Marvel Cinematic Universe, Phase Three and BEYOOOOONND

[RDU Neil]

4 hours ago, Starlord said:

Captain Marvel will be action-comedy

 

How is that different than most of them, so far? Iron Man was a comedy from a certain standpoint. Certainly GotG and Thor Ragnarock were more comedy than action, but Iron Man 1 and 3, Ant-Man, etc., they are practically comedies. I'd expect a wise-ass action heroine to fall in that mold.

[Lord Liaden]

I suppose it's a matter of balance. The original Iron Man had a good dose of comedy, mostly thanks to RDJ's improv; but overall it was much more serious than comedic. The Captain America movies were mostly serious, as was The Incredible Hulk. Guardians of the Galaxy I and Ant-Man split about evenly between comedy and drama, while the second GOG and Thor Ragnarok skewed heavily to the comedic side. Overall there's been a spectrum in comedy in Marvel movies, although none to date has been entirely serious.

[zslane]

A certain amount of Marvel's so-called comedy is just bathos inappropriately applied to a scene. That shouldn't count towards the overall sense that the MCU is "full of comedy". A good examination of this phenomenon can be found here:

 

 

[Christopher R Taylor]

Good storytelling will have some humor as well as the other bends of human emotion, that's just part of doing your job as a writer.  Writing comedy is another thing entirely, that's where you get Guardians of the Galaxy and Ragnarok; attempting to get laughs.  Its okay for some settings and groups but I don't really see hardcore flight jockey and military persona Carol Danvers yukking it up to get everyone laughing.  So hopefully they're just trying to tell everyone "this will be fun, not some grimfest or a SJW tract"

[Bazza]

I reckon I can explain the Infinity Stones using classical metaphysics. Space, time, mind, soul, power, and reality just got real. 

[Bazza]

 

[RDU Neil]

On ‎3‎/‎2‎/‎2018 at 9:18 PM, zslane said:

A certain amount of Marvel's so-called comedy is just bathos inappropriately applied to a scene. That shouldn't count towards the overall sense that the MCU is "full of comedy". A good examination of this phenomenon can be found here:

 

 

 

Ok... just watched this, and agree, 95%. I hated Dr. Strange, for just the reasons he positioned. I loved Wonder Woman for its sincerity. But Ant-Man? Ant-Man is a comedy, and it worked there, just as in the first GotG. And the airport scene in Civil War? It was inconsistent because it was a group of people fighting who never really wanted to fight. Stark's back and forth between his normal wise-ass demeanor and his passionate desire to talk Cap down were completely in character for me... as were the rest of the jokes. No one there wanted to fight, let alone really wanting to hurt the other side. The fact that it ended darkly worked there the same way, say, Del Toro's violence works in his movies... they are beautiful, idyllic, magical, and then some very blunt, awful violence happens that makes you uncomfortable, and it should. That scene with Rhodey was jarring because there was a price to pay that no one was happy about. It worked. To say that Marvel is painting all its movies in that light... that is a bit much. GotG 2 (worst... movie... ever) was an example of flat out stupidly trying to do the same jokes over and over. Ragnarok worked, because it was full-throttle comedy, and original... but Spider-Man: Homecoming? I wish he'd focused on that one, because it was the perfect match of a very funny movie, that got serious when it needed to, and didn't flinch from it. It was, again, sincere. Winter Soldier? Best, and most sincere of the Marvel movies... and still had very funny moments... that didn't undermine the drama.

 

Here's hoping that they manage to make Captain Marvel sincere, while still making her a wise-cracking, ace military pilot. IMO, if they miss the opportunity to do Top Gun (flipping gender roles of course) as superhero movie, they will have missed the boat.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

Stark's back and forth between his normal wise-ass demeanor and his passionate desire to talk Cap down were completely in character for me

 

It didn't work for me at all.  They took a fun, clever guy and made him psychotic.  And he's irredeemably so, you cannot fix what they did to that character, there's no coming back.

