Agents of SHIELD - Season 2 Discussion Threads. (Spoilers Likely)
- Thread starter Trekker4747
- Start date
Haw! I don't even read (or watch) Punisher and I got that one.
Parking.
I like to think of it as deadpanning while waiting for someone to notice the obvious abbreviation.
Marvels?
Seriously, what would happen if they were referred to as mutants? Surely Fox doesn't own the word itself.
Maybe they could just be called "genetic mutations" or a similar side term.
I wonder about the whole difference between Mutant and non mutant, really, there's been at least 4 or 5 official "mutant" Avengers, plus what's the big difference? Spider Man, FF, Hulk they all seem to be some kind of mutant but they are not officially mutants. I remember when Spiderman had the blurb "the Non-Mutant superhero" on his cover and wondering why the line between mutant and nonmutant is so specific. And why then only Mutants are persecuted and the others mostly aren't.
So, maybe how Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver got their powers decides if they are mutants but they won't mention it? There are two Quicksilvers now, could they have two of other characters?
Kinda makes one wonder if the show would be deemed a "smash hit" today, had it been released from the beginning in House Of Cards fashion, on Netflix or what-have-you.
Binge-watching seems to be the wave of the future, right now.
Spidey, the FF, & Hulk were not born with the capability of attaining powers. Mutants are. It's the mutation that makes them what they are.
Marvel classifies mutants as someone born with their ability or will develop their ability naturally. Spider-man, FF and Hulk were mutated by some external stimuli. Franklin Richards (son of Reed and Sue) is a mutant because he was born with his abilities.
Right, so the question is: If they can use Pietro or Wanda, why wouldn't they be able to call them mutants? I don't think Fox can issue a cease-and-desist order over the use of the word "mutant". The word exists outside the context of the X-Men. They just wouldn't be able to draw any connections with Magneto or X-Men characters.
Edit: Thinking about it, I suppose there could be a couple of considerations, depending on how character rights work (and how they're written).
It could be
1) The rights to Pietro and Wanda as Avengers members could be written specifically as "Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, members of the Avengers, a brother and sister who are (respectively) a speedster-type and a magic-type".
Whereas for the X-Men it would be phrased as "Pietro and Wanda, Magneto's son and daughter, associated with the X-Men, who are (respectively) a speedster-type and a magic-type".
You can use the characters in either context, including where the descriptions cross over. But any mingling of these descriptions outside of that would constitute infringement. Notice that it doesn't exclude the use of the word "mutant" for the Avengers, though.
Or it could be
2) The Avengers description is as above, but the X-Men description is "Pietro and Wanda, Magneto's son and daughter, mutants with (respectively) speedster-type mutant powers and magic-type mutant powers". In that case the Avengers would not be able to mention them as mutants. But I still bet they could get away with calling them a variant like "genetic mutations" as long as they did it low-key.
or
3) ????
Edit: Thinking about it, I suppose there could be a couple of considerations, depending on how character rights work (and how they're written).
It could be
1) The rights to Pietro and Wanda as Avengers members could be written specifically as "Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, members of the Avengers, a brother and sister who are (respectively) a speedster-type and a magic-type".
Whereas for the X-Men it would be phrased as "Pietro and Wanda, Magneto's son and daughter, associated with the X-Men, who are (respectively) a speedster-type and a magic-type".
You can use the characters in either context, including where the descriptions cross over. But any mingling of these descriptions outside of that would constitute infringement. Notice that it doesn't exclude the use of the word "mutant" for the Avengers, though.
Or it could be
2) The Avengers description is as above, but the X-Men description is "Pietro and Wanda, Magneto's son and daughter, mutants with (respectively) speedster-type mutant powers and magic-type mutant powers". In that case the Avengers would not be able to mention them as mutants. But I still bet they could get away with calling them a variant like "genetic mutations" as long as they did it low-key.
or
3) ????
Last edited:
Sure the word exists outside the canon. But if the word is used to describe characters in /marvel with that ability, then Fox has a right to complain. That was one of the boundary lines of what Fox has the rights to: the word mutants not in a general sense (the MCU can have a character talk about common mutant genes like baldness, but they can't use the term with relation to superpowers.
This has been talked about so many times, in interviews with Feige and/or Donnor, not talking msg boards, that it gets fuzzy what is what.
