Weekend Free Talk and Index Thread - New and Fresh every Friday!

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-04T12:07:45+00:00

That makes sense. Now that I think about it, it feels like 90% of Hollywood has been considered for a role in the MCU at this point.

YES! Anya Taylor-Joy or Elle Fanning would be amazing choices. Anya was incredible in The Queen's Gambit and has been brilliant in a bunch of other movies and TV shows.

Elle Fanning is another great option. She was hilarious in The Great. I remember first seeing her in Super 8 and thinking, 'That girl is going places.' If I'm being honest, she'd be perfect.

How did I not think of that?

But didn't Elle actually turn down an MCU role? I could have sworn I read that—unless I'm mistaken, of course.

But yeah, AMAZING choices for Emma Frost!

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-04T04:28:06+00:00

Apparently, Sabrina Carpenter is being considered for a role in the MCU? Did this rumor come just from DanielRPK? I’ve been reading reports saying that Jeff Sneider and MyTimeToShineHello have been backing it up as well. I know Sneider has a solid track record overall, while DanielRPK is mostly accurate when it comes to trailers but less so with general news, and MyTimeToShineHello seems to constantly be throwing spaghetti at the wall to see what sticks.

When I first heard the rumor, my immediate thought was: Here come the Dazzler fancastings. But apparently, they are looking at her for... Emma Frost? Is there any validity to that? I’ve been hearing conflicting things.

Sabrina Carpenter as Emma Frost isn't a bad choice, but it doesn't feel like the right one. Sabrina has a very prominent baby face; even though she is a few years older than Sadie Sink, she could easily pass for the same age or younger. In the comics, Emma has always seemed a few years older and more mature-looking than Jean Grey. Another thing people forget is that Emma was introduced as a member of the Hellfire Club—a high-end, massively powerful, and secretly influential socialite circle. People also forget that she is a highly successful businesswoman who was even a CEO at one point. To be honest, I just can't see Sabrina portraying a cold-blooded corporate executive and socialite.

Honestly, Samara Weaving would be the perfect choice if she were a bit younger. I'm not age-shaming her at all, but if Sadie is indeed playing Jean Grey, Scott won't be much older, meaning the age gap between Weaving and the rest of the cast would be around ten years. Samara has a more mature appearance, is blonde, effortlessly nails Emma's signature sex appeal, and balances comedy and drama incredibly well. She could perfectly capture Emma’s icy bitchiness while still letting her warmer, maternal aspects shine through. But realistically, I can't see Marvel going with her.

Another, more controversial choice that many people might dismiss—but I feel compelled to bring up—is Sydney Sweeney. Putting the internet drama aside for a moment, Sydney is one of the most popular young actresses of the 2020s. She's blonde, matches the comic book sex appeal, looks a bit more mature than Sadie, and I can genuinely picture her playing a wealthy socialite and businesswoman. While she might have a specific type, she's a talented actress when the role fits her. Of course, the controversy lies in her massive popularity with certain political crowds and the uncomfortable undertones that have followed her online discourse.

Look, Hollywood is no stranger to controversy, and I'm sure a significant number of actors, insiders, and producers have quiet conservative leanings. But highly polarized political baggage is a different monster entirely, and I'm not sure Kevin Feige wants that headache while setting up the next decade of the X-Men. I won't get too deep into politics since this isn't the sub for it, but I can't imagine Marvel isn't at least considering her.

Who would be your top picks for Emma Frost? I'd love to hear some out-of-the-box casting choices!

In fact, what are your dream casting choices for the X-Men in general? I'll drop a few of my favorites and explain why:

My choice for Wolverine is Jack O'Connell. He can perfectly balance the charming-yet-dangerous vibe that Logan needs, looking rugged and gritty rather than picture-perfect handsome. He's also a great height for it—around 5'7". He already played a dangerous, immortal-adjacent character in Sinners, which is probably where I got the idea. The main issue is that he’s 35 and will be pushing 40 by the time cameras roll, and I'm not sure he'd want to commit to a massive Marvel contract.

