Spoilers Marvel Cinematic Universe spoiler-heavy speculation thread

[TREK_GOD_1]

There's no rational argument presented against the FF being set in the period of their origin. Further, if there's one thing the current MCU does not need is to pile more characters into a bloated field. Characters need room to breathe and establish their own identity, not melt into the less than appealing trends of story or tone of this MCU era.

Jesus, Reed Richards is a dead ringer for Bob Dobbs, visually speaking and in terms of smugness the quintessential 60s white dude. He was even a pipe smoker.

1962 would be just right for this gang.

View attachment 38622

Indeed.

 

[YLu]

Even so, that's a metatextual point, not a textual one. I don't see anything about those characters and elements that's particularly tied to the 1960s as an in-story setting, given how many of them have already appeared in the modern MCU, or at least the 1990s.

It's not that they need to be tied to the 60s, it's that they already are. When folks picture the Fantastic Four, the platonic version that swims into their heads is often the 60s version in a way that isn't true for most other Marvel characters. Just look at this thread.

(I'm not in favor of a period piece myself. I'm explaining the 'why,' not agreeing with it. I have little time for nostalgia in general.)

 

[DarrenTR1970]

Since we know who the main cast is for the Fantastic Four, who do we think the villain should be? I know people would probably like to see Doctor Doom, but he appeared in all three of the Fox movies; so, how about thinking outside the box, like the Frightful Four, or the Red Ghost, or maybe even the Mole Man or Molecule Man?

 

[Christopher]

It's not that they need to be tied to the 60s, it's that they already are. When folks picture the Fantastic Four, the platonic version that swims into their heads is often the 60s version in a way that isn't true for most other Marvel characters. Just look at this thread.

I'm "folks" too, and I've never seen them that way, so please don't overgeneralize. Sure, I saw the '60s and '70s animated series from time to time growing up, but my familiarity with the FF is mostly from the '90s and '00s animated series and various 21st-century comics. Most of the FF content I've read or watched in my life does not depict them in a retro or nostalgic way. I haven't read them as extensively as some other characters, but I gather that the John Byrne era from 1981-86 is considered a "second golden age," just as classic and influential as the original Lee-Kirby run, and a lot of the most admired FF comics work has been done post-2000.

So that's what I'm asking. You're asserting that people associate the FF with the '60s, but if that's so, why do they see it that way? That's what I'm trying to understand, where that alleged association comes from, because it's absolutely news to me that it's a thing.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

Since we know who the main cast is for the Fantastic Four, who do we think the villain should be? I know people would probably like to see Doctor Doom, but he appeared in all three of the Fox movies; so, how about thinking outside the box, like the Frightful Four, or the Red Ghost, or maybe even the Mole Man or Molecule Man?

...Kang!

Too soon?

 

[Relayer1]

I've never seen any of the animated versions, but I've read a lot of the comics. My absolute favourite era (by a good margin) is by Hickman.

I hope it's influential on the new movie.

 

[Set Harth]

And it's weird to imply that Reed is defined by whiteness so soon after Pedro Pascal was announced in the role.

Pascal is white-passing.

 

[YLu]

I'm "folks" too, and I've never seen them that way, so please don't overgeneralize. Sure, I saw the '60s and '70s animated series from time to time growing up, but my familiarity with the FF is mostly from the '90s and '00s animated series and various 21st-century comics. Most of the FF content I've read or watched in my life does not depict them in a retro or nostalgic way. I haven't read them as extensively as some other characters, but I gather that the John Byrne era from 1981-86 is considered a "second golden age," just as classic and influential as the original Lee-Kirby run, and a lot of the most admired FF comics work has been done post-2000.

It's a generalization of course but I'd argue not an overly broad one.

