Spoilers Marvel Cinematic Universe spoiler-heavy speculation thread

[Anwar]

It's not worth it. The revelation of Wakanda's isolationism didn't connect to what happened to that Wakanda mission and King T'Chaka's reaction in "Civil War" to me. And what was Nakia doing in Nigeria? What did her actions have to do with Wakanda?

You're misunderstanding what the movie explained. Wakanda stayed unknown until the last few years and T'Chaka revealed the country. But he made sure to make everyone think that Wakanda was this backwater 3rd world country not worth investigating or lots of attention. The point of BP was T'Challa deciding that this was still BS and he unveiled the true power of Wakanda to the world.

Nakia? Whatever she was doing was for protecting Wakanda's status as a fake 3rd world country. Stuff no longer necessary by the end of the film.

My biggest problem with the movie was the last 20 minutes or so. Why? Why didn't T'Challa follow Naka's advice and use Wakanda's technology to help the African diaspora and other African nations?

He's starting to, but he's also willing to start sharing with other major countries to keep them from getting too curious as to what was going on in Africa and provoke any kind of international incidents.

Why did Coogler and Marvel allow Wakanda to share its tech with countries that did not require any real help?

So to avoid international repercussions from them helping their neighboring countries.

Why did Marvel and Ryan Cogler attached this conservative agenda at the end of the film?

Because there's no magic cure and a downside to becoming a true part of the international world is that everything you do will attract attention. So might as well nip that in the bud by making yourself available to all the world instead of helping lesser countries and get the big guys mad at you for not wanting to work with them as well. They want their piece of the pie after all.

 

[YLu]

Not at all, people still do Kung Fu and it still has masters.

Yeah, but it's not in the zeitgeist the way it was in Shang-Chi's heyday. Highlighting that aspect of the character, of all the possible things, as his major selling point feels unusual in 2018, like an evocation of the zeitgeist of a bygone decade. I mean, it's not as if it's the character's sole defining schtick; you can't throw a stick in the Marvel Universe without hitting three martial arts masters.

If Marvel created Shang-Chi today, does anyone think for a second MASTER OF KUNG FU would be the title they'd choose to go with for the book?

 

[fireproof78]

Yeah, but it's not in the zeitgeist the way it was in Shang-Chi's heyday. Highlighting that aspect of the character, of all the possible things, as his major selling point feels unusual in 2018, like an evocation of the zeitgeist of a bygone decade. I mean, it's not as if it's the character's sole defining schtick; you can't throw a stick in the Marvel Universe without hitting three martial arts masters.

If Marvel created Shang-Chi today, does anyone think for a second MASTER OF KUNG FU would be the title they'd choose to go with for the book?

Yes.

Especially given that the rebooted Karate Kid actually focused more on Kung Fu than Karate.

 

[Christopher]

Yeah, but it's not in the zeitgeist the way it was in Shang-Chi's heyday. Highlighting that aspect of the character, of all the possible things, as his major selling point feels unusual in 2018, like an evocation of the zeitgeist of a bygone decade

Why would you think that? Kung fu is just a blanket name for Chinese martial arts. If anything, Chinese culture has only gotten more culturally influential in the West, with many films (Marvel films included) being funded and co-produced by Chinese backers. Action stars like Jackie Chan, Michelle Yeoh, Chow Yun Fat, and Jet Li are still part of fairly recent cultural history. Also, the Kung Fu Panda movies and the Avatar: The Last Airbender franchise made a big splash over the past decade, introducing Chinese martial arts to a whole new generation that's now in adolescence or young adulthood. So I don't know where you got the idea that kung fu was somehow an antiquated trope.

 

[Turtletrekker]

It would seem some folks in China are up in arms about Shang-Chi, claiming it an insult that Marvel would make their first movie starring an Asian-American the son of Fu Manchu.

https://m.scmp.com/news/china/socie...ury-china-over-marvels-asian-superhero-origin

 

[Enterprise is Great]

I'm pretty sure that Marvel is dropping the Fu Manchu part of his origin.

 

[Turtletrekker]

I'm pretty sure that Marvel is dropping the Fu Manchu part of his origin.

