Spoilers Marvel Cinematic Universe spoiler-heavy speculation thread

[Allyn Gibson]

The Guardian has a piece today on whether or not Galactus wins in Fantastic Four. No spoilers, it's all based on the tone of the final trailer.

First Steps to ruin: Is Marvel’s Fantastic Four finally about to let the bad guys win?

Is cosmic obliteration really what the future holds, as the latest trailer for the forthcoming First Steps appears to show?

www.theguardian.com

 

[theenglish]

The Guardian has a piece today on whether or not Galactus wins in Fantastic Four. No spoilers, it's all based on the tone of the final trailer.

First Steps to ruin: Is Marvel’s Fantastic Four finally about to let the bad guys win?

Is cosmic obliteration really what the future holds, as the latest trailer for the forthcoming First Steps appears to show?

www.theguardian.com

I'm going to be avoiding pieces until the movie releases. I stated my projection up a bit, which is Franklin stops Galactus or Galactus decides to move on because of Franklin. I am also guessing that Franklin is the reason the FF jumps to the main MCU Earth.

 

[Turtletrekker]

The Guardian has a piece today on whether or not Galactus wins in Fantastic Four. No spoilers, it's all based on the tone of the final trailer.

First Steps to ruin: Is Marvel’s Fantastic Four finally about to let the bad guys win?

Is cosmic obliteration really what the future holds, as the latest trailer for the forthcoming First Steps appears to show?

www.theguardian.com

It may just be me, but that seems like an absolutely horrible way to introduce your new tent-pole heroes.

 

[eschaton]

It may just be me, but that seems like an absolutely horrible way to introduce your new tent-pole heroes.

Reminds me of how Quantumania removed any real menace related to Kang.

 

[Anwar]

Reminds me of how Quantumania removed any real menace related to Kang.

That was only one version of Kang, out of several. He wasn't even the strongest one.

The most powerful Kang was from the Loki show, he was menacing and strong.

 

[Christopher]

Reminds me of how Quantumania removed any real menace related to Kang.

I don't get that. Just because he was defeated the first time, he has no more menace? That makes no sense. Darth Vader was humiliatingly defeated at the end of Star Wars -- the mighty Dark Lord of the Sith sent spinning by a stray shot from a space truck driver -- but it didn't prevent him from becoming even more menacing in the sequels. Khan was defeated in "Space Seed," but that didn't preclude him from being menacing in The Wrath of Khan. Biff Tannen was defeated and humiliated in the climax of Back to the Future, but he rallied to become a far greater menace in the sequel. Heck, Hannibal Lecter was defeated before The Silence of the Lambs even started, but it didn't stop him from being menacing there.

I agree, though, that it would be a bad idea to have the Fantastic Four lose in their first movie. You expect comic book villains to be defeated and come back again; that's what they do. But the heroes losing in their first story would set a bad tone.

 

[eschaton]

That was only one version of Kang, out of several. He wasn't even the strongest one.

The most powerful Kang was from the Loki show, he was menacing and strong.

Victor Timely was hardly menacing. I guess you mean He Who Remains? I'm not sure I'd agree that he was strong He was ageless and basically omniscient, but he had no real powers and just sat there and let Sylvie shank him, repeatedly. Plus he existed within the narrative to serve as a hype man for the Kangs we never really got to see. I guess I can understand the sense of menace though.

I don't get that. Just because he was defeated the first time, he has no more menace? That makes no sense. Darth Vader was humiliatingly defeated at the end of Star Wars -- the mighty Dark Lord of the Sith sent spinning by a stray shot from a space truck driver -- but it didn't prevent him from becoming even more menacing in the sequels.

I'd quibble on a few things with Vader. One is that Lucas's thoughts about a potential sequel were pretty ill formed at that point. But the most important is that Obi-Wan died! I really wouldn't have had an issue with a relatively low-level Avenger like Scott defeating Kang if it came at the cost of his life - particularly if it was to save his daughter. Indeed, though Paul Rudd still looks amazing for his age, it was a logical place to retire the character (or at least, this variant of the character, much like the OG Loki was choked out by Thanos).

 

[Christopher]

I'd quibble on a few things with Vader. One is that Lucas's thoughts about a potential sequel were pretty ill formed at that point. But the most important is that Obi-Wan died! I really wouldn't have had an issue with a relatively low-level Avenger like Scott defeating Kang if it came at the cost of his life - particularly if it was to save his daughter. Indeed, though Paul Rudd still looks amazing for his age, it was a logical place to retire the character (or at least, this variant of the character, much like the OG Loki was choked out by Thanos).

As I've argued before, I categorically reject your premise that killing a main character is the only possible way to make a character menacing. There are so many counterexamples throughout fiction that I hardly feel it necessary to list any of them.

Also, your Obi-Wan comparison is hardly valid. Obi-Wan didn't die because Vader was some overpowering unstoppable foe; he literally stopped fighting back and let Vader cut him down so that he would become "more powerful than you can possibly imagine." It's not exactly impressive that Vader killed an elderly man who was just standing there. He would've had a harder time breaking a pinata.

After all, Vader wasn't originally intended as the big bad, but as Tarkin's flunky, the Sheriff of Nottingham to Tarkin's King John. That's why he was relatively unimpressive in the first movie compared to the reputation he's accrued since then. But that's exactly my point. A character's future effectiveness is not absolutely dependent on what happens in their first appearance. It's a function of how you build on what was introduced.