Lack of Diversity — Again

History seems to get twisted up what took place and when. Depending on what research you do.

[@therealsilvermane]

2 hours ago, drotto said:

I am not a fan of the current version of Carol, and as a long time comic reader going back at least 30 years, she was never a major player until about 6 years ago.  She was a fairly regular Avengers supporting cast member, granted, and she has been elevated more recently.  But again, coming from a comic standpoint, even after her elevation, she has not been able to sustain a solo book, and I think her series is on its 5th reboot, and about to be rebooted again.  Hold this up against characters like Iron Man, the X-Men, FF, Avengers, Thor, Captain America and many more, which have been published more or less continuously for 50 years, and she is not even close to as important from a sales perspective. That is a very thin history of comic success as compared to proven long term winners with very deep histories. You can't necessarily assign labels like misogamy to people not liking her character. People are allowed to like or not like the character. Even with the smaller sales of modern comics, her books numbers lag behind many other Marvel books, that is all the result of a vast conspiracy again CM and Brie Larson?  To me when I read Civil War 2, she came across as the villain of the story.

 

Her movie was fine, I rank it in the bottom third of MCU films.  That seems fairly consistent with many other fans.  For me, and I can only speak for myself, she was the least interesting character in her own movie. Moving forward that is a problem. Given these things, I do question if she is the right pick to lead the new MCU. I do think she is going to play a big role however.

 

I would argue that even Disney has seemed to pull back some as her being the new head of the MCU. CM2 has now morphed into much more of a team film, with Marvel heavily advertising other characters that will be in it.  Also it seems that they keep pushing projects like Dr. Strange 2, Anti-Man and Wasp, Guardians, Thor, and the streaming shows more heavily. There have also been some rumblings about how much of Larson's contract has been fulfilled at this time (it was rumored to be a 3 or 4 movie deal, but I could be wrong).  If that is true after CM2 she will have made the majority of her contracted appearances, and there has yet to be any large announcements about an extension.

I can tell you don't like the Carol Danvers Captain Marvel. Your post has a lot of negative projecting. I can clear a few things up, though.

Carol Danvers Captain Marvel has consistently had her own monthly series since her introduction in 2012. Yes, there have been several volumes in the past few years, but there've also been several volumes of X-Men, Spider-Man, Avengers, etc. recently. They all got rebooted with Marvel NOW! and Marvel Legacy etc. Doesn't really mean anything. That era of rebooting Marvel Comics series to renew reader interest is over, though. Marvel Comics is under new management and there are no future plans to start over Captain Marvel's current monthly series at #1 again. Marvel Comics top female writer Kelly Thompson is currently writing Captain Marvel and it's pretty good with strong sales and a lot of recent "hot" issues.

All MCU films are basically "team-up films" now. Iron Man 2, Winter Soldier, Civil War, Thor Ragnarok, even Dr Strange and Black Panther, were all team-up films to one degree or another. The first Captain Marvel film was a team-up of Carol Danvers, Nick Fury, Talos, and Maria Rambeau. It doesn't mean Kevin Feige plans to pull back their plans for Captain Marvel, whatever those plans are. The rumor is that Captain Marvel 2 may actually be a mini-Avengers movie like Civil War was and possibly address the team roster. It's just a rumor, though.

Brie Larson reportedly has a 7 movie deal with Marvel Studios. She's only been in two movies. That leaves 5 in her reported contract.

Edited April 6, 2021 by @therealsilvermane

[Bosco685]

4 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

I can tell you don't like the Carol Danvers Captain Marvel. Your post has a lot of negative projecting. I can clear a few things up, though.

Spoiler

 

Carol Danvers Captain Marvel has consistently had her own monthly series since her introduction in 2012. Yes, there have been several volumes in the past few years, but there've also been several volumes of X-Men, Spider-Man, Avengers, etc. recently. They all got rebooted with Marvel NOW! and Marvel Legacy etc. Doesn't really mean anything. That era of rebooting Marvel Comics series to renew reader interest is over, though. Marvel Comics is under new management and there are no future plans to start over Captain Marvel's current monthly series at #1 again. Marvel Comics top female writer Kelly Thompson is currently writing Captain Marvel and it's pretty good with strong sales and a lot of recent "hot" issues.

All MCU films are basically "team-up films" now. Iron Man 2, Winter Soldier, Civil War, Thor Ragnarok, even Dr Strange and Black Panther, were all team-up films to one degree or another. The first Captain Marvel film was a team-up of Carol Danvers, Nick Fury, Talos, and Maria Rambeau. It doesn't mean Kevin Feige plans to pull back their plans for Captain Marvel, whatever those plans are. The rumor is that Captain Marvel 2 may actually be a mini-Avengers movie like Civil War was address the team roster. It's just a rumor, though.

Brie Larson reportedly has a 7 movie deal with Marvel Studios. She's only been in two movies. That leaves 5 in her reported contract.

 

 

 

 

And yours don't when you go around attacking anything not the MCU?