Marvel doesn't even own the rights to use the name anymore. Since when has something like a simple truth stopped online furor? However, it would seem that Marvel plans on keeping the "evil Chinese globalist for a father" aspect of Shang-Chi's character. Essentially, Fu Manchu in all but name.

 

[Marsden]

It's a good thing Marvel doesn't have the rights to Egg Fu

 

[Neroon]

By the way . . . fuck you. I don't need your pretentious bullshit.

Warning for flaming. Comments to PM

 

[YLu]

So I don't know where you got the idea that kung fu was somehow an antiquated trope.

Something doesn't need to be antiquated to feel off as the primary, headlining selling point. Skateboarding isn't exactly unpopular and there are still pro skateboarders and everything, but if Marvel made a movie about Night Thrasher, a character who in fact does go around a skateboard, I doubt they'd name it Night Thrasher: Skateboard Warrior in this day and age. Heck, Batman's technically a kung fu master, but no one's going to use that as a subtitle for a Batman movie any time soon.

Of course, fighting skills is just one component of the larger character of Batman, not what defines him. But that's my point: so is kung fu for Shang-Chi.

Marvel doesn't even own the rights to use the name anymore. Since when has something like a simple truth stopped online furor? However, it would seem that Marvel plans on keeping the "evil Chinese globalist for a father" aspect of Shang-Chi's character. Essentially, Fu Manchu in all but name.

Well, Fu Manchu's in the public domain now, so they could easily have a line about how one of the names he's used in the past was Fu Manchu or how he's the real life inspiration for Fu Manchu.

 

[Turtletrekker]

@YLu The stories are in the public domain, but the Sax Rohmer estate has a trademark on the name "Fu Manchu".

 

[YLu]

That wouldn't prevent using the name within the movie the way I described.

 

[Christopher]

Something doesn't need to be antiquated to feel off as the primary, headlining selling point. Skateboarding isn't exactly unpopular and there are still pro skateboarders and everything, but if Marvel made a movie about Night Thrasher, a character who in fact does go around a skateboard, I doubt they'd name it Night Thrasher: Skateboard Warrior in this day and age. Heck, Batman's technically a kung fu master, but no one's going to use that as a subtitle for a Batman movie any time soon.

Again: the Kung Fu Panda trilogy (2008-16) was hugely popular. KFP2 is the second-most successful female-directed movie in the world, after Wonder Woman. So I don't know where you're getting this notion that putting "Kung Fu" in a title is some kind of box-office poison.

That wouldn't prevent using the name within the movie the way I described.

Apparently it would, given that Marvel has avoided using the name in their comics.

 

[YLu]

Again: the Kung Fu Panda trilogy (2008-16) was hugely popular. KFP2 is the second-most successful female-directed movie in the world, after Wonder Woman. So I don't know where you're getting this notion that putting "Kung Fu" in a title is some kind of box-office poison.

That's not what I'm saying. I doubt the title will turn people off. It's a Marvel movie so I'm sure it'll do great at the box office no matter what. But I don't think the title's something that's going to be much of a draw either, so it's an odd choice as the focus. A title like "Iron Man" isn't a draw either, but hey, it's the guy's name. But "Master of Kung Fu" *isn't* Shang-Chi's name. The only reason he has that epithet is that it was the 70s and kung fu was really in back then. For comparison, Iron Man's called the Golden Avenger in the comics, but the MCU's never referenced that epithet once...

Again, Batman's a martial arts master, but they're not about to work that into the title of his next movie.

Apparently it would, given that Marvel has avoided using the name in their comics.

I think Marvel has used it in the way I'm talking about. In Ed Brubaker's Secret Avengers run, he had "Fu Manchu" as an alias that Shang-Chi's dad, renamed Zheng Zu or something, once used.

 

[Christopher]

That's not what I'm saying. I doubt the title will turn people off. It's a Marvel movie so I'm sure it'll do great at the box office no matter what. But I don't think the title's something that's going to be much of a draw either, so it's an odd choice as the focus.

