Spoilers Secret Invasion grade and discussion

[Dee1891]

I've been thinking on how long Rhodey had been held by Gravik's Skrulls. According to the MCU wiki site, he had been replaced a few years after the events of "Endgame". Which makes sense to me. When exactly was it confirmed that Rhodey had been replaced by a Skrull before the events of "Endgame"? At a time when Gravik was still assisting Fury? Please remember that Rhodey had been wearing leg braces created by Stark Enterprises tech since the end of "Civil War". it possible that Gravik's supporters may have grabbed him, while he was undergoing some kind of medical check up . . . and not wearing his leg braces? Which would explain why Rhodey had required assistance out of Gravik's New Skrullos facility. Has anyone considered this?

 

[F. King Daniel]

I really injoyed Secret Invasion. Big Alien Nation vibes.

It was the Magical Healing Jacket at the very end that drove me round the bend

 

[Reverend]

It's been a while since I've seen 'Captain Marvel', but I'm pretty sure the whole point of the whole faster than light engine, was to be able to get the Skrulls to a place that the Kree couldn't find them. So it's not really a matter of no unoccupied habitable planets so much as no *safe* unoccupied habitable planets.

Just another one of many things the show did a piss-poor job of explaining, but I suppose we can surmise that they simply couldn't find any suitable world outside the Kree Empire that wasn't also within the territory of some other multi-galaxy spanning Empire.

Maybe as soon as Carol got out beyond the borders of Kree space and out of reach of the UNTN, she ran smack into the Shi'ar. Then when she turned around and tried a different direction, all she could find was whole galaxies infested with the Symbiote Hive. When she tried yet again she met some silver bloke on a surf board who assured her that everything in that direction stretching back 13 billion lightyears had already been chomped by Galactus. By the time she ran into the Phalanx, it would have been pretty clear that the Milkyway is in the eye of a storm of unpleasantness and any attempt to move a refugee population through any of it is doomed to fail, and there's no way to even know if any safe harbour even exists on the other side.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

What If...?: Captain Carter and the "evil" Dr. Strange from Multiverse of Madness were both first seen in this series.

Not quite. I don't remember who said it (probably Michael Waldron, the film's screenwriter) but the Captain Carter we see as part of the Illuminati is a different one from What If...? I'm pretty sure the same is true for the evil Dr. Strange since the nature of his exile was different from the one seen in What If...?

That said, the show did introduce the concepts of both of those characters and helped general audiences see where they could have come from, even though they're not the same characters.

I've been thinking on how long Rhodey had been held by Gravik's Skrulls. According to the MCU wiki site, he had been replaced a few years after the events of "Endgame". Which makes sense to me. When exactly was it confirmed that Rhodey had been replaced by a Skrull before the events of "Endgame"? At a time when Gravik was still assisting Fury? Please remember that Rhodey had been wearing leg braces created by Stark Enterprises tech since the end of "Civil War". it possible that Gravik's supporters may have grabbed him, while he was undergoing some kind of medical check up . . . and not wearing his leg braces? Which would explain why Rhodey had required assistance out of Gravik's New Skrullos facility. Has anyone considered this?

Most people (including many reviewers, annoying) have assumed his capture was longer based on the fact Rhodey couldn't walk on his initiative. But there are two obvious explanations, ones I hope either of which are true:

He was there for longer than most captured people which caused muscle atrophy and he couldn't walk right away.

OR.

The advance tech that Tony developed for him (originally external but may have became nano-based after Infinity War) were removed.

It's been a while since I've seen 'Captain Marvel', but I'm pretty sure the whole point of the whole faster than light engine, was to be able to get the Skrulls to a place that the Kree couldn't find them. So it's not really a matter of no unoccupied habitable planets so much as no *safe* unoccupied habitable planets.

Just another one of many things the show did a piss-poor job of explaining, but I suppose we can surmise that they simply couldn't find anywhere suitable world outside the Kree Empire that wasn't also within the territory of some other multi-galaxy spanning Empire.

Yeah, this is one of my biggest complaints. There was no real explanation or even an attempt to explain why and how Nick and Carol failed at this. Simply "they failed."

Which is just piss poor writing. Deeply frustrating, not just because of the expectations for this show, but also because that could've easily been explained with a few lines. But no attempt at all? Ugh.

Maybe as soon as Carol got out beyond the borders of Kree space and out of reach of the UNTN, she ran smack into the Shi'ar. Then when she turned around and tried a different direction, all she could find was whole galaxies infested with the Symbiote Hive. When she tried yet again she met some silver bloke on a surf board who assured her that everything in that direction stretching back 13 billion lightyears had already been chomped by Galactus. By the time she ran into the Phalanx, it would have been pretty clear that the Milkyway is in the eye of a storm of unpleasantness and any attempt to move a refugee population through any of it is doomed to fail, and there's no way to even know if any safe harbour even exists on the other side.

