MCU/Superhero Discussion Thread

[Ameriganastan]

It would be good if every goddamn episode wasn't focused on Webby. I gave up before season 1 was over cause of her.

Holy shit you have beef with fucking Duck Tales.

That is awesome. Never change. Comic Book Guy has less beefs than you.

I have more beef than a cow farm. I still have beef with Rusty Wallace for spinning out Jeff Gordon once, and that was over 20 years ago.

[Lord Dominator]

Holy shit you have beef with fucking Duck Tales.

That is awesome. Never change. Comic Book Guy has less beefs than you.

I have more beef than a cow farm. I still have beef with Rusty Wallace for spinning out Jeff Gordon once, and that was over 20 years ago.

In some twisted way, you are an inspiration to us all

[HC Eredivisie]

It has 104 episodes of Ducktales though, and I mean the good old show, not the new one.

The new series is good though.

Could be, I don't watch it because I'm not part of the intended audience I don't like the art style but that's with a lot of new cartoons nowadays. Before it looked like someone actually put effort in it, now it looks like they needed to make four episodes before lunch.

[New haven america]

The new series is good though.

Could be, I don't watch it because I'm not part of the intended audience I don't like the art style but that's with a lot of new cartoons nowadays. Before it looked like someone actually put effort in it, now it looks like they needed to make four episodes before lunch.

Design aesthetic=/=Animation quality.

For example, despite the new series looking more simple and rougher than the older series, it is actually much more animated and fluid than the original series. This is the case for a lot of TV shows, they have to pick style vs. motion because making things well animated and complex looking takes too long (See: Avatar TLA and Gravity Falls).

Just look at most anime, which while aesthetically pleasant to look at is barely animated a lot of the time.

[Ameriganastan]

Could be, I don't watch it because I'm not part of the intended audience I don't like the art style but that's with a lot of new cartoons nowadays. Before it looked like someone actually put effort in it, now it looks like they needed to make four episodes before lunch.

Design aesthetic=/=Animation quality.

For example, despite the new series looking more simple and rougher than the older series, it is actually much more animated and fluid than the original series. This is the case for a lot of TV shows, they have to pick style vs. motion because making things well animated and complex looking takes too long (See: Avatar TLA and Gravity Falls).

Just look at most anime, which while aesthetically pleasant to look at is barely animated a lot of the time.

He does have a point. It is pretty well animated. Least last time I watched.

[New haven america]

Design aesthetic=/=Animation quality.

For example, despite the new series looking more simple and rougher than the older series, it is actually much more animated and fluid than the original series. This is the case for a lot of TV shows, they have to pick style vs. motion because making things well animated and complex looking takes too long (See: Avatar TLA and Gravity Falls).

Just look at most anime, which while aesthetically pleasant to look at is barely animated a lot of the time.

He does have a point. It is pretty well animated. Least last time I watched.

Marvel cartoons are actually a great case study of this concept.

The X-Men in the 90's tried being an action show to compete against Batman TAS and Superman TAS, but it was so detailed and complex that the characters could barely move. Or modern Marvel cartoons like Avengers Assemble or Ultimate Spider-Man/Spider-Man (2017), one of them is pretty complex looking and relies a lot on bad CG and the characters being stilted most of the time, and the Spider-Man just looks like crap.

[Forsher]

Could be, I don't watch it because I'm not part of the intended audience I don't like the art style but that's with a lot of new cartoons nowadays. Before it looked like someone actually put effort in it, now it looks like they needed to make four episodes before lunch.

Design aesthetic=/=Animation quality.

For example, despite the new series looking more simple and rougher than the older series, it is actually much more animated and fluid than the original series. This is the case for a lot of TV shows, they have to pick style vs. motion because making things well animated and complex looking takes too long (See: Avatar TLA and Gravity Falls).

Just look at most anime, which while aesthetically pleasant to look at is barely animated a lot of the time.

This is getting away from your point, but I think I'd take Design Aesthetic over animation quality. I mean, Digimon is a notorious example of anime that is "barely animated" but it's perfectly watchable and the way the characters look suits the story. This, and I think it's actually largely coincidental but imma use it as an example anyway, is particularly true of the episode where Tai goes back to the real world which looks like thiscompared to a normal episode that looks like this. Actually, the contrast is less obvious than I remember but hopefully you get the idea.

