First Avenger "Over There"....The USO plot point thread

[roach]

The problem is, the story you just described to me doesn't have to be about Steve Rogers. It could be about any person who gets involved with the War and has to do things they don't want to. Johnston's story couldn't have been told about any character other than Steve. It's about someone chasing their dream of being able to help their country fight the war, and the obstacles he must overcome in order to do so. If it's about a character other than Steve Rogers, we don't get the emotional connection of what he had to go through to be an acceptable soldier, which means that him being turned into a USO mascot is that much less painful for for the character.

yet the story of someone wanting to fight in WW2 and being held back to sell bonds is not a unique story either. It was part of the Flags of our father and the WW2 series the Pacific....and considering how the story was done in the Pacific most recently its gonna come off as copying

If you get rid of Steve's struggle to make it onto the battlefield in the first place, even after he gets the SSS, then suddenly Steve can be easily replaced with any character. The internal conflict has to be specific to Steve and where he came from, because if you set up a character with an origin as specific as his and then just make it be about universal themes of war and peace, then suddenly you've got just an average WW2 movie that happens to have a superhero in it.

But see you get all that pre SSS. No need to show it again after he gets the serum...Once you cut out the USO then the internal conflict comes from him trying to live up to being Captain America.

 

[Webhead2006]

I think that the USO plot point is a great idea. It adds an emotional conflict for Steve to overcome, and good storytelling is about conflict. Steve's dream was to serve in the armed forces, and when a miracle of science finally gave him the opportunity to, it's taken away from him. They put him in a monkey suit and shove him out on a stage, because he's too valuable to put into actual combat. Can you imagine the emotions they could get from the viewer when they show Steve Rogers in his dressing room, staring into the mirror at himself wearing his kitschy looking stage getup (probably complete with blue sequins instead of armored scales)?

The story can't just be as simple as "Steve Rogers gets pumped full of SSS, gets to wear a heroic costume, and then kicks the Third Reich's ass," because that's not a story at all. Johnston's story as he's described it is a lot higher concept than that. It's not just the story of a weak person becoming empowered. That's would be like having a romantic comedy that's just about a single guy who gets a new girlfriend. That would be a string of events, not a story, and that was one of my biggest concerns about this project initially (which fortunately, Johnston is doing his best to alleviate). A story would be a borderline-OCD bachelor meets a girl he likes, but it tuns out that she's got an opposite personality from his, loving things for being erratic and unpredictable. He gives up on her, but then realizes that the things he thought he hated about her, he now misses, because she had that was missing in his life. Now you've got a story going.

Similarly, instead of Captain America just being about a powerless person getting power, it needs complications in that part of the narrative. Steve wants to fight in the war, but he can't because he's too weak. Through his own determination and some help from science, he becomes the greatest soldier the world has ever seen, but instead of sending him into battle, where he belongs, they turn him into a mascot. He almost got everything he wanted, but ends up with none of it, and finally has to make some tough decisions about how badly he wants to pursue his destiny.

You can't just introduce powers to Steve Rogers and then jump into a completely different story, because then Cap's origins just become exposition, and ultimately he's just filling the role in a story that could be told about any hero unless his origin plays an important part in the main plot. Otherwise, even if the plot is good, Cap's origins at the beginning don't feel so much like a part of the story so much as just a long explanation for why our main character has super powers. In Johnston's story, it HAS to be about Steve Rogers, because it's not just a world war 2 movie where the main character is a superhuman.

Going back to my RomCom analogy, it's the difference between just telling us that a guy got a girlfriend, and telling us a story about a guy who got a girlfriend.

You have some valid point here man. i do really hope the whole storyline/theme of this whole uso thing ultimately works out in the end. But only time will tell if it does or doesnt. Crossing fingers it all works out in the end.

 

[Dragon]

No, no you haven't, unless you've seen the movie somehow, you have not seen what is actually written and will be shown to us in the movie.

Dude, the only thing missing from Johnston's description is dialogue and the repertoire of songs Cap and the girls would be performing. Some of you guys rose-coloring this keep missing the central point- that' ap's story isn't about the costume. The costume is only one aspect of being Captain America.

You only have a basic idea, nothing more.

