• 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 The Falcon and Winter Soldier discussion

Riiiiggghtt...you can kill Hulk, Vision, Colossus, Thing, Doctor Doom, Iron Man, and Magneto (just to name the ones on that cover) with bullets! :lol:
1) Hulk yes, you just wait for him to reverse to Banner.
2) Vision in the 2%
3) Thing idem
4) Doom, he doesn't sleep in his armor
5) Iron Man, idem.
6) Magneto Use a ceramic bullet. Simple.
 
Comics Hulk explicitly cannot ever permanently die (unless, maybe, someone successfully pulls off shenanigans with 'the green door' which cannot possibly be affected by a bullet). He 'dies', he wakes up again fairly soon after.

MCU Hulk could still be backtracked away from that if the writers wanted, but 'the other guy spit it out' pretty clearly signals that the basic concept of MCU Hulk is also that he can't really die (or at least, not just from something killing Banner).

Also, Dr. Doom probably does sleep in his armor a significant portion of the time... And he definitely sleeps in an imprenetrable fortress guarded by legions of soldiers, robots and arcane security systems.
 
Last edited:
I can't say I've been in the situation or made the attempt myself, but I can easily imagine getting pretty nervous about it... :shrug:
 
Last edited:
In other words, some would become new Icons to people. Fans would be become outright followers, movements would form, rivalries between groups following different Supers would also begin....fighting would start and people would die.

That's not really what I was referring to? That's one possibility, but I don't think it's an inevitability.

I suspect that the phenomenon that would be far more destabilizing to the social order would be the emergence of parallel power structures with the ability to physically overpower state power structures. That could encompass charismatic cults of personality led by superbeings as you suggest, but it could just as easily encompass, say, reactionary militias led by normal people with super-powered supporters, or it could encompass far-left direct democracy movements with a mix of regular and superpowered supporters and leaders both. It could also encompass standard criminal syndicates such as drug cartels or the Italian Mafia, but with superpowered enforcers introduced to the mix.

It's not so much superpower-led cults that I'm talking about as all sorts of parallel power structures that could suddenly have the ability to overpower agents of the state to an extent that's never been possible in real life in the post-Industrial era.
 
I agree to a point, but it was definitely a choice to introduce the five-year gap and leave a lasting mark on the setting. Granted, MCU-world and the real world were already plenty far apart, but I do think there was a creative intent to have the Infinity Saga have a permanent, pervasive impact on the setting instead of just being reset-buttoned. Even if it isn't something that's a premise-maker the way it has been for these past two shows, it'll always be a card they can play from now on, one character asking another, "Where were you during the Blip?"
Yeah, I could see it continuing the be a part of the backstory, but I just doubt it will continue to get the kind of attention it got in WandaVision and this.
 
They only introduced The Snap to give us a big shocking cliffhanger ending for Infinity War, and The Blip as a way to give the characters a big heroic moment, and to bring back characters like Dr. Strange, The Falcon, and Spider-Man, I doubt it was ever their intention to go all that deep on it.

If having a "heroic moment" was the only reason for using such a catastrophic event as you suggest, then it was horribly misused, as an writer knows such an event instantly demanded follow ups in their connected universe of films and TV series.

Like I've said before, you are clearly looking for the wrong things in these movies and shows, they just aren't the kinds of things that are really going to go that deep into stuff like how The Blip effected things.

No, I expect franchise heads/showrunners to do more than throw spectacle and illogic in front of a camera and think that audiences are just going to swallow it all as the franchise moves forward from that "biggest ever"/"biggest disaster" event

These are movies and shows about people in brightly colored costumes fighting aliens, robots, and other people in brightly colored costumes, and anything more than that is just extra, and is just there to make us care about the people in brightly colored costumes and why they are fighting aliens, robots, or other people brightly colored costumes

That's a poor excuse, and contradicts your earlier backpedal:

I do like the movies to have some depth in the characters and story, so I'm not looking for totally mindless action,

Mindless action is all you're getting if this snap/blip was hard-sold as such a grave, dramatic event in the lives of everyone, yet only one series seriously used it as the central plot driver/focus, and its never addressed again, while an earlier production such as Far from Home barely addressed it at all, with everything looking/functioning as if all were right with the world. That's an astounding lack of franchise-runner and plotting consistency (and forethought about what needed to happen in all post-blip earth-based films for the near future) that a world in chaos, (en)forced migration, etc., on the level constantly stated in Captain America and the Winter Soldier is just paid lip service (if that) from this point forward.

