Dr.Device

Where does Ant-Man and The Wasp fit into this theory? It also fell between Infinity War and Endgame, but made on modestly more than Ant-Man. My memory is more of a bunch of really positive reviews and a bunch of really negative reviews, with some in the middle. I can certainly seeCaptain Marvel's spot in the schedule boosting opening weekend somewhat, but I don't see that holding up long enough to get it to the levels it reached without a lot of fans really liking the movie. The idea that its position nearly doubled its take, but somehow only gave Ant-Man and The Wasp a modest boost, if any, strikes me as grasping at straws.

Entirely? That's an interesting theory. Have you seen anything to support it other than the certainty that people couldn't have really liked the film enough to give it those numbers?

There are some uncited assertion in there. Where did female cast members "bash males"? The Brie Larson quote cited in the article listed upthread had nothing to do with the MCU, and was nothing close to male bashing, and it's the only thing presented so far. As Ternaugh pointed out, Captain Marvel was a blockbuster, by any reasonable definition. As to why Black Widow is doing so relatively poorly, that's really complicated. I sincerely doubt it has anything at all to do with anything Johansson has said in interviews. The movie is about a character that is already dead in the continuity of the series. It was released simultaneously to streaming and theaters, and it was released a year late due to the pandemic. All those are almost certainly bigger factors than folks caring about whatever Johansson said. Regarding Dr. Strange being cut from shows, do you have an example beyond WandaVision? Otherwise, that's one show, and I've got to say, making the decision to not have the powerful man come in and save the day at the end of that series was a solid one. Having any character show up and Deus Ex Machina the ending would have been bad, but having a man do it in a show that's otherwise been mostly centering women would have sucked. This whole panic over more diversity in the MCU makes me laugh. There was one female super hero for the entirety of phase one of the MCU, and she's the one who didn't get a solo movie (until just now), while there were four male-led solo movies. In phase two they added two more women. Wanda only became a hero at the very end of the last movie of phase 2, and Gamora was added as the one woman in a crew of five. There were once again four male-led solo movies, and zero female-led. Phase three gave us our first female-led movie, and five male-led movies. As the original lead actors retire, their characters are getting replaced. We got a black Captain America. We're going to get Iron Heart instead of Iron Man. We know we're getting a female Thor in Love and Thunder, and rumors say that Hemsworth's Thor may be going to die, but I haven't heard anything solid on the future of those two characters. A lot of fans want Shuri to be the new Black Panther, but, once again, Marvel seems to be playing their cards close to their chest, so who knows. This year we get Shang Chi, a new male lead, our first Asian lead in the MCU. Someone in one of these threads said that Dr. Strange is going to die in Multiverse of Madness, and that Hawkeye is going to die in his Disney+ series. I've seen nothing to back these up. But the thing is, if the MCU becomes no longer completely centered around white males for a while, it's not the end of the universe. White males have dominated lead roles in these movies so far (and in all of Hollywood, for that matter) for a long while, and it would take a long time of that no longer being true to reach even close to parity. It would be okay to let some other folks take the spotlight for a while.

Nice!

That was a pretty standard Captain America speech. Cap has been a social justice warrior since way back.

I think that's a completely valid viewpoint. I disagree with it, but I can definitely see where you're coming from. Larson gave a very understated performance in many ways. There were lots of barely there smiles, and bits of understated humor. I think this was most likely a directorial choice (which worked fine for me), because I've seen her play much more emotionally broad characters. I find the accusations of arrogance against the character unfair, but, once again, that's a question of perception. Overall, it's a matter of the character as written/Larson's performance working for some people and not others. And that's fine. I think part of why it worked for me is that I identified with the character a lot. Most of my life I didn't display much emotion. People tended to find me arrogant, when really, I just didn't connect well. And until recently, for as long as I remember people had told me I was something I wasn't, and I had believed them. So it makes sense that I would connect more.