Yup, any of those explanations would've served well, even in general terms for the mainstream audience but enough details for comic fans to go "Oh! I know who or what Carol ran into! Great set up for further down the line..."

But nope. Nothing.

 

[Charles Phipps]

The show's political bias is shown multiple times in the show even with the edits:

* The Refugees are the bad guys
* Fury says the Tucker Carlson guy is right some of the time
* Russia is being framed for evil
* The chief Skrull baddie is a man of color
* America is the put upon victim of Europe who questions its warmongering
* Torture Always Works
* The evil refugees' leaders are actually incredibly rich secret Zionist...Skrullos cabal. They just don't help their poor relatives.

I'd say this show is slightly to the right of 24.

 

[eschaton]

The show's political bias is shown multiple times in the show even with the edits:

* The Refugees are the bad guys
* Fury says the Tucker Carlson guy is right some of the time
* Russia is being framed for evil
* The chief Skrull baddie is a man of color
* America is the put upon victim of Europe who questions its warmongering
* Torture Always Works
* The evil refugees' leaders are actually incredibly rich secret Zionist...Skrullos cabal. They just don't help their poor relatives.

I'd say this show is slightly to the right of 24.

I think you forgot Olivia Coleman torturing a Skrull for information...successfully.

A show having a scene where a "good guy" - or even a checkered antihero - uses torture as a successful interrogation tactic is a red line for me, spreading factual inaccuracy for the sake of promoting moral bankruptcy.

 

[Charles Phipps]

I think you forgot Olivia Coleman torturing a Skrull for information...successfully.

A show having a scene where a "good guy" - or even a checkered antihero - uses torture as a successful interrogation tactic is a red line for me, spreading factual inaccuracy for the sake of promoting moral bankruptcy.

Yep, the Torture Always Works comment referred to that.

Bleah.

 

[Set Harth]

* The chief Skrull baddie is a man of color

This is automatically an indication of political tribe? To be a good Democrat one's villains must be white?

 

[Dee1891]

The show's political bias is shown multiple times in the show even with the edits:

* The Refugees are the bad guys
* Fury says the Tucker Carlson guy is right some of the time
* Russia is being framed for evil
* The chief Skrull baddie is a man of color
* America is the put upon victim of Europe who questions its warmongering
* Torture Always Works
* The evil refugees' leaders are actually incredibly rich secret Zionist...Skrullos cabal. They just don't help their poor relatives.

I'd say this show is slightly to the right of 24.

This is the MCU. It is always trying to portray the franchise as politically progressive, yet end up pushing some conservative politics into the story. Even "Black Panther" was guilty of this during its last 20 minutes or so. Refugees as bad guys? Didn’t "The Falcon and the Winter Soldier" do something similar? The franchise's refusal to acknowledge the unconditional nature of the Sokovia Accords has always disturbed me. Tony Stark's rant against Steve Roger for the latter's refusal to sign the Accords really pissed me off, considering no one had bothered to correct Tony. I think the MCU has always been centrist or sometimes slightly to the right.

By the way, I believe Gravik had made it clear he had set his plan in motion some time after "Endgame".

 

[Reverend]

Yeah, this is one of my biggest complaints. There was no real explanation or even an attempt to explain why and how Nick and Carol failed at this. Simply "they failed."

Which is just piss poor writing. Deeply frustrating, not just because of the expectations for this show, but also because that could've easily been explained with a few lines. But no attempt at all? Ugh.

I suspect this isn't even an oversight, but simply because they couldn't think of a credible reason why they failed in such a way that the Skrulls would feel legitimately betrayed without 1) making Nick & Carol seem uncharacteristically feckless, and/or 2) making the Skrull antagonists (G'iah included) seem unreasonable to the point of stupidity.
And yet by NOT specifying it, they went and achieved both those things anyway.

 

[Charles Phipps]

This is automatically an indication of political tribe? To be a good Democrat one's villains must be white?

Not at all and I only bring it up in the fact that it is a pattern of things. Which is in this case, the fact that the two Skrulls who are good are white while all the bad ones are People of Color. It's not even notable since Nick Fury is the star but for the fact that it's a bunch of genocidal refugees led by body snatching secret cabals.

This is the MCU. It is always trying to portray the franchise as politically progressive, yet end up pushing some conservative politics into the story. Even "Black Panther" was guilty of this during its last 20 minutes or so. Refugees as bad guys? Didn’t "The Falcon and the Winter Soldier" do something similar? The franchise's refusal to acknowledge the unconditional nature of the Sokovia Accords has always disturbed me. Tony Stark's rant against Steve Roger for the latter's refusal to sign the Accords really pissed me off, considering no one had bothered to correct Tony. I think the MCU has always been centrist or sometimes slightly to the right.

