Feige: "more than half of [heroes] will be women."

[Big Bang]

Nah.. there is no lawsuit possible. All they have is the right of first refusal of distribution of films titled "Hulk". Supporting characters have nothing to do with it and it is only a question of how Marvel can fit in a She Hulk story into another ongoing story.

The point is, if you tried stuffing a Hulk-centric film (including supporting characters) and just call it a different name, then Universal would try to argue Marvel is trying to circumvent the contract. It's likely why Marvel hasn't tried to do so.

Consider the rights they have, and that they refused to part with those rights in any deal with Disney. You don't turn down significant cash and then not assert those rights.

 

[BaronZemo]

It's amazing that when the MCU was male-dominant because of Pelmutter none of you were making a beep but when Feige takes over and wants to create a more multi-faceted and equal MCU you start losing your sh^t...

Who cares about the gender or agendas or SJW? if the females are great characters why do you care if they are more than men?

The low-key sexism here, in IGN or YT or twitter is really starting to bug me. Feige knows he has a platform unprecedented in history, the biggest and more sustainable franchise of all time. It's only natural he wants to balance things up gender-wise. More marketing potential and demographics that are still un-tapped.

 

[NotNickFury]

Come on, you can do better than falling back on an -ism as the supposed reason as to why people take issue with the way Feige framed it. If you want to fall back on stuff like 'sexism' as your argument, you can try that with the Star Wars crowd. It won't work any better there, but there's nothing to do with sexism here. Not one person here has said anything even remotely similar to 'Eww, this is the He-Man Woman Hater's MCU' stuff.

But you also just answered your own question. If the females are great characters...why do you care? Truth is, no one really does. All people would want is great characters. But when you draw attention to gender like it's a selling point, particularly when it's not necessary, then you get Ghostbusters. Character comes first, gender and everything else under the sun come second. This is a film franchise, not a United Colors of Benetton ad.

 

[Spider-Fan]

But how do you know they're NOT putting character first? Why is the assumption that they are catering to feminists, as opposed to introducing a bunch of awesome characters who happen to be female? Further, if the plan is to introduce a lot of female heroes, what do you want Feige to say? Nothing?

 

[Jh7058622]

He could always just tell us the characters he wants to do female and male. He has been doing these headlining quotes to be pro female which is amazing but to me it comes across as hollow and unnecessary. He wants women to be more powerful than the males (Captain Marvel) just do it don't sell it as her being Ms. MARYSUE. It doesn't feel progressive but much like when Marvel was trying so hard to make Inhumans "happen" and we all know how that turn out.

 

[MasterCat]

But how do you know they're NOT putting character first? Why is the assumption that they are catering to feminists, as opposed to introducing a bunch of awesome characters who happen to be female?

That would be great; who are they? I've spent this whole thread trying to make the numbers work, and they don't add up with both an Eternals film and an F4 film. Well, maybe there will be female Eternals besides Sersi and Thena (I can't think of any) and maybe Sue Storm's sibling will be gender-swapped.

Here's what I've got so far.
Captain Marvel 1 & 2: 2 female heroes (Mar-Vell presumably dead)
GotG3: Adam Warlock & a female hero
The Eternals: at least one more male hero than female (let's say 3-2)
X-Men: equal ratio of students, male Xavier
Fantastic 4: 3-1 male
That brings us to something like 11-9. Assuming no gender swaps, that means 3 more female heroes introduced in solo films or Avengers before projects like Nova or James Gunn's Moon Knight.

 

[Big Bang]

But how do you know they're NOT putting character first? Why is the assumption that they are catering to feminists, as opposed to introducing a bunch of awesome characters who happen to be female? Further, if the plan is to introduce a lot of female heroes, what do you want Feige to say? Nothing?

I think it is the vagueness that is getting people riled up. Ironically, if some suspicions are correct, the vagueness was necessary if what he wanted to talk about was the crop of female characters that are inbound from Fox, many of whom are among Marvel's most popular. Obviously because of the legalities involved, he can't outright say it yet. Many of whom I have no doubts nobody will take issue with being given the spotlight.

A lot can be (mis)construed from Feige's vague statement. Given how badly the situation has become for another of Disney's major products, and how even Iger now even supposedly wants that studio's president gone, I'd understand where a lot of the concern is coming from.

 

[Spider-Fan]

He could always just tell us the characters he wants to do female and male. He has been doing these headlining quotes to be pro female which is amazing but to me it comes across as hollow and unnecessary. He wants women to be more powerful than the males (Captain Marvel) just do it don't sell it as her being Ms. MARYSUE. It doesn't feel progressive but much like when Marvel was trying so hard to make Inhumans "happen" and we all know how that turn out.