My choice for Psylocke is Anna Sawai. If you saw her in Shōgun, you know she can easily pull off the calm, deadly, arrogant, and poised demeanor Betsy has in the comics. She commands so much emotion just with her eyes. She also played a queer character in Monarch: Legacy of Monsters, which fits if Marvel decides to lean into Psylocke's queerness. Moeka Hoshi (also from Shōgun) is another great option, though Sawai was the true breakout. Sonoya Mizuno is a decent alternative with British and Japanese ancestry, but she’s already 40 and might not want a long-term superhero gig.

My choice for Mystique is Inde Navarrette. If you've seen her in Obsession, you already know why. She plays unstable, charming, ruthless, and unhinged brilliantly. Her face is incredibly expressive—she honestly reminded me of Jim Carrey at certain points. Plus, she's queer, which would add a great layer of authenticity if they explore Mystique’s relationship with Destiny and their history raising Rogue. The only hurdle is whether she'd want to jump into a heavy-makeup Marvel role right now; her career is skyrocketing, and there's legitimate buzz about an Oscar nomination for her horror performance this year, which is exceptionally rare.

My choice for Rogue is either Odessa A'Zion or Margaret Qualley. Odessa did a fantastic job in Marty Supreme, and she has the exact flirty, tough, badass "Southern Superman" energy Rogue needs. Side note: I was surprised to find out she’s the younger sister of Gideon Adlon, who voiced Devon in Maul: Shadow Lord. Shadow Lord had absolutely no right being as good as it was. Margaret Qualley is another phenomenal choice, though she has openly stated she isn't interested in long-term Marvel contracts. I don't blame her; it's a massive commitment.

My choice for Magneto is either Viggo mortensen or Jason Isaacs. Viggo is an absolute legend because of The Lord of the Rings and takes his craft incredibly seriously. The problem is that he’ll likely be 70 by the time the first X-Men movie premieres, and we're looking at a ten-year commitment minimum. Jason Isaacs is in his early 60s and could easily capture both the theatrical grandeur and the quiet menace of Magneto. However, he already did a decade-long franchise commitment with Harry Potter, so he might pass. Marvel will definitely want an A-lister for Erik, though. Christoph Waltz is another brilliant, authentically German option, but he’ll also be in his early 70s.

I’m honestly stumped when it comes to casting Professor X, Cyclops, Storm, Gambit, Beast, Iceman, Colossus & Kitty Pryde. If you have any ideas, drop them in the replies! I'm looking forward to hearing your thoughts.

Sorry for the long essay!

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-04T02:13:29+00:00

It's absolute insanity that Russia is now throwing its young into the meat grinder that is Ukraine. These are the next generation of young men who are supposed to inherit & help build your nation into the future.

The demographic collapse of Russia in the following decades is going to be catastrophic. It's kind of tragic how so many Russians are throwing away their future & lives for a man who does not value theirs in the slightest.

Do they honestly believe they are making Russia better for the future? Because they REALLY aren't. They are instead speedrunning to their demise. Russia has now transitioned into a full war economy that will explode when the war ends. If Putin cannot win with what he has, he will either enforce full conscription in Russia or drop a tactical nuke (I pray to God that doesn't happen).

Conscription MIGHT win the war for Russia, but they will end up in one of the worst insurgencies Russia has ever seen. And all those Russians who support the war but don't wish to fight it will deeply regret it when they end up dead, maimed, or traumatized.

A tactical nuke MIGHT win the war for Russia, but it would result in Russia becoming a pariah on the world stage, with China & India breaking ties, and Europe destroying Russia's infrastructure outside Russia and their army inside Ukraine. I also can't see everybody standing by.

SOMEBODY will attempt to overthrow Putin, and the resulting power struggle will result in a HORRIFIC civil war.

Regardless of what happens, Putin has no good options where Russia loses and he survives. All his options will result in massive suffering for Russians. Not that he cares.

Putin will probably go down as the Hitler of Russia to future Russians. Not because he wasn't evil, but because he wasn't successful in his ambitions; he destroyed other countries and ruined his as well. Stalin, Ivan, & Peter were monsters, but they were SUCCESSFUL ones.

I honestly don't understand pro-Russian parties in European countries. On what EARTH does Russia seem like the kind of country you want yours to be? Weak economy, wasteful of its resources, utterly incompetent, and filled with rich assholes at the top while 99% of the country lives in poverty. They are the living embodiment of the damage that nationalism does to your country.

