Marvel Films The Marvel Studios News and Discussion Thread

[Spider-Fan]

Tony's arrogance, at least in the first film, was due to his wealth and his mistaken belief that he was untouchable. Being kidnapped and severely wounded by the Ten Rings proved him wrong on both counts, and started him on the path to change his ways.

As for the other films, I didn't worry about them, because they weren't made with the intention of making a racial statement or sending a political message. A small case could be made for "The First Avenger", since its largely set in World War 2...but most of the film correctly shows the Red Skull as a selfish power-mad dictator.

You don't think Iron Man was a political commentary on war profiteering? You don't think Winter Soldier was a political movie about freedom vs security and how much freedom we are willing to sacrifice in the name of security and the nature of the people in charge of these decisions? Almost every movie you watch is political.

 

[JoshB1980]

You don't think Iron Man was a political commentary on war profiteering? You don't think Winter Soldier was a political movie about freedom vs security and how much freedom we are willing to sacrifice in the name of security and the nature of the people in charge of these decisions? Almost every movie you watch is political.

Tony did have a good point, to the lady who accused him of war profiteering - that all his profits were used to do things like support food shortages and such. And after his freedom from the Ten Rings, he stopped making weapons as an attempt to atone for his past. As for "freedom vs. security", Zola and Pierce were (again, correctly) shown to be in the wrong about it.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Tony did have a good point, to the lady who accused him of war profiteering - that all his profits were used to do things like support food shortages and such. And after his freedom from the Ten Rings, he stopped making weapons as an attempt to atone for his past. As for "freedom vs. security", Zola and Pierce were (again, correctly) shown to be in the wrong about it.

I think maybe you need to watch these movies again my man. Tony's position at the beginning of Iron Man is supposed to be tone deaf and showcase his lack of care about how his weapons are being used and how his company was wrong to be doing what it was doing. It "wasn't a good point" nor intended to be taken as such in the work. As for Zola and Pierce being wrong, we'll yeah they're the villains. But I don't see how that matters to your core point about the other movies. You are grasping at strawman arguments and not addressing the core arguments you're being presented.

I dont think this exchange is going the way you think or hope it's going

 

[Cap2024]

Let's face it - in the real world, many people of African descent remain hostile and one-sided toward whites

I don't ignore or gloss over past racism

You openly just demonstrated that you view the world from a monolithic standpoint above.

I will say you should take your own advice: "one key to that is trying our best to see the good in people."

So on some level you know doing so is wrong even though you can't see yourself doing it in your own post.

 

[JoshB1980]

You openly just demonstrated that you view the world from a monolithic standpoint above.

I will say you should take your own advice: "one key to that is trying our best to see the good in people."

So on some level you know doing so is wrong even though you can't see yourself doing it in your own post.

If expecting people to be responsible for their own reactions and feelings makes me "monolithic", then so be it. I do try my best to see the good in people, but that doesn't mean I always have to agree with or support them. Different views do not equal hate.

 

[squeekness]

I'm not trying to tick off anyone, or get myself in trouble, but this discussion started because of a slight comment I made about some of the folks at Disney and Marvel...then everything just exploded. I've done my best to explain my stances rationally and peacefully, and if that's not enough I'm sorry people's feelings are hurt. But when I see folks with an attitude like "You owe me", and I know that I don't, I call them out on it.

You do need to chill, dude. You may not realize it but your posts are actually insulting and hostile to races and genders. Think carefully as you post. There is no room for racism or sexism on the board.

 

[JoshB1980]

The real question, Eleanor, is what do we owe to each other?

The way that I was raised, is that my main responsibilities were to be loving and not malicious - the word "tolerant" wasn't even used in my childhood. I think my elders' general idea was that "You do what you can, and others' responses are on them."

 

[JoshB1980]

You do need to chill, dude. You may not realize it but your posts are actually insulting and hostile to races and genders. Think carefully as you post. There is no room for racism or sexism on the board.

I'm doing my best, truly and honestly.

 

[squeekness]

I'm doing my best, truly and honestly.

Just try to stay on topic and avoid touchy subjects. That'll help.

 

[squeekness]

Can we please just get back on topic? This is not a place to discuss racism.

 

[Kane52630]

To be honest, I've grown tired of this debate.

*reads the past three pages*

 

[squeekness]

Yes, let's get back on track or time off will happen. Last chance. I'm deleting posts tohelp that happen.