This is, to put it politely, somewhat overwrought, and entirely inaccurate. Is the Falcon (now Captain America) nerdy or gay, submissive, or an idiot? No. Sure, the Winter Soldier is a reformed villain, but, then again, so was the Black Widow. Black Panther? None of those things. And if the actor hadn't died, he'd be back for another movie soon. The Vision died again recently, but we may well see him again. Spider-man is nerdy, I'll give you that but what's wrong with that? Dr. Strange doesn't fit this categories either, although he is a bit of a pompous ass. I won't include Hawkeye, since he's a serial killer (but other than that he's an okay guy), or Starlord, because I'd say he does tend to fall in the idiot bucket (and is also an arrogant, insecure jerk). I've seen Ant-Man criticized because Wasp is a better fighter than him, but there's a lot more to being a positive role model than being able to kick ass (which he still often manages). There are also a ton of supporting characters who are good role models. And, guess what, a gay character can be just as much of a positive male role model as a straight character, not that we see many of them in the MCU or other action movies (The Old Guard is a nice exception there). And Terry Crews is, this very year, playing a badass character on Brooklyn 99. A smart, accomplished bad ass. He just happens to also be a dad, and a caring person. It's a sitcom, so of course they give him an amusing tic (he tends to refer to himself in third person), but he looks like a pretty positive role model to me.

I'd like to see some links to these interviews and statements by Brie Larson and Scarlett Johansson. The idea that Marvel is somehow portraying white men as inherently evil is laughable on its face. Captain America? Iron Man? The Hulk? Hawkeye? Dr. Strange? Thor? Ant Man? Star Lord? Spider-man? Yeah, no. Do they have evil white men in their shows and movies? Sure. But nowhere is it ever implied that being white and male makes them evil or inferior in any way. And as for people not going to see Captain Marvel, it's the second highest grossing of the non-team-up MCU films, so I don't think people stayed away in droves. And it really doesn't make sense to draw any conclusions about Black Widow, with the year+ pandemic delay, the new and untested release strategy, and the lack of a China release (as of yet).

Still a hard disagree. The past twenty years has seen many amazingly good, creative, and original movies.

Wow. That's so utterly different from my experience. When you include direct to streaming content, I think we're in a golden age of video content. There is so amazingly much good stuff out there. That's not to says that there isn't a lot of amazing stuff from the past, too, of course. It's just that there's more of it now. Is there a lot of crap being made? Sure. But that's always been true. Sturgeon's law and all. The thing is, even the stuff that isn't all that great in a critical sense is often a lot of fun.

Potions: Diminution Giant Growth Fire Resistance Leaping Beauty Vitality (increases END/REC and grants LS: does not sleep for duration) Invisibility Iron Will (Mental Defense + DMCV) Sustenance (LS:Eats once per week) Longevity (LS: Does not age) Salves: True Sight (Full replacement for sight, built outside of sight group. Should see through 99% of Illusions/Invis) Iron Skin (rPD/rED)

True. Although it then goes further to state that Density Increase UAA with that limitation "is not a valid power construction." Stripping the DCV bonus from Shrinking seems to be of a kind with stripping the strength from DI.

Mass is eighthed per level of shrinking, so 30 AP of shrinking is 1/32768 mass, 48 AP is 1/16,777,216, and 60 AP is 1/1,073,741,824. Also note, for the shrinking option, that, per RAW, UAA powers are not allowed to take limitations that affect the target, only limitations that would affect the power's owner (Side Effect, Increased END, etc.). Thus there's no option to take a limitation to have the UAA shrinking power not reduce DCV and PER rolls. Personally, I'd consider allowing those as advantages rather than limitations.

Specifically, the rules for UAA powers on inanimate objects are located in 6Ev1p355 I am going to assume that the km is supposed to be kg, because, well . . . NB: As noted, this only applies to inanimate objects. Thus, a power with the base level of UAA could affect Godzilla, but not a subcompact car. Make of this what you will.

As pride month draws to a close, I just want to wish any other LGBT+ folks on here a happy Pride!