Feige and Marvel Studios didn't make Inhumans. Marvel TV did. That's a whole other division, so Marvel Studios didn't "try so hard" to make it happen. In fact, they didn't make the movie, so quite the opposite.

I really hate the term "Marysue" as people often use it incorrectly. To call Carol a "Marysue" at this stage when there is no footage or anything is just showcasing a bias. But you'll probably see her as a "Marysue" either way since you're conditioning yourself that way already. Here is an old fashioned idea, why don't we WATCH the movie first? Radical, I know.

That would be great; who are they? I've spent this whole thread trying to make the numbers work, and they don't add up with both an Eternals film and an F4 film. Well, maybe there will be female Eternals besides Sersi and Thena (I can't think of any) and maybe Sue Storm's sibling will be gender-swapped.

Here's what I've got so far.
Captain Marvel 1 & 2: 2 female heroes (Mar-Vell presumably dead)
GotG3: Adam Warlock & a female hero
The Eternals: at least one more male hero than female (let's say 3-2)
X-Men: equal ratio of students, male Xavier
Fantastic 4: 3-1 male
That brings us to something like 11-9. Assuming no gender swaps, that means 3 more female heroes introduced in solo films or Avengers before projects like Nova or James Gunn's Moon Knight.

X-Men has tons of potential female characters, not just in the main X-Men film. Storm can easily be in a BP movie, etc. We don't know who will be in the Eternals or how many (speculating at the moment is useless). Don't forget whoever is introduced in Black Widow. GotG have other members they can add, including Moondragon, etc. There is plenty to mine in the female character arena. Plus some characters like Ghost may be gender swapped (the change didn't help or hurt Ghost IMO...she was just kind of okay either way).

 

[Spider-Fan]

I think it is the vagueness that is getting people riled up. Ironically, if some suspicions are correct, the vagueness was necessary if what he wanted to talk about was the crop of female characters that are inbound from Fox, many of whom are among Marvel's most popular. Obviously because of the legalities involved, he can't outright say it yet. Many of whom I have no doubts nobody will take issue with being given the spotlight.

A lot can be (mis)construed from Feige's vague statement. Given how badly the situation has become for another of Disney's major products, and how even Iger now even supposedly wants that studio's president gone, I'd understand where a lot of the concern is coming from.

Feige has been running this ship for 20 films. All pretty much well-liked. He clearly has shown he knows what he is doing. Instead of making outlandish claims, why don't we see what the guy who championed this franchise to what it is today has in mind first?

 

[BaronZemo]

Come on, you can do better than falling back on an -ism as the supposed reason as to why people take issue with the way Feige framed it. If you want to fall back on stuff like 'sexism' as your argument, you can try that with the Star Wars crowd. It won't work any better there, but there's nothing to do with sexism here. Not one person here has said anything even remotely similar to 'Eww, this is the He-Man Woman Hater's MCU' stuff.

But you also just answered your own question. If the females are great characters...why do you care? Truth is, no one really does. All people would want is great characters. But when you draw attention to gender like it's a selling point, particularly when it's not necessary, then you get Ghostbusters. Character comes first, gender and everything else under the sun come second. This is a film franchise, not a United Colors of Benetton ad.

Sorry, not buying it. None of you was even complaining during the first Phase and suddenly you question Marvel's ability to put character first. It's weird...

You don't realize y Feige is putting gender first in his statements? Really? Why do you think BP was ssuh phenomenon? Because it didn't emphasize on the cultural/racial/social context of the movie in order to tap into the african demographic?

Feige is very smart. he knows his standard MCU crowd will show up for his movies and they will be successful. He knows that. It's the other gender pools that don't nromally go to cbms that he tries to attract. Or do you need me to break down to you why WW made 421 in the domestic box opffice with over 50% of that being from women? Women don't usually account to that big of a percentage in cbms.

It's marketing and strategic move and it's a very smart one.

 

[BaronZemo]

I think it is the vagueness that is getting people riled up. Ironically, if some suspicions are correct, the vagueness was necessary if what he wanted to talk about was the crop of female characters that are inbound from Fox, many of whom are among Marvel's most popular. Obviously because of the legalities involved, he can't outright say it yet. Many of whom I have no doubts nobody will take issue with being given the spotlight.

A lot can be (mis)construed from Feige's vague statement. Given how badly the situation has become for another of Disney's major products, and how even Iger now even supposedly wants that studio's president gone, I'd understand where a lot of the concern is coming from.

I will be quite blunt with you. You have lost the right to doubt Feige. Fair and simple. After spearheading the most consistent franchise in history you have the lost the right to question his ability to put character first WHICH IS THE EPITOME of the entire MCU.