No, we have a pretty detailed idea. And more importantly, we know the reasoning behind the idea, which is the actual problem. We know that the only reason for this idea, which is bad to begin with, is to waste time explaining what doen't need explanation. We don't need to be told why Cap is in costume in a superhero movie. We need to know what the impact of living in that costume is for Steve Rogers. Not merely because he's a man in a costume. But in his accepting the mantle of being both the lone super soldier in the American cause, and being a symbolic representation of the American ideology. Both the good and bad aspects of that. There's no need wasting time explaining how he gets into the costume when the more compelling story is what his life is before and after getting into it.

[qoute]I did the same thing with TDK. When I heard that Harvey wasn't going to be scarred in a courtroom and I was up in arms about it. I had a list of reasons why I thought him getting his face burned by gasoline was a dumb idea compared to how you could do it in the comics.

But then I saw the movie, and it worked.[/quote]

Actually I don't think it worked at all. But not for the reasons you were championing. The animated Batman series also had Harvey scarred in an explosion, and the story worked fine. The problem for me was the timing of Harvey's scarring. That IMO Two-Face was an unnessecary plot point tacked on just to arrive at an ending where Batman takes the blame for Harvey's crimes and becomes hunted. Two-ace wasn't allowed to develop into a full character. And I didn't buy for one moment Harvey not killing The Joker. He might indeed have gone after Gordon et al- but he'd have certainly killed the one whose hand was on the trigger of Rachel's killing. I think a better way of handling all those points would've been to not have Harvey scarred at all in TDK, but have him corrupted by Rachel's death 9including his own feelings of guilt for not protecting her) and have him blame Batman, thus unjustly mobilizing the authorities to go after him. Let this continue in the third film where his pursuit of Batman turns him into Two-Face.

And why do you think this is only to get a costume?

Because Johnston said so.

The way he talked about it, it seemed to me to be more about Steve's frustration of not getting to fight, and the army using him as an advertising tool (which oddly enough, is just what the Cap comics were used as).

Cap's frustration about not going into combat is a by-product of the USO thing. And also a mistake.

 

[Dragon]

The problem is, the story you just described to me doesn't have to be about Steve Rogers.

Yes it absolutely does have to be about Steve Rogers. The scenario I've laid out deal with the unique circumstances of Steve Roger's life, before and after becoming Captain America.

It could be about any person who gets involved with the War and has to do things they don't want to.

Obviously not on two key points.

1. Steve CAN'T get involved in the war as everyone else does. That's the point of the events he encounters and why his story is interesting.

2. I didn't say that it's only about Steve having to do things he doesn't want to. There are many things he does that he's quite proud of. It's just examining the full spectrum, both the good and the bad of being Captain America.

Johnston's story couldn't have been told about any character other than Steve. It's about someone chasing their dream of being able to help their country fight the war, and the obstacles he must overcome in order to do so. If it's about a character other than Steve Rogers, we don't get the emotional connection of what he had to go through to be an acceptable soldier, which means that him being turned into a USO mascot is that much less painful for for the character.

If you get rid of Steve's struggle to make it onto the battlefield in the first place, even after he gets the SSS, then suddenly Steve can be easily replaced with any character. The internal conflict has to be specific to Steve and where he came from, because if you set up a character with an origin as specific as his and then just make it be about universal themes of war and peace, then suddenly you've got just an average WW2 movie that happens to have a superhero in it.

Okay- this is why I said that the story you were speaking of is the wrong approach. Captain America's story has never EVER been merely about someone who wants to fight in the war but has difficulty doing so. I don't know where you got the idea it was, cause it sure as hell isn't in the comics. Cap's story has always been about his ability to survive unbearable conditions. From his childhood frailty, to the battlefield of WW2, to his being frozen and losing decades of his life, to his emergence into the modern world where he has to cope with life now.

This means dealing with not just the threats, but the loss, the loneliness and the weight of being Captain America. It's also about why being Cap is a great thing.

Based on the concept you're endorsing, the goal is about getting him on the battlefield- so all of the important points- Who he is before and after the super soldier project, the relationships he has, the tragedies he suffers, the victories he wins, are all secondary, when they should be primary.

 

[Dragon]

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/her...uso-performer-in-the-movie-director-says.html

Somehow I doubt folks will be reading this, although they should.

Off topic: I liked your old sig about Kick-Ass..

 

[Dragon]

I think that the USO plot point is a great idea. It adds an emotional conflict for Steve to overcome, and good storytelling is about conflict.