[theCapraAegagrus]

13 hours ago, drotto said:

The other thing about the MCU that people seem to ignore is Iron man was not expected to be the big break out character.  He was crass, rude, sexist, and an alcoholic.  He was everything that was not PC.  Captain was honorable, respectful, and wholesome.  I think CA was supposed to be the leader when the MCU was first mapped out, but Tony exploded in popularity, because of RDJ, and well it turns out the public likes to root for jerks sometimes. So the writers adjusted what they were doing based on the popularity of the characters. It just proves that sometimes you can not force who takes off, and sometimes you can not predict it.  Attempting to force CM as the main character of the MCU is not the way to make her popular.  You need to give the public good stories, and good characters, and then watch what happens. Once you see what gets traction you then make adjustments. 

[theCapraAegagrus]

13 hours ago, chezmtghut said:

I'm all for that, but sometimes they push these agendas to the extent that it turns people off. I guess that's something to say about their balancing act.

There's nothing wrong with diversity. People want equal opportunities. What people don't want is equal outcomes. Black Panther was a huge hit. I don't think that Jane Foster Thor will be the same, mostly because the comics version was not good. Is it possible that they rectify that bad story within the MCU? Sure, but the source material won't be of any help, and that is what leads to the pessimism regarding her character.

[theCapraAegagrus]

Basically: People want characters to earn their impact to the audience. They don't want to be force-fed a character that is bland 'just cuz'.

[@therealsilvermane]

13 hours ago, drotto said:

The other thing about the MCU that people seem to ignore is Iron man was not expected to be the big break out character.  He was crass, rude, sexist, and an alcoholic.  He was everything that was not PC.  Captain was honorable, respectful, and wholesome.  I think CA was supposed to be the leader when the MCU was first mapped out, but Tony exploded in popularity, because of RDJ, and well it turns out the public likes to root for jerks sometimes. So the writers adjusted what they were doing based on the popularity of the characters. It just proves that sometimes you can not force who takes off, and sometimes you can not predict it.  Attempting to force CM as the main character of the MCU is not the way to make her popular.  You need to give the public good stories, and good characters, and then watch what happens. Once you see what gets traction you then make adjustments. 

The MCU wasn't really mapped out when production began on Iron Man. Nobody at the fledgeling Marvel Studios knew if the movie would be a hit or not, much less how an Avengers movie would look like. The end credits scene, according to Feige and co., was added on to see how audiences would react. When Iron Man was a hit and the crowd went wild over the Nick Fury scene, that's when Marvel decided to give the Avengers thing a go. And Iron Man proved to be very popular over the years, but Captain America was still the field leader of the Avengers in the first movie(in the second half of the movie), in Age of Ultron, and in Civil War.

Captain Marvel isn't the main character of anything yet except her first movie. What are they forcing?

[@therealsilvermane]

13 hours ago, chezmtghut said:

I'm all for that, but sometimes they push these agendas to the extent that it turns people off. I guess that's something to say about their balancing act.

How is having a solo female super-hero or a solo black super-hero an agenda? Is having all the major A level super-heroes be all white males itself an agenda?

Edited April 7, 2021 by @therealsilvermane

[@therealsilvermane]

15 hours ago, drotto said:

I am not a fan of the current version of Carol, and as a long time comic reader going back at least 30 years, she was never a major player until about 6 years ago.  She was a fairly regular Avengers supporting cast member, granted, and she has been elevated more recently.  But again, coming from a comic standpoint, even after her elevation, she has not been able to sustain a solo book, and I think her series is on its 5th reboot, and about to be rebooted again.  Hold this up against characters like Iron Man, the X-Men, FF, Avengers, Thor, Captain America and many more, which have been published more or less continuously for 50 years, and she is not even close to as important from a sales perspective. That is a very thin history of comic success as compared to proven long term winners with very deep histories.

As for Carol Danvers history going back more than 30 years, she obviously wasn't the first female Marvel hero, but she was its first major solo female hero. She began life as a strong supporting character (head of NASA security) to Mar-Vell in 1969, but she started her superhero career in 1977 as Marvel's first major solo female hero effort. Yes, Night Nurse, Tigra, and Red Sonja briefly had their own series earlier, but Ms. Marvel was the real serious attempt at a major female hero in her own series. Ms. Marvel herself was to be Marvel's Wonder Woman and was Stan Lee's chess move to counter/cash-in on the popularity of the TV Wonder Woman series, and to appeal to the growing women's lib movement of the late 70's.

So if you're being faithful to what's come before in the comics with the characters you have at your disposal, then it was only fitting that the first solo MCU female superhero should have been Carol Danvers Captain Marvel.

[▫️]

I’ll say this, I’ll never rewatch Captain Marvel unless I have insomnia but I’ll watch CM2 with my daughters because it’s under different direction. Larson may actually be directed to emote. Maybe a few less smug smirks and actually portray some real emotion we can feel. I hope she knocks it out of the park. I have preferred my action heroes to be female since Aliens and Terminator 1-2. Those two ladies didn’t raise the bar, they set it. 

