Spoilers Marvel Cinematic Universe spoiler-heavy speculation thread

[Nerys Myk]

Probably for the same reason Thor doesn't throw down with Jehovah. It's a little touchy.

Probably. Marvel got a little heady in the 70s when the horror restrictions were lifted. They pushed a few boundaries on other content too. Guys like Englehart, Gerber, Claremont and a few others tacking topics that in the past or future wouldn't be touched. (In the Mighty Marvel Manner of course) The decade that followed seemed a little conservative at times.

 

[Samurai8472]

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

Accept third party cookies

 

[JD]

Like I said, it's a matter of taste. I'm not a fan of the extent of monotheism's influence on the real world, so I find the MCU's de facto depiction of a polytheistic universe to be refreshing. The existence of a major character from the major monotheistic mythologies naturally leads to the question of what's the deal with the main supernatural character from such stories, and I'd rather none of that be in the picture.

If it makes you feel any better Mephisto isn't actually The Devil, he's just one of a whole bunch of demons who all control a bunch of different dimensions.

A few of Marvel's "evil entities" have pretended to be the Devil, Lucifer and Satan saying that they don't exist. And the Deviant Kro pretended to be "The Devil" in the past. OTOH, Marvel was less shy about using Satan as a real entity at other points in their history. The aforementioned Son of Satan, Ghost Rider and Satana in the 70s for example. Moved way from that in the 80s for some reason. They seem to prefer using Mephisto as the Devil in more recent books.

I think I remember reading somewhere that Mephisto was involved with Ghost Rider, was that a later retcon?

 

[Nerys Myk]

I think I remember reading somewhere that Mephisto was involved with Ghost Rider, was that a later retcon?

It was Satan originally.

 

[Mudd]

It was Satan originally.

Jack Chick sued over trademark and copyright.

 

[JD]

OK, it was retconned later then, because the Marvel Database says that it was Mephisto.

He was the son of famed stuntman Barton Blaze, who tragically died during a stunt. He became bound to Zarathos the Spirit of Vengeance after making a deal with the demon Mephisto to spare the life of his surrogate father, Crash Simpson.[2]

 

[Nerys Myk]

OK, it was retconned later then, because the Marvel Database says that it was Mephisto.

Marvel does that. All the Satan related characters got retcons.

 

[JD]

Oh, I didn't realize that. I guess that would explain why there are so many kind of Devilish, but not the Devil characters hanging around.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Spoiler

So he's the Devil, Why is that a problem? Monotheism and polytheism exist side by side in Marvel Comics and the MCU. Mephisto, Hades and a host of other entities can gather souls for various reasons.
As an aside, Marvel had a host of "Devils" for a while. Ghost Rider was given his powers by Satan. Doctor Strange fought one called "Satannish." Damien Hellstrom was the Son of Satan. He has a sister named "Satana". Lucifer has popped up a few times, a well.

Its never been a problem for Marvel, as he and other Monotheistic beings have appeared in Marvel comics at least since the 1970s (with no broad outcry of protest from readers), and added a real world dimension to the costumed hero world of the MU.

 

[JD]

I read the first volume of Jonathan Hickman's of Fantastic Four during my free time at work today, and now that I can really compare the comics to what we're seeing in the promotional stuff for the movie, they really appear to have done a fantastic job of bringing the characters personalities from the comics into the movie.

 

[Gaith]

If it makes you feel any better Mephisto isn't actually The Devil, he's just one of a whole bunch of demons who all control a bunch of different dimensions.

Meh, because another thing: I find the whole idea of "selling one's soul to the Devil" dramatically incoherent, and thus uninteresting. It's a contradiction in terms because our notions of souls are inextricable up by our experiences as mortals, so no eternal afterlife versions of ourselves, can really be said to be us. Therefore, because "being doomed to go to hell" isn't a viable dramatic construct, a deal with the Devil always has to go wrong in one's mortal lifetime to be at all interesting, and that defeats the whole point of the trade-off. Granted, that sort of flawed bargain storyline was good for a few laughs in Bedazzled (either version), but I don't think a dramatic story along those lines would work, at least for modern entertainment sensibilities.

So, whether a given antagonist is the Devil from Christian mythology or an expy thereof, not interested, thanks.

 

[Jayson1]

The first two were the peak for the franchise, that's for sure.

The one franchise that literally only has one good movie in it IMO.

 

[Set Harth]

If it makes you feel any better Mephisto isn't actually The Devil, he's just one of a whole bunch of demons who all control a bunch of different dimensions.

Allegedly, the letters page of Thor #227 (1974) contained the editorial note "Mephisto and Satan, however, difficult as it may be for you to accept at first, are one and the same character."

But it looks like they changed their minds at some point: now Mephisto isn't actually the Devil and his plane isn't actually Hell ( at least not that one ). Worried about a Christian boycott or something?

 

[kirk55555]

This talk of Marvel's "Not Satans" reminds me that I'm pretty sure that terrible Helstrom Hulu show never referred to the title character as the "Son of Satan", at least they didn't in any trailers or marketing that I remember. They called the show "Helstrom", even though the characters name is Daimon Hellstrom, and made the main characters children of a serial killer instead of a demon. I seriously wonder why that ever got made, even with the weird stuff Marvel TV used to do.

Honestly, Studios being worried about Christians being offended is weird nowadays, because the ones that will boycott things are already whining about everything anyway (I still remember people declaring Pokemon to be demonic ). Those kinds of things never end up effecting a movie/TV shows success, anyway.

 

[fireproof78]

Allegedly, the letters page of Thor #227 (1974) contained the editorial note "Mephisto and Satan, however difficult as it may be for you to accept at first, are one and the same character."

But it looks like they changed their minds at some point: now Mephisto isn't actually the Devil and his plane isn't actually Hell ( at least not that one ). Worried about a Christian boycott or something?

Nothing new under the sun

Church Declares 'Last Temptation' Morally Offensive

The U.S.

www.latimes.com

 

[Set Harth]

Well, that movie is technically blasphemous, it's like letting Charles Dickens mash up the gospels with A Christmas Carol.

 

[fireproof78]

Well, that movie is technically blasphemous, it's like letting Charles Dickens mash up the gospels with A Christmas Carol.

So is the film Constantine but that just gets an analysis

https://friesian.com/keanu.htm

 

[theenglish]

Well, that movie is technically blasphemous, it's like letting Charles Dickens mash up the gospels with A Christmas Carol.

What about the novel it's based on?

 

[Commander Troi]

Did you get to sit in the Captain's chair? I think I heard that was part of the experience. Then you get to eat lunch or something at Quark's bar.

No Captain's chair on my trip. There was a "4D" ride/experience, a lot of original costumes on display, and yes, Quark's restaurant and bar. Also a gift shop - I got an adorable Spock teddy bear.

 

[DigificWriter]

I said this on the Marvel Studios subreddit, but after just rewatching it for the third time (along with Iron Man 1), I genuinely feel like Iron Man 2 is still one of the best showcases of how to successfully incorporate Guest Characters into a narrative without having them overtake the story.