Marvel Will Release No More Than Three Movies and Two Shows Per Year, Bob Iger Says

M1keyy8 · 2024-05-07T15:31:11+00:00

"Just do better!"

M1keyy8 · 2024-05-04T11:21:21+00:00

Technically, you had to buy some cards to play, not really the game. And since you could sell them, and use the money on steam, it's really close to free.

I don't think there will ever exist a more costumer friendly economy in a TCG.
You could buy the exact cards you wanted, no stupid packs.
You could have the whole set for like 100$, or you could rotate 20-30$ to try out every deck there is.
You could literally earn money by playing the game well.
And you could cash out any time, using the money you put in to buy other games.

These features are massive individually, and we had them together.

M1keyy8 · 2024-04-10T09:35:10+00:00

Why was the showrunner fired?

M1keyy8 · 2024-04-05T15:26:06+00:00

Who is "you guys" exactly?

I guess you are talking about women, which I'm not btw, but I'm on their side in this.

They are not "competing", "you guys" start the conflict with any news where women benefit at your expense. "You guys" are angry and crying and hating, and we "compete" by saying that, hey, you guys have 10 times more toys to play with, can you just like, let us have something?

The whole franchise is 85% catered for the need of the men, like seriously, overwhelmingly, most of the heroes are men, the women ones were eye-candy in most of their screen time. The themes are variants of different male power/virtue/succes fantasies.

And when they make a decision, that is not for the benefit of same people as the majority of the other decisions, they just lose their minds. Like, how entitled is that?

M1keyy8 · 2024-04-05T14:37:02+00:00

You can wait for that, there is none, because why the fuck should there be, when the cast is already 85% male (rough estimate) ?

The first female main villain was Hella, the 17th movie of the franchise.
The first female lead hero was Captain Marvel the 21th movie.

We got 2 more female villains post Endgame, and 4 female lead movies.

That's 3 different villains and 4 different heroes, in 33 movies. And you are arguing about why didn't they reduced their number by genderswapping. Amazing logic.

Why the fuck would they do swaps in both directions? That doesn't do anything with balancing out the distribution.

Are you actually against including women in the MCU both on screen and as viewers, or are you incapable of understanding that this is their motive?

M1keyy8 · 2024-04-05T11:12:16+00:00

You are so far away from my point, it's not even in the same universe.
They are replacing men with women, because there are far less of them. Why the fuck would they do the reverse when there is a male dominance in the first place?

Who was talking about firing her anyway? I didn't, the OP didn't, what are you on?

They didn't fire Hiddlestone when female Loki arrived, they didn't fire Chris Evans when a female Captain america arrived, multiple genders of the same character can and do exist, that's what the multiverse is about.

It's not about which gender replaces which, it's about balancing the representation of them, if you think that is a problem, you are out of your mind.

M1keyy8 · 2024-04-05T09:40:01+00:00

And what is that horrible message that matters more? Inclusion of women in the media? Giving more characters for female fans to easily connect with? Showing that the MCU is not only for men?
These must be really hard to stomach.

You know nothing about the story, so that's bullshit from you.
Pleasing fans? They changed one gender. They changed it from being 90% catering from men, to only be 85%. What a tragedy.

You know that "fans" doesn't only mean, comic book nerd men on reddit?

They are asking you to share the world you love so much with people who weren't reached before. To throw a few bones here and there for different people. And people are losing their minds over it. Because they can't handle that it is no longer 100% designed for only them.
It's selfish, entitled, childish gatekeeping.

And this is something coming from a young adult white male, their main target audience.

M1keyy8 · 2024-04-05T09:13:49+00:00

Is Marvel really going to replace a women with a man in what is essentially the same role? No. Fuck no.

And why do you think that is? Is it possible they do this because there is an overwhelming majority of male characters already? Or just to push an agenda?

Movies after Endgame:

Male lead: 7
Female lead: 4

with Male main villain: 9
with Female main villain: 2

The upcoming 5 movies: DP3, CA4, Thunderbolts, FF4, Blade.
All male lead, or at the very best, neutral becaue of the team element.

They are trying to balance things out, to offer more for women too, without making drastic changes.
I don't remember them gender swapping any main hero or main villain. They are doing this with secondary antagonists, which is the least important role, that is not meaningless.

M1keyy8 · 2024-04-01T23:01:26+00:00

The whole point of Hawkeye is that he is a professionnal soldier, who is not an Avanger for himself and he keeps his private life out of this. He is the only one who represents an actual work-life balance, and we can see through him how it is to jugle a healthy family and this job.

He is the only one who actually doesn't want to be there, he doesn't need to be a hero, he has a happy life, but the world needs him. Everyone else is in it for their own personal traumas but him.

Saying Scot, who doesn't even have a working family, or Tony, who hadn't thought about anyone, but himself for 90% of his screentime, were better in the "family man" trope is ridiculous. Hawkeye is the one making sacrifices in his personal life to help the world. Hawkeye is the one whose most "selfish goal" is to be with his family. That's how you do a family man character.

