• 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
Christopher said:
Reed-y Anagonye? Fork yeah! Harper's an excellent actor, and certainly good at playing an intellectual, empathetic hero, so he'd be a good choice for Reed, if that were indeed his role.
Click to expand...
I saw a comment from someone that they now have to get Kristen Bell to be Sue Storm which would be fantas-, er, great. It’s hard for me to not think of Harper as Chidi which isn’t quite what I think of Reed so I’m not quite sold on the notion just yet.
 
Well, this is interesting. Apparently, the X-Men 97 showrunner made it a rule that everyone in the writer's room had to be a fan.

https://screenrant.com/xmen-97-showrunner-important-marvel-writers-room-rule/

My general rule was you HAD to be a fan. No questions. I've been on shows - namely The Witcher - where some of the writers were not or actively disliked the books and games (even actively mocking the source material.) It's a recipe for disaster and bad morale. Fandom as a litmus test checks egos, and makes all the long nights worth it. You have to respect the work before you're allowed to add to its legacy.
Click to expand...

Is this the first time an adaptation has done this?
 
YLu said:
Apparently, the X-Men 97 showrunner made it a rule that everyone in the writer's room had to be a fan.
Click to expand...

That worries me. Fandom does not automatically make for good writing; on the contrary, it often makes for self-indulgent writing that's more about geeking out on the concept and characters than telling a good story. When Steven Moffat took over Doctor Who, he changed it from a show about the Doctor exploring the universe to a show about the universe reacting to how incredible and godlike the Doctor is. The fannishness overwhelmed it to the detriment of the core concept. And other franchises run by fans often end up being more about indulging in endless nostalgia and rehashing of past characters and storylines than about moving the series forward. Pandering to old fans -- including oneself -- can get in the way of making a series good enough to create new fans.

One of the most important rules of writing is "kill your darlings" -- never put sentimental attachment to a concept or scene above the pragmatic needs of good storytelling. And fandom is all about sentimental attachment. So even if you are a fan of the thing you're writing, you still need to be a professional first. A professional should put equal care into every job whether they have prior personal attachment or not. That's where the respect comes from -- respect for the needs and parameters of the job, for doing the research and practice you need to master the subject and do it well, whether you had previous knowledge of it or not.

Not that there isn't value in bringing fandom into one's work. I've certainly put my own fandom into much of what I've written. But it needs to be kept in balance with other considerations. With a TV writers' room or other collaboration, it's probably wiser to have a mix of fans and non-fans to provide perspective. After all, you want a show to be accessible to a new audience, and not so meta and inside that new viewers can't get it.
 
I feel like there should be room for a happy medium somewhere between "everyone must be a super-fan" and "half of these people hate the source material" since neither of those options seem optimal.

I'd take a solid story told by writers with a good grip on storytelling craft (regardless of how they feel about it) over a dozen undercooked, hairbrained fanfics anytime. That said, while I don't need for such a writer to be any kind of fan, they should at least respect the material . . . unless it's a deliberate lampoon or subversion like 'Starship Troopers', in which case: go nuts!
 
YLu said:
Well, this is interesting. Apparently, the X-Men 97 showrunner made it a rule that everyone in the writer's room had to be a fan.
Click to expand...
Understandable. (Notably, the Star Wars franchise is not doing this. Some of the people in the writers' room basically know nothing.)
 
Evil Headhunter said:
Hell, yeah! I figured we hadn't seen the last of White Vision so I'm glad he's getting his own series...and hopefully confirms that Wanda survived.
Click to expand...
I'm thinking it will be flashbacks or a head-Wanda sorta thing if she comes back. Honestly, I hope she stays dead.
 
Booji said:
I'm thinking it will be flashbacks or a head-Wanda sorta thing if she comes back. Honestly, I hope she stays dead.
Click to expand...
No body, no death.

And I would have been shocked if we never saw White Vision again. What would have been the point of introducing him if they were just going to forget about him? Hell, they even got back to Abomination and the Leader eventually.

When Kevin Feige stated so definitively that "there will not be a WandaVision season 2", I actually sort of assumed that that would be because the story would continue under a different title, as "WandaVision" would not be an appropriate name for the show without the TV sitcom backdrop. While I actually expected the follow up to be the Agatha series, this is the more likely candidate. Perhaps they will all be tied together.
 
