Joss Whedon developing Marvel SHIELD series for ABC

[Dark Raven]

I see SHIELD as being like the equivalent of these later Star Trek series. They were set in the same continuity as the movies (either the original Star Trek or the later Next Generation movies). So characters from Deep Space Nine or Voyager could easily show up in one of the movies, and indeed they did on several occasions (eg the EMH in ST:First Contact, or even Janeway as a now Admiral in ST: Nemesis). Also, changes made to the movies or series could also be reflected in either - eg the First Contact uniforms began showing up in Deep Space Nine, or even the Deep Space Nine jumpsuits showing up in Star Trek Generations.

And there were obviously references to the Dominion War going on at the time of Deep Space Nine in some of the Next Gen movies.

So I think we'd get that kind of crossover with the MCU films and the SHIELD tv series, but just as with Star Trek, they were autonomous with one another but still occasionally affected each other as well.

 

[Pink Ranger]

I see SHIELD as being like the equivalent of these later Star Trek series. They were set in the same continuity as the movies (either the original Star Trek or the later Next Generation movies). So characters from Deep Space Nine or Voyager could easily show up in one of the movies, and indeed they did on several occasions (eg the EMH in ST:First Contact, or even Janeway as a now Admiral in ST: Nemesis). Also, changes made to the movies or series could also be reflected in either - eg the First Contact uniforms began showing up in Deep Space Nine, or even the Deep Space Nine jumpsuits showing up in Star Trek Genesis.

And there were obviously references to the Dominion War going on at the time of Deep Space Nine in some of the Next Gen movies.

So I think we'd get that kind of crossover with the MCU films and the SHIELD tv series, but just as with Star Trek, they were autonomous with one another but still occasionally affected each other as well.

That's an excellent comparison. Also, keep in mind that Joss has some experience keeping two concurrent stories running in the same universe, as with Buffy and Angel.

 

[Webhead2006]

really budget is going to be what ever it is, if the show is 4-6mill per episode they can do occasional super heroes with powers. Same goes with any powered marvel comics villains. And in the case of carol she has what energy powers that is a doable power on tv along with invul/strength shows been doing that for decades. Plus really its not like they be useing powers for 42 mins of an episode. Probably just be 2-3 scenes per episode. And same with flying if carol was to get powers in the show or in avengers sequel/future marvel movie. No need she has to be flying all the time in an episode. Just when its needed. Same with costumes if they were to do carol/spider-woman they dont need to be sporting them all the time or in every episode. Could just be for special occasions. So really i dont see why folks think powers/costumes would be so far out of relm of happening. The show is going to be set in the MCU where heros exist and costumes too. They just dont need to be worn all the time. In down times/regular day to day stuff they could be just wearing street attire/shield uniforms. Then for special deals wear comics costumes. As for abc in charge, sure they will probably have some say in things but i serious doubt they be like sorry we dont want costumes/marvel villains etc.... to appear in the show. So far disney seems to let marvel be on its own. So i think marvel will have more say what will or wont be used in the show.


Seth i never said we need to have smulders or jackson as series leads. They can be special guest stars who pop in 2-3 times a season. Either physically on set at least once or twice a season. Baring there schedules. And other times like i said there characters could be refrenced in a computer message/phone call. Or they could have smulders/jackson do audio recording which is a super cheap and easy way and have it used in an episode/ to having smulders/jackson coming in and do a little video recording in front of a blue/green screen to be turned into something used. Just cause smulders has other tv show she is on doesnt mean its impossible for her to show up ever for the show. Same goes with jackson he loves marvel/his character alot and look at many other network/cable series that get big name stars to pop in for an episode or two. I doubt he wouldnt not show up once in a great while. Like i said before we dont need them to be in all episodes every season to have there characters be used and play a part. Just have them in 2-3 times a season in any form.


Also too on joss since he signed a multi year deal with marvel studios. For this show, avengers 2(writing/directing) he is going to have his hands in thor 2/cap2/guardians films too on top of avengers. So having things connected to the mcu films and show wouldnt be that hard to pull off. Since he is helping marvel set things up and get them all gelling together. So i doubt there be problems like that in the show.

