Honestly, Carol giving birth to her own rapist is nowhere near as convoluted as the story of the father of the rapist.
Captain Marvel (2019)
- Thread starter Skywalker
- Start date
I thought Mantis married a tree . . ..
In any event, I seriously doubt we're ever going to see that particular Carol Danvers story onscreen. If Marvel ever reboots their comics universe in a big way, I'm guessing that plot line is among the first to get consigned to oblivion.
True, her child was a human-tree hybrid.
What gets me isn't so much the "she gave birth to the guy who violated her" aspect as it is the "and then everyone was fine letting her wander off with him into the sunset." I know they later retconned the whole thing as mind control, but that clearly wasn't the intent when it was written. The author seemed to think it was genuinely romantic, which is just all kinds of messed up.I still can't wrap my mind around how any writer would think that's an interesting storyline...and that an editor okayed it. What the fuck?
...what the fuck?
Yeah, if every dumb story were incorporated inter every character when they adapted them for the big screen, not only would it be a garbled mess, but thanks to massively inconsistent characterisation the characters would all come off like schizophrenics with multiple personality disorder (and every personality is a bi-polar manic depressive), plus it'd only serve to highlight how bonkers Marvel's sliding timescale is once you remove the fig leaf.
Marvel and DC could both benefit to start from scratch again. I got interested when they both went for soft reboots about a decade ago, but then they quickly start rolling out a million titles and bringing back all the old continuity pretty quickly. It's just too much.
^ I don't really agree. A reboot, to me, says that these are the only stories worth reading because they're the ones that "count." And, if that's the case, it better be as good as what came before.
The weirdest thing to me about the story is less that she was raped and gave birth to her own rapist or that the Avengers seemed entirely ignorant of this and just happy to see a baby. The weirdest thing to me is that the story seems to call out the specific concerns before forgetting about them. When Carol discovers she's pregnant with no memory of it, she immediately feels violated and explicitly says as much. In other words, the idea that it is a rape story is not something they were ignorant of when writing it.
The only thing I'll add in possible defense of Shooter is that David Michelinie's run on Avengers (edited by Shooter) seemed to have some of the same problems. Specifically, Absorbing Man gets kind of rapey because, once again, he's a powerful man so of course that's what he's going to do. So, it's possible that Micheline is more to blame. But it's interesting that all these stories are written or edited by Shooter and this story gives Shooter a specific story credit.
I don't entirely buy his innocence combined with martyrdom of accepting responsibility. Jim Shooter has other stories in that era that suggest "of course people with power would try to rape people" (Graviton is one example of that). He also has stories that seem to fail to understand the difference between mind control and genuinely falling in love (the Korvac Saga is the best example of that). So the Marcus/Carol story fits in cleanly with those two stories.
The weirdest thing to me about the story is less that she was raped and gave birth to her own rapist or that the Avengers seemed entirely ignorant of this and just happy to see a baby. The weirdest thing to me is that the story seems to call out the specific concerns before forgetting about them. When Carol discovers she's pregnant with no memory of it, she immediately feels violated and explicitly says as much. In other words, the idea that it is a rape story is not something they were ignorant of when writing it.
The only thing I'll add in possible defense of Shooter is that David Michelinie's run on Avengers (edited by Shooter) seemed to have some of the same problems. Specifically, Absorbing Man gets kind of rapey because, once again, he's a powerful man so of course that's what he's going to do. So, it's possible that Micheline is more to blame. But it's interesting that all these stories are written or edited by Shooter and this story gives Shooter a specific story credit.
^Actually, (and I'm looking right at them) those Avengers issues that you refer to with the Absorbing Man were edited by Roger Stern, not Shooter.
That said, the was a story in Rampaging Hulk written by Shooter that featured gay man as being rapey.
You've never seen Oz?
Marvel has digitally aged and de-aged a lot of their characters in their movies, but segments with those characters tend to be very limited in length. This is made me wonder the extent of Samuel L Jackson's role in Captain Marvel. I assumed that he was going to have an important but limited role in the proceedings.
Apparently, that will not be the case. Nick Fury will be a full fledged supporting character, digitally de-aged throughout.
http://comicbook.com/marvel/2018/07/06/captain-marvel-nick-fury-samuel-l-jackson-cgi-de-aged/
Apparently, that will not be the case. Nick Fury will be a full fledged supporting character, digitally de-aged throughout.
http://comicbook.com/marvel/2018/07/06/captain-marvel-nick-fury-samuel-l-jackson-cgi-de-aged/
Last edited:
I think creating alternate universes without the burden of 60 years of continuity like the Ultimate line is a better way to go about it. The whole new 52 thing may have been a good jumping-on point, but I know more than a few long-time readers who decided it was the perfect time to step away from weeklys or even the hobby as a whole.
I thought the Ultimate lines were great. Especially X-Men. It was fun to see new takes on them because I read mostly X-Men and it was just one book that was easy to follow.
I got into Batman for a while during the New 52, but then I lost interest because it went to more books than I could keep up with.
I got into Batman for a while during the New 52, but then I lost interest because it went to more books than I could keep up with.
So either this film is going to be costly or the VFX to do this de-aging has become easier/cheaper to do. I understand their confidence having seen RDJ, Douglas, Pfeiffer and Fishburne all de-aged in other films. However, those were mere minutes. I was already looking forward to this, especially with AM&TW now in my rearview but I'm now intrigued even more.Marvel has digitally aged and de-aged a lot of their characters in their movies, but segments with those characters tend to be very limited in length. This is made me wonder the extent of Samuel L Jackson's role in Captain Marvel. I assumed that he was going to have an important but limited role in the proceedings.
Apparently, that will not be the case. Nick Fury will be a full fledged supporting character, digitally de-aged throughout.
http://comicbook.com/marvel/2018/07/06/captain-marvel-nick-fury-samuel-l-jackson-cgi-de-aged/
The film has wrapped. First trailer with Venom in October perhaps?
Making SLJ look twenty years younger isn't likely to break the bank. They're probably just going to smooth out wrinkles, minor stuff really.
There could very well be a teaser at Comic Con. My opinion only, don't read anything into that.