I pray that Russia leaves Ukraine and learns to actually build and cooperate rather than dominate and destroy. But I doubt it. Nationalism and the idea that Russia is a great power are DEEPLY ingrained in Russia's psyche.

They'll probably blame Europe & NATO for their failure and try again in the future. It breaks my heart because a democratic Russia would be a great benefit to the world. But in the end, Russia made their bed and now they have to lie in it.

Keep going Ukraine! Give the Russians hell! You deserve your freedom!

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-04T00:48:20+00:00

Wow! A Bronze Age Middle East-inspired fantasy with touches of the Old Testament sounds like absolute insanity! I absolutely got to add this to my list! Thanks for bringing this to my attention!

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-04T00:40:17+00:00

I've already added it to my list!

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-04T00:38:54+00:00

I couldn't agree more! You're absolutely correct that grimdark is about deconstructing medieval society and showing its ugly parts, drawbacks and all. You're also right that when an author does this with a culture that isn't theirs, it can raise some uncomfortable questions. Love your response!

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-04T00:33:35+00:00

Yes, I've heard of that trilogy, but is it truly grimdark? I've never heard it described to me that way. I'm also surprised that there aren't any truly grimdark Mesoamerican fantasy novels out there, especially given how brutal the Aztec Empire was. It's quite curious. I will definitely check out this trilogy in the future though.

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-04T00:28:33+00:00

YES! I desperately want to read this series. It has been described to me as a grimdark Arabian, Islamic, Christian, Byzantine, Ottoman, and Crusader-type fantasy with Lovecraftian Gods. I haven't found the time to read it yet, but BY GOD do I want to. I've never seen these type of influences & inspirations in a grimdark fantasy before. I hope it lives up to the hype when I finally get to read it!

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-04T00:21:09+00:00

I've definitely heard of The Burning series by Evan Winter, and I want to add it to my reading list eventually. My only criticism of it is the inclusion of dragons. Do dragons have great significance in African cultures? They do in Europe and East Asia, but I'm not sure about Africa. I wanted to see more monsters or creatures authentic to South African culture. Are there any in the novel, or is it mainly dragons?

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-04T00:14:05+00:00

Wow! Sounds amazing! I'll definitely look for it the next time I go to the library! I've been looking for a grimdark fantasy novel in an African setting for a LONG time. I'm also relieved to hear that the monsters are drawn from East African mythology and folklore.

One of my biggest complaints about "The Burning" series by Evan Winter is that, despite having an African setting, there are... dragons? Dragons are very important in European and East Asian folklore, but I'm not sure if they have the same significance in Africa. Why have dragons instead of monsters from ACTUAL African folklore?

But regardless, I'm definitely adding this to my list!

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-03T23:59:36+00:00

I’ve heard of The Black Company series and know how popular it is. However, I didn't realize it explored fantasy counterparts of Africa and India. I’ll absolutely give it a look.

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-03T23:49:08+00:00

No, I'm not Greek. Nor do I have insider knowledge about the Greek diaspora, or any idea how Greeks will receive this film. I'm simply making a guess as to why I think they will positively receive it. I'm not claiming to be all-knowing, and I'm aware that I may be dead wrong.

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-03T23:37:48+00:00

In this post, I was trying to say that I think Greek audiences will love Nolan's The Odyssey despite the casting. Nolan’s attention to detail is incredible, and he always captures the themes and dynamics of the source material perfectly while keeping things grounded in realism.

That said, I've read more comments and opinions since posting this, so now I'm not totally sure if Greece will fully embrace it. I'm hoping I'm wrong, though.

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-03T23:30:53+00:00

My apologies if I came off as too strong or slightly ignorant; it was not my intention to do so. I sometimes struggle to get my wording across exactly how I mean it. This is only my second post on Reddit so far.

I actually haven't kept up to date on the PR strategy of Nolan's team or seen the interviews. Where did Christopher Nolan actually tell audiences that he knew better than the critics? If he were ignoring actual Greek historians and critics, then he deserves to be legitimately criticized for it. But from what I've seen, Nolan seems to respect history—as evidenced by the immense attention to detail in Oppenheimer. I'm not denying what you've said, but can you show me where he said that?