And John Byrne's run is probably one of the big reasons for the 60s view of the characters, honestly. It doesn't help when the second golden age of a book is, for the most part, a "back to basics" remix of the Lee/Kirby stuff. (And yes, I know about stuff like Alicia getting with Johnny Storm and the new costumes. Hence "for the most part" and not "entirely.") There was an amusing interview with, I think, Marv Wolfman at the time where he criticizes the then-in-progress Byrne run for being regressive and backwards-looking.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

Another way to look at it is the success of Barbie and Oppenheimer. With all the talk of fatigue and the traditional fare being pumped out not doing well at the box office the novelty of a period setting could possibly spark curiosity and interest.

 

[Mudd]

And it's weird to imply that Reed is defined by whiteness...

Calling him a "quintessential 60s white dude" isn't implying anything, I asserted it. And it's probably the least weird thing one can say about ol' Reed.

Which is why Pascal is such a great idea. Shakes things up where they need some shaking. Not that they could go any further in the other direction, after Hyde-White and Gruffudd.

Though they certainly are hewing to FF tradition where casting Sue Storm is concerned - the gap between between Kirby and Pascal is close to fifteen years.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

I wonder if he'll be clean shaven as Reed, I think a lot of Pedro's "look" comes from his mustache.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

I wonder if he'll be clean shaven as Reed, I think a lot of Pedro's "look" comes from his mustache.

Maybe they'll go in the other direction and go full beard. I've always preferred that look on Reed.

But I'm very biased on that point.

 

[Mudd]

Good looking people who look good with moustaches almost always look good without them. Just like people who are attractive with clothes on are attractive naked.*



*Feel free to disagree, but that's really kinda sad.

 

[Mudd]

I have a bias where the period setting is concerned. First Avenger is my favorite Captain America movie and one of my three favorite Marvel films. I'm sure folks will disagree on that one. But WWII is where Cap fits most naturally, and beginning with him in the context of the values of his era really sharpened his conflicts and relationships when he was brought into the present-day movies, IMO. If a director has a real feeling for an era, nostalgic though it may be, like Johnston did, then they can make something really atmospheric and attention-getting, at least.


The 60s setting is speculative, of course, so in the spirt of speculation: maybe the first part of the movie takes place in the 1960s but the bulk of it is in the present. It's a four-very-odd-fish out of water story, right? Hanks spends most of Big as an adult, after all. It goes without saying that Marvel movies jettison the continuity of the comics without much of a second thought. So the FF have their Cosmic Ray experience but never go public afterward in the few months they remain their own time. It's one of Reed's attempts to fix things that propels them into the 21st century.

Reed Richards in particular would find "the future" about as confusing and distressing as Time After Time's H.G. Wells did. Reed already had a flying car sixty years ago.

Carry the Time After Time thing further: Richards knows what a monster Von Doom is from stuff that happens between them back in the day. The FF arrive in 2025 to find him a solid international citizen and benefactor of the masses in his own country. He's a genius; maybe he builds, I dunno, EVs and social media platforms. And Reed's going to go nuts trying to warn the establishment that Viktor is a bad dude on the verge of some Bad Bad Awfulness.

 

[Captaindemotion]

View attachment 38627

[|QUOTE]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[eschaton]

I have a bias where the period setting is concerned. First Avenger is my favorite Captain America movie and one of my three favorite Marvel films. I'm sure folks will disagree on that one. But WWII is where Cap fits most naturally, and beginning with him in the context of the values of his era really sharpened his conflicts and relationships when he was brought into the present-day movies, IMO. If a director has a real feeling for an era, nostalgic though it may be, like Johnston did, then they can make something really atmospheric and attention-getting, at least.


The 60s setting is speculative, of course, so in the spirt of speculation: maybe the first part of the movie takes place in the 1960s but the bulk of it is in the present. It's a four-very-odd-fish out of water story, right? Hanks spends most of Big as an adult, after all. It goes without saying that Marvel movies jettison the continuity of the comics without much of a second thought. So the FF have their Cosmic Ray experience but never go public afterward in the few months they remain their own time. It's one of Reed's attempts to fix things that propels them into the 21st century.

Reed Richards in particular would find "the future" about as confusing and distressing as Time After Time's H.G. Wells did. Reed already had a flying car sixty years ago.