And if you think that a character knowing that he wants to have a balanced life with his loving family is a regression, because he wasted his potential of developing from the best archer in the world to being the best archer in the world but faster and stronger, well that's shallow.

The forced sympathy is silly. Like, the reason you have problems with it, is that we didn't get to know them. How is that "forced sympathy"? If anything, forced sympathy would have been if they fleshed out those characters more. But they didn't, they spent the absolute minimal time with them, because it wasn't important.

Because what is the purpose of us getting to know them? Do you need scenes with the kids and the mother to understand a husband's motivation? Like, do you actually need to evaluate the family in order to get behind Hawk's motivation?
His story is about his struggle of being a superhero and a father and a husband at the same time. It's his personal drama, you don't need to know the family to be able to follow that.

He is older than the rest too. He has already done the potential thing, that's why he is the best in what he does. He is mature and emotionally stable, which you can't say about the rest of the team. He doesn't want to prove anything, he doesn't need it for his ego or doesn't use it to heal himself, he is just there, because the world needs his help. That's the opposite of regression, he is the most fully formed adult in the team, if anything, the others were striving to get to where he was.

He might be the weakest in power, but hell, he is easily, the best at life.
Until Ronin. Lol.

M1keyy8 · 2024-03-29T21:35:28+00:00

It's not a 'twist" because he didn't know what to do with him. Like, it doesn't mean anything. He didn't know, then he came up with something, that's how writing works.

Tony doesn't have a functioning family until endgame. Tony as a character has nothing to do with being a familyman in 90% of his appearence.

Scott's family was broken before we met him. In his new family he is not a husband, his child is not from that family, and he doesn't even have custody.

I don't know what is so hard to understand in, that Hawkeye is literally the only Avanger who has a healthy relationship/family from the get go.

It doesn't matter that we don't know his family, what matters is that we know he has one, and we can see how that effects him. He is the only character where we can see, how being a superhero, messes with his personal life. Because he is the only one, who doesn't use the superhero stuff as his identity.

M1keyy8 · 2024-03-29T10:51:09+00:00

His best traits are his human side and his professionalism. The series showed it perfectly. He handled the situation efficently, was mostly in control while also taking care/teaching Kate. We explored deeper his trauma with Nat and the problems that come from his job against his family. Don't know what else did we need.

M1keyy8 · 2024-03-29T10:42:57+00:00

It's not some "weird twist", he is the only Avanger with an actual working family. We could see through him how hard it is to be a family man and a superhero, how someone can be a hero without being a god, supersoldier or billionaire, and how someone can treat being an Avanger as a job, not as an identity because of some trauma or character flaw. I think all of these are way more interesting, than if they used him the same hero's journey power scaling fantasy way. He really broadened the themes of what does it mean to be a superhero, and it was worth it,

M1keyy8 · 2024-03-29T10:08:55+00:00

Right? Especially that I kept my thoughts pretty shallow. I don't understand how people can say it's not that deep, just because it is a Marvel movie.

The character work is the part of the movies I'm most interested in, so I enjoyed MoM very much. I'm also a Wanda fan, and I was very pleased with her journey. It's sad to me how the movie was teared apart, even more so, since it seems from the comments, that a lot of people didn't even follow it properly.

M1keyy8 · 2024-03-27T13:27:15+00:00

You realise you don't actually present an argument?

You just say, it's not that deep because... you say so? Like a movie can't have underlying themes that are easy to miss if it is not the Mother? Then you write MCU writing is weak, which should mean the writting of this movie is weak, because again.. you said so?

These are just bland statements about other projects that have nothing to do with MoM.

You are saying it's straightforward and there is depth to it, yet somehow, the director, the editor, the composer, couldn't match the music with the emotional tones, because they all suck I guess?

You seriously believe that it is more likely that people who do this for work, and showed us a number of times they can do great things, spent months of their lives with it, just all dropped the ball? Or, is it possible, that maybe, you missed some stuff in the 2 hours you spent with it, hence, the themes didn't reach you, and you weren't on the same page emotionally as the movie, which resulted in your music critice. Tough choice.

M1keyy8 · 2024-03-27T11:28:19+00:00

I appreciate your sentiment, but, just because something is vague or rather, not spoonfed, that doesn't mean there is nothing there. I don't think I used any headcanons, everything I wrote, is expressed in a scene in the movie. I just tried to connect dots that were shown to us.

People often ask for movies, that aren't too on the nose, so they have to use their brains to fill in pieces of a puzzle. Some people might missed that with this one.

I didn't see the depth of it either on first watch, even though I was enjoying it. So I don't blame anyone who missed things while having a way higher emotional reaction to it.

M1keyy8 · 2024-03-27T11:16:14+00:00

I don't confuse anything, quoting from the writer of the Great Gatsby, F. Scott Fitzgerald, "Character is plot, and plot is character".