At this point, going deeper into The Blip really isn't going to add that much more to people in brightly colored costumes or the reasons why they are fighting aliens, robots, or other people in brightly colored costumes, so I can't see them wasting their precious screen time on it.
From the way you talk about the MCU productions on here, it sounds like you've never even liked them, and it's clear you are never going to be happy with anything they do, so I'm really starting to think you might be better off just not wasting your time with anything coming from Marvel Studios.

^ Nothing like blanket statements to not make a point. That, and yours was a highly defensive, weak cop-out shifting blame to the viewer, rather than the productions. If you think its all the greatest stuff ever put on screen, that's fine for you, but this is far from the first time movie-goers have questioned the lack of consistency in the Marvel movies over the years, and now that they've added the idea of a post-blip world, viewers will naturally question how a film can go back to blast antics when we were just told innumerable parts of the earth's population are suffering.

Audiences were not asleep and missed all of that.


By the way, I had a similar discussion on a Comic Book forum: you can kill the 98% of superheroes out there with a bullet. They are still alive because the writers say so.

(and this is exactly the plot of this story)
649921.jpg

Probably. Someone mentioned Iron Man (doubting he could be killed that way), but in the real world, all manner of bullets are designed for different and very specific purposes. That being very, very true in reality, then, in the fantasy of comics, who couldn't develop a bullet that would rip through Iron Man's armor?
 
Probably. Someone mentioned Iron Man (doubting he could be killed that way), but in the real world, all manner of bullets are designed for different and very specific purposes. That being very, very true in reality, then, in the fantasy of comics, who couldn't develop a bullet that would rip through Iron Man's armor?
That was me. I guess it depends on how magical his armor is going to be. If it's the nanotech of the last two Avenger films, I would say it's hard for most bullets...unless, I guess, nanobullets or some shit like that.
 
If having a "heroic moment" was the only reason for using such a catastrophic event as you suggest, then it was horribly misused, as an writer knows such an event instantly demanded follow ups in their connected universe of films and TV series.
And we've gotten that follow up in Far From Home, WandaVision, and now The Falcon & The Winter Solider.

No, I expect franchise heads/showrunners to do more than throw spectacle and illogic in front of a camera and think that audiences are just going to swallow it all as the franchise moves forward from that "biggest ever"/"biggest disaster" event
And they have done more than that, we've gotten 2 TV series and a movie that showed the aftermath and how it effected things. I doubt they'll forget about it, but I just can't see them focusing to much more time on it.
That's a poor excuse, and contradicts your earlier backpedal:
No it does not even in the slightest, all I meant was that everything in these movies is going to have to relate to the superhero conflicts, and that they are not going spend a lot of their run times on things that don't direct relate to those superhero conflicts. They are not completely mindless, they do still give a fair amount of depth to their characters and stories, but in the end that stuff is still going to tie back into the superhero stuff.
Mindless action is all you're getting if this snap/blip was hard-sold as such a grave, dramatic event in the lives of everyone, yet only one series seriously used it as the central plot driver/focus, and its never addressed again, while an earlier production such as Far from Home barely addressed it at all, with everything looking/functioning as if all were right with the world. That's an astounding lack of franchise-runner and plotting consistency (and forethought about what needed to happen in all post-blip earth-based films for the near future) that a world in chaos, (en)forced migration, etc., on the level constantly stated in Captain America and the Winter Soldier is just paid lip service (if that) from this point forward.
Just because they aren't dealing with the things you want them to deal with doesn't make them mindless.
The franchise is not about the Snap/Blip, so I can't see them spending an excessive amount of time on it.
^ Nothing like blanket statements to not make a point. That, and yours was a highly defensive, weak cop-out shifting blame to the viewer, rather than the productions. If you think its all the greatest stuff ever put on screen, that's fine for you, but this is far from the first time movie-goers have questioned the lack of consistency in the Marvel movies over the years, and now that they've added the idea of a post-blip world, viewers will naturally question how a film can go back to blast antics when we were just told innumerable parts of the earth's population are suffering.
Audiences were not asleep and missed all of that.
But they're not just going back to blast antics, they have dealt with how the Snap & Blip effected things, but since that is not the focus of the franchise, I just can't see them spending much more time on it than they have.
I could see it being mentioned as part of a movie or character's backstory, but I can't see the stuff we've got coming up focusing on it to much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sci
I think the key thing to remember is that at the end of the day, Marvel's bread and butter is producing spectacle-driven middlebrow action movies for the 8-38 audience base. They're not interested in doing cinéma vérité. They're not going to make Rome, Open City or Bicycle Thieves or Come and See or About Elly or Amour. There's a limit to how deeply an MCU movie can reasonably be expected to explore what would in reality be the most horrific and traumatic event in human history.
 