Carry the Time After Time thing further: Richards knows what a monster Von Doom is from stuff that happens between them back in the day. The FF arrive in 2025 to find him a solid international citizen and benefactor of the masses in his own country. He's a genius; maybe he builds, I dunno, EVs and social media platforms. And Reed's going to go nuts trying to warn the establishment that Viktor is a bad dude on the verge of some Bad Bad Awfulness.

I think I might have said it here, but if they wanted to bring back Chris Evans for anything, I'd just like to see a standalone Steve Rogers story set in the early 1960s, where he and Peggy are in suburbia, trying to raise kids, while his neighborhood/local schools are integrating. We'd get to see the internal tension as Steve has changed to become a 21st century man in terms of his ideals, and can't deal with the reactionary viewpoints of many of his neighbors. Also the tension that he wants to intervene, to try and fix things somehow, but he must remain incognito in order to protect the timeline.

You could drag Howard Stark back into the story - perhaps playing a role as Steve's official contact with the U.S. government. Maybe find some way to use Isaiah Bradley as well, saying that he gets released from prison for a mission, but the government breaks its promise of clemency, so he's thrown back into jail at the end of the story.

Only problem I have is I can't think up a good villain/external conflict. But honestly, I would find it more compelling to try and focus on Steve wrestling with a problem that he can't punch his way out of.

 

[Captaindemotion]

I think I might have said it here, but if they wanted to bring back Chris Evans for anything, I'd just like to see a standalone Steve Rogers story set in the early 1960s, where he and Peggy are in suburbia, trying to raise kids, while his neighborhood/local schools are integrating. We'd get to see the internal tension as Steve has changed to become a 21st century man in terms of his ideals, and can't deal with the reactionary viewpoints of many of his neighbors. Also the tension that he wants to intervene, to try and fix things somehow, but he must remain incognito in order to protect the timeline.

You could drag Howard Stark back into the story - perhaps playing a role as Steve's official contact with the U.S. government. Maybe find some way to use Isaiah Bradley as well, saying that he gets released from prison for a mission, but the government breaks its promise of clemency, so he's thrown back into jail at the end of the story.

Only problem I have is I can't think up a good villain/external conflict. But honestly, I would find it more compelling to try and focus on Steve wrestling with a problem that he can't punch his way out of.

I think you - or someone - has posted along those lines before. But it’s a great idea, so it bears repeating IMHO.

 

[DarrenTR1970]

Or, they could set the movie in the 1950s during the height of McCarthy hearings and have Steve be torn about his feelings towards Communism and the Soviet Union and maybe some of his friends be labeled Communists.
Marvel even relabeled Cap's comic book as 'Captain America - Commie Smasher' for a while.

 

[Airmandan]

Or, they could set the movie in the 1950s during the height of McCarthy hearings and have Steve be torn about his feelings towards Communism and the Soviet Union and maybe some of his friends be labeled Communists.
Marvel even relabeled Cap's comic book as 'Captain America - Commie Smasher' for a while.

If I recall from the Black widow movie, the Red Guardian Character keeps telling stories of fighting Captain America, so theoretically you could work it in that he was doing missions.

 

[Nightowl1701]

The 60s setting is speculative, of course, so in the spirt of speculation: maybe the first part of the movie takes place in the 1960s but the bulk of it is in the present. It's a four-very-odd-fish out of water story, right? Hanks spends most of Big as an adult, after all. It goes without saying that Marvel movies jettison the continuity of the comics without much of a second thought. So the FF have their Cosmic Ray experience but never go public afterward in the few months they remain their own time. It's one of Reed's attempts to fix things that propels them into the 21st century.

I’d go the other way and set it towards the end of the 60’s; the FF are well established, have faced several of their rogues gallery, Reed & Sue have been married for a while and already had at least Franklin. (Surprise appearance by Kathryn Hahn as Franklin’s babysitter Agatha!) The vibe is The Incredibles meets Thunderbirds meets the first part of Austin Powers. Make the jump to the present/MCU in the last ten-fifteen minutes, as the Watcher makes the save after the team apparently sacrifice themselves saving their Earth (from Galactus?)