Spoilers Marvel Cinematic Universe spoiler-heavy speculation thread

[TREK_GOD_1]

Yeah, I would definitely love to see the as variants.

The Fox X-men should be jettisoned, leaving the MCU to establish its own X-identity--preferably based on the 1963 version.

As for Blade, with the original comics starting in the '70s, that would be my first thought for the time period.

The world Blade inhabited when he made his debut (7/1973) would be interesting to set a film in--only if certain mentalities do not think the default tapestry for that period was Nixon, Nixon, Nixon, Blaxploitation (in influence or song best known for those films), Norman Lear TV and other topical references. There would be next to no other super-beings, and it could be gritty--as a Blade film set in that era should be

 

[Dee1891]

Personally, I've thought for years that Filoni was the best creator they had in SW-dom. There's nobody I'd rather see in charge.

I'm not so sure.

As has been discussed at length finding the right head creative organizer, like Feige, is not easy. DC hasn't done it, Star Trek hasn't done it, etc. Feige is apparently a very unique talent.

The only real talent Feige has is the ability to keep his cool and keep the franchise together. Somewhat. He has made mistakes. And those mistakes have been increasing over the past several years - like transforming the third Captain America movie into an Avengers tale in all but name and allowing Robert Downey Jr. to be the co-lead; and claiming that "Agents of SHIELD" was not part of the main MCU timeline. I found the latter especially stupid, considering the series had made great effort to keep up with what was going on in the films, but the latter didn't bother to do so, aside from "Age of Ultron". For me, those are two of Feige's mistakes. I think he is a solid franchise manager, but a mediocre storyteller.

 

[Set Harth]

liketransforming the third Captain America movie into an Avengers tale in all but name and allowing Robert Downey Jr. to be the co-lead

I don't see that as a mistake.

 

[theenglish]

I can't remember, did the earlier Blade movies bring up the fact that, as a "daywalker", Blade ages very slowly? I don't remember it being a factor in the trilogy, although its been part of the comics for awhile.

Regardless, the MCU could definitely use that to have some fun with different time periods, although I'm assuming Blade would end up in the present at some point of the film, even if its just at the end (since we know he's the one who talked to Dane in the eternals end credit scene).

I don't know either. I do remember reading issues of a Blade series in the mid 00s that did flashback to previous eras.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

Is Culture Crave a trustworthy source, I've never heard of them. Typically I don't trust any entertainment news unless the original source is something like IGN, EW, The Hollywood Reporter, or Variety.



Yeah, I would definitely love to see the as variants.

As for Blade, with the original comics starting in the '70s, that would be my first thought for the time period. How much do we know about the MCU in the '70s? Wasn't that when Hany Pym and Janet van Dyne were originally active?

I believe the original Ant-man adventures were supposed to be in the 80s, though maybe they started in the 70s.

 

[cooleddie74]

 

[fireproof78]

For me, those are two of Feige's mistakes. I think he is a solid franchise manager, but a mediocre storyteller.

With how big the MCU is leaving it at two is not bad. I think Feige is a talented franchise manager and tolerates ups and downs way more than most companies would.

But, yeah, Captain America: Civil War was a huge downgrade for me.

 

[Dee1891]

I don't see that as a mistake.

It was a mistake to me. Iron Man as the co-leading character in a Captain America movie? There is no way in the world RDJ would have tolerated another character as co-lead in an Iron Man film. I suspect Chris Evans had remained quiet on the subject in order not to rock the boat. And I wanted a third Captain America movie. A movie that would have allowed Steve Rogers to develop even further his relationships with Sam Wilson, Sharon Carter and especially Bucky Barnes, who was nothing more than a plot device for Helmut Zemo's revenge plan and a point of contention for Steve and Tony. That never happened. Not really. The Civil War arc had played out across various Marvel Comics titles. And Feige had allowed it to be the main narrative in a solo film. That was so stupid to me. And after six years, I'm still trying to find out what had really caused the breakup of the Avengers - the Sokovia Accords (which has never been handled properly in the films) or Zemo's irrelevant revenge plans involving Steve and Tony. This movie was a bust to me, especially since I had such high hopes for it and a sign of the franchise's eventual decline.

 

[Christopher]

I don't think that disagreeing with some of a person's decisions means that person is a bad choice for the job. It just means that all of us are different and no two people will make the same decisions about everything.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

It was a mistake to me. Iron Man as the co-leading character in a Captain America movie?

That's right! No way Captain America would share a lead with another Avenger!

Wait. Does Black Widow count? Dang. So, nevermind. Precedent was set for Cap to not have a movie alone right from his second movie.