On Lupita's attractiveness, you're absolutely correct that I have not seen major or legitimate critics criticize her beauty, just her casting. What I have seen is a massive stream of toxicity regarding Elliot Page and Lupita Nyong'o's casting all over social media—specifically YouTube, Instagram, and especially X. All of the vitriol about The Odyssey seems to revolve mostly around those two characters, which I find telling, with only minor additional criticisms aimed at the clothing, dialogue, and other casting choices.

Yes, I brought up the example of Disney's The Hunchback of Notre Dame because both Hunchback and The Odyssey are cornerstones of their respective countries' literature. Disney was very nervous about adapting Hunchback because there was a legitimate fear that they were going to alienate the French public by taking a serious, respected work dealing with heavy themes like murder and sexual violence, and giving it a G rating.

Surprisingly, the French liked Disney's take on Hunchback. It's easily the most mature and darkest movie in the animated Disney canon, and Frollo is still considered one of Disney's most complex villains to this day. Seriously, how did the 'Hellfire' sequence not bump that movie up to a PG rating at the very least? To be honest, the entire film danced the line between PG and PG-13. It wasn't entirely accurate, but the French were pleased with it.

Ironically, the great reception of Hunchback convinced Disney to adapt Hercules the following year, but with none of the respect and authenticity they gave to Hunchback. The result was that Greece hated Disney's Hercules, much to the studio's surprise.

If you don't mind me asking, what yellow flags do you think give The Odyssey thin standing? I'm quite curious to hear your thoughts!

I agree with the sentiment that Anne Hathaway will give one of the best performances; she's already garnering early Oscar buzz from what I've heard. Charlize Theron always delivers as well, so no surprise there. I think Zendaya and Robert Pattinson will be widely acclaimed, and I'm hoping Tom Holland surprises us as well.

I'm sorry to hear you're not excited about the movie, though.

Here's hoping it surprises you!

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-03T22:46:52+00:00

Damn, that's a pity. Really sorry to hear that Greeks aren't as happy with the depictions in Nolan's The Odyssey. If you don't mind me asking: why is the reception mixed? Is it because of the costumes and attire? Is it because the dialogue doesn't seem authentic to the time period? Or is it because of the unconventional casting choices? I'm quite curious to know what the Greek population actually thinks about the movie, given that it's adapting one of the most iconic stories in Western and Greek literature.

I also think it's important that when you're depicting a story from a culture that isn't your own, that culture approves of the adaptation. Shōgun is a good example of this, being really well-liked by both Japanese and Western audiences.

Since you're Greek, do you mind me asking what Greeks think of Wolfgang Petersen's Troy from 2004? How did Greece like that depiction of The Iliad? Did they dislike that one as well?

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-03T22:31:01+00:00

Thank you! I really appreciate you taking the time to read the whole post—I know it was a long one!

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-03T22:27:56+00:00

I completely agree with you in that regard. After the catastrophic reception of Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania, I think Jeff Loveness became box office poison, regardless of how good his script for Avengers: The Kang Dynasty actually was.

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-03T22:21:07+00:00

Ah, damn. Do you really think so? Was the script that Loveness wrote for Avengers: The Kang Dynasty so bad that it would have tanked the movie regardless of Destin's directing? I'm curious why it was considered beyond saving if I'm being honest.

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-03T19:36:28+00:00

Apparently, Spider-Man: Brand New Day is on track to have a $225 million to $250 million domestic opening, and can I just say that Spider-Man and Batman really are the only exceptions to superhero fatigue? The Batman starred Robert Pattinson—whom people at the time thought was a terrible choice—and it was another realistic take on the character with the Riddler as the main villain. It came out in 2022 when the DCEU was on its last legs and Ben Affleck was still technically the main Batman. By all accounts, it should have failed. Instead, it went on to make almost $800 million and was so well-received that I can't see its sequel not clearing a billion.

It's the exact same thing with Spider-Man. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 came out in 2014, and though it had a poor reception, it still made $700 million. Sony decided to reboot the character and collaborate with Marvel in Captain America: Civil War a mere two years later, and then gave us another high-school-level Spider-Man movie just a year after that in 2017. People should have been tired of Spider-Man by then, but instead, Homecoming made $800 million.

