Well... no one's asserted anything as "definitive," unless you're determined to press a claim of definitive debunking.
Spoilers Marvel Cinematic Universe spoiler-heavy speculation thread
- Thread starter bbjeg
- Start date
I was being sarcastic and dismissive. I just find it wild that people still listen to anything any random person says on Twitter simply because a website like comicbook.com reported as newsworthy. And then build a whole argument on top of it to dismiss an actress.
If you were born in a pre-internet era, yes, it's normal to find it strange. But if Kevin Fegie is said to have said such a thing on the internet, he probably said it at an event for a movie promotion. Because at that time, it was something everyone who followed the internet and Marvel stuff knew.
Again, my point is the quote was unattributed, posted by some random person on Twitter (and not a news outlet of any kind), and covered by a comicbook.com, which is hardly reputable.
I probably heard it on this board.
Because the internet is a black hole; it's impossible to tell what's a "lie" and what's a "leak." Even random people reporting online sometimes report "leaks." If claims about Marvel projects are "leaks," Marvel either confirms them at events with its journalists or fans. Or, when Marvel's film and series actors can't reach an agreement with Marvel on a project, they announce it themselves. Anyway, back to the topic, because there are plenty of people attending these events online and posting on Twitter (and there are also plenty of people on Reddit who went to test screenings and wrote the entire movie, down to the After Creeds scene, and their writing turned out to be true). There are even plenty of people who believe the news on sites like Comic Books. Furthermore, "people" tend to believe any news online unless it's political news.
My rule with entertainment news is that I don't believe it unless it comes from a legitimate source like IGN if they're the original source, Entertainment Weekly, Deadline/TVLine, the Hollywood Reporter, Variety, or if it comes directly from an official social media account for a person involved or the studio.
Even if it was just something someone said at a con or something like that all or most of those sources have reporters at the cons who are pretty quick to post any annoucements. A random person at a con saying they saw something that no one else reported on is not a trust worthy source.
Even if it was just something someone said at a con or something like that all or most of those sources have reporters at the cons who are pretty quick to post any annoucements. A random person at a con saying they saw something that no one else reported on is not a trust worthy source.
The thing is the idea of making her the face of the MCU actually makes sense from a certain point of view as well, if you look at from a perspective of pre-hate for the character. I mean someone has to become the new face and who else are your options? All the phase 1 characters will be gone except maybe Thor and Hulk and Hawkeye for sure isn't going to be it. Ant Man is comic relief, The Guardians are sort of off doing their own thing. That leaves you with Dr Strange,Spiderman,Captain Marvel and Black Panther.
Spiderman,Captain Marvel and Black Panther are I think the logical choices in theory at that time. But that doesn't take in account Captain Marvel not being liked that much or the actor sadly dying in regards to Black Panther. That is why the MCU basically has had no face since Stark and Rogers left.
It was decent, and well-made, but I didn't feel it revealed enough about Wakanda or the rest of the world. It was a chance to do some nice exploration of world history, but they did two in antiquity, wasting one on the very familiar myth of the Trojan War instead of picking something more novel, and then just jumped over the next couple of millennia. I agree, they needed more episodes to take full advantage of the potential.
IMO a second FF movie could take off.
People liked this movie. Drop the four on 616's more familiar New York and let them do the fish-out-of-water thing.
Much as I loved retrofuture NYC - and I'd never call it "a mistake" - it may have been something of a weakness. It distanced the audience. I was never not aware that I was watching people on (very big) sets.
People liked this movie. Drop the four on 616's more familiar New York and let them do the fish-out-of-water thing.
Much as I loved retrofuture NYC - and I'd never call it "a mistake" - it may have been something of a weakness. It distanced the audience. I was never not aware that I was watching people on (very big) sets.
Last edited:
It's interesting: my husband felt distanced by the retrofuture stuff, while I felt more immersed in the film by it. So I think you have a good point.
I don't see the resemblance.
The big eyes and the jawline.