[RDU Neil]

7 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

 

It didn't work for me at all.  They took a fun, clever guy and made him psychotic.  And he's irredeemably so, you cannot fix what they did to that character, there's no coming back.

 

I guess I didn't see this as anything needing "fixing." Stark is the most interesting character in the MCU, because ever since his epiphany his noble impulses have been strong, and his execution increasingly flawed and sclerotic. He can't get out of his own way, and constantly makes things worse. I don't think that Marvel is savvy enough to actually take that to its most dramatic level... but Stark has done a lot of things that are difficult to justify (whether irredeemable or not... well... this is comic books after all) and a serious reflection and come-uppance would be awesome. Again, I doubt we'll see it, but if the Russo brothers thematically work that into Infinity War (they've got two movies to let that play out) I'd love to see the accountability for his actions come to a head as a completion of the RDJ/Stark storyline.

[Starlord]

Yeah, the huge problem with Civil War was that it should have been painfully obvious that Bucky was being setup as well as clearly brainwashed if one had done any follow-up into his history.  I have never had a problem Stark's manner during serious moments and could even buy his intense disagreement with Cap over the accords due to his guilt over his past mistakes.  Natasha, though, was the only rational member of Tony's team for the last half of that movie IMO.

[Lord Liaden]

Keep in mind that whether Bucky had been brainwashed or not wasn't the point. He was clearly extremely dangerous, and widely known to be so after the events of Winter Soldier. Considering his past actions, and the (falsified) video evidence of his involvement in the UN bombing, the authorities were well justified in trying to bring him in, and to terminate him if he resisted. If he made it to trial his culpability would have been hashed out then.

 

I agree that Tony Stark was losing it over the course of Civil War. But for all his mistakes he does deserve some sympathy. He was under enormous stress, both external and internal. He was trying to do what he believed was best for everyone in extremely difficult circumstances. And after all of that he was hit with one of the biggest shocks of his life. No question that he's screwed up repeatedly, and is still trying to figure out the kind of hero he wants to be; but for someone who was a world-class jerk most of his life, the road to redemption is bound to be long and rocky.

[Starlord]

20 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

Keep in mind that whether Bucky had been brainwashed or not wasn't the point. He was clearly extremely dangerous, and widely known to be so after the events of Winter Soldier. Considering his past actions, and the (falsified) video evidence of his involvement in the UN bombing, the authorities were well justified in trying to bring him in, and to terminate him if he resisted. If he made it to trial his culpability would have been hashed out then.

 

To the authorities and gen pop., yes...not to the Avengers and Cap's friends.

[zslane]

I find Stark's character development pretty logical too, given the things that have happened to this point. However, I think the tone of Civil War is uneven, especially whenever Tony (or Scott Lang or Peter Parker) quips during moments of (what should be) intense drama. You can argue until the cows come home that this is "in character" and completely consistent with their emotional defense mechanisms, but the fact remains that the writers undercut the drama and tension of their scenes by choosing to interject that quipping at those moments. There is a dramatic price to be paid for being "true" to such a character in every scene he appears in, and in cases like the big airport battle, that price is too high if you actually want the audience to feel like that battle is in any way a serious one, rather than just a cartoony action romp where very little is actually at stake.

 

IMO, this is all part and parcel of Disney's "we don't make R-rated movies" philosophy. They will seek to undercut serious drama, especially where violence is concerned, with light humor just to make sure all the kiddies (and their parents) remain comforted by the soft, cozy blanket of the PG-13 rating and the "Marvel is the FUN superhero universe" mantra that governs the MCU. You'll notice that this sort of thing doesn't happen on MCU shows like Jessica Jones where the "superheroes in a realistic world" ethos is actually taken seriously by its creators. I'm sure Feige believes Marvel is successfully walking the fine line between serious drama and overt comedy in the movies he makes, but there are many instances where they stumble and inject bathos where it doesn't belong.