BTW- you actually think that Steve's story was missing an emotional conflict?

 

[Ace of Knaves]

I think it is a good idea. I don't think they'll have him literally singing and dancing, but he'll be up on stage, paraded like a propoganda tool.

And that will hurt him, annoy him and embarrass him.

It will be a way to show the REAL Steve Rogers. He wants to be a soldier, he wants to fight for his country, not be a flag waving jingo.

It will also show people who don't know the real Captain America that he isn't a jingo flag waver.

 

[roach]

My issues with the USO are:
1)Singing and dancing:Whether you believe it or not JJ said thats what he was going to be doing. We cant pick and choose what we want to believe based on what JJ said.
2)If we have to explain Caps costume then we have to explain everyones. What excuse is going to be fabricated for the Red Skull.
3)By saying Cap was created to fight Red Skull you are setting up the greatest hero/villain conflict in Marvel history. It makes it personal as that's Cap's mission. It was done in Batman when the had Batman create Joker, in TDK when Joker comes out the wood work to test Batman, Hulk when Blonsky is enhanced to fight Hulk and becomes obsessed with beating him. Imagine if you will the movie Karate Kid. Basic premise is that kid gets bullied, kid learns karate, kid defeats bully in karate tournement....now take away this element of the bully being the reason he goes to learn karate...the film is all over the place and you really dont care if he beats the guy at the end of the film.
4)It potentially sets up a theme that Steve hates being Cap. His is embarassed by the suit or the name.

 

[Artistsean]

Maybe this is what people are affraid of when they hear Captain America... singing and dancing... USO show:
[YT]dNdWyZ--rRY[/YT]

 

[Infinity9999x]

Dude, the only thing missing from Johnston's description is dialogue and the repertoire of songs Cap and the girls would be performing. Some of you guys rose-coloring this keep missing the central point- that' ap's story isn't about the costume. The costume is only one aspect of being Captain America.



No, we have a pretty detailed idea. And more importantly, we know the reasoning behind the idea, which is the actual problem. We know that the only reason for this idea, which is bad to begin with, is to waste time explaining what doen't need explanation. We don't need to be told why Cap is in costume in a superhero movie. We need to know what the impact of living in that costume is for Steve Rogers. Not merely because he's a man in a costume. But in his accepting the mantle of being both the lone super soldier in the American cause, and being a symbolic representation of the American ideology. Both the good and bad aspects of that. There's no need wasting time explaining how he gets into the costume when the more compelling story is what his life is before and after getting into it.

I did the same thing with TDK. When I heard that Harvey wasn't going to be scarred in a courtroom and I was up in arms about it. I had a list of reasons why I thought him getting his face burned by gasoline was a dumb idea compared to how you could do it in the comics.

But then I saw the movie, and it worked.

Actually I don't think it worked at all. But not for the reasons you were championing. The animated Batman series also had Harvey scarred in an explosion, and the story worked fine. The problem for me was the timing of Harvey's scarring. That IMO Two-Face was an unnessecary plot point tacked on just to arrive at an ending where Batman takes the blame for Harvey's crimes and becomes hunted. Two-ace wasn't allowed to develop into a full character. And I didn't buy for one moment Harvey not killing The Joker. He might indeed have gone after Gordon et al- but he'd have certainly killed the one whose hand was on the trigger of Rachel's killing. I think a better way of handling all those points would've been to not have Harvey scarred at all in TDK, but have him corrupted by Rachel's death 9including his own feelings of guilt for not protecting her) and have him blame Batman, thus unjustly mobilizing the authorities to go after him. Let this continue in the third film where his pursuit of Batman turns him into Two-Face.




Because Johnston said so.



Cap's frustration about not going into combat is a by-product of the USO thing. And also a mistake.

Where has Johnston said "the only reason we're doing the USO is because of the costume." If he's said this, then you're right, it's stupid, but to me, it seemed like it was more about Cap dealing with the frustration of not being able to fight and being used as advertisement. And that makes sense to me. The costume thing was just a pleasant by-product. At least that's how I've read it. Now, if Johnston has a quote specifically saying "We only introduced the USO to explain the costume" then I stand corrected. But I don't remember reading that anywhere. I think that's just your own take on it.