And we've gotten that follow up in Far From Home, WandaVision, and now The Falcon & The Winter Solider.

Only one of those productions used it as the central driver of the story, as it should be with many post-blip productions to come, but that is not going to happen.

No it does not even in the slightest, all I meant was that everything in these movies is going to have to relate to the superhero conflicts, and that they are not going spend a lot of their run times on things that don't direct relate to those superhero conflicts.

It was you who posted:

I do like the movies to have some depth in the characters and story, so I'm not looking for totally mindless action,

...only for you to return to the "its all about superhero fights," arguing against any future plots focusing on the post-blip consequences--conflicting positions.

They are not completely mindless, they do still give a fair amount of depth to their characters and stories, but in the end that stuff is still going to tie back into the superhero stuff.

You are of the opinion that living up to addressing the massive consequences of an "all changing" event like the blip is somehow moving away from superhero business. One, superhero business comes in many forms--including having it (from time to time) play a supportive (instead of a dominant, plot-driving) role in stories. Two, arguably the greatest MCU film--Captain America: The Winter Soldier--was a great example of superheroic action there to support a larger, more serious, plot & character-driven film, so I find arguments against that kind of superhero film fallacious at best.

But they're not just going back to blast antics

We will see.

they have dealt with how the Snap & Blip effected things, but since that is not the focus of the franchise, I just can't see them spending much more time on it than they have.

Which will seem rather odd when earth-bound characters in films that take place either at the same time or not too far ahead of Captain America and the Winter Soldier's timeline are "superhero-ing" it up while audiences know the post-blip chaos is still going on in that world, and no one else ever addresses it in any meaningful way.
 
Only one of those productions used it as the central driver of the story, as it should be with many post-blip productions to come, but that is not going to happen.
Which is perfectly fine, they pretty much covered all of the important stuff in Far From Home, WandaVision, and The Falcon and The Winter Soldier.


It was you who posted:



...only for you to return to the "its all about superhero fights," arguing against any future plots focusing on the post-blip consequences--conflicting positions.
And that is not a contradiction, the movies can still give us deeper characters and stories, without losing their focus on the superhero action.


You are of the opinion that living up to addressing the massive consequences of an "all changing" event like the blip is somehow moving away from superhero business.
I can't really see any of the superheroes getting involved in anything that goes deeper into the post-blip world than what The Falcon & The Winter Soldier already did.

One, superhero business comes in many forms--including having it (from time to time) play a supportive (instead of a dominant, plot-driving) role in stories. Two, arguably the greatest MCU film--Captain America: The Winter Soldier--was a great example of superheroic action there to support a larger, more serious, plot & character-driven film, so I find arguments against that kind of superhero film fallacious at best.
Everything we got in The Winter Solider still tied back into the superhero story of Hydra and Project Insight.

Which will seem rather odd when earth-bound characters in films that take place either at the same time or not too far ahead of Captain America and the Winter Soldier's timeline are "superhero-ing" it up while audiences know the post-blip chaos is still going on in that world, and no one else ever addresses it in any meaningful way.
Not at all, there's already going to be plenty of other stuff going on without having to waste time on some in depth examination of the effects of the Snap/Blip.
 
Last edited:
The Blip not having any major consequences to civilization is just being extremely faithful to the spirit of the comics, where the continued presence of magic, superpeople, miracle tech, etc. since at least the 1940s has somehow not significantly altered society.

Stan Lee liked to talk about how the appeal of Marvel is that it's "the world outside your window." You can have that or you can play alternate-history worldbuilding, but you can't have both.
 
I think the key thing to remember is that at the end of the day, Marvel's bread and butter is producing spectacle-driven middlebrow action movies for the 8-38 audience base. They're not interested in doing cinéma vérité. They're not going to make Rome, Open City or Bicycle Thieves or Come and See or About Elly or Amour. There's a limit to how deeply an MCU movie can reasonably be expected to explore what would in reality be the most horrific and traumatic event in human history.
As it should be. Escapist fiction should be escapist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sci
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top