slikmar

I have always liked Blade and Ghost Rider, and I liked the original Moon Knight run, but the others meh.  And Moon Knight has had more reboots, versions, and changes than Hawkman so who even knows what they want to do with him?  Done as a silver batman he's great.  All that other stuff?  None of it worked.

Hadn't seen this one mentioned, but I am all for it:
https://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/midnight-sons-movie-reportedly-early-development/

I got my friend an elephant for his room.  When he said "Thank You," I said, "Don't mention it."

This is why you never see Doc Ock and Doc Samson together.

This is where we don't have enough information.
 
 
Given that Thanos has been killed twice in one timeline, as I see it we have a two different options as to how this can work and still keep the "you can't change the past" rule in place:
(It also occurs to me that the Black Order & very likely a bunch of the chitauri all die twice as well)
 
1) Past Thanos is from a different timeline which existed briefly but no longer does.  That timeline was created the moment the stones were taken, existed to the end of the universe, then "unwound" once the stones were put back. If we accept the Ancient One & Banner's discussion this timeline shouldn't exist, but it clearly does (its where Nebula gets captured & interrogated after Rhodey takes back the Power Stone).  If putting the stones back prevents this reality from existing, we can suppose that it will "unwind" once the stone is put back.  If this is true, Thanos using the Pymm/Stark time travel device allows him to escape his sinking ship of a timeline only to get killed in another one.  If the Thanos in the "main" timeline hadn't been dead, they could have met & because they were from different realities they would not have affected each other
If we think Banner & the Ancient one got it wrong and the alternate timelines do exist even after the stones are replaced, then this timeline where Thanos vanished before he could gather the stones & snap half the universe way still exists somewhere in the multiverse.

2) We see that you have to have a strong idea what you want when you use the Infinity Gauntlet.  The Avengers talk about exactly what Hulk will "wish" for before he uses it, and Stark reminds him not to undo the old snap and just bring back everything.
We don't actually know what Stark "wished for" when he used the Gauntlet to erase Past Thanos.  It's possible he just evaporated all the "bad guys" around him.  It' also possible that a tired and battered Stark, who understood he was about to die, wished for an effect instead of an action.  Something like "Thanos and all his minions should not exist anymore & my loved ones won't have to deal with any cosmic fallout from all this Thanos crap"  In which case the Infinity Gauntlet not only evaporated Past Thanos & minions, it also papered over all the time paradoxes that had been created so the universe could keep going (thus fulfilling the "let not deal with any more fallout from Thanos" part of Stark's Snap.

I admit these are both purely fannon/conjecture on my part and the 2nd answer puts words in Stark's mind, but I think both fit what we see on screen. (Stark was very worried about the Infinity Gauntlet undoing his daughter who was born after the first snap, so I can easily imagine making sure she didn't get erased by unforeseen circumstances was on his mind when he made the third snap)

Also; If you can use the Infinity Gauntlet for anything, but the big wishes do damage to the wielder, could you use your first activation of the Gauntlet wish to be immune to Infinity Gauntlet damage and instantly heal any you do somehow receive?  That way you could then do all kinds of crazy things after that without crippling or killing yourself.
Just a thought.

As I understand it, the Vision in the TV show was a construct created by her and not the real one, so no gem.

MCU Red Skull is literally unavailable, being a damned soul on an alien planet. Zemo had a lot of knowledge about Hydra's super-soldier serum and program, as well as the world of international espionage, which is what Sam and Bucky needed. His history with Bucky made for an interesting character interaction.
 
I don't know why it still surprises me how individuals can have such radically different reactions to the same entertainment.

"We're all individuals!"
 
"I'm not."

Customer: "Did you get rid of that horrible screeching sound my car was making?"
 
Mechanic: "Yeah, I took out the Cardi B CD and replaced it with Pink Floyd. You're good to go." 

They have had ten rewriting crisis since then. Think about that. I saw the DC History book on the book shelf and laughed.
CES
Dan Didio, the former top dog, said get rid of all the legacy guys and bring back the old guys, and then went out of his way to give the shaft to Nightwing and Wally West. Everything bad that has happened to those characters has been because Didio hated them.
CES  

The thing that annoys me is that DC had been well on their way to doing a good job of the Legacy thing. Kyle had replaced Hal, with some really good stories. Wally had replaced Barry. Roy had replaced Oliver. They didnt replace the "big 3" though Dick could have replaced Bruce and they had replaced the Robins. Barring her retro'd screwed up history, Donna could have replaced Diana at some point, but wasn't needed as both Diana and Superman were long lived. As mentioned above, Atom and Blue Beetle had been replaced pretty well. Then writers decided they wanted to do Hal, Oliver and Barry stories, so they were brought back. In bringing back Oliver, they even played on it where he was in the JL satellite and Kyle and Wally were there and he was asking if everyone was replaced. If this was some alternate universe or something.

Or Static or Icon.

If the characters are interesting and feel fresh, that is a good indicator that they are not creatively empty.  Writers and artist are putting thought and effort into crafting these legacy characters.  The fact that they are legacy characters is because the major comic book companies are risk adverse, and because legacy characters tend to sell better than other new characters.  There have been plenty of new, non-legacy characters that have come out in the last 20 years and most people can't name even one of them.
 
Being risk adverse and wanting to sell as many issues as possible is not the same as being lazy and creatively empty.  Different adjectives are required.

Also true, most likely, that I'm being cynical and distrusting Hollywood.  One can argue that the biggest movie event of 2020 was the night ABC showed Black Panther, after Chadwick Boseman's death.  Black Panther wasn't a great diversity movie, it was a great movie that incorporated diversity elements.  Now add in that Hollywood generally is being hammered for lack of diversity  So...why are they *really* releasing a black Superman movie?  What is going to make a gay Green Lantern a better choice than another straight Green Lantern?