Obviously, there might be a certain "the brain is used to it" character to the fluidity aspect. I find I have to get used to watching traditional animation again. Watched the Secret of NIMH again the other day, for example, and it was initially quite weird with the painted backdrops but after a while I mostly stopped noticing. But the point is, the brain can compensate for these shortcomings so much more.

Voice Acting is also really important. Get that wrong and the whole thing can collapse just as, if not more easily, than getting the look wrong.

And then you get Fantastic Mr Fox which moves weird, sounds wrong and arrogantly trumpets the aesthetic of its director over the source material. Terrible, terrible film. Better than Alpha and Omega, of course, but still awful.

And since we're on the subject, I still think they should have animated the Inhumans television show. I mean, how did they think Inhumans could be pulled off with a TV budget? Had anyone involved with that ever picked up an Inhumans comic? Aside from anything else, they would've saved a packet on Black Bolt... no voice actor required.

Of course, you can convince someone of the design aesthetic's quality... possibly I mean relevance. The first time I watched the Spiderverse trailer I was very sceptical. I just rewatched it now and I could barely convince myself it looked weird.

[Ameriganastan]

He does have a point. It is pretty well animated. Least last time I watched.

Marvel cartoons are actually a great case study of this concept.

The X-Men in the 90's tried being an action show to compete against Batman TAS and Superman TAS, but it was so detailed and complex that the characters could barely move. Or modern Marvel cartoons like Avengers Assemble or Ultimate Spider-Man/Spider-Man (2017), one of them is pretty complex looking and relies a lot on bad CG and the characters being stilted most of the time, and the Spider-Man just looks like crap.

Yeah, I see the commercials for that Spider-Man show sometimes. It looks so...flat.

[HC Eredivisie]

Could be, I don't watch it because I'm not part of the intended audience I don't like the art style but that's with a lot of new cartoons nowadays. Before it looked like someone actually put effort in it, now it looks like they needed to make four episodes before lunch.

Design aesthetic=/=Animation quality.

I know but that's the feeling they give me.

He does have a point. It is pretty well animated. Least last time I watched.

Marvel cartoons are actually a great case study of this concept.

The X-Men in the 90's tried being an action show to compete against Batman TAS and Superman TAS, but it was so detailed and complex that the characters could barely move. Or modern Marvel cartoons like Avengers Assemble or Ultimate Spider-Man/Spider-Man (2017), one of them is pretty complex looking and relies a lot on bad CG and the characters being stilted most of the time, and the Spider-Man just looks like crap.

From what I remember I think the X-men show looked decent, just as the Avengers Assemble or Ultimate Spider-Man/Spider-Man you mention look good to me.

I still think they should have animated the Inhumans television show. I mean, how did they think Inhumans could be pulled off with a TV budget? Had anyone involved with that ever picked up an Inhumans comic? Aside from anything else, they would've saved a packet on Black Bolt... no voice actor required.

They're in the Avengers show for an arc, Black Bolt even gets to yell at Ultron.

[Ameriganastan]

Aside from anything else, they would've saved a packet on Black Bolt... no voice actor required.

You say that, but he still talks in cartoons.

...I'd link to the specific time, but COPPA is retarded. So just jump to about 59 seconds.

[Cannot think of a name]

Aside from anything else, they would've saved a packet on Black Bolt... no voice actor required.

You say that, but he still talks in cartoons.

...I'd link to the specific time, but COPPA is retarded. So just jump to about 59 seconds.

He talked eventually in the tv series as well. 'Cause that's his power. He has to say something in order for it to work.

[Ameriganastan]

You say that, but he still talks in cartoons.

...I'd link to the specific time, but COPPA is retarded. So just jump to about 59 seconds.

He talked eventually in the tv series as well. 'Cause that's his power. He has to say something in order for it to work.

I'm aware.

[Stanmenistan]

Does anyone else think it was very disappointing that the MCU Captain Marvel movie had the Skrulls led by Talos (A D-List Hulk Foe with super strength instead of shapeshifting), instead of Empress R’kll or Veranke (or even Queen Akilll of the Skrull, who only appeared once)?

Wasn't it supposed to be all female empowerment and feminist and stuff? Why not have a alien lady as a heroic leader? It would contrast better with how the Supreme intelligence appears as a woman to the audience and the captain herself.

It really only sends girls and women a way worse message for a group of characters to be led by a guy the same time they stop being evil. I know certain Skrulls associated with the Fantastic Four like The Super Skrull and R’kll (debuted and died in the Fantastic Four's mag) weren't allowed (the Fox Buyout was a bit more complex than Joe Q Public knows), but Veranke debuted in an Avengers title. Why shouldn't she be the Skrulls leader? Or why not an original female Skrull leader?