By the way, I believe Gravik had made it clear he had set his plan in motion some time after "Endgame".

CIVIL WAR is kind of an iffy thing because it reflects the RL confusion among fans about what sort of politics it would represent in the original comics. Because on one hand, the government overreaching and becoming fascist oppressive to anyone with powers is a classic X-men plot and the 9/11/Patriot feel of the comics are heavy. On the other hand, "Superheroes should be allowed to carry out summary police action with no supervision whatsoever" is most similar to radical copaganda. Particularly, "Those people trying to reign us in are letting the terrorists win."

We know Captain America is always right but it's an insane position anywhere but Marvel where the US government is fascist.

 

[Charles Phipps]

I suspect this isn't even an oversight, but simply because they couldn't think of a credible reason why they failed in such a way that the Skrulls would feel legitimately betrayed without 1) making Nick & Carol seem uncharacteristically feckless, and/or 2) making the Skrull antagonists (G'iah included) seem unreasonable to the point of stupidity.
And yet by NOT specifying it, they went and achieved both those things anyway.

The thing is there's plenty of answers that don't have to be RIGHT but can at least be understood.

1. Nick Fury said that Carol fought the Kree for twenty years to be able to get them to back down enough to settle a new world. Then the Snap threw things into chaos again.
2. The Skrulls are actually not accepted anywhere they could find because it turned out they had a history of imperialism and wetwork they neglected to mention.
3. Make it a surprise revelation. "There's actually a bunch of worlds the Skrulls still live on. All of them consider you slaves. Talos knew this but was keeping it a secret."
4. "I tried and I failed and I'm sorry but this is a stupid overreaction."

 

[Reverend]

1. Nick Fury said that Carol fought the Kree for twenty years to be able to get them to back down enough to settle a new world. Then the Snap threw things into chaos again.

Which would run contrary to the premise that Fury & Danvers "betrayed" them.

2. The Skrulls are actually not accepted anywhere they could find because it turned out they had a history of imperialism and wetwork they neglected to mention.
3. Make it a surprise revelation. "There's actually a bunch of worlds the Skrulls still live on. All of them consider you slaves. Talos knew this but was keeping it a secret."

Not impossible, but both rather undermines how the movie flipped the usual narrative by actually making the Skrulls the victims. This would make them not only villains, but liars. I think this show had enough demonising of refugees as it is without making it seem like they deserved to be on the receiving end of a pogrom.

4. "I tried and I failed and I'm sorry but this is a stupid overreaction."

Which is essentially what we got, and is indeed lazy writing.

 

[Charles Phipps]

Which would run contrary to the premise that Fury & Danvers "betrayed" them.

Except, it's made clear Gravik is a lunatic. Talos doesn't think Fury betrayed them.

Besides, you don't need to be accurate to be a populist terrorist.

Not impossible, but both rather undermines how the movie flipped the usual narrative by actually making the Skrulls the victims. This would make them not only villains, but liars. I think this show had enough demonising of refugees as it is without making it seem like they deserved to be on the receiving end of a pogrom.

I dunno, it depends on how they want to follow up, "We did not lose the war because we didn't fight it. We lost it because we were too good at it."

The Skrulls don't have to be pure innocent victims to deserve sympathy. They just need to be decent people in the present. Saying the Skrulls used to be imperialists themselves doesn't mean they deserve to die - it just means some people may not give a crap about helping them today.

Which is essentially what we got, and is indeed lazy writing.

Gi'ah instead says Fury thought Skrulls would just settle on Earth.

 

[Reverend]

Except, it's made clear Gravik is a lunatic. Talos doesn't think Fury betrayed them.

Besides, you don't need to be accurate to be a populist terrorist.

That would matter if it was just Gravik, but it's clearly not. The show makes it very clear that Talos is very much in the minority opinion, so the point stands.

I dunno, it depends on how they want to follow up, "We did not lose the war because we didn't fight it. We lost it because we were too good at it."

That's not what was said. The correct quote is: "We did not end up homeless refugees because we were unwilling to wage war. We ended up homeless refugees because we were too willing."
Being too willing to fight is not the same thing as "being too good", let alone provoking said fight in the first instance. It speaks more to an understandable compulsion to strike back at any and all costs, even if it means loosing sight of what they were fighting to protect in the first place. It's about getting lost in rage. Words mean things.

Saying the Skrulls used to be imperialists themselves doesn't mean they deserve to die - it just means some people may not give a crap about helping them today.

Since when has there ever needed to be a rational reason why refugees are shunned? It happens no matter what the history of there people may or may not be. So that would add exactly nothing to the story besides needless convolutions for the sake of convolutions.