 

[sethypants]

I guess, I'll wait for it to be screened. Hopefully I'm wrong. I just wanna see Carol Denvers as Ms Marvel.

 

[OB12]

I think we will see Agent Danvers as a regular part of the show, but I'd be surprised if she is featured as Ms. Marvel. My thought is one of the season long story arcs ends with her gaining her powers and then she springboards into the films.

 

[Webhead2006]

ya like we were saying she doesnt have to come right out of the gate and be ms marvel/captain marvel. She can just be a regular shield agent. Play her up that way develop her character like we saw in the solo films for the other heroes got. Then at a later point in the show or in a future marvel film she gets her powers and title of ms marvel/captain marvel and go on from there.

 

[mr. peasant]

Wait...... Are you trying to say that Thor the god of War and the storms is dumb as a brick? I must be reading that wrong.

Yes, I'm saying Thor is the 'dumb muscle' of the group - especially in comparison to the likes of Tony Stark and Bruce Banner. Case in point; he keeps falling for the exact same tricks of Loki's. So much so that the movie (via Loki) lampshades his gullibility. Einstein, he is not.

This god is a leader of men in countless battles across the nine realms and eventually has his own kingdom. Have you ever picked up a Thor comic?

While we've seen him lead warriors into battle in his first movie, he's always relied on brute force and his nigh invulnerability to win the day; often to the point of neglecting his comrades. Yes, he learned to care for others over the course of the movie but we've not seen him lead a group into battle since.

More importantly, even if he is able to do so, this was not the role he plated in Avengers. In said movie, he never took the lead and instead played according to Rogers' plan.

 

[Pink Ranger]

Yes, I'm saying Thor is the 'dumb muscle' of the group - especially in comparison to the likes of Tony Stark and Bruce Banner. Case in point; he keeps falling for the exact same tricks of Loki's. So much so that the movie (via Loki) lampshades his gullibility. Einstein, he is not.

I kind of get what you mean, so I'm not going to pile on with all the rest here, but I'd say Thor is a little naive and a little old-fashioned, but not necessarily dumb.

This argument reminds me of the wisdom of Terry Pratchett: he wrote in one of his books that people often make the fatal mistake of assuming "simple" means "stupid."

 

[Lorus]

So you're saying Marvel Studios is catering to the female demographic by introducing strong, independent superheroines as feminist role models in non-objectified costumes....? Great! Very forward-thinking of them. So let's see, we've got....um, how many superheroines again....? Just one....? And she's, um, a seductress in a black catsuit....

Reality check: the only female audiences the Marvel Studios have attracted are the ones who love to see Thor, Cap, and Hulk shirtless. Because face it --- that's the only skin they've ever shown in these movies. All those topless men with their glistening, rock-hard pecs and six-pack abs....sexploitation! Where's the RAAAAGE, man....?!?!

Hey, be sure and wake me up whenever Marvel Studios introduces these strong, non-sexualized, non-objectified female superheroine role models you seem to have dreamed up.

I'm very conscious of the fact that I'm picking up something that everybody moved on from but I wanted to comment on this regardless, so forgive my self indulgence.

The general idea that this post presents is that having any kind of sexualised content runs counter to portraying strong independent heroes that women, or anyone I guess, can appreciate. This idea is fundamentally flawed, I feel, as it suggests that character strength or worth is linked to a lack of sexuality. To demand non-sexualised, non-objectified female characters in order to accept that Marvel Studios are providing 'role models' is to make an arbitrary and unnecessary caveat. The claim also seems to take aspects of Widow's part out of context and the use of the term 'seductress' to sum her up isn't particularly consistent with her portrayal either. In short, these claims seem wildly inaccurate.

More on topic, I expect that if Carol Danvers were to be used on the show then she would start as a regular SHIELD agent before gaining her powers over the course of the series or an arc. That would allow the show to start off relatively grounded and eventually introduce more and more 'outlandish' elements as it progressed. Therefore, by the time Ms Marvel is introduced fully she would not appear particularly out of place.

 

[Primal Slayer]

This budget will probably be able to pull off anything Heroes was able to pull off which is plenty.

