Has the MCU peaked?

[Spider-Fan]

Is that the case though? It seems unfair to me to reduce a character like She-Hulk to just being the female version of the Hulk when she has been a major character in the comics and has had her own identity since the 80's.

Same can be said of all these characters. The MCU didn't invent Kate Bishop or Yelena or any of the alternate versions of characters they're using now. Many of them in well regarded runs in comics of their own. So they're not just arbitrarily replacing them with female characters. They're using other versions who already worked in comics

 

[Chris B]

Same can be said of all these characters. The MCU didn't invent Kate Bishop or Yelena or any of the alternate versions of characters they're using now. Many of them in well regarded runs in comics of their own. So they're not just arbitrarily replacing them with female characters. They're using other versions who already worked in comics

Plus all those characters you mentioned have been positively received as far as I can tell. You have people calling for a Kate/Yelena team-up series for example.

 

[Docker2.0]

Your posts in this thread say everything I need to know. If you don't want the perception of being an incel or a troll, then don't say trollish things. I am in plenty of threads on this forum discussing the current state of Marvel Studios, and there are plenty of people who have intelligent reasons for why they're struggling. Guess how many of them I call out as trolls? None. Cause well reasoned arguments are well reasoned. When you say crap like "Loki was about Sylvie and Moon Knight was about Scarlet Scarab" which are claims that are just not true, you are showing me exactly who you are. And that is nowhere near the only example of you making points like this. You want that perception to change? Start presenting better arguments than crap like that.

Wait! so me questioning the sex changes and race swapping is considered trolling?! Even though you have major outlets slowly starting to say the same thing that not only me but others have been saying. I could careless if you think I'm a troll but people are not going to see these shows and movies for a reason and it's not superhero fatigue. It's the bait and switch and swaps that people are boycotting. Most every voice in this thread seems to like everything that Marvel puts out and there is a reason this forum doesn't get the traction it use to.

 

[Docker2.0]

Plus all those characters you mentioned have been positively received as far as I can tell. You have people calling for a Kate/Yelena team-up series for example.

Cool! Can't wait to see it happen! Let's see what the general audience thinks about it.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Wait! so me questioning the sex changes and race swapping is considered trolling?! Even though you have major outlets slowly starting to say the same thing that not only me but others have been saying. I could careless if you think I'm a troll but people are not going to see these shows and movies for a reason and it's not superhero fatigue. It's the bait and switch and swaps that people are boycotting. Most every voice in this thread seems to like everything that Marvel puts out and there is a reason this forum doesn't get the traction it use to.

Who did they sex swap? Last I checked, Kate Bishop was always female. So was Yelena. Characters created in the comics years ago. There is a difference between trying determine why a character isnt working, and saying its not happening cause of a sexist agenda. Which you've clearly showcased many times. So yes. You are a troll. Plenty of headlines examine this issue without blaming the fact that there is a women in a movie. If you're basing your views on articles using that as an excuse, then you are also reading sttuf by authors I don't care to read nor follow on any form of social media. The fact a character is female isn't why they're not popular. It could be the writing, the actor, could be many things. But the very fact that the character is a woman? That's an agenda showing.

As for the point on traction, forums are not in vogue anymore as a whole and social media has changed more toward Facebook or Twitter models. But if the reason is cause a bunch of sexist people decided they hated being called out about being sexist, then I don't care about them not coming here anymore. Good riddance to them.

 

[TheVileOne]

Who did they sex swap? Last I checked, Kate Bishop was always female. So was Yelena. Characters created in the comics years ago. There is a difference between trying determine why a character isnt working, and saying its not happening cause of a sexist agenda. Which you've clearly showcased many times. So yes. You are a troll. Plenty of headlines examine this issue without blaming the fact that there is a women in a movie. If you're basing your views on articles using that as an excuse, then you are also reading sttuf by authors I don't care to read nor follow on any form of social media. The fact a character is female isn't why they're not popular. It could be the writing, the actor, could be many things. But the very fact that the character is a woman? That's an agenda showing.

As for the point on traction, forums are not in vogue anymore as a whole and social media has changed more toward Facebook or Twitter models. But if the reason is cause a bunch of sexist people decided they hated being called out about being sexist, then I don't care about them not coming here anymore. Good riddance to them.

