• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Marvel Cinematic Universe spoiler-heavy speculation thread

What grade would you give the Marvel Cinematic Universe? (Ever-Changing Question)


  • Total voters
    185
Good enough for me.
Or one better: Natalia Romanoff *was* born in 1984...and died as an infant a few days later. The woman we've been calling Romanoff this whole time was a nameless orphan born (or perhaps bred, depending on how much you want to lean into the super soldier idea) in the 50's or 60's and the Romanoff identity was just the cover she was using when the Soviet Union collapsed.
 
@Emh Actually, Natasha's birth year was spoken in dialogue by Arnim Zola.

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

And I actually did watch Iron Man 2 and infinity War back to back last night, and Johansen, Downey and Paltrow have all noticeably aged.
 
@Emh Actually, Natasha's birth year was spoken in dialogue by Arnim Zola.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
Ah, I stand corrected. Thanks for that. Still, there are easy workarounds as demonstrated by Reverend, even working around the Winter Soldier wrinkle which I had forgotten about.

And I actually did watch Iron Man 2 and infinity War back to back last night, and Johansen, Downey and Paltrow have all noticeably aged.
Hm, okay. I can't comment further until I do the same but I don't think it'll be too much a big deal. And who knows, when we watch Captain Marvel next year, we'll all be blown away by how realistically young Jackson looks for the whole film on the big screen and that will be a viable option for Johannsen.
 
Just looked it up: Scarlett Johannson was actually born in 1984, which is probably why they used that year. Therefore, she was 25-26 when she filmed Iron Man 2.
 
@Emh Actually, Natasha's birth year was spoken in dialogue by Arnim Zola.

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

And I actually did watch Iron Man 2 and infinity War back to back last night, and Johansen, Downey and Paltrow have all noticeably aged.

And Zola NEVER lies. He's such an honest sort.
 
Fair point. Which brings up the question, why would he lie about that?

Don't know really, but I don't think any future work should feel obligated to stick to it as a "fact". Was he lying or not, he's an unreliable source so it can be disregarded without any problems.
 
More to the point, if Zola did lie (after all, he was stalling) and Natasha's true birthdate is shady, then she would probably have good reason to go along with the lie, even if she had become closer to Steve at that point.
 
Yeah, I think Zola was speaking the truth so far as he knew it. Whether his facts were accurate or not is an open question.

Here's something of note: if they set this story (or at least part of it) against the backdrop of the disintegration of the Soviet Union (way more interesting than Y2K if you ask me!) then it may coincide and possibly be linked with the Winter Soldier's hit on Howard Stark and the theft of the super soldier serum he had in the trunk.
Note that we still don't know what he was doing with that; could it be that SHIELD had just acquired it from the last survivor of The Red Room? A feared assassin that turned herself in and now in custody at a SHIELD blacksite? If Leviathan were using that on their Black Widow operatives, it's a given Hydra would have heard about it and want it out of SHIELD's hands in into their's.

Ending the movie with her in a SHIELD prison has the upshot of both honouring the comic lore that had her start off as a villain and of leaving the door open for a second movie where Nat is given a chance to redeem herself and be released from prison, presumably by teaming up with Barton and ending up with Fury making her an Agent. Third movie...I don't know: either whatever the hell happened in Budapest or one set in the present, though probably dealing with some ghost from her past to bring it full circle.
 
As for how she met Hawkeye, this is what she said to Loki about her past (and, again, here it's possible that Natasha is obscuring the truth from Loki).
"Before I worked for SHIELD, I, well, I made a name for myself. I have a very specific skill-set and I didn't care what I used it for. Or on. I got on SHIELD's radar in a bad way. Agent Barton was sent to kill me. He made a different call."
 
As for how she met Hawkeye, this is what she said to Loki about her past (and, again, here it's possible that Natasha is obscuring the truth from Loki).
I'll be honest, I was just spinning ideas of the top of my head and didn't remember this specific detail. The basic premise is still sound; maybe at the end of the first movie she does a runner when SHIELD attempts to capture her, but all they get is that case of serum. Then maybe the second movie can start with her out in the world as a mercenary assassin and you can do the whole "Barton is sent to kill her, but ends up recruiting her" bit.
 
Last edited:
The word, “endgame” is also mentioned in Age of Ultron adding more credence to it being the title of Avengers 4.
 
I understand why they're waiting. They don't want people to be talking about Avengers 4, they want people to be talking about Captain Marvel. However, I don't see how they can keep the title out of the spotlight for that long. Then again, maybe I'm under estimating Marvel's snipers.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top