Sequels Couple Potential Problems For Captain Marvel Sequel (SPOILERS)

[jolldan]

Anyone who has read my review will know I was pretty much lukewarm to Captain Marvel but that doesn't mean I want to see her fail quite the contrary I hope I enjoy the eventual sequel more than I did the first one. I was actually thinking about a sequel on my way home and it made me think there could be a few potential problems for Captain Marvel 2.

1. Time Period Potentially Removes Any Threat To Protagonist

This is just my assumption but I think it would make sense for a continuation of Carol Danvers story to take place somewhere after the events of her first film and before the events of Infinity War. As we see her at the end as she is away to lead the Skrull's to a new home. Continuing here would make a decent amount of sense but one big problem that films that do this is they will have a movie where the audience knows that there is no danger of the protagonist dying because she's alive at a later date so a lot of threat is removed.

2. If They Use Ronan As The Villain Same Goes For The Antagonist

I only say this because that little bit with Ronan at the end saying they will return for the woman sort of made me think he may feature in her sequel and honestly you can't have Lee Pace as Ronan again without him taking centre stage. However if they do this not only have they removed any threat from the protagonist now they have removed it from the antagonist as well. Now im not saying I want anyone to die in the next film but if you remove any chance of it happening its harder to get invested in a lot of scenes.



Couldn't stop thinking about these two things last night after the movie, what are your thoughts? Is there any other potential problems I have missed?

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

What mainstream superhero film has anyone gone to with even the barest expectation that the titular character was in actual danger of dying either before one saw it or in the middle of viewing it?

Even if you have a halfway decent answer "Well movie X did that" etc. the VAST majority of all super hero films don't have that as an element and the vast majority are franchises based on a character. There was no doubt Iron Man was going to survive his second film. Captain America was going to NOT be killed by The Winter Soldier. Everyone on some level knows this.

With an interconnected shared universe using characters in a past setting like Ronan does bring up certain issues but knowing the ultimate fate isn't some giant issue as there is still tension in the story based on their actions and the fallout therof. That Ronan lives is of less importance than say if his being imprisoned by the Kree results from actions that have repercussions to either the protagonist or other characters. Say he gets taken in by the Kree at the end but his actions have the effect of turning the Skrulls more militant or some such.

 

[The_Manhunter]

Look at Revenge of the Sith. We knew the fates of all the key characters, but that hardly made the story less compelling. Same with Rogue One, we knew that Vader lived and that something bad probably happened with the main cast, but it still worked too.

Another prequel can work, just gotta do it right.

 

[eon001]

Anyone who has read my review will know I was pretty much lukewarm to Captain Marvel but that doesn't mean I want to see her fail quite the contrary I hope I enjoy the eventual sequel more than I did the first one. I was actually thinking about a sequel on my way home and it made me think there could be a few potential problems for Captain Marvel 2.

1. Time Period Potentially Removes Any Threat To Protagonist

This is just my assumption but I think it would make sense for a continuation of Carol Danvers story to take place somewhere after the events of her first film and before the events of Infinity War. As we see her at the end as she is away to lead the Skrull's to a new home. Continuing here would make a decent amount of sense but one big problem that films that do this is they will have a movie where the audience knows that there is no danger of the protagonist dying because she's alive at a later date so a lot of threat is removed.

2. If They Use Ronan As The Villain Same Goes For The Antagonist

I only say this because that little bit with Ronan at the end saying they will return for the woman sort of made me think he may feature in her sequel and honestly you can't have Lee Pace as Ronan again without him taking centre stage. However if they do this not only have they removed any threat from the protagonist now they have removed it from the antagonist as well. Now im not saying I want anyone to die in the next film but if you remove any chance of it happening its harder to get invested in a lot of scenes.



Couldn't stop thinking about these two things last night after the movie, what are your thoughts? Is there any other potential problems I have missed?

Neither of those things would be a problem if they just do a present day sequel

I would suggest have a present day sequel with alot of flashbacks. There was a season of Ray Donovan that done it masterfully.

That being said, I'm good with prequel stories. Hobbit worked.

 

[Asharad]

Most super hero movies aren't about survival of the hero or villain. They are about survival of the protagonist group (Kree refugees, Xandar, Earth, New York, 50%, Asgard, etc). This is what usually separates the good super hero films from the mediocre.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

What mainstream superhero film has anyone gone to with even the barest expectation that the titular character was in actual danger of dying either before one saw it or in the middle of viewing it?

Only one I can think of is The Dark Knight Rises.

 

[writer0327]

I hate this constant criticism of "the hero wasn't in any danger" and therefore this diminishes the story or the stakes. It's one of the worst criticisms because it makes it sound like the ultimate goal of the hero is to merely survive the ordeal, when often the goal of the hero is to stop the bad guy, rescue someone, to prevent some bad thing from happening, etc. In other words, to save the day.

Obviously this is much easier to pull off if the hero is alive, and having a hero in mortal danger can cause the story to have more at stake, but the story isn't necessarily less compelling because we know the hero will likely survive. The focal point should be "what is the hero/villain trying to accomplish?" A hero can be alive and well, in no physical danger, but completely be in danger of failing to achieve his objective.

 

[Web-Head]

Do you have these same complaints about WW84?