[Old Man]

[RDU Neil]

1 hour ago, Starlord said:

 

To the authorities and gen pop., yes...not to the Avengers and Cap's friends.

 

But this was the crux of the movies... whether or not they agreed with the authorities, there were those who say "They have the right to decide, and we shouldn't undermine or act against them," vs. "We know better than the authorities, therefore we take it on ourselves to interfere." The Bucky issue was the "personal" issue that exemplified the larger, more broad issue of the Accords. 

 

To have the "follow the law" group be all, "Oh, except when Cap says He's my friend! and then I will break the law" would have been disingenuous at best.

 

That Cap went after Bucky ahead of the J-SOC and police who were on a kill mission made sense. Bucky's response made sense, even though it made it harder on Cap. THEN, Black Panther comes in for revenge and REALLY makes it a mess... but Bucky is captured.

 

At that point, ok... things are tense, but we really haven't crossed any lines, yet. Once Bucky escapes, killing more people on the way out... now Cap is willing to keep risking more and more collateral damage (civilian death) because he's obsessed with his friend. The only way you justify the other Avengers just going along with Cap is if you take the unrealistic "We are in a comic book, so of COURSE he's being manipulated by a REAL villain!" attitude. That's not appropriate for these characters, especially not Stark after Bucky very deliberately tried to put a bullet through his head. They had every reason to assume he homicidal and unstable, even if it as due to years of conditioning by Hydra... that only makes it worse. He'd been known to affect these exact kind of attacks (destabilizing, taking out progressive leaders, etc.) in the past. To expect everyone to trust Cap, just because he's Cap, I don't see that he's earned that, yet.

 

I particularly like Civil War, because I didn't agree with either "side" very much. The Accords were going to happen, but Stark's obsessive manipulation to get people in line was terrible. Cap's egotistical "I know better, so I shouldn't have to be accountable" attitude was seriously troubling, in that he completely dismissed the law over his obsessive friendship with Bucky. Both of them were highly flawed and driven by their emotions... and it really ended badly for them both.

[Lord Liaden]

To be fair, Cap didn't dismiss the law just over his friendship with Bucky. He knew that Zemo had set Bucky up, and that Zemo had forced Bucky to tell him the location of the facility where Bucky, and the other Hydra "winter soldiers," had been kept. His conclusion -- that Zemo wanted control of the other supers for his own purposes -- was logical. Knowing how great a threat a whole squad of super-soldiers would be, he saw no choice but to go to Siberia to stop Zemo before he gained control of them.

[Lord Liaden]

To quote one reviewer discussing Civil War, "If my government abuses its control of me, nothing's going to happen. If the government abuses its control of Captain America, or the Vision, or the Hulk, terrible things could happen."

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

Keep in mind that whether Bucky had been brainwashed or not wasn't the point. He was clearly extremely dangerous, and widely known to be so after the events of Winter Soldier. Considering his past actions, and the (falsified) video evidence of his involvement in the UN bombing, the authorities were well justified in trying to bring him in, and to terminate him if he resisted. If he made it to trial his culpability would have been hashed out then.

 

I agree, and what's more, so does Bucky.  I get Cap's loyalty and love toward his old buddy, but... no, that was all wrong.  Bucky does not deserve that kind of friendship and he needs to be behind bars.  Particularly if any random jobu with a code phrase can make him into anything he wants.

[Starlord]

As I said, I had no problems necessarily against the accords.  Cap was not arguing against prison or wrongdoing...he was simply trying to catch him without him being killed.  AND HE WAS RIGHT ABOUT HIM.  Particularly near the end, the Avengers should have helped them, yet they forced a confrontation and only Natasha acted like she should...that is what superheroes do, accords or no accords. 

[Doc Shadow]

3 hours ago, Old Man said:

 

"Hey y'all, I'm Mary Poppins!"