I suspect Chris Evans had remained quiet on the subject in order not to rock the boat.

I suspect the opposite, that they all get along REALLY well and welcome the chance to work with each other. Every single outtake and behind the scenes clip or interview supports that, as opposed to just an emotional preference of yours.

 

[fireproof78]

And after six years, I'm still trying to find out what had really caused the breakup of the Avengers - the Sokovia Accords (which has never been handled properly in the films) or Zemo's irrelevant revenge plans involving Steve and Tony. This movie was a bust to me, especially since I had such high hopes for it and a sign of the franchise's eventual decline.

Same. It felt like things happened because they had to happen to set up the pieces for the next phase of Marvel. I know it's a popular film but even on my Marvel rewatch leading up to No Way Home: Homeward Bound part 3, I still did not care for it. It felt so unnecessary.

Regardless, Feige is doing a good job, one I think few can do well.

 

[Anwar]

Not do derail the thread ( but i still will ) - Dave Filoni. Disney has something like Feige in their Star Wars Department and he has proven time and time again that he can do it, chief amongst it the Clone Wars Series and Mandalorian. With the last one he did it together with Favreau but i don't know if Favreau would have been available back then when Disney took over and planned the trilogy. In either case i think Filoni would have turned out something much better if he had total creative control like Feige and just chose the right directors for each movie and kept them on a tight path ( which led to some MCU walkouts under Feige with directors, who were used to more freedom or having their own ideas that didn't overlap with MCU needs).

Filoni can't do anything but gutless fanservice. He has no courage as a writer.

Leave it to him, the Sequels would've been all about the old worn-out OT characters and not one new character would've been introduced.

Or if he did make his versions of Rey, Finn and Poe he'd make sure they were the useless idiot sidekicks to the OT cast who never do anything but waste space.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

What's the second image from?

 

[fireproof78]

What's the second image from?

The Rise of Skywalker.

 

[Set Harth]

Star Wars

edit: too slow

 

[The Nth Doctor]

The Rise of Skywalker.

Huh. I didn't even recognize it.

 

[fireproof78]

Huh. I didn't even recognize it.

Poe Dameron for the win

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

That's right! No way Captain America would share a lead with another Avenger!

Wait. Does Black Widow count? Dang. So, nevermind. Precedent was set for Cap to not have a movie alone right from his second movie.

The Winter Soldier's version of Black Widow seemed to be more of a "special guest star", particularly since she did not have as much of her own plot / direct impact on the story as Stark in Civil War.

Same. It felt like things happened because they had to happen to set up the pieces for the next phase of Marvel.

True. Civil War all hinges on the biggest examples of Plot Convenience 101 / coincidences ever committed to film. Ultimately, it only served to shoehorn Spider-Man into the MCU and have the Avengers split (thus, less effective) when Thanos and his minions come to earth.

It felt so unnecessary.

Agreed.

 

[Dee1891]

I don't think that disagreeing with some of a person's decisions means that person is a bad choice for the job. It just means that all of us are different and no two people will make the same decisions about everything.

It would exactly that to the person had disagreed with those choices. I never said that Feige was a bad choice. He's a good manager who managed to keep the franchise together. But I personally feel the declining quality of the franchise's writing, along with some of the choices Feige had made during the past six years have led me to believe he is not the best pop culture producer there ever was. Not by a long shot.

Same. It felt like things happened because they had to happen to set up the pieces for the next phase of Marvel. I know it's a popular film but even on my Marvel rewatch leading up to No Way Home: Homeward Bound part 3, I still did not care for it. It felt so unnecessary.

Regardless, Feige is doing a good job, one I think few can do well.

I think a good number of producers can do just as good or better than Feige. And some have in both movies and television. The only way I see myself singing that man's praises is if the MCU franchise had maintained its excellence from the first six years.

 

[Christopher]

It would [mean] exactly that to the person had disagreed with those choices.

It doesn't mean that to me, because I recognize that different people can make different choices that are equally valid, or have different preferences that are equally valid. I also understand that my total lack of experience at doing someone else's job means I'm not qualified to judge how they do it. What might seem to me, an inexperienced outsider, as a good idea might actually be a terrible idea to anyone who knows what they're doing. I've certainly heard enough non-writers' ideas about how writing should work to know that they have no bloody clue what they're talking about -- and I remember that I had no bloody clue what I was doing when I first started trying to write. It takes years of hard work and learning to become qualified to judge how a job should be done. Which is why I have no patience for armchair quarterbacking.

There are millions of people affected by a studio executive's choices. What determines that executive's suitability for the role is whether their decisions have a negative impact on a large percentage of those people, not any isolated one.