Gi'ah instead says Fury thought Skrulls would just settle on Earth.

Yes. And?

 

[Charles Phipps]

Since when has there ever needed to be a rational reason why refugees are shunned? It happens no matter what the history of there people may or may not be. So that would add exactly nothing to the story besides needless convolutions for the sake of convolutions.

Which gets to the point of, "This is a story about refugee terrorists." So the question is do we make it actually distinct from refugee violence in general and specifically about Skrulls. Maybe saying something about past crimes, colonialism, imperialism, and racial revisionism (Make the Skrull terrorists more idealizing a past militant legacy?) or do we stick with just saying people living in a host country are dangerous (which I'd prefer to avoid)?

Yes. And?

It makes no damn sense given what Fury said on the train. So she's either lying or Fury is.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

That would matter if it was just Gravik, but it's clearly not. The show makes it very clear that Talos is very much in the minority opinion, so the point stands.

Is Talos the minority? Aren't there a million Skrulls on Earth? We have no idea which side more than 500, 000 of them are on. It just showed us a, well, minority amount as the bad guys.

 

[Reverend]

Which gets to the point of, "This is a story about refugee terrorists." So the question is do we make it actually distinct from refugee violence in general and specifically about Skrulls. Maybe saying something about past crimes, colonialism, imperialism, and racial revisionism (Make the Skrull terrorists more idealizing a past militant legacy?) or do we stick with just saying people living in a host country are dangerous (which I'd prefer to avoid)?

That's blatantly trying to have your cake and eat it. One doesn't get to have a socio-political drama with all the trappings of an allegory for current events and historical strife . . . and get to handwave away any responsibility on the messaging of said allegory by just saying "oh it's all just made up, so it's fine to make out the refugees are secretly the real baddies."
Pick a lane.

It makes no damn sense given what Fury said on the train. So she's either lying or Fury is.

This show contradicts itself every other scene. This is not proof of anything other than bad writing. Trying to unpick the logic is an exercise in futility.

Is Talos the minority?

Yup.

Given the attitudes of the ruling council, the people seeking shelter, Gi'ah (who let's remember is motivated by revenge, not sympathy for humanity) and the fact that Talos was literally the only Skrull backing Fury's corner at all (and that includes Fury's wife!), I think it's safe to say that his views weren't reflective of the prevailing sentiment. That plus that final revelation that the extremists' little bunker of kidnap victims was utterly dwarfed by the larger scale of what's really going on in that vast underground basement full of seemingly hundreds if not thousands of people in fracking pods seen right at the end.

Even if none of that were the case; when it comes to this kind of thing, a silent majority is an irrelevant majority.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

That's blatantly trying to have your cake and eat it. One doesn't get to have a socio-political drama with all the trappings of an allegory for current events and historical strife . . . and get to handwave away any responsibility on the messaging of said allegory by just saying "oh it's all just made up, so it's fine to make out the refugees are secretly the real baddies."
Pick a lane.

This show contradicts itself every other scene. This is not proof of anything other than bad writing. Trying to unpick the logic is an exercise in futility.


Yup.

Given the attitudes of the ruling council, the people seeking shelter, Gi'ah (who let's remember is motivated by revenge, not sympathy for humanity) and the fact that Talos was literally the only Skrull backing Fury's corner at all (and that includes Fury's wife!), I think it's safe to say that his views weren't reflective of the prevailing sentiment. That plus that final revelation that the extremists' little bunker of kidnap victims was utterly dwarfed by the larger scale of what's really going on in that vast underground basement full of seemingly hundreds if not thousands of people in fracking pods seen right at the end.

Even if none of that were the case; when it comes to this kind of thing, a silent majority is an irrelevant majority.

Personally, I saw about 40 Skrulls in the show.
If there are a million, I certainly don't have a big enough sample size to make a determination one way or another.

I guess it's the same as watching any show about a dictator in another country. Just because the show focuses on the minority in power and making the decisions doesn't mean the rest of the country it's set in feels that way. In fact it's generally the opposite, with the majority not irrelevant but just too afraid to do anything about it.

 

[eschaton]

Secret Invasion would have worked just as well if we discovered around the year 2000 or so, Fury decided he couldn't find a home for the Skrulls, and told them they'd be safe on Earth if they all worked together with him. Have Gravik lead a faction who was opposed to assimilation, because he believes Skrulls should rule humans, rather than live under them. So he slowly starts covert missions collecting DNA of superhumans attempting to create the perfect Super Skrull - not just for himself, but for everyone in his faction.

Fury plays a game of cat and mouse with Gravik, attempting to stop DNA sample after DNA sample from falling into his hands, but losing due to the sort of double bluffs possible with creative use of shapeshifting.