Why is it an odd choice when it's what the guy is? Just calling the movie Shang-Chi wouldn't tell the audience anything by itself, any more than calling a movie Tony Stark or Carol Danvers would. Shang-Chi isn't a code name like Iron Man or Captain Marvel, it's just the guy's name. Calling it Shang-Chi, Master of Kung Fu at least tells the audience that they're getting a movie with a martial arts focus. Your Batman analogy doesn't work because martial arts are just one aspect of what Batman does, but the martial-arts milieu is central to a Shang-Chi story.

Also, it's a title that Marvel holds a trademark on and thus it's logical that they'd use it.

I think Marvel has used it in the way I'm talking about. In Ed Brubaker's Secret Avengers run, he had "Fu Manchu" as an alias that Shang-Chi's dad, renamed Zheng Zu or something, once used.

According to this article, Brubaker's run only said that Zheng Zu had gone by many names in the past. It implied that Fu Manchu had been one of those past aliases, but did not actually use the name in the text. The article also excerpts a few earlier stories and shows how they danced around the name without ever stating it.

 

[YLu]

Your Batman analogy doesn't work because martial arts are just one aspect of what Batman does, but the martial-arts milieu is central to a Shang-Chi story.

More central yes, but not so central that it's the only choice for how to promote the character in a title. If being a great martial artist was all the character had going for himself as a driving concept, he would never have lasted over 100 issues, not when the Marvel universe is replete with kickass fighters. But Shang-Chi was also raised from childhood to be a living weapon, he's the son/enemy of an immortal criminal genius, he's a super-spy who gets involved in crazy international intrigue... Heck, his name means "the rising of the spirit" and there are probably ways to work with that in a title... If you had a brand new character with all that going on, and you could name their book *anything* would you go with a reductive "Master of Kung Fu"?

Basically, if you're not just going to use the character's name as the title (and I agree that would be a bland choice) you can go *anywhere* and while I suppose "master of kung fu" is a valid choice, surely it can't possibly be the best choice, unless you consider...

Also, it's a title that Marvel holds a trademark on and thus it's logical that they'd use it.

Well, okay, yeah, there is that.

According to this article, Brubaker's run only said that Zheng Zu had gone by many names in the past. It implied that Fu Manchu had been one of those past aliases, but did not actually use the name in the text.

I think he did use it in at least one issue, but I'm too lazy to go check.

 

[Christopher]

If you had a brand new character with all that going on, and you could name their book *anything* would you go with a reductive "Master of Kung Fu"?

I still don't see why you think there's anything wrong with that. So what if it's a little retro? Retro is often desirable. Look at Luke Cage and how much its theme music references the funky '70s blaxploitation genre that inspired the original comic. Captain America: The First Avenger was a nostalgic WWII film, and Captain America: The Winter Soldier reflected '70s political thrillers. Captain Marvel is set in 1995. Clearly the MCU does not have a problem with retro.

 

[Marsden]

I wonder if this movie might include that other "Mandarin" that wasn't in Iron Man 3.

 

[YLu]

I still don't see why you think there's anything wrong with that. So what if it's a little retro? Retro is often desirable. Look at Luke Cage and how much its theme music references the funky '70s blaxploitation genre that inspired the original comic. Captain America: The First Avenger was a nostalgic WWII film, and Captain America: The Winter Soldier reflected '70s political thrillers. Captain Marvel is set in 1995. Clearly the MCU does not have a problem with retro.

One more time, I'm not saying there's anything *wrong* with the title, just that you can probably come up with a better one if not bound by tradition for the sake of tradition, which Marvel Studios never particularly has been.

If they're deliberately going for something retro, I agree the title is then fitting and ideal.

 

[LJones41]

So to avoid international repercussions from them helping their neighboring countries.

What? WHAT? Which neighboring countries are you talking about? So . . . Wakanda is not allowed to help its neighboring countries and the African diaspora without the "blessed" approval of the Western and other "more technically advanced" nations?

Fucking Marvel. Keeping it conservative until the bitter end. The only way my opinion of this franchise will approve is for someone finally state in the open that the Sokovia Accords is a violation of the U.S. Constitution.