Making every single IM villain a dark mirror is already redundant.
Spoilers Marvel Cinematic Universe spoiler-heavy speculation thread
- Thread starter bbjeg
- Start date
Making every single IM villain a dark mirror is already redundant.
First off, the in-universe "origin story" is not as important here as the real-life, definitely racist fictional precedents that informed the creation of the character. Fans may have the luxury to fixate on the fictional universe alone, but creators have to be aware of the impact their work will have in the real world. What marginalized communities in the audience feel about the use of a character rooted in discrimination against them needs to be taken into account, and using that character at all is problematical no matter how much you try to downplay the bad parts. That's why both IM3 and Shang-Chi made the right choice by essentially throwing out all that baggage and starting from scratch with new approaches, in their own distinct and complementary ways.
Yes, it's possible to "clean up" the Mandarin and downplay the racist underpinnings of the character, as was done, for instance, by the Iron Man: Armored Adventures animated series. But that's the easiest, most predictable route to take. What Iron Man 3 did was more clever and subversive. I think it was a braver, more creative move to confront the racism and use it to make a statement, rather than going the more timid, less honest route of trying to sweep it under the rug and pretend it was never there. And what was created and developed through IM3, Long Live the King, and Shang-Chi is fresher and richer than a sanitized copy of the comics' Mandarin would've been.
Why are you insisting on the racial angle based purely on how the character can be written? Seems the issue may not be with the character at all but the baggage people might have trouble leaving behind from the comics.
How is what they did in "Shang-Chi" any different from what I was saying? That was exactly what I wanted in the character and they did a good job of bringing it.
Why are you arguing as if it were a hypothetical? I'm saying the makers of the MCU were already smart enough to recognize that the racial angle was important, and that's why they made the choices they made. There is no debate over what they "should" do; they already did it years ago, and I'm saying why I think it was the right choice.
https://observer.com/2019/09/marvel-shang-chi-details-destin-daniel-cretton-tiff-interview/
As I already said, Xu Wenwu isn't even really the Mandarin; he's the replacement for Fu Manchu, Shang-Chi's father in the original comics, and a character that Marvel no longer has the rights to, which is why they renamed him and conflated him with the Mandarin. Although, of course, the Mandarin was just a riff on Fu Manchu to begin with, as were Ra's al Ghul, Ming the Merciless, and numerous other villains from 20th-century fiction.
Also, it's different because they didn't just try to "clean up" a character created by white people based on racist tropes, but instead brought in Asian-American filmmakers to create a new character that originated from within their own perspective. There's a difference between trying to fix something fundamentally flawed and throwing it out completely and starting over. And where the character came from is hugely important.
Exactly!
Seriously though I don't think it matters either way. That said, you'd think if it was Killian's fake 10 Rings, they'd have explicitly mentioned that in IM3. Of course there's always the third option of it being a rogue cell that turned to mercenary work (they were being a bit on the loud side) and Xu would have gotten around to dealing with them eventually.
I'd actually argue that it's okay that Iron Man 3 had a shite villain because it's much more of a "man versus himself" story in terms of its central conflict than "man versus man."
Yeah, Tony needs to stop the shitheel, but the story is really about Tony coming to terms with who he is as a person, finding his strengths when he's not in the suit.
Yeah, Tony needs to stop the shitheel, but the story is really about Tony coming to terms with who he is as a person, finding his strengths when he's not in the suit.
It's kind of funny how ever after all these years later, certain folks are still upset when the villain isn't the real star of the show the way it used to be in older CBMs.
Like the idea that the Hero could be the real lead and the internal conflict could be the main thrust is somehow still an alien concept.
Like the idea that the Hero could be the real lead and the internal conflict could be the main thrust is somehow still an alien concept.
Don't embed Wiki images, it doesn't work properly.Also, this guy in IM 2 was supposed to be from Ten Rings, but it's not like the movie bothered to explain this in any way other than having "Ten Rings Gangster" next to a name in the credits.
I don't think I even knew this was coming, or if I did, I forgot (bad memory sucks). Looks to be pretty good.
Tom Holland will take a year off from acting due to the strain his upcoming Apple TV series took on his mental health
https://www.cnn.com/videos/entertai...alth-the-crowded-room-sot-cprog-mwrmx-vpx.cnn
https://www.cnn.com/videos/entertai...alth-the-crowded-room-sot-cprog-mwrmx-vpx.cnn
look good to me
Never works on this end.
Because it's already cached on your end.
I agree. The movie worked as a coda to The Avengers.
Good for him for recognizing that he needed to take a break instead of pushing himself too far. We need more public figures to address their mental health properly in order to help remove terrible stigmas on such issues.
I just hope Sony is patient and doesn't panic into a snap decision to recast Spider-Man. Surely even they realize that Tom is a huge part of why his films are such successes creatively and financially.
But didn't production for the series end nine months ago?
So?