Marvel Cinematic Universe spoiler-heavy speculation thread

[Christopher]

Also slightly too old for a role that might run at least a decade unless you are aging up the rest of the Fantastic Four (which you could do by starting midway through their career).

Yes, please. No more origin stories -- the FF's origin is the least interesting thing about them, and even their debut comic reserved it for a relatively brief mid-issue flashback. What's interesting about them is their role as an established hero team and family, prominent and respected within the Marvel Universe. They could've established themselves during the Blip years, with Reed moving into the void left when Tony Stark withdrew to his cabin.

 

[Rich Watson]

Also slightly too old for a role that might run at least a decade unless you are aging up the rest of the Fantastic Four (which you could do by starting midway through their career).

Reed Richards is supposed to be old(er). He was well into his 40s in FF #1 (Though that age has drifted downwards over the years.)

 

[JoeZhang]

Reed Richards is supposed to be old(er). He was well into his 40s in FF #1 (Though that age has drifted downwards over the years.)

He was but they had a bigger age gap between him and Sue (let's not get into Byrne's em...idea) back then. So you either have that (which tends not to play well now) or you have Sue in her mid-30s at least and also age up Johnny or have a big age gap between the siblings (and is not an insurmountable problem).

It just feels to me that early 40s rather than 50 or above (like James Bond) is a good age for casting.


(Also believe it or not - his grey hair is explained away as being due to what he saw in WW2 not age. So he could actually be say in his very early 40s when he first appears).

 

[Gaith]

How is it a straw man?

No one was arguing that box office correlates to quality.

-------------

I don't know beans about the FF (haven't even seen any of their movies), but it seems to me the best move would be to set their movie in a whole new universe, in the 1960s. They could always inevitably find their way to the present day in the main timeline once they're established, but I think audiences might appreciate a movie with no continuity baggage, and it's been a while since we've had a period superhero movie that really felt like it took place in a different time. (X-Men: Apocalypse certainly didn't feel very retro, and from what I've seen, not much of WW84 did, either, so maybe Days of Future Past and Wonder Woman were the last ones that really used period settings to significant effect?)

 

[Christopher]

Hold on a moment... Didn't Disney say during the strike that they'd already settled on their Fantastic Four and would announce them as soon as the strike ended? But now they're saying they're only "in talks" to land Pascal. So did they have an earlier choice that fell through during the strike? Or were they telling a fib before?

 

[eschaton]

Yeah, it's the Tony on Sakaar one.

Pretty sure it was a Gamora-focused one, which is why she was in the finale despite not having an episode.

 

[wayoung]

So I googled this and an answer did not come up and I don't have time to search ATM, maybe more tonight, but does anyone know how many screens The Marvel's actually has?

I ask because I'm visiting family in a rural part of Canada. Big population but it's spread out in little towns and villages. The only movie theater here within an hour's drive for a lot of people passed on The Marvels opening weekend and played Killers of the Flower Moon instead. The Marvel's is listed as coming soon.

I wonder if the bad tracking and Disney's demands for exclusivity windows turned off independent theaters....

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

No one was arguing that box office correlates to quality.

Indeed.

I don't know beans about the FF (haven't even seen any of their movies), but it seems to me the best move would be to set their movie in a whole new universe, in the 1960s. They could always inevitably find their way to the present day in the main timeline once they're established, but I think audiences might appreciate a movie with no continuity baggage, and it's been a while since we've had a period superhero movie that really felt like it took place in a different time.

Before the 2000s FF films were ever announced, I always argued that any FF movie should be set in the 1960s, as the period of their "birth" played heavily into the kind of 50s sci-fi movie tropes of hero-is-plagued-with-something-otherworldly that influenced the comic. Attempts to update the FF to the modern day (including their experiments and the environment they're working in) lose the gravity of importance the original comic had in being tied to then all-important Space Race. Having a superhero group set in the early 60s instantly takes it out of the present day, very overpopulated MCU, and exists in a zone that could be free of any connection to older characters active in that period (e.g. Fury). I doubt Marvel would have the guts to explore that chapter of its published history.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Reed Richards is supposed to be old(er). He was well into his 40s in FF #1 (Though that age has drifted downwards over the years.)

I don't know about "well into his 40s". FF#1 came out in 1961, just twenty years after the start of WWII. Ben and Reed joined right out of College they'd be in their late 30s or early 40s by 1961. Reed was in the OSS, which formed in 1942. Sue I've always assumed to be about ten years younger than Reed, so late 20s or early 30s. Johnny's in his late teens. 16 to 18.

 

[JD]

Indeed.