And again, we have not seen anything! We have to keep in mind that the situation might play out in a different way then we imagine.

And in regards to Two-Face, I actually agree about his character development, but I was talking about the incident of the scarring itself. I thought that worked fine. What didn't work for me was how they treated Two-Face in the movie. They should have left him for B3, because he had so much more potential. But they made him a character that was solely based on revenge, which was too bad, because he could have been so much more.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Wait, what? Dragon you think the sole reason the USO show is in there is for the costume?

Errr... wha...? The motivation for that is CLEARLY to show that Cap is uncomfortable with all that crap.

Steve Rogers volenteered for the SS program so he could be a soldier and fit in. Then his government orders him to be some show poney? He'd be all kinds of pissed and embarrassed by that. THAT is the motivation for that scene. That is what that scene is for, to show the REAL Steve Rogers.

If anything, the costume is the by product.

 

[roach]

No one reads my posts. From the interview:

"They've added a new wrinkle to the classic mythology to explain why a scientifically enhanced super-soldier would venture out in the WWII battlefields in a costume that leans a bit heavy on the old Betsy Ross imagery."

 

[Ace of Knaves]

And? The USO may introduce the costume and show why he is originally forced to where it.

But for me it's still pretty obvious that the main motive for that scene is to show the real Steve Rogers.

Then the other troops along with Steve himself will realize that through his actions on the battle field, the costume becomes a lot more than a fancy propaganda tool. It becomes a symbol of hope and encouragement.

 

[roach]

And? The USO may introduce the costume and show why he is originally forced to where it.

But for me it's still pretty obvious that the main motive for that scene is to show the real Steve Rogers.

Then the other troops along with Steve himself will realize that through his actions on the battle field, the costume becomes a lot more than a fancy propaganda tool. It becomes a symbol of hope and encouragement.

No the only reason why they added the USO theme was to explain the costume.

 

[Rage]

While they are using the USO show to explain the costume... you seem to forget that this element can (and hopefully will) be there to create conflict for Steve. He wants to do what's best for the USA... but he doesn't think its the USO. (is that not what alot of people are arguing about?) So he goes AWOL to do "the right thing" proving the military braintrust wrong and in doing so, figures out that the costume is a powerful motivational tool out in the trenches where the average "Joe" is starving, thirsty and beaten down by the grind of the war.

I have no problem with this concept (I just pray that he doesn't actually sing and dance)

 

[Ace of Knaves]

No the only reason why they added the USO theme was to explain the costume.

No... Johnson also hinted at it showing the real Steve Rogers. He said "Steve wants to be out there fighting" or something right?

He's not gonna go into detail about it showing the real Rogers. Save that for the film.

But seriously, to think the sole purpose of the USO show is just to show the costume is pretty idiotic to be honest.

I mean, you honestly think that scene won't show the true mentality of Rogers? That he doesn't like being this show pony? You think they will fundamentally change the character so that he enjoys it or not show how he feels about it at all?

C'mon... I know you are not a fan of JJ but that is just utterly moronic if you think that way.

 

[Infinity9999x]

No the only reason why they added the USO theme was to explain the costume.

You're right. They didn't want to show Steve's inner turmoil and frustration as being used as military propaganda.

...Except, they've already told us that this will be a plot point of the USO theme.

And the interview doesn't prove anything, it's clearly the reporters take on the situation, not Johnston's. The USO idea is obviously more then just the costume. It serves to explain the costume but also add some interesting conflicts for the character. You can't deny that this is an aspect of it, because the director has specifically said this will be so.

 

[roach]

No... Johnson also hinted at it showing the real Steve Rogers. He said "Steve wants to be out there fighting" or something right?

He's not gonna go into detail about it showing the real Rogers. Save that for the film.

But seriously, to think the sole purpose of the USO show is just to show the costume is pretty idiotic to be honest.

I mean, you honestly think that scene won't show the true mentality of Rogers? That he doesn't like being this show pony? You think they will fundamentally change the character so that he enjoys it or not show how he feels about it at all?

C'mon... I know you are not a fan of JJ but that is just utterly moronic if you think that way.

Look I am not reading anything into what the director said. He didnt say they created the USO theme to show Rogers true nature...

 

[Dragon]

Wait, what? Dragon you think the sole reason the USO show is in there is for the costume?