 

[Destructus86]

I really see Autumn Reeser as more suited to Wasp. She's almost like the A:EMH version, and often looks very much like the really classic 616 Janet Van Dyne:

And on top of that, if people were wanting an Ultimate Wasp who is Asian, well Autumn Reeser sometimes even looks like she has slight traces of that in certain pictures, so she would easily be able to straddle both.

I would find it a shame to use Autumn as Bobbi when she'd be perfect as Jan.

agreed. Always seemed like the perfect Wasp to me.

 

[Megaton Sun]

In terms of budget, i just hope the CGI is more on par with Lost rather than Once Upon a Time. Once Upon has prob the worst green screen effects i have ever seen.

 

[mr. peasant]

I kind of get what you mean, so I'm not going to pile on with all the rest here, but I'd say Thor is a little naive and a little old-fashioned, but not necessarily dumb.

This argument reminds me of the wisdom of Terry Pratchett: he wrote in one of his books that people often make the fatal mistake of assuming "simple" means "stupid."

While what Pratchett said makes sense, just because he said it doesn't automatically make it true. More to the point, I'd like to qualify my statement by contending that in the absence of superior intellect in other domains, being 'simple' and overly naive would skew you below average.

In addition, descriptors like 'dumb' and 'smart' are very much relative to the others within the group. And with the exception of the Hulk, Thor is pretty much clearly the least intelligent of them all and the movie plays up this aspect - not only by his frequently getting duped by Loki but in how he's the last to catch onto something and doesn't pick up pop culture references that even Steve Rogers does. It's understandable given his non-Earth upbringing but it's all part of his 'fish out of water' schtick in The Avengers.

 

[Primal Slayer]

In terms of budget, i just hope the CGI is more on par with Lost rather than Once Upon a Time. Once Upon has prob the worst green screen effects i have ever seen.

LOST didnt have to worry about as much cgi as OUAT does so of course whenever they used it, it would look better.

 

[DrCosmic]

This budget will probably be able to pull off anything Heroes was able to pull off which is plenty.

I think that's a great comparison, and while Heroes was indeed able to pull off a wide variety of powers, it's important to note it only did this two or three times in a given episode. There was a big stink in the season 1 finale when a lot of the action had to be cut and the 'big super battle' ended up being a three-or-four move exchange.

There are some powers that are relatively cheap, like super speed, or cheesy flight, where the character just moves off camera really fast. Other powers, especially those involving something glowing can be very expensive when they're not cheesy.

I see SHIELD as being like the equivalent of these later Star Trek series. They were set in the same continuity as the movies (either the original Star Trek or the later Next Generation movies). So characters from Deep Space Nine or Voyager could easily show up in one of the movies, and indeed they did on several occasions (eg the EMH in ST:First Contact, or even Janeway as a now Admiral in ST: Nemesis). Also, changes made to the movies or series could also be reflected in either - eg the First Contact uniforms began showing up in Deep Space Nine, or even the Deep Space Nine jumpsuits showing up in Star Trek Generations.

And there were obviously references to the Dominion War going on at the time of Deep Space Nine in some of the Next Gen movies.

So I think we'd get that kind of crossover with the MCU films and the SHIELD tv series, but just as with Star Trek, they were autonomous with one another but still occasionally affected each other as well.

This is a great comparison. There also a not-quite-even comparison about how Worf 'graduated' from the TV series to the movies, but still was able to return to his show (DS9) in full tilt. Also, it's a good example of an ensemble show with a lead. The Captain in that case, is the main character, but by no means the only significant character.

Costing. It would be expensive to have her using her powers all the time (especially if there are superpowered villains on the show as well). And if she doesn't use her powers when it would logically make more sense for her to do so, that just makes her look dumb.

Plus, ensemble balance. Having her outclass the other characters in every way would leave them with little to contribute. It's because of this that I specified character roles when I posted my thoughts on who the main characters of the show should be.

This was the source of the Thor's intelligence argument and while it can be argued that Thor isn't dumb, he is relatively unintelligent paired with Tony Stark and Nick Fury. There is balance. As said, he can't do *everything* better than everyone else, he just hits harder. So in this example, even if Carol Danvers could fly and shoot... this is all she was ever doing anyway. Superior infiltrators, mission controllers, tech guys, negotiators are all still just as essential as ever.