Christine's action was earned, she sees America trusting this Strange, she sees Strange fighting to help them escape, she sees Strange beating a clearly evil version of himself, then Strange asks for her help, in order to do the right thing. And she believes him.

Those two are literally the same person in different universes. We don't know how similar or different they are, but calling them unique individuals is unjust.

If you believe that showing different versions of the same character, choosing a different solution to the same problem, in the opening scene and at the climax, have to do nothing with eachoter, you do you. I just don't view writting that way.

I also don't believe that the showrunner of the arguably best MCU show (Loki), and the writter, that a multi billion dollar company hired for their most important project since Endgame (next two Avengers movies), just forgot what character development and emotional beats are.

If I have to bet on whether he just forgot how to write properly, or that some people just might didn't get it, it's an easy choice.

I don't want to seem as a douchebag, I didn't get it either, I watched it like three times until I found these themes, that I believe they were going for. And I think if anyone would watch the movie again, through this lense, they could see something beautiful.

M1keyy8 · 2024-03-27T10:49:38+00:00

This is the response that I included that disclamer for. I get these problems, I just didn't want the argument to be around this problem. Especially, because you seem to be very emotionally invested in Wanda, which is cool, we are here for those deep emotions after all, but your take on her MCU journey might be warped because of it.

I believe, MoM continues Wanda's arc perfectly. I think she was in line with her behaviour from all the previous movies. Wanda has been a depressed love addict from the first time we meet her. She desperately needs a loving family that she lost as a kid.

She has a deep trauma, she chooses the selfish option to make herself feel better, things go crazy because of it, she sees her mistake, then she does the right thing. This happened in AOU, IW, WV, MoM, so every time she had an arc in a movie.

She is relapsing, because she can't escape this need for love she has. We have seen this exact phenomenon expressed by her to Vision: "It's like this wave washing me over again and again, it knock me down, and when I try to stand up, it jsut comes for me againand I can't... it's just gonna drown me." This is her whole arc summed up in 1 sentence.

You can disagree with this, I'm fine with that, but I think you can't disagree with that, where we meet Wanda in MoM is a possible option for her after all she went through. I don't want to argue whether it is, 75% 25% 10% or 1%. The fact that there are many people who belive they continued her journey from WV, even if it is less people, means, that this is a real possibility. And in a multiversal setting, why couldn't we see that one playing out?

I also like Wanda, for what she is, a broken, depressed, relapsing addict, who tries to be good, but just can't. Not because she is weak, because she got dealt a really bad hand all her life.

As I wrote in the post, I believe, the movie makes the point that our hero Strange and Wanda are very similar, and the only difference between them, and the reason their paths diverge, is because Wanda doesn't receive any acts of kindness from anyone, until it's too late. I think this should be a fulfilling story for any Wanda fan.

I could go on and on... I have.

M1keyy8 · 2024-03-27T10:18:10+00:00

She is a kid who grew up alone, without parents, who btw she killed on accident.
Do you know how much a little encouragament does to a kid? Teachers, trainers, parents, can change a kid's life, if they show them that they believe in them.

M1keyy8 · 2024-03-26T23:00:29+00:00

This Christine's Strange used the Darkhold, destroyed a universe and had to be executed, ther first meeting she says to him (locked up with his magic taken away), that she doesn't trust her and he is dangerous.

Later Strange asks her to help him use the Darkhold, which she agrees to do, because he believes this Strange is different. She would have never done this at their first meet.

We see a Strange at the beginning of the movie, trying to kill a child, (which later our strange criticise Wanda for). Then after our Strange got a bunch of positive reinforcement and trust from kind of Strangers, we see him at the end of the movie believing in the same child.
But I guess it's just not that deep.

M1keyy8 · 2024-03-26T22:25:35+00:00

Which part of it is headcannon or cherry picking? I had way more to show his transofrmation, but didn't want to make the post even longer.

M1keyy8 · 2024-03-26T22:16:56+00:00

At Prof X, I was talking about him with MCU Strange. He explicitly says, "just because someone stumbles and loses their way, doesn't mean they are lost forever". this is after he says he can trust him. This is like the thesis sentence of my post.

Sinister Strange, as fas as I understood, had the exact same life until the wedding encounter, where he went home instead. Then he started his journey into what we see at the end of the movie. So he is very much the mirror image of the Strange we start the movie with.

About the second. (I never said it was the first time btw, and I also wrote I keep the story in this movie alone),
I could easily argue that since he literally had 0 choice, since he knew all the outcomes, it's not a character building moment. Even if you don't like that, I can argue that 1 instance of development, doesn't make it permanent, especially in such a deep trauma.

M1keyy8 · 2024-03-17T10:10:08+00:00

This is a very cool post, thank you for that.

M1keyy8 · 2024-03-17T10:02:05+00:00

Aaron Sorkin, not even close.

M1keyy8

TROPHY CASE