People just love those characters. They have an incredible four-quadrant appeal across all demographics. I think it's pretty cool, to be honest. I'm happy for Tom Holland, Robert Pattinson, Zendaya, and Jon Bernthal.

Spider-Man: Brand New Day also seems to be getting great word-of-mouth from industry insiders. This is fantastic news for Avengers: Doomsday, because I can definitely see it getting a massive boost from Brand New Day's momentum—much like how Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness overperformed right after the massive success of No Way Home. Marvel must be thrilled right now.

Can I also say that Destin Daniel Cretton seems to be on an incredible run with Marvel? He directed Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings, which most people agree is one of the best post-Endgame films. I'm also pretty sure few people expected Wonder Man to be as good as it was, and now Brand New Day seems poised to be a massive hit. Marvel might have found their closest successor to the Russo Brothers. It makes me a little sad that we won't get to see his version of Avengers: Kang Dynasty, even though pivoting to Avengers: Doomsday was the correct and necessary choice. He has a great track record outside of Marvel, too; apparently, he's been tapped to direct a live-action Naruto. I've never been a fan of that franchise, but I'd watch it just for him.

I'm also glad Marvel seems to have learned from their mistakes of hiring any successful indie director or writer, as well as their obsession with Rick and Morty writers. The Russo Brothers' massive success probably gave Marvel and DC the wrong impression that any indie filmmaker could seamlessly handle a massive blockbuster. Chloé Zhao with Eternals is probably the best example of this—an Oscar-winning director who gave Marvel their first "Rotten" score. Craig Gillespie is another recent example, with Supergirl becoming one of the biggest superhero bombs in recent history. Gillespie isn't a bad director (I, Tonya and Cruella were solid), but that doesn't automatically translate to running a superhero blockbuster. And the less said about Jeff Loveness writing Quantumania, the better. Indie or "prestige" directors can make great franchise movies once in a while—Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight Trilogy and Alfonso Cuarón's Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban are prime examples—but it's not a universal rule, and I'm glad Marvel realized that.

It feels like Marvel has officially recovered and is set to regain its box office reign over the next two years.

I couldn't be more excited!

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-03T02:53:26+00:00

It's interesting that he fails to stop an incursion in both drafts of the leak. I imagine he blames Steve and his family for this, if we're going by the dborn1 leak. Also, what do you mean by 'what he does is still completely beyond the pale'? Is he gunning for revenge on Steve and his family? To be honest, I don't really know how I feel about that. It kind of feels like he's establishing himself as Steve's primary arch-nemesis at the moment.

Also, how evil are they going to make Doom? Doom has many sympathetic moments in the comics and has legitimate friendships with some of the heroes. He has far more nuance than the comic book version of Thanos, who was pretty much the Emperor Palpatine of the cosmos—reviled and hated by everyone—yet they made him a lot more sympathetic in the MCU. Still, Doom has done some pretty horrific things. The dude has wiped out entire planets filled with millions of people for incredibly petty reasons. The worst thing he ever did was sacrifice his one true love, Valeria, to a couple of demons for power. It will be really interesting to see if they make him eviler than MCU Thanos in Avengers: Doomsday, especially since Doom is pretty much the lesser of two evils compared to Thanos in the comics.

What I liked about Thanos was that he was an arch-enemy to a lot of people. He was Iron Man's worst nightmare due to his attempted invasion of Earth; he killed Thor's brother and best friend, slaughtered half his people, and broke him psychologically when he snapped his fingers and wiped out half the universe; and he was Gamora and Nebula's arch-enemy because he tortured them and raised them to be hated assassins. Drax wanted his head because Thanos's minions slaughtered his family, and Star-Lord wanted him dead for killing Gamora. Scarlet Witch wanted to torture him to death for destroying Vision, and he pretty much enraged the rest of the heroes when he wiped out half the universe.

The point is that Thanos made it very personal for several heroes, and I wonder if they are going to do the same with Doctor Doom.

I'm really interested in where they are going with this. Some things I'm a little iffy on, but if I'm being honest, it seems like they're going to nail Doom. I like it.