Mar-Vell and Taskmaster.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Mar-Vell and Taskmaster.

Mostly talking about heroes. Not side characters and villains cause they're not your faces of the franchise. Your average movie goer also doesn't give a crap or are aware that they gender swapped Mar-Vell or Taskmaster. They're not well known characters outside comic fandom

 

[TheVileOne]

Mostly talking about heroes. Not side characters and villains cause they're not your faces of the franchise. Your average movie goer also doesn't give a crap or are aware that they gender swapped Mar-Vell or Taskmaster. They're not well known characters outside comic fandom

I mean most comic characters aren't well-known outside of comic fandom either.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Yeah it is absolutely the prevalence of women in lead roles and "swapping" as if the GA remotely cares about upholding the masculine legacy of superhero identities and not the rapid, obvious decline in quality the franchise suffered. Or the extreme over exposure caused them spreading themselves too thin to pump out D+ shows. Or growing audience disinterest in the genre. Clearly it's all the dirty wimmenz with their periods and their feminism.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I mean most comic characters aren't well-known outside of comic fandom either.

Precisely, which is why no one cares about any of this gender swapping outside of comic book fans

 

[Iceman]

Using characters like Kate Bishop, Ironheart, She-Hulk, X-23 etc isn't gender swapping, it's using established comic characters with very distinct personalities that have existed alongside the similar male characters. When we had the early alternative versions of Flash we didn't call it any kind of swapping and those are all seen as legit characters.

The GA would care if you legit gender-swapped Superman, Batman or Spider-Man (and I don't mean using Supergirl/Batgirl/Spider-Gwen) out of thin air, but they wouldn't even know for the vast majority of other characters, and certainly not Taskmaster. The only way they would know is if they were already in circles where topics like that were the main point of discussion over and above actual entertainment.

 

[GreenKToo]

I feel they missed an opportunity not making Galactus the next big bad.
He's Practically immortal, and would have "eaten" tens of thousands of planets across the universe by now.
With Thanos, you could at least talk to and reason with. Not so with galactus.

 

[MadVillainy]

I feel they missed an opportunity not making Galactus the next big bad.
He's Practically immortal, and would have "eaten" tens of thousands of planets across the universe by now.
With Thanos, you could at least talk to and reason with. Not so with galactus.

I think Galactus would've been good. However, you're point of Galactus not being able to be reasoned with doesn't make him that that compelling for a whole saga imo. I think he fits best as an Avengers level threat on an Ultron level. Like they could've done "Avengers: The Rise of Galactus" but he should'nt be the next Thanos.

The best choices were/are a more personal Earthbound villain like Magneto, Osborn or Doom because after a universal threat like Thanos a smaller more personal threat would've been great. Or they go big like they're trying to do with Kang and have a multiversal threat.

 

[TheVileOne]

Hercules and Squirrel Girl reasoned with Galactus.

 

[The Overlord]

I feel they missed an opportunity not making Galactus the next big bad.
He's Practically immortal, and would have "eaten" tens of thousands of planets across the universe by now.
With Thanos, you could at least talk to and reason with. Not so with galactus.

The problem with Galactus is he's a force of nature, he doesn't scheme and there is no escalation with him like there is with Thanos, after he tries to attack Earth and the heroes drive him off, what do with him? That's enough for a movie, but it's not enough for a series of movies. That should be the last FF movie. Maybe a Silver Surfer movie could be a good follow-up, but I would leave Galactus to FF and Silver Surfer movies, and let the Avengers deal with someone else.

Anyway, I think Marvel should focus less on interconnection, and make good solo movies where you don't have to watch a ton of stuff beforehand. Hire directors and give them creative freedom to tell interesting one-shot stories, instead of trying to micromanage them and write the climax of the film before they get involved. And tone down the humor, it's getting annoying and it undercuts the stakes.

 

[TheVileOne]

I mean the existence of Silver Surfer is proof that there's more to Galactus than just a gluttonous planet-eating entity.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I think Galactus could be a great Phase villain, but not a Saga. He isn't a guy who has a master plan. All you would do is build towards him coming to Earth. I don't think that concept could carry 7 years.

 

[The Overlord]

I mean the existence of Silver Surfer is proof that there's more to Galactus than just a gluttonous planet-eating entity.

That doesn't mean you can use him as a saga-wide villain, I like Galactus, but I think he is a bit limited in what you can do with him as a villain.