[media_junkie]

20 minutes ago, Oddball said:

I’ll say this, I’ll never rewatch Captain Marvel unless I have insomnia but I’ll watch CM2 with my daughters because it’s under different direction. Larson may actually be directed to emote. Maybe a few less smug smirks and actually portray some real emotion we can feel. I hope she knocks it out of the park. I have preferred my action heroes to be female since Aliens and Terminator 1-2. Those two ladies didn’t raise the bar, they set it. 

Aliens is just a master class in how to do an action movie correctly.  Weaver killed it, as well as all the supporting actors.  Absolutely one of the best movies out there.

[drotto]

1 hour ago, @therealsilvermane said:

How is having a solo female super-hero or a solo black super-hero an agenda? Is having all the major A level super-heroes be all white males itself an agenda?

It is not.  I loved the first WW (pretending WW2 does not exist), I think it is endlessly rewatchable. Marvel has an amazing catalog of female characters, many of which could have supported a movie as well or better then CM.  We are getting a Black Widow movie, which I still believe is long overdue and should have come out years ago.  I also think characters like Rogue (one of my personal favorites), Storm, Spider-Woman (I am aware of the rights issues), She hulk (finally getting a show), etc. have just as much history or more in the Marvel universe, and are infinitely more likable then the current version on CM.  Honestly, the Ms. Marvel version of Carol is so different at this point, that it is almost a different character from the current CM.  A arc that explored he relationship with early Rogue taking her powers and how she dealt with that, could be very interesting. So there are good stories to tell with Carol, but the version the gave is not likable.  

 

I am sure you have seen it, but the picture they paint in the expanded scene with the motorcyclist is not pretty for her character.  The guy is an ahole, and sexist, but does that justify someone beating someone else up, when they know they can beat without any effort, then steal there stuff?  I thought as a society we have move beyond what is essentially bulling and stealing.  Are those the actions of a likable hero? When Cm first lands on Earth her actions put civilians at risk (I know hero stories do this all the time, but at least the audience gets a wink a nod about it). We have a hero that is constantly told that her emotions hold her back, that never expresses any emotions. Even when she lets it go and realizes her emotions are an asset, not a hinderance, her persona does not change ion the slightest. I know these have been pointed out endlessly, but they are still valid.  I do not know if these aspects of the movie are -script related, director related, or Brie Larson related, but for me (and obviously other on this forum), they need correction moving forward.

[drotto]

15 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

And yours don't when you go around attacking anything not the MCU?

I know we go at it at times, all in good fun, but he is very rigid in his devotion. Any attempt to debate over possible issue or flaws in the MCU is met with name calling and attempts to shut down discussion.  I love 80% of the MCU, even movies others have panned, I do not love it enough where I can ignore the flaw.  Plus we are comic geeks and nerds, we love to argue and debate about this.

Edited April 7, 2021 by drotto

[Bosco685]

28 minutes ago, drotto said:

I know we go at it at times, all in good fun, but he is very rigid in his devotion. Any attempt to debate over possible issue or flaws in the MCU is met with name calling and attempts to shut down discussion.  I love 80% of the MCU, even movies others have panned, I do not love it enough where I can ignore the flaw.  Plus we are comic and and nerds, we love to argue and debate about this .

I'm with you in that I own every MCU film - even Captain Marvel (  ).

But to be so blindly committed to this franchise to the point only its approach matters and only its roadmap makes the most sense is very short-sighted and close-minded. Marvel Studios figured out its only magic sauce pre-Disney and as part of the incredible Disney Marketing force. Yet as incredible as the MCU journey has been, the myth-building sound bites (e.g. everything has made money; all were B/C/D/E/F-list characters and now they are all A-List) cloud the waters has everything truly been incredible throughout.

Unfortunately with that blind fanaticism this led to an excessive amount of sources demand more of the same from WB/DC leading to an over-correction. Yet these fanatics were not the bulk of the viewers that would appreciate a different take on a comic book franchise. And you had loudmouths like John Campea proclaiming Aquaman was going to fail against Mary Poppins Returns because Disney knew what it was doing - WB didn't. How'd that turn out?

So where I take issues with these MCU fanatics being so hardcore 'DO IT MARVEL STUDIOS'S WAY' is they disrupt enjoying other properties because they are busy stomping their feet wanting their way. And goofy studios like Warner Bros. are reacting to these folks, proving they are even questioning their own plans. WB needs a 'Feige' strong hand in the worst way possible! To include sticking with a plan where it makes sense versus repeat resets.

[Gatsby77]

I've said it before, but - having just watched the last Black Widow trailer for the first time, it's worth repeating.

I think Taskmasker is her mom (Rachel Weisz).

Edited May 1, 2021 by Gatsby77

[Bosco685]

1 hour ago, Gatsby77 said:

I've said it before, but - having just watched the last Black Widow trailer for the first time, it's worth repeating.

I think Taskmasker is her mom (Rachel Weisz).

Now this is most probably accurate. What the motivation is TBD.