Errr... wha...? The motivation for that is CLEARLY to show that Cap is uncomfortable with all that crap.

Steve Rogers volenteered for the SS program so he could be a soldier and fit in. Then his government orders him to be some show poney? He'd be all kinds of pissed and embarrassed by that. THAT is the motivation for that scene. That is what that scene is for, to show the REAL Steve Rogers.

If anything, the costume is the by product.

First off, As Roach KEEPS POSTING- Johnston has said that the primary function of the USO thing is to explain the costume.

Second- you're way off about Steve Rogers not liking being in costume. He was indeed proud of that mantle. Especially because he knew he would be the only super soldier. to quote him: "Fight for America? Man, I was Captain America!" There came a point, after his being revived when he became cynical about representing America. But then he realized (Or remembered)that he wasn't representing the US government, but he was representing the ideals that America was based on.

Now I'm all for Steve discovering the difficulties in being a symbol. But he can discover them on the battlefield- he still doesn't need to do so on a USO stage.

Like I said, it's all about the approach. Sure, you could've had an army of Spiders spin Peter's Spidey suit for him overnight under orders of the Spider-God. Batman could've made his costume from batskins. Just because it's A WAY doesn't mean its the RIGHT WAY.

 

[roach]

And the interview doesn't prove anything, it's clearly the reporters take on the situation, not Johnston's. The USO idea is obviously more then just the costume. It serves to explain the costume but also add some interesting conflicts for the character. You can't deny that this is an aspect of it, because the director has specifically said this will be so.

I dont understand whats so hard about taking the words of the director at face value. First people wont believe he said Cap will be singing and dancing on stage when he clearly did and now when he mentioned that the created the USO theme to explain the costume now we dont believe it because the interviewer tried to put some spin on it????
I will probably be the first person to buy tickets to this movie but I have concerns about some of the things the director has said...and everyone is pretending like he didnt say it or trying to read JJ's mind.

 

[Dragon]

And question- Why would Steve want to fight for his country and NOT be a propaganda for it? Especially since he can see that The Red Skull is propaganda for the Nazis?

 

[Infinity9999x]

I dont understand whats so hard about taking the words of the director at face value. First people wont believe he said Cap will be singing and dancing on stage when he clearly did and now when he mentioned that the created the USO theme to explain the costume now we dont believe it because the interviewer tried to put some spin on it????
I will probably be the first person to buy tickets to this movie but I have concerns about some of the things the director has said...and everyone is pretending like he didnt say it or trying to read JJ's mind.

Exactly, it's about taking the directors words at face value. You said a few minutes ago "No the only reason why they added the USO theme was to explain the costume."

This is clearly not true. Yes, PART of the USO theme is introducing the costume, but Johnston also stated that the USO plot would have Steve becoming frustrated with not being able to fight and being used only for Propaganda.

You earlier said the ONLY reason of the USO was to explain the costume. But you would be the one ignoring what the director said when you state this. Because Johnston has said it is more then this.

And question- Why would Steve want to fight for his country and NOT be a propaganda for it? Especially since he can see that The Red Skull is propaganda for the Nazis?

He wouldn't mind doing that. What he would and does have a problem with is NOT fighting for his country and ONLY being propaganda. That's made very clear in the interview.

 

[Dragon]

But then Steve doesn't have to be in a USO show to be frustrated about not being in combat. Their simply keeping him in the testing facility would accomplish this.

 

[Infinity9999x]

But then Steve doesn't have to be in a USO show to be frustrated about not being in combat. Their simply keeping him in the testing facility would accomplish this.

Yes, that would work. But since Captain America the character was used as propaganda in real life, it makes sense that Captain America the person would be used as propaganda as well.

And from a storytelling aspect, it makes sense. They don't want to lose the one super soldier they have, but they don't want him to remain invisible either, so they use him for propaganda.

 

[Rage]

But it plays a dual role and there for it is NOT only in there to be a starting point for the costume. And Dragon... you asked..."Why would Steve want to fight for his country and NOT be a propaganda for it?"

The answer there is that EVERYONE wanted to go to war and fight the Japanese or the Germans after Pearl Harbor... nobody wanted to talk about doing it...Even without power, Steve Rogers was a man of ACTION... and standing on the sidelines letting someone else fight his battles, wouldn't be in his nature... and that would eat at him.