 

[NotNickFury]

Sorry, not buying it. None of you was even complaining during the first Phase and suddenly you question Marvel's ability to put character first. It's weird...

You don't realize y Feige is putting gender first in his statements? Really? Why do you think BP was ssuh phenomenon? Because it didn't emphasize on the cultural/racial/social context of the movie in order to tap into the african demographic?

It's marketing and strategic move and it's a very smart one.

Pandering, you mean. Also, unless you've been keeping tabs on everyone since Phase One, you really don't know what anyone here thought or said during the MCU's early years, do you? At least pretend you can back up wild claims.

 

[Abudefduf]

I hope you were being sarcastic, but if those are what you'd call "bad movies", then please keep making them! They're some of the best movies released in recent years.

But they're all extremely popular in "woke" geek circles, and that makes them bad. Sorry, I don't make the rules.

We don't know who will be in the Eternals or how many (speculating at the moment is useless).

According to a rumor it will be centered around Sersi, which would be great because on paper she sounds much more interesting than that blonde Icaron dude.

 

[Spider-Fan]

But they're all extremely popular in "woke" geek circles, and that makes them bad. Sorry, I don't make the rules.

According to a rumor it will be centered around Sersi, which would be great because on paper she sounds much more interesting than that blonde Icaron dude.

I like Sersi, so this works for me

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I really hate the term "Marysue" as people often use it incorrectly. To call Carol a "Marysue" at this stage when there is no footage or anything is just showcasing a bias. But you'll probably see her as a "Marysue" either way since you're conditioning yourself that way already. Here is an old fashioned idea, why don't we WATCH the movie first? Radical, I know.

The term "Mary Sue" has been so misused and abused that it has essentially lost all meaning. These days it mostly gets used as "Protagonist (usually female) that I don't like."

And Captain Marvel should be one of the most powerful Marvel heroes. That's who the character is. She should be on Thor's level or close to it.

 

[Spider-Fan]

The term "Mary Sue" has been so misused and abused that it has essentially lost all meaning. These days it mostly gets used as "Protagonist (usually female) that I don't like."

Yeah, this is pretty spot on

 

[Ozbridge]

1. Captain America (Sebastian Stan): 4 films on his contract after A4.
2. Ant-Man. 2 films left for Paul Rudd.
3. Doctor Strange. 3 films left after A4.
4. Spider-Man. We know there'll be an MCU Spider-Man 3.
5. Black Panther. Chadwick Boseman only contracted for 5 films, but BP2 won't even be out at this point.
6. Hawkeye. 1 film for Renner after A4.

1. Black Widow. ScarJo's contract is over. I would think they'd have better things to do after her solo film than keep paying her what she'd demand.
2. The Scarlet Witch. Elizabeth Olsen would have 2 films left if she's more than a cameo in A4.
3. The Wasp. 4 films left if A4 is legally a cameo.
4. Carol Danvers. 4 films left.
5. Mantis. Originally an Avenger in the 1970s; Pom will have 2-3 films on a standard Marvel contract after GotG3, depending on whether her A4 appearance is a cameo.

How can you say how many movies are left for each characters based merely on (reported) contracts? I think the contracts are only binding on the actors' part, i.e. if Marvel wants them then they're obligated to be in the movie(s), but Marvel isn't obligated to make movies staring them.

That would be great; who are they? I've spent this whole thread trying to make the numbers work, and they don't add up with both an Eternals film and an F4 film. Well, maybe there will be female Eternals besides Sersi and Thena (I can't think of any) and maybe Sue Storm's sibling will be gender-swapped.

Here's what I've got so far.
Captain Marvel 1 & 2: 2 female heroes (Mar-Vell presumably dead)
GotG3: Adam Warlock & a female hero
The Eternals: at least one more male hero than female (let's say 3-2)
X-Men: equal ratio of students, male Xavier
Fantastic 4: 3-1 male
That brings us to something like 11-9. Assuming no gender swaps, that means 3 more female heroes introduced in solo films or Avengers before projects like Nova or James Gunn's Moon Knight.

Is there any report on Adam Warlock? The Eternals? Fantastic 4? Why are you so sure?

And if there're indeed that many male-starring movies, I'm pretty sure Marvel's creative team can pull the same number of female characters from the comics, no matter how obscure they are.

 

[honestbharani]

The point is, if you tried stuffing a Hulk-centric film (including supporting characters) and just call it a different name, then Universal would try to argue Marvel is trying to circumvent the contract. It's likely why Marvel hasn't tried to do so.

Consider the rights they have, and that they refused to part with those rights in any deal with Disney. You don't turn down significant cash and then not assert those rights.

But you CANNOT win an argument like that. As long as the titular character of the movie has a significant role and arc, there is just absolutely no grounds for Universal to even entertain a lawsuit there. The key word is the definition of what constitutes a "Hulk" movie and honestly , Ragnarok showed what they can do playing around with that phrasing.