[Lord Liaden]

2 hours ago, RDU Neil said:

 

To expect everyone to trust Cap, just because he's Cap, I don't see that he's earned that, yet.

 

Actually, one of the things I enjoyed about both Winter Soldier and Civil War is that how people reacted to Captain America showed that he had earned it. This is the Living Legend of WW II, popularized as the patriotic symbol of America. The hero who helped save the world from the Red Skull, from an alien invasion, from Hydra in SHIELD's clothing. The man whose return from apparent death was celebrated with a major display at the Smithsonian. Who's asked to record public service announcements played in American high schools. Sam Wilson told him, "Captain America needs my help. There's no better reason to get back in." Loyal SHIELD agents turned against their Hydra-allegiant superiors because they believed in Steve Rogers. Scott Lang was awed and honored just to be asked to help him.

[Greywind]

2 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

 

I agree, and what's more, so does Bucky.  I get Cap's loyalty and love toward his old buddy, but... no, that was all wrong.  Bucky does not deserve that kind of friendship and he needs to be behind bars.  Particularly if any random jobu with a code phrase can make him into anything he wants.

 

Cap's memories of Bucky weren't memories he had of the Winter Soldier. The only thing he had on the Winter Soldier was Natasha's story.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

To expect everyone to trust Cap, just because he's Cap, I don't see that he's earned that, yet.

 

Yeah, they didn't handle that very well.  His appearance in the past was so brief (some USO shows, a tour of schools, and then a few weeks campaign on VIPER) did not establish him as the hero Cap was in the comics.  He was fighting Nazis and more for years before disappearing.  But the movies just presume everyone respects and admires him and who cares if we've established that or not?

[Bazza]

Quote

 

Steve Rogers: [letter to Stark] Tony, I'm glad you're back at the compound. I don't like the idea of you rattling around a mansion by yourself. We all need family. The Avengers are yours, maybe more so than mine. I've been on my own since I was 18. I never really fit in anywhere, even in the army. My faith's in people, I guess. Individuals. And I'm happy to say that, for the most part, they haven't let me down. Which is why I can't let them down either. Locks can be replaced, but maybe they shouldn't. I know I hurt you, Tony. I guess I thought by not telling you about your parents I was sparing you, but I can see now that I was really sparing myself, and I'm sorry. Hopefully one day you can understand. I wish we agreed on the Accords, I really do. I know you're doing what you believe in, and that's all any of us can do. That's all any of us should... So no matter what, I promise you, if you need us - if you need me - I'll be there. 

[Tony looks at a flip phone Steve sent him]

 

Notes:

• Since Steve was 18 he has relied on people, and doing what he thought was right. 
• Because Steve has had to rely on people (initially Bucky), Steve has had faith in people -- he wants to see the best in them,
• Before the army, and during the army, Steve's people were his unit, the Howling Commandos and he had faith in them. 
• Steve has a questionable allegiance to authority/bureaucracy; he said he didn't fit in the army, didn't fit in with SHIELD, and didn't fit in with the Avengers under the Accords. In some of the above, authority and/or bureaucracy let him down or betrayed him. 
• Steve still believes in the mission of the Avengers, but can't be with them under the Accords. 

 

Steve knew Bucky was framed. What would Steve do to clear his buddy of these charges? Could Steve work with the authorities to ensure Bucky was treated justly? Could Steve trust Tony that Tony would uses his resources to ensure Bucky had the best legal representation to beat these charges? Could Steve trust a stranger, Black Panther, and the other Avengers & Team Steve to follow through with the lead about Zemo and the other winter soldiers. Presumably this evidence would clear Bucky. 

If not, why not?

I still think the situation could have been handled differently, the Avengers still exist, and Bucky and Steve are not fugitives from international law. 

[Greywind]

Steve was active for years before he landed Red Skull's plane in the water. He mentions specific years during CA:TWS and I believe he did also in CA:CW.