Jump to content

Marvel Cinematic Universe, Phase Three and BEYOOOOONND


Bazza

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 11k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On 10/29/2014 at 9:54 AM, Bazza said:

 

As it turns out, Chadwick Boseman appeared in 4 Marvel movies. All movies entirely in Phase Three. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yay. But that still leaves a lot to left desired. Not liking the direction Thor has been taking "Hercules Thor" & "Fat Thor" but understand that Chris needs something to come back too to continually play the role. More Thor in Phase Four just cements Thor's role in the MCU as a major star. 

 

Here is a thought, with Chadwick Boseman's death, would Marvel be looking at Thor to be the leader of the Avengers? Love and Thunder might de-Thor Thor like the first film, and then he could join the As-Guardians of the Galaxy. He could also be the "Tony Stark" mentor figure of the Young Avengers. Basically, Thor could take on a similar role as Tony Stark did. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Bazza said:

Yay. But that still leaves a lot to left desired. Not liking the direction Thor has been taking "Hercules Thor" & "Fat Thor" but understand that Chris needs something to come back too to continually play the role. More Thor in Phase Four just cements Thor's role in the MCU as a major star. 

 

Here is a thought, with Chadwick Boseman's death, would Marvel be looking at Thor to be the leader of the Avengers? Love and Thunder might de-Thor Thor like the first film, and then he could join the As-Guardians of the Galaxy. He could also be the "Tony Stark" mentor figure of the Young Avengers. Basically, Thor could take on a similar role as Tony Stark did. 

 

I could see Thor being the hand-to-hand combat instructor for the Young Avengers since Thor has 1400 years of hand-to-hand combat experience.

 

I'm not sold on him as a mentor beyond that. Thor has been depicted as a "have a battle then have a drunken party" kind of person.

 

I'm not sure that Thor understands the concept of underage drinking or the subtle difference between being intoxicated on mead and being intoxicated on meth. Or that he understands that the good guys don't loot the battlefield. Or that he understands the concept of a driver's license.

 

Once a bunch of kids are combat-capable, I'd expect Thor to treat them as if they were responsible adults rather than to continue to treat them like kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree Thor was a fight hard, play hard type before...but with the events of the last 4 movies he was in, serious maturation is entirely plausible.  I could see him taking the leadership role, OR a mentor role...declining to be the titular leader if there's someone else who can take it, because he feels he's not proven he can lead.  And push comes to shove, when HAS he led, in MCU anyway?

 

Side arguments...bring in a new leader who doesn't have the baggage from being part of the Infinity Wars debacle.  (Hey, we know it was impossible to stop, but it was still a debacle.  Tony's SNAP should honestly be as much of a shock as Thanos'.  One point among MANY...suddenly almost 4 billion people need to be fed that weren't there 10 minutes ago.)  Thor is terrible at the PR aspects of being the leader...and his image is likely worse with many leaders.

 

So...could easily go either way.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When has Thor led? In Thor 1, Thor led his friends (and Loki) to the planet of the Frost Giants in retribution for their attack. Nearly resulted in war. Big mistake. Got exiled to Earth, later found his "worthiness again". This film corresponds to the "apprentice" level of apprentice-journeyman-master level adopted by the guilds. Also in Thor 1 we hear Odin give Thor his values:

Do you swear to guard the Nine Realms?

Do you swear to preserve the peace

Do you swear to cast aside all selfish ambition and pledge yourself only to the good of all the Realms?

 

Thor 2 The Dark World. Thor disobeyed Odin's orders and showing initiative, with his friends (and Loki again) implemented a new plan to save Jane and extract the Aether planning to destroy it afterwards. Mistake again as Aether can't be destroyed. Still leading his friends beat the Dark Elves. As Thor went against Odin and showing initiative he displayed the beginnings of actual leadership as well as its consequences. In this movie, Thor is a journeyman. 

 

Thor 3: Odin passed on. Thor led Asgard in successful defeat of Hela. As he ascended to the Kingship of Asgard and displayed wisdom, and unconventional tactics displayed in Thor 2 he showed he was a better leader than Odin, to which Odin acknowledged. Thor has become master.

So to find afterwards when Thor decides he doesn't want to be king anymore, it feels like a retcon and someone (the scriptwriters, or directors or both, or others) didn't grok Thor's journey in his solo films. Basically it is a decision that is out of character. The counter argument is that Thor has never been interested in leadership (eg end of Thor 2) as long as there is anyone else as he prefers adventure to taking responsibility for protecting, and guiding his people.    

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He lost Asgard altogether;  I don't call that successful leadership.  And he doesn't ever beat Hela;  he concedes he can't on his own.  It's why he brings Surtur back, but that's like dropping a dozen nukes on your city to take out King Kong.  That isn't winning.

1 minute ago, Greywind said:

Thor could become king of Wakanda.

 

Cool story idea, but the outcry against it would be deafening...and the boycott crippling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

Personally, I favor recasting. The Black Panther is a much bigger and more important person than whoever plays him, even if that person is a Chadwick Boseman. There are so many stories still to tell about him.

 

Strong disagreement.  T'Challa has spent the vast majority of his career as a c-lister, only occasionally ascending to the b-list before tumbling down again with the next writer.  Chadwick Boseman and Ryan Coogler took him to the a-list, but did so by fundamentally changing the character.  They toned down his arrogance and softened him and made him more likable.  They made him less Bruce Wayne and more Peter Parker.  IOW, they made him not the jerk we see in the comics most of time. 

 

The fact that they had to do such a major overhaul to make him palatable to movie audiences shows the weaknesses of him as a lead character.  So, instead of making him into a character that he never was in comics, pass the mantle.  Let someone else play Wally West to T'Challa's Barry Allen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And to perpetuate the friendly disagreement :) , those elements of T'Challa's personality that you criticize have appeared and disappeared depending on the comic writers. What I remember of the character since his introduction in the 1960s is by and large a noble, honorable man. When we see his movie debut in Captain America: Civil War, he is all of that, but also proud, even arrogant, and definitely angry. Hardly "toned down" or a "major overhaul." He simply grew over that and his own movie, as characters do.

 

But the Black Panther was never a C-list character. He's always been an important figure in the Marvel Universe, even if he didn't always have his own title. And among the black community in North America, and across the world, he was and is an important symbol. The first black superhero in mainstream American comics, an African, a king, and ruler of the most technologically advanced nation on Earth, which had never suffered European colonization. Even black people who had never read comics had heard of the Black Panther.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  I just watched a video on YouTube of sports figures from all around the world; English and Italian soccer, African rugby, American basketball and French tennis players, all giving the “Wakanda Forever” salute.  It seems to have become a gesture of pride for people of color everywhere. 
  I believe whatever Marvel decides to do, be it recast or replace the character, they better treat as carefully and respectfully as handling nitroglycerin during an earthquake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, unclevlad said:

He lost Asgard altogether;  I don't call that successful leadership.  And he doesn't ever beat Hela;  he concedes he can't on his own.  It's why he brings Surtur back, but that's like dropping a dozen nukes on your city to take out King Kong.  That isn't winning.

 

Cool story idea, but the outcry against it would be deafening...and the boycott crippling.

 

He sacrificed Asgard to stop Hela. Because Odin told him "Asgard isn't a place. It's her people." So wherever his people are IS Asgard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...