 

[Spider-Fan]

There have been enough warnings. Next ignored warning is time off. Move on

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Frankly, I don't think the Ant-Man films would have been more successful if they had Hank and Janet instead of Scott and Hope. Though Quantumania had disappointing returns, the series did have 3 entries. That's a success. It may not be what some fans may have preferred, but the Ant-Man film series had more success than Ant-Man, the character, ever did in comics. Hank could never keep a solo title in comics. He was always a supporting character. But the MCU had 2 successful Ant-Man films and even if the 3rd one was less successful, still managed a trilogy. So if we are talking personal preference, that's entirely up to you. But in terms of success, it was a good decision that made Marvel Studios money

I think Lang was the right choice. Marvel has plenty of scientist-type characters. Stark, Banner, Reed, etc. They are lacking in "every man" characters, so Scott filled a niche. Even now his closest comparisons (ex. Parker, Kamala) are much younger characters, which isn't really the same. Also, the best part of the Ant-Man films were the heist parts, which fits Lang more.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

To be honest, I've grown tired of this debate. I've done what I can to offer an objective explanation, but if I go any further I'll probably risk being banned. So with that in mind, I think its best to move on. If folks want to know my stances, they can read those posts, or contact me privately.

"Risk" is a bit of an understatement, buddy. Rolling up into our community with open, blatant racism is not acceptable. Anyone spouting it is not welcome here.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

So he's a racist and an idiot.

Especially since they both made over a billion.

 

[Mr. Peanut]

To be honest I don't really understand the point of an in-universe reboot if it functions the same as an out-of-universe reboot. In other words, if everyone just forgets about the old universe and acts as if the new one is the way it's always been, why not just do a regular out-out-of universe reboot (IE, just focus on a different universe, like how Reeves's Batman and Gunn's DCU are in a different universe from the DCEU) so you don't erase and undermine the old universe? It feels like a sleight of hand to make viewers think you're continuing the same story when in fact you're starting over with a new one.

Like what if instead of some sort of big multiversal purge-and-reset happening at the end of Secret Wars, what if they just...put things back to normal, had a happy ending, and wrapped everything up in a nice little bow? And then after that, start focusing on a new phase 1 in a new universe (set in the same multiverse, so we could still get crossovers now and then). The whole "erasing the old universe" step just seems pointless to me.

 

[Comicbookguy339]

'I Question His Record': Disney Investor Slams Kevin Feige and 'Woke' Marvel Movies

Disney investor Nelson Peltz questions Kevin Feige's track record and diversity in Marvel movies.

www.cbr.com

More comments from Peltz:

Per the Financial Times, Nelson Peltz has openly criticized the company and Marvel Studios head Kevin Feige in a new interview. Peltz, who holds a stake of around $3.5 billion, has attributed the declining success of Disney's Marvel movies to the "woke" strategy used for casting their characters. He suggested that the MCU has been putting out too many "losers" in recent years which might mean that it's time for a change in leadership.

"They say we know nothing about the movie business - we don’t claim we do - but I don’t think they do, with five big losers in a row," Peltz said. "They’ve lost first place in animation, they’ve lost first place in features. Maybe it’s time to change management in those divisions."

When pressed if that means that Kevin Feige should be fired, Peltz added, "I’m not ready to say that, but I question his record. People go to watch a movie or a show to be entertained. They don’t go to get a message.

 

[Cap2024]

'I Question His Record': Disney Investor Slams Kevin Feige and 'Woke' Marvel Movies

Disney investor Nelson Peltz questions Kevin Feige's track record and diversity in Marvel movies.

www.cbr.com

More comments from Peltz:

“Woke” strategy? So not the bigot strategy of only hiring non-minorities.

So many “losers”? Who is this guy? Trump or a pitiful wannabe?

Animation? Since he’s talking Marvel, does he think Kevin is behind Spiderverse? He unintentionally just signaled he knows nothing about the company. I think he’s trying to say Mario made more than Spiderverse without realizing that’s Sony.

Right wingers see minorities merely existing as “a message.”

 

[chamber-music]

I think Lang was the right choice. Marvel has plenty of scientist-type characters. Stark, Banner, Reed, etc. They are lacking in "every man" characters, so Scott filled a niche. Even now his closest comparisons (ex. Parker, Kamala) are much younger characters, which isn't really the same. Also, the best part of the Ant-Man films were the heist parts, which fits Lang more.

They should of gone with Edgar's original take on Scott Lang as a career criminal who reforms when he becomes Ant-Man. Edgar's take gave Scott a better character arc. Scott in the MCU committed one Robin Hood crime and got caught.