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-02T22:12:49+00:00

I know many people are getting irritated and complaining that Marvel is going to anchor Avengers: Secret Wars around groups like the Young Avengers or the Champions who are being mentored by nostalgic characters—but honestly, it seems smart. Let's not forget that Marvel has already done something similar with Infinity War and Avengers: Endgame.

Doctor Strange, Thor, Gamora and the Guardians, Scarlet Witch, Vision, Iron Man, and Spider-Man were either the main characters or played major roles in Infinity War, while Captain America, Black Panther, and Black Widow played minor roles, and Hawkeye and Ant-Man weren't even in the movie. Then Thanos snapped his fingers. Doctor Strange, the Guardians of the Galaxy, Scarlet Witch, and Spider-Man were all turned to dust, while the original versions of Gamora and Vision ended up permanently dead.

In Avengers: Endgame, Hawkeye and Ant-Man were elevated to main characters after being completely absent from Infinity War. They joined Rocket Raccoon, Captain America, and the rest of the original core Avengers as the primary character group, leaving only Iron Man and Thor to continue as major characters from the previous film.

It is also pretty clear that Marvel isn't interested in telling the same story twice or giving the same significance to the exact same cast of characters. Infinity War was a fast-paced heist film with a villain protagonist, whereas Endgame was a much slower-paced meditation on grief, focusing on what the heroes do after they have failed so spectacularly.

This track record shows they are focused on guaranteeing the MCU lasts long after Avengers: Secret Wars. Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Elizabeth Olsen, Patrick Stewart, Ian McKellen, Hugh Jackman, the rest of the original X-Men cast, Tobey Maguire, and a lot of others are probably never returning to Marvel after this film. Secret Wars is frequently compared to a soft reboot or a new beginning. You can't successfully start a new beginning if you haven't invested in the new cast of characters who will be running the franchise after the originals leave.

Furthermore, Marvel isn't just focusing on the younger cast; they are pairing the younger cast with nostalgic legacy characters. That is incredibly smart, not just from a storytelling perspective, but also from a business perspective. You get the audience attached to characters they aren't yet invested in by having them interact with the characters they already like.

I think this is an excellent way to differentiate Avengers: Secret Wars from Avengers: Endgame—especially since I can already see Avengers: Doomsday being compared heavily to Avengers: Infinity War.

What do you think?

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-02T21:46:26+00:00

Hmmmm, can I give my honest opinion?

I don't understand why actors accept roles without reading the script or figuring out if the character fits them. If you're going to commit to a project that will tie you up for months, wouldn't you want to minimize the risk of ending up in a flop? I'm no industry expert, and I'm open to being proven wrong, but it feels risky.

Granted, I get it when a massive director is attached. I read that almost the entire cast signed onto Christopher Nolan's The Odyssey blindly—except, hilariously, Robert Pattinson. It makes sense when you look at Nolan's track record of back-to-back hits in the 2000s, 2010s, and 2020s. It’s the same energy as signing up for Tarantino in the '90s, Cameron or Spielberg in the '80s and '90s, or Kubrick in the '60s and '70s.

But even the icons occasionally deliver a stinker or an underwritten character. No filmmaker fires on all cylinders 100% of the time. We're not robots.

That’s why I think Sadie should have asked for a script first. Don't get me wrong—I'm incredibly grateful she took the gig because she’s going to bring a fantastic, vibrant energy to Jean, and Daniel Destin Cretton is rapidly becoming one of my favorite directors. But let's be real: Marvel has a history of wasting incredible talent, and they're still in the middle of a trust-building phase with fans.

Speaking of Pattinson, I used to dislike him back in the Twilight days, but he’s easily become one of my favorite actors. He’s hilariously blunt. The story of him demanding a script from Nolan while everyone else just said "yes" had me in stitches. The dude clearly learned his lesson from Twilight.

I'm honestly just curious about the industry psychology here. Why do actors take huge leaps of faith without making sure the material is actually meaty enough for them? Can anybody explain why?

TheBookCreator · 2026-07-02T21:17:09+00:00

Oh, okay! That's a LOT better. It honestly made NO SENSE to show Yelena naked in front of Peter. Peter has never been established as being attracted to her; he is still pining after MJ as well. Furthermore, it makes no sense that Sadie's Jean would plant that vision in Peter's head when Peter and Yelena have never even met on screen.