 

[Bayne]

Realistically, there were only a few actually practical options for a new phase/saga villain starting from where the MCU was in 2020.

Either you go bigger than Thanos, which means Kang and the multiverse or you go radically smaller than him with a built-in justification for why the Avengers can't just beat the bad guy.

The only real options they had for number 2 at the time were the skrulls/Secret Invasion or some flavor of political/scheming villain like Osbourne, Doom, Thunderbolt Ross, Valentina or Kingpin.

Osbourne would've been too risky because of the Sony deal, Ross or Valentina would've felt too small and kind off the cuff since that's not really who those characters are designed to be, and Kingpin would've been a massive departure from what people loved about the character on Netflix. Which means their best option was probably Doom, only they might have already been committed to a new direction before the Fox merger even went through. And it would've been weird to introduce Doom as an MCU wide villain for years before the F4 exist in the MCU.

Or there was secret option c of just not having an overarching villain for a while.

 

[MadVillainy]

Realistically, there were only a few actually practical options for a new phase/saga villain starting from where the MCU was in 2020.

Either you go bigger than Thanos, which means Kang and the multiverse or you go radically smaller than him with a built-in justification for why the Avengers can't just beat the bad guy.

The only real options they had for number 2 at the time were the skrulls/Secret Invasion or some flavor of political/scheming villain like Osbourne, Doom, Thunderbolt Ross, Valentina or Kingpin.

Osbourne would've been too risky because of the Sony deal, Ross or Valentina would've felt too small and kind off the cuff since that's not really who those characters are designed to be, and Kingpin would've been a massive departure from what people loved about the character on Netflix. Which means their best option was probably Doom, only they might have already been committed to a new direction before the Fox merger even went through. And it would've been weird to introduce Doom as an MCU wide villain for years before the F4 exist in the MCU.

Or there was secret option c of just not having an overarching villain for a while.

I would've loved a smaller villain that they can't just punch out be the villain. An Osborn/Doom tandum would've been the greatest choice imo. (Kingpin feels too small time)

That's why I'm hoping, but I doubt it'll happen, that if they ever get the JL off the ground again they adapt part of the JLU s2 Cadmus arc.

 

[GreenKToo]

I mean the existence of Silver Surfer is proof that there's more to Galactus than just a gluttonous planet-eating entity.

I think you guys misunderstood me.
What I meant by he can't be reasoned with, is he is Basically a God ( big G )
He would pay no more attention to the heroes trying to communicate or stop him, than we would an ant trying to reason with us.
It takes several ants stinging you to really get your attention.

He is definitely not some mindless monster eating planets. Far from it.

 

[TheVileOne]

He's been reasoned with in the comics before *Shrugs*

 

[Albright]

MCU has definitely peaked.
I liked Eternals and Quantumania and when I watch it I still thin, that they’re so fun to watch.
But media makes me believe, that they sucked and that’s why I don’t feel the anticipation for any new MCU movie a series now.

 

[Silvermoth]

I think going back to the characters and having faith in them to keep people interested will help the franchise. The MCU has gotten to sherbet mixed with an energy drink, all “oh my gosh this happened then this happened then this happened”

 

[The Overlord]

I think you guys misunderstood me.
What I meant by he can't be reasoned with, is he is Basically a God ( big G )
He would pay no more attention to the heroes trying to communicate or stop him, than we would an ant trying to reason with us.
It takes several ants stinging you to really get your attention.

He is definitely not some mindless monster eating planets. Far from it.

It's not that Galactus is mindless, it's that he is too single-minded to have some complex scheme that escalates to a giant climax like Thanos did.

What's the conclusion of the Galactus story? After the Earth-based superheroes drive Galactus away from Earth, are they supposed to give up their lives on Earth and chase Galactus across the universe to stop him from eating other planets? Are they supposed to kill Galactus to end his threat? Neither of those seems like a good conclusion, after the Earth heroes drive Galactus away from Earth, it's like the Earth heroes will no longer be involved with Galactus, Galactus can still menace the Silver Surfer in his movie, but then what after that?

Also, I saw this video about how Marvel should tone down its comedic dialogue.



At this point, I would prefer heart-felt melodrama then everyone being some snarky jokester who says ''Well that just happened'' all the time.