But there is a cost concern, especially for her shiny powers, they'd have to give a reason why she still uses guns instead of turning every shootout into an SFX bonanza. As a character who absorbs energy to power her powers, such an explanation isn't really hard to come across.

The biggest problem with having Carol in the series is,you can kiss any hopes of her being Ms Marvel in an Avengers film good-bye.

Wha-hu? Totally missed this logic.

 

[Paradox1]

Yes, I'm saying Thor is the 'dumb muscle' of the group - especially in comparison to the likes of Tony Stark and Bruce Banner. Case in point; he keeps falling for the exact same tricks of Loki's. So much so that the movie (via Loki) lampshades his gullibility. Einstein, he is not.

You sir are quite wrong about Thor being "dumb muscle" and the "tricks". The only reason he appears to fall for them because he has love for his brother. His love for Loki is creating a huge blind spot in his logical thinking, nearly everyone has a blind spot for a loved one who you've given a hundred chances to finally change. Just like Loki they continue to disappoint you but you can't give up on them because they are family or like it.

The brain power being less than Stark or Banner I would say that is questionable. In the terms of how much knowledge they have Thor is on another level. They just don't learn the rules of physics they learn how to break them where he is from Him being from an advanced alien race of tech Gods gives him a huge advantage It would be like comparing a caveman's knowledge of the universe and world to that of human being from today.

 

[OB12]

This budget will probably be able to pull off anything Heroes was able to pull off which is plenty.

Agreed. I think a lot of the action sequences will be straight up hand-to-hand combat, some gunfire and explosions. However, they need to be able to pull off superstrength and invulnerability, some energy manipulation, and maybe some flight. Heroes seemed to do those things and then some just fine.

 

[flickchick85]

I see SHIELD as being like the equivalent of these later Star Trek series. They were set in the same continuity as the movies (either the original Star Trek or the later Next Generation movies). So characters from Deep Space Nine or Voyager could easily show up in one of the movies, and indeed they did on several occasions (eg the EMH in ST:First Contact, or even Janeway as a now Admiral in ST: Nemesis). Also, changes made to the movies or series could also be reflected in either - eg the First Contact uniforms began showing up in Deep Space Nine, or even the Deep Space Nine jumpsuits showing up in Star Trek Generations.

And there were obviously references to the Dominion War going on at the time of Deep Space Nine in some of the Next Gen movies.

So I think we'd get that kind of crossover with the MCU films and the SHIELD tv series, but just as with Star Trek, they were autonomous with one another but still occasionally affected each other as well.

I think that's exactly what the case will be with this show.

 

[Webhead2006]

Ya they just have to use ther budget wisely and if they have a budget like early heroes did. The flying/etc... powerrs are doable. Just doesn't need to be in every episode and only like two or three scenes of a episode. No reason to expect powered folks in episodes to be using powers for the whole episode. Plus having guys like joss in charge who knows how to work in fx shows and all. I am sure they use budget and powers wisely and good in show.

 

[Dark Raven]

This is a great comparison. There also a not-quite-even comparison about how Worf 'graduated' from the TV series to the movies, but still was able to return to his show (DS9) in full tilt. Also, it's a good example of an ensemble show with a lead. The Captain in that case, is the main character, but by no means the only significant character.

Also the Star Trek series were still full of special effects - obviously some more in some episodes than others. I see the SHIELD agents being like the Starfleet officers, but there were these other alien species or even people who joined the crew like Seven of Nine, who added more of a mystique.

Having the likes of Ms Marvel eventually would be like having a Seven of Nine character on the show. Same with Spider-Woman who would be more of a direct comparison with Seven since she would belong to the enemy first but then defect and help them out and join their ranks. Also Jessica Drew was, in her early days, just as naive about the world and quite morally ambiguous like Seven of Nine. SHIELD needs a Spock/Data/Seven of Nine/ EMH type character on the show.