Before the 2000s FF films were ever announced, I always argued that any FF movie should be set in the 1960s, as the period of their "birth" played heavily into the kind of 50s sci-fi movie tropes of hero-is-plagued-with-something-otherworldly that influenced the comic. Attempts to update the FF to the modern day (including their experiments and the environment they're working in) lose the gravity of importance the original comic had in being tied to then all-important Space Race. Having a superhero group set in the early 60s instantly takes it out of the present day, very overpopulated MCU, and exists in a zone that could be free of any connection to older characters active in that period (e.g. Fury). I doubt Marvel would have the guts to explore that chapter of its published history.

Yeah, and setting in the '60s would be a nice way to fill in more of the MCU's history.

The What If? trailer looked like it could be fun. I liked the first season so I'm definitely looking forward to more.
Is one of the episodes 1602? Some of the stuff in the trailer looked like it could fit in that kind of era.

 

[Tuskin38]

Pretty sure it was a Gamora-focused one, which is why she was in the finale despite not having an episode.

They're the same episode
https://comicbook.com/marvel/news/what-if-gamora-episode-season-2-prequel-spoilers/

 

[Christopher]

Yeah, and setting in the '60s would be a nice way to fill in more of the MCU's history.

I don't care for that idea, since part of what defines the FF is that they're on the cutting edge of technology and discovery.

 

[Turtletrekker]

Peyton Reed once pitched a 1960s period piece Fantastic Four movie to Fox, but Fox went with Tim Story's pitch instead.

 

[Set Harth]

"Didn't you guys chart in the 60s?"

 

[TerryTrek]

Not to discount your larger point, which is certainly up for debate, but there was a lot of ceremony. The movie began and ended with ceremonies to the character, and by extension, actor.

In the most literal sense of the word, there were ceremonies. Yes.

They killed him offscreen, randomly, in the first few minutes. It seemed a really unworthy and underwhelming death for such an important character.

Good thing they didn't do that, then. They made entire movie dedicated to grief and consequence and the character's ongoing legacy.

Not sure what planet we're on where that is unceremonious.

Also, just to point out the obvious: at least part of killing off T'Challa the character in Wakanda Forever is about the cast, crew and everyone involved in the movie getting the chance to express their own grief and loss over Boseman. Whatever the potential issues raised by the creative decision, and regardless of whatever we perceive as the quality of the film, I'm not about to tell them that wasn't a thing they couldn't or shouldn't do.

They could tribute him without killing off his character T'Challa, the one he put so much effort into making a great character. Marvel has made a lot of bad decisions with Phase 4/5 and it shows now. Killing off T'Challa not only undermines Boseman's work, but leaves the MCU without a very important, central hero that it clearly needed.

He was like the Superman of the MCU, to young Black boys. And it showed in the incredibly merch/toy sales for BP 2017. The MCU is much lesser without T'Challa in play.

 

[TerryTrek]

Destin Daniel Cretton has just made the best decision of has career.
https://www.thewrap.com/avengers-kang-dynasty-director-destin-daniel-cretton-exits/

RIP Kang.

Latest pinch of salt rumour has Pedro Pascal for Reed Richards in the Fantastic Four movie. Well, at least he provides appropriate alliteration. https://deadline.com/2023/11/pedro-pascal-reed-richards-marvel-studios-fantastic-four-1235599560/

If Deadline is reporting this, there are legit negotiations. He's a solid choice. Good age that matches up well with Bruce, Thor, Tony Cap and the others (assuming they are all coming back).

He'll be 50 around the time the film comes out. That means the Doctor Doom actor should be around that age as well, they might be going with a solid big name character actor for that role. Doom may be the new MCU big bad.

As troubled as the MCU is now, Star Wars is much worse and completely directionless. So Pascal is probably better off here.

 

[MikHutch]

What If? Season 2 looks good

I'm skeptical of Madame Web

 

[theenglish]

Fantastic (pun intended) actor but I just don't see as Reed Richards.

Also slightly too old for a role that might run at least a decade unless you are aging up the rest of the Fantastic Four (which you could do by starting midway through their career).

Reed and Ben are supposed to be about 15 years older than Sue and Johnny, at least back in the 60s.

 

[MikHutch]

Reed and Ben are supposed to be about 15 years older than Sue and Johnny, at least back in the 60s.

That always bugged me (among other things I never liked about F4)

 

[Set Harth]

RIP Kang.

I know this feeling... first the setup for Kang Dynasty is removed from the end of Loki season 2, then the writer for the film quits, then the director quits...

...it reminds me of how Michael Keaton was removed from the end of The Flash, and also Aquaman 2, and Batgirl was destroyed...