Last edited:
Vision could end up good and I may even end up really liking it but there's so many other Marvel things I'd rather have announced instead.

As to X-Men 97, maybe it's not just to make a better show but to create an environment where that person finds it rewarding and pleasant to work. That's something I can definitely appreciate.
 
Mr. Adventure said:
As to X-Men 97, maybe it's not just to make a better show but to create an environment where that person finds it rewarding and pleasant to work. That's something I can definitely appreciate.
Click to expand...

How rewarding is an environment where everyone already likes the same things? I'd say a rewarding creative environment is one where different people bring different perspectives to the table to create new possibilities from the contrast and synergy. And an "in-group only" barrier to entry seems like the opposite of an open and welcoming work environment.

Fandom is a hobby. Writing is a profession. Having a hobby in common is not a meaningful qualification for professional work, and it's not a requirement for people to be able to work together comfortably. A pleasant work environment isn't about what people did before they got the job, it's about the climate the employers create within the job itself. If they need to have some prior connection to work together well, that means the people in charge are abdicating their own responsibility to nurture a positive climate and relationships. (And seriously, when have fans as a group ever gotten along without conflict?)

In particular, the television writers' room system is meant to be about grooming future producers and showrunners, helping newcomers to the trade hone their craft and rise through the ranks. It's intrinsically a teaching process, so what makes a positive and rewarding writers' room environment is about what you learn and how well you're prepared for the future, regardless of how much or how little you knew coming in.
 
White Vision was already confirmed to come back in Armor Wars, it's nice he's getting his own series too
 
Re: The X-Men '97 writer's room. I don't think limiting your pool of writers to fans is a good idea, but looking at it from the other perspective, if there was, say, a show about the joy and power of 90s-2000s pop music, would it really seem strange if they specifically sought out writers who genuinely had a connection to it?
 
Last edited:
Christopher said:
How rewarding is an environment where everyone already likes the same things? I'd say a rewarding creative environment is one where different people bring different perspectives to the table to create new possibilities from the contrast and synergy. And an "in-group only" barrier to entry seems like the opposite of an open and welcoming work environment.

Fandom is a hobby. Writing is a profession. Having a hobby in common is not a meaningful qualification for professional work, and it's not a requirement for people to be able to work together comfortably. A pleasant work environment isn't about what people did before they got the job, it's about the climate the employers create within the job itself. If they need to have some prior connection to work together well, that means the people in charge are abdicating their own responsibility to nurture a positive climate and relationships. (And seriously, when have fans as a group ever gotten along without conflict?)
Click to expand...
I think that really depends on the job, there are a lot of hobbies than can become careers, and a lot of those jobs require experience with that "hobbie" before it can become a career.
 
YLu said:
Re: The X-Men '97 writer's room. I don't think limiting your pool of writers to fans is a good idea, but looking at it from the other perspective, if there was, say, a show about the joy and power of 80s-90s pop music, would it really seem strange if they specifically sought out writers who genuinely had a connection to it?
Click to expand...

As I said, it would be good to have both fans and outsiders on the staff, so that both audiences are served. I mean, what is the point of a multi-member staff if not to include a range of different perspectives? After all, any fandom is finite in size, so you don't want to make a show so insular that it's inaccessible to people outside the fandom. You want to pay homage the subject matter while also making the work universal enough to appeal to people who aren't already in the loop.

Also, it makes no sense to assume that prior fandom is the only way to be knowledgeable about a subject. As I already said, in any other profession, if the job requires certain knowledge or skill, then you'll be given the necessary training before you start, or be required to get it yourself. So why should it be any different here? Harve Bennett and Nicholas Meyer weren't Trek fans when they were picked to do the second movie, but they watched every episode to learn the material and get ideas. I had limited familiarity with Spider-Man comics when I was hired to do a Spidey novel, but I bought the complete DVD-ROM collection of The Amazing Spider-Man and borrowed every other Spidey collection the library had, and my novel was critically praised for its use of continuity. Research is a basic step in the writing process. If you didn't already know something, then you learn it. That's just part of the job.
 
I don't see anything wrong with having writers who aren't necessarily familiar with the source material enough to be considered fans, but it's another thing entirely to have writers who are openly disdainful for the source material they are supposed to be adapting. I'd rather the writers have some actual passion for what they're doing rather than just be there to collect a check while wishing they were somewhere else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top