 

[honestbharani]

why people take issue with the way Feige framed it. .

Again, I honestly wish you would actually read what Feige said before posting. Its really not that hard to try to read something before commenting.

 

[honestbharani]

H He wants women to be more powerful than the males (Captain Marvel) .

Ok first of all, what is wrong with that? And secondly and more importantly, when the hell did he say that?

 

[Ozbridge]

He wants women to be more powerful than the males (Captain Marvel) just do it don't sell it as her being Ms. MARYSUE.

I don't think he specifically said "women more powerful than men". IIRC correctly he said something along the line of "Captain Marvel is the most powerful individual in the MCU, more powerful than even Captain America or Thor".

And secondly and more importantly, when the hell did he say that?

IIRC correctly he said that after the Civil War's name reveal and the big announcements of the rest of phase 3 (Doctor Strange, Black Panther, GotG 2, AMatW, Inhumans, Captain Marvel and Infinity Part I and II).

 

[Big Bang]

Feige has been running this ship for 20 films. All pretty much well-liked. He clearly has shown he knows what he is doing. Instead of making outlandish claims, why don't we see what the guy who championed this franchise to what it is today has in mind first?

I wouldn't go so far as to call anything outlandish. Not after what we've seen go down with Lucasfilm, and the corporate drama that is breaking out behind the scenes. That whole mess is probably feeding some of the reactions to what Feige said. I'm not saying that they are correct. Just that people are pretty raw around what has been going on.

I will be quite blunt with you. You have lost the right to doubt Feige. Fair and simple. After spearheading the most consistent franchise in history you have the lost the right to question his ability to put character first WHICH IS THE EPITOME of the entire MCU.

WTH? What part of what I said was doubting anything he has done? The only thing I was speaking to his plans on bringing forward the female heroes coming over from Fox, and because that deal isn't complete yet he can't outright say what he means to do. He can only vaguely speak to them in the manner in which he did though.

 

[Big Bang]

But you CANNOT win an argument like that. As long as the titular character of the movie has a significant role and arc, there is just absolutely no grounds for Universal to even entertain a lawsuit there. The key word is the definition of what constitutes a "Hulk" movie and honestly , Ragnarok showed what they can do playing around with that phrasing.

It's not as clear cut as that. If it was, Marvel would have pulled everything Hulk related, slapped a different name on it or in support of another character they do have full rights to and gone forward. They also wouldn't have bothered trying to buy back the distribution rights. Given the chance, Universal (and by extension, Comcast) would jump at any chance for a lawsuit.

 

[Thör-El]

Jessica Jones and Agent Carter are the only female lead characters in the MCU so far, the original Avengers/Guardians line ups each just had one woman out of five or six heroes and we've had to wait until the 10th year of the MCU to get a female led film with Captain Marvel. Compare that to Thor, Cap, Iron Man, Hulk, Spidey, Dr Strange, Ant-Man, Black Panther, Daredevil, Luke Cage, Iron Fist etc plus mostly male led Avengers/Guardians/Defenders within the first ten years and it does start to look like a poor showing gender equality wise.

Part of the problem was lack of willingness to bet on a female/minority lead before Wonder Woman/Black Panther. Hopefully that's going to change now.

I do think another factor behind the MCU's limited diversity is that it's a reflection of the lack of diversity in the comics. Most major 616/Ultimate Marvel heroes are male - definitely the vast majority of characters that have had their own comic - and that's something that's been built up over almost 60 years so it can't be fixed overnight. There aren't as many major female/minority characters to adapt - especially outside of the X-Men - and a lot of female heroes are legacy characters (e.g. She-Hulk, Spider-Woman, Kamala Khan, Riri Williams, Shuri as Black Panther), aren't the main heroes of the stories they appear in (e.g. Valkyrie, Sif, Clea, Sharon Carter) or are fairly obscure for non-comic buffs (e.g. Spectrum, America Chavez, Mockingbird, Quake, Elsa Bloodstone etc).

With that in mind I definitely think trying to make half the MCU heroes female is ambitious (and I'm pretty sure he must have the X-Men in mind for meeting that target) but Feige knows what he's doing in terms of respecting the source material and great storytelling and I hope he pulls it off.

 

[MasterCat]

With that in mind I definitely think trying to make half the MCU heroes female is ambitious (and I'm pretty sure he must have the X-Men in mind for meeting that target)

Definitely. A majority of Marvel superheroines recognizable to people who don't go into comic book stores are still locked up in that one property. Heck, possibly every single non-black minority woman they had until 2014 is a Mutant except the very obscure Silverclaw.