I think the show also needs a strong lead. Not sure which character that will be, but even if Cobie Smulders were available, I don't think she would be that person. She is more of a First Officer material. The show needs someone older and wiser like a Picard, Sisko or Janeway type. Incidentally, if Samuel L Jackson weren't Nick Fury, Avery Brooks could've been a decent alternative.

 

[mr. peasant]

This was the source of the Thor's intelligence argument and while it can be argued that Thor isn't dumb, he is relatively unintelligent paired with Tony Stark and Nick Fury. There is balance. As said, he can't do *everything* better than everyone else, he just hits harder. So in this example, even if Carol Danvers could fly and shoot... this is all she was ever doing anyway. Superior infiltrators, mission controllers, tech guys, negotiators are all still just as essential as ever.

But there is a cost concern, especially for her shiny powers, they'd have to give a reason why she still uses guns instead of turning every shootout into an SFX bonanza. As a character who absorbs energy to power her powers, such an explanation isn't really hard to come across.

The thing is... the debate started with the idea that Danvers starts off as a regular SHIELD agent with no special powers who much later gets her Miss Marvel powers. Meaning, in the ensemble, she would already have had an established niche; with others having their own respective niches. Her gaining powers would significantly change the dynamic (as such a change should) by adding to her roles without taking away any (since she doesn't lose any of her previous abilities or skill sets), which would consequently likely step on the toes of the other members of the team. If the change is permanent, these other characters would get sidelined or made redundant.

Hence, the way I figure it would work best is to make it a temporary as a story arc; with Danvers operating solo for awhile whilst the other members of the team have to try and cope without her during that period. In terms of costing, these episodes can take a larger-than-average portion of the budget with savings made from the pre and post Miss Marvel episodes.

Another problem about introducing Miss Marvel as the sole superpowered heroic character is that it risks turning the show into 'The Miss Marvel and Friends' show since she'd take the main spotlight most of the times and be the clear lead character (a la Buffy). To avert her looking like the creators' pet/favourite character, the show would have to start introducing other superpowered characters to make her look less unique and/or the recipient of special treatment; which would result in the show feeling more like an Avengers TV show rather than a SHIELD one.



But with all this talk about Carol Danvers, one more thing:

Here's an idea of who I think should play her: Katheryn Winnick. Actress, trained bodyguard, Taekwondo champion and black belter. If you ask me, I think she's bloody perfect.

Just putting the idea out there.

 

[Human Torch]

The thing is... the debate started with the idea that Danvers starts off as a regular SHIELD agent with no special powers who much later gets her Miss Marvel powers. Meaning, in the ensemble, she would already have had an established niche; with others having their own respective niches. Her gaining powers would significantly change the dynamic (as such a change should) by adding to her roles without taking away any (since she doesn't lose any of her previous abilities or skill sets), which would consequently likely step on the toes of the other members of the team. If the change is permanent, these other characters would get sidelined or made redundant.

Hence, the way I figure it would work best is to make it a temporary as a story arc; with Danvers operating solo for awhile whilst the other members of the team have to try and cope without her during that period. In terms of costing, these episodes can take a larger-than-average portion of the budget with savings made from the pre and post Miss Marvel episodes.

Another problem about introducing Miss Marvel as the sole superpowered heroic character is that it risks turning the show into 'The Miss Marvel and Friends' show since she'd take the main spotlight most of the times and be the clear lead character (a la Buffy). To avert her looking like the creators' pet/favourite character, the show would have to start introducing other superpowered characters to make her look less unique and/or the recipient of special treatment; which would result in the show feeling more like an Avengers TV show rather than a SHIELD one.

Yes,I agree.This has been my point,more or less,all along.

 

[OB12]

The thing is... the debate started with the idea that Danvers starts off as a regular SHIELD agent with no special powers who much later gets her Miss Marvel powers. Meaning, in the ensemble, she would already have had an established niche; with others having their own respective niches. Her gaining powers would significantly change the dynamic (as such a change should) by adding to her roles without taking away any (since she doesn't lose any of her previous abilities or skill sets), which would consequently likely step on the toes of the other members of the team. If the change is permanent, these other characters would get sidelined or made redundant.