I seem to think that within the context of these Marvel properties that the word MUTANT is indeed off the table to be said or referenced within current Marvel Studios Produced fare. Not sure if it's just film or if it's across the board, including AoS and upcoming Netflix shows.
While the word MUTANT is indeed not something "owned" by the X-Men I seem to recall this being some "understood" and that it might even be in writing among the studios.
I seem to think that within the context of these Marvel properties that the word MUTANT is indeed off the table to be said or referenced within current Marvel Studios Produced fare. Not sure if it's just film or if it's across the board, including AoS and upcoming Netflix shows.
While the word MUTANT is indeed not something "owned" by the X-Men I seem to recall this being some "understood" and that it might even be in writing among the studios.
I was quoting Strucker at the end of CA:TWS. He calls Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch Miracles and I'm assuming that's what they plan on calling Mutants in the MCU.
"Miracle"? No wonder Pietro has such an attitude.
I still think that they're just going to make Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch Inhumans in the MCU. In the Winter Soldier post-credits scene, Strucker and his lackey were talking about how all the other test subjects they'd been experimenting on had died, and only Wanda and Pietro survived the process. I'm thinking that's because their DNA contains latent Inhuman genes, and Strucker inadvertently activated those genes and triggered the twins' powers.
Fox sued Marvel and Tribune Entertainment over their syndicated series Mutant X, which forced the series to use the term "New Mutant" (to the point of irritation), instead of simply calling them 'mutants'.
Keep in mind that this is a question of what their contract agrees to, not what the law of trademarks and copyright says. Obviously, Fox hold the rights to the trademark to the word mutant because it almost certainly can't be trademarked.
Kevin Feige was talking about how much he wanted Inhumans and in the same conversation said that Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch would not be Inhumans in the movies. Given that context, I can't think of any reason to be deceptive and he certainly was unequivocal that they would not be Inhumans.
So I really think this belief has been thoroughly debunked by now.
I don't read Punisher - I thought she said Mike Rowe - the "Dirty Jobs guy"...
Strucker only said, "What we have is more valuable than they ever knew, and we have only scratched the surface." in response to his doctor subordinate's question, "What about the volunteers?" I know I'm leaning toward Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch getting powers from scepter/Mind Stone mutation, but Strucker's line is inspecific to me.
Yeah, I think it's a plausible interpretation of the scene, but it's also possible he was either experimenting on them (to enhance their powers) or trying to control them or a number of other possibilities.
Well that was part of my point, the only difference is getting their powers from an "external" event, so as long as the character gets the power from something, an experiment or accident, then they aren't a mutant and could use them.
But I don't suppose that would let Beast be an Avenger.
But I don't suppose that would let Beast be an Avenger.
^Too bad. I'd love Coulson having Beast handle an interrogation. Just imagine Kelsey Grammar sitting down, staring at the bad guy across the table...and saying, "I'm listening." 
Act I:
Whitehall's Nazi backstory, huh?
Is that woman related to May, by any chance...?
Back to the present: So, Skye's dad was roughed up by Whitehall's goons, huh? So much for an alliance....
BTW--gotta love his wisecracks. He's Skye's dad, all right! ("Much...much cooler.")
SO--the obelisk is connected to the city, eh?
Is there a reason Simmons seems big on the "Catholic girl" outfit, I wonder...?
I love Mockingbird's "Bond Villain" line.
AND...looks like we'll be looking into Whitehall's past--like how he's lived this long.
And NOW...battle of the brothers. Place your bets. I wouldn't be surprised if Sen. Ward's got some skills of his own....
Act I:
Whitehall's Nazi backstory, huh?
Is that woman related to May, by any chance...?
Back to the present: So, Skye's dad was roughed up by Whitehall's goons, huh? So much for an alliance....
BTW--gotta love his wisecracks. He's Skye's dad, all right! ("Much...much cooler.")
SO--the obelisk is connected to the city, eh?
Is there a reason Simmons seems big on the "Catholic girl" outfit, I wonder...?
I love Mockingbird's "Bond Villain" line.
AND...looks like we'll be looking into Whitehall's past--like how he's lived this long.
And NOW...battle of the brothers. Place your bets. I wouldn't be surprised if Sen. Ward's got some skills of his own....
Similar threads