I always thought Pym's niche was Marvel's mad scientist, Pym is Marvel's Victor Frankenstein. I thought Rick and Morty writer Jeff Loveness would bring a bit of that Rick Sanchez grouchy cynical mad scientist energy to Hank Pym's character in Quantumania but he didn't.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

"They say we know nothing about the movie business - we don’t claim we do - but I don’t think they do, with five big losers in a row,"

This isn't even true. He's lying. They've had two big failures, Quantumania and The Marvels. Their second to last film was GOTG3 which did quite well. And they were fine the previous year with Dr Strange 2 doing very close to a billion.

 

[Comicbookguy339]

“Woke” strategy? So not the bigot strategy of only hiring non-minorities.

So many “losers”? Who is this guy? Trump or a pitiful wannabe?

Animation? Since he’s talking Marvel, does he think Kevin is behind Spiderverse? He unintentionally just signaled he knows nothing about the company. I think he’s trying to say Mario made more than Spiderverse without realizing that’s Sony.

Right wingers see minorities merely existing as “a message.”

He's trying to get on the Disney board so I think he's talking about Disney in general.

This isn't even true. He's lying. They've had two big failures, Quantumania and The Marvels. Their second to last film was GOTG3 which did quite well. And they were fine the previous year with Dr Strange 2 doing very close to a billion.

Again, I think he's talking about Disney overall.

"People go to watch a movie or a show to be entertained. They don’t go to get a message."

Not only is this a pathetic, simplistic point of view, but it also has nothing to do with MCU's decline. The Marvels was a huge flop and it doesn't have any "messaging" in it, it's pure jingling keys entertainment. Unless you consider the gender or ethnicity of the leads a political message, and in that case, it's 100% a you problem and very telling. This person has no business making creative decisions anywhere, least of all at Disney.

I didn't include it in the quote but Peltz immediately followed up that comment with him questioning why Disney is making all-black or all-female movies. Here's the full quote:

When pressed if that means that Kevin Feige should be fired, Peltz added, "I’m not ready to say that, but I question his record. People go to watch a movie or a show to be entertained. They don’t go to get a message. Why do I have to have a Marvel that’s all women? Not that I have anything against women, but why do I have to do that? Why can’t I have Marvels that are both? Why do I need an all-Black cast?"

So you're exactly right in that for him having non-male or non-white leads is a woke political statement in itself. It's really sad that some right-wingers think that Peltz and Perlmutter will suddenly be able to right the MCU ship.

All they will do is put a stop to projects with diverse casts and directors. They're not going to tackle the issue of mixing TV series with movies. They're not going to tackle the issue of Marvel throwing out too many disparate characters and then failing to capitalize on them with sequels or team-ups in a timely manner. They won't tackle those problems because they don't know or care about the actual storytelling. You can't expect billionaire fossils to pay any attention to the minutae for movies they most likely don't even consume.

And let's say that Perlmutter and Peltz achieve all their goals. They get Feige to leave or fire him (Pelrmutter is clearly out for revenge) and put a stop to more Black Panther, Blade, Falconcap, Shang-Chi, Captain Marvel, the Young Avengers etc. What do you replace those projects with? Endless sequels to Thor, Spider-Man, Ant-Man and Doctor Strange?

 

[Bayne]

He's trying to get on the Disney board so I think he's talking about Disney in general.



Again, I think he's talking about Disney overall.

So would that mean he's including Indiana Jones in the 'too woke' basket? Or calling Elemental a loser?

Or is he throwing all the Searchlight films on the pile and ignoring the fact that Searchlight makes niche movies anyway?

 

[Comicbookguy339]

So would that mean he's including Indiana Jones in the 'too woke' basket? Or calling Elemental a loser?

Or is he throwing all the Searchlight films on the pile and ignoring the fact that Searchlight makes niche movies anyway?

I'm not surprised he'd consider The Dial of Destiny woke. After all, it co-starred a woman. But seriously, did you not see all the complaints about it being woke? And I also imagine that he does consider Elemental a failure because it didn't make a billion.

 

[Filmfreak]

Elemental had abysmal opening but incredible legs. If you compare it to other blockbusters last summer it was surely on the winning side, but due to high cost it probably barely broke even. I wouldn't call it a lose but one can make a case about Pixar and Disney animated features losing a lot of steam lately due to Disney+ and Chapek. I'm curious how Inside Out 2 is going to perform since the first one is considered one of the very top movies.