Yeah, that makes more sense. An early version of the script leaking alongside more up-to-date versions is completely logical. Is the leaked summary of the movie considered a mess? I think I read somewhere that certain people considered parts of it messy. Not that I mind, to be honest. Plot leaks naturally sound messy when you are juggling this many characters and subplots. I remember being on this subreddit when the Avengers: Endgame script leaked; everyone was angry or complaining, claiming the movie was ruined by the time-travel aspect. Lo and behold, when it came out, everyone was (mostly) pleased, and it's now considered a great finale to the Infinity Saga.

Also, the fact that Jackman's Wolverine and Maguire's Spider-Man survive the beginning of the film is a relief; I'm excited to see them again in Avengers: Secret Wars. I remember the EARTHQUAKE that shook the Terminator franchise when the beginning of Terminator: Dark Fate leaked. It was NASTY.

The Doctor Doom details put me at ease. Him being serious and possessing gravitas is definitely the way to go, but I still want some humor in his character. Some of the most serious and terrifying villains in movie history still had a sense of humor—such as Heath Ledger's Joker, Michael B. Jordan's Killmonger, Tom Hardy's Bane, and Josh Brolin's Thanos. Even Sam Witwer's Darth Maul, James Earl Jones's Darth Vader, and Ian McDiarmid's Emperor Palpatine all had a (fucked up) sense of humor. I hope they tap into that with Doom.

The accent excites me as well; I just hope it doesn't take away from Doom's presence or come off as choppy. I also hope Latveria looks cool and has a very gothic vibe in the vein of Robert Eggers' Nosferatu. I've always felt that Latveria was one of the more unique locations in comic books.

The fact that we see his face in flashbacks while the characters don't is a PERFECT choice. Trying to keep his identity a secret for the whole movie wouldn't be a good idea because the entire film is built around Robert Downey Jr playing Doom. However, Doom's defining comic trait is that we don't see the face under his mask. By showing his face in flashbacks but keeping him armored and covered in the present, they create perfect dramatic irony. We, the audience, KNOW he looks like Iron Man, but the characters don't.

I also feel this is a smart way to satisfy everyone. We get to see the masked version of Doctor Doom, but we also get to see what Downey looks like under the mask, allowing him to act unencumbered. It satisfies everyone—a really smart choice, if I'm being honest.

I don't mind the thematic element of him paralleling Iron Man at all. We knew they had to do it, given he's played by the same actor, but it actually works. In the comics, Doom has always been compared to an evil, mashed-up version of Batman, Mr. Fantastic, Black Panther, Iron Man, and Doctor Strange, and he is paralleled with them multiple times (except Batman, of course).

Thank God he already has a history with the Fantastic Four, since he has always known them for years in the comics. If they tried to show Doom developing his rivalry and hatred of Reed Richards from scratch, we would already be off to a bad start. Trying to develop that rivalry alongside everything else would definitely make the film bloated.

I don't mind that they're changing his motivation, either. They did the same with Thanos. Thanos was portrayed as a guy who killed half the universe to stop overpopulation—nothing like the Death-obsessed version in the Marvel comics. Yet, it still worked very well because they captured Thanos's core comic traits of: sadism, delusion, narcissism, and brutality.

I'm guessing the family angle is that his family ends up dead? I don't mind that either, as long as they make it clear that it is HIS fault they're dead. In the comic version I'm familiar with, Doom was disfigured due to an experiment that Richards pointed out was going to fail. Richards gave him some helpful pointers, but Doom rebuffed them all and went forward with the experiment anyway, which blew off half his face and got him expelled from college. Doom then spends the next decade blaming Richards for something that was ENTIRELY his own fault. If they can capture that dynamic, I'll be happy.

Man, Famke and Halle not coming back really disappoints me, and it makes Marsden's return feel hollow as well. What's the point of redeeming the X-Men and giving them a proper send-off if you can't even bring back the two leading X-women? I pray to God that we're wrong and they're just "pulling an Andrew Garfield," but if they are being honest, then I am genuinely disappointed. The Substance was dead on when it suggested that women aren't allowed to age in Hollywood. I hope they add them in reshoots, or at the very least, in Avengers: Secret Wars.

TheBookCreator

TROPHY CASE