Hence, the way I figure it would work best is to make it a temporary as a story arc; with Danvers operating solo for awhile whilst the other members of the team have to try and cope without her during that period. In terms of costing, these episodes can take a larger-than-average portion of the budget with savings made from the pre and post Miss Marvel episodes.

Another problem about introducing Miss Marvel as the sole superpowered heroic character is that it risks turning the show into 'The Miss Marvel and Friends' show since she'd take the main spotlight most of the times and be the clear lead character (a la Buffy). To avert her looking like the creators' pet/favourite character, the show would have to start introducing other superpowered characters to make her look less unique and/or the recipient of special treatment; which would result in the show feeling more like an Avengers TV show rather than a SHIELD one.

My thought is that once Danvers becomes Ms. Marvel, she is no longer a regular cast member. I propose that we spend a couple of seasons with Agent Danvers before she gains her powers, but once she is a full on superhero, she has graduated into The Avengers or other movies while making a 2-3 guest spots in future seasons of SHIELD.

The good part about this series is that Marvel can get in on the ground floor with these actors. If they target a character for future film appearances, they can make it known up front that they would still like to see that character occassionally on TV. It avoids the problem they potentially have right now with trying to get some of the movie actors to make appearance, though I think some will eventually.

 

[Webhead2006]

Dark defintately right train of thought with trek comparison and how we could include marvel aliens and powered humans down the road and in the show.

 

[Specter313]

The thing is... the debate started with the idea that Danvers starts off as a regular SHIELD agent with no special powers who much later gets her Miss Marvel powers. Meaning, in the ensemble, she would already have had an established niche; with others having their own respective niches. Her gaining powers would significantly change the dynamic (as such a change should) by adding to her roles without taking away any (since she doesn't lose any of her previous abilities or skill sets), which would consequently likely step on the toes of the other members of the team. If the change is permanent, these other characters would get sidelined or made redundant.

Hence, the way I figure it would work best is to make it a temporary as a story arc; with Danvers operating solo for awhile whilst the other members of the team have to try and cope without her during that period. In terms of costing, these episodes can take a larger-than-average portion of the budget with savings made from the pre and post Miss Marvel episodes.

Another problem about introducing Miss Marvel as the sole superpowered heroic character is that it risks turning the show into 'The Miss Marvel and Friends' show since she'd take the main spotlight most of the times and be the clear lead character (a la Buffy). To avert her looking like the creators' pet/favourite character, the show would have to start introducing other superpowered characters to make her look less unique and/or the recipient of special treatment; which would result in the show feeling more like an Avengers TV show rather than a SHIELD one.

The problem with most of the arguments going around here are that everyone focuses on too many "ifs". "If" Danvers gets powers. "If" she's the only one with powers. "If" she's even IN the damn thing!

We know next to NOTHING about this show right now, so it's just tedious to try and argue about how things should go down when we have not even the slightest hint of what will go down.

That being said, it seems to also be that some people seem to be forgetting who the heck will be in charge of this thing. Whedon has proven to almost be a master of changing characters in major, significant ways. Two significant characters that come to mind instantly are Willow and Fred. Willow goes from the quiet, mousy girl to this badass, powerful witch, and Fred literally goes from human to god in Illyria. They're both examples in different speeds of these changes as well, in that Willows was gradual over a couple seasons, and Fred's was from one ep to the next. Both were handled quite well, and neither distracted from anyone else on the show, and even enhanced the stories they were able to tell over time. And they're not the only ones. Gunn, Wes, Cordelia, Giles, Oz, Spike, River, Echo, all went through some kind of big change that put them in a different place from where they started and took them out of what could be considered their "niche" spot. And that's something a good show should do, because if you try to keep them in the same spot all the time, they're going to get stale and boring and then they'll be redundant. These characters, whoever they'll be, will need to grow, and being set in the Marvel U, people will expect powers to be involved in some form, especially the possibility of some of these SHIELD agents having some or acquiring some. It all depends on how it is handled and it is way to early for anyone to say that someone getting powers will overshadow everything else, especially with the show being run by someone who has a history of running shows with characters that have a multitude of powers and abilities that don't overshadow each other and grow in ways that enhance the story rather that distract.