[Shanghai industrial complex]

I love Hulk best.He is Green, and strong,and Green.By the way, when will the Deadpool join the MCU？He and Thanos are the couple

[Forsher]

Does anyone else think it was very disappointing that the MCU Captain Marvel movie had the Skrulls led by Talos (A D-List Hulk Foe with super strength instead of shapeshifting), instead of Empress R’kll or Veranke (or even Queen Akilll of the Skrull, who only appeared once)?

Pay attention to the actual movie. The Skrulls aren't the bad guys. It'd be a fucking disgrace if, say, Veranke was the leader of the Skrulls seen in the movie. (Now, if Talos' daughter is Veranke and still a bad guy/religious fanatic... yes fucking please.)

Why not have a alien lady as a heroic leader?

Again, pay attention to the actual movie. This is Mar-Vell. I mean, yes, gender flipping, but whatever. This is what the movie has.

And assuming Carol is half-Kree in the MCU too (yay! retcons!... although in this case I really don't care because, yay! Carol! but it's the principle of the thing) that's the entire film...

I mean, at least we didn't get the whole "female hero, therefore need female villain" argument from you... but, still, what the actual fuck?

[Stanmenistan]

Does anyone else think it was very disappointing that the MCU Captain Marvel movie had the Skrulls led by Talos (A D-List Hulk Foe with super strength instead of shapeshifting), instead of Empress R’kll or Veranke (or even Queen Akilll of the Skrull, who only appeared once)?

Pay attention to the actual movie. The Skrulls aren't the bad guys. It'd be a fucking disgrace if, say, Veranke was the leader of the Skrulls seen in the movie. (Now, if Talos' daughter is Veranke and still a bad guy/religious fanatic... yes fucking please)

Talos is a bad guy in the comics too but a good guy in the movies; is that not a fucking disgrace to put it in your vernacular?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for staying accurate to a character's roots in an adaptation, I thought it was good they saved Miles for a parallel universe crossover movie where he is the 2nd incarnation of Spider-Man, but I don't mind changes if they help make the new story work better (e.g. Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver in X-Men:Evolution, Toad in X-Men 1, The TMNT's more varied personalities in the 1987 Cartoon, The martial artist versions of the Terrible Trio in Batman: The Brave and The Bold).

But Captain Marvel was meant to be this big "Female Empowerment/Feminist Superhero Movie" for the MCU, like Wonder Woman was to the DCEU. If that's the case, why give a traditionally female role (Leader of the Skrulls) to a male character/actor (Talos portrayed by Ben Mendelsohn)? That seems a bit backwards.

If the Marvel Ultimate Alliance Game from 2006 features heroic Skrulls led by an empress, why the hell doesn't the 2019 movie?

I do think Veranke would be good as the leader of a rival group of Skrull's to Talos'; Skrulls who are actually hostile and possibly allied with the (hostile) MCU Kree, even. They think of Talos' Skrulls as heretics who must be punished for their blasphemy.

Why not have a alien lady as a heroic leader?

Again, pay attention to the actual movie. This is Mar-Vell. I mean, yes, gender flipping, but whatever. This is what the movie has.

And assuming Carol is half-Kree in the MCU too (yay! retcons!... although in this case I really don't care because, yay! Carol! but it's the principle of the thing) that's the entire film...

I mean, at least we didn't get the whole "female hero, therefore need female villain" argument from you... but, still, what the actual fuck?

Just read this quote for my response to that.

The Supreme Intelligence is a villain; the female version of original Mar-Vell dies; the Captain herself remains a soldier, a follower not a leader.

A heroic female leader who remains alive until the end of the film could have been great.

Sure, Talos was very funny, but their are tons of funny actresses and comediennes who could have been great as R'kll or Veranke.

Like I said, this only sends girls and women a way worse message for a group of characters to be led by a guy the same time they stop being evil. Other female leaders remain evil or if they are good, they will end up dead.

I know certain Skrulls associated with the Fantastic Four like The Super Skrull and R’kll (debuted and died in the Fantastic Four's mag) weren't allowed (the Fox Buyout was a bit more complex than Joe Q Public knows), but Veranke debuted in an Avengers title. Why shouldn't she be the Skrulls leader? Or why not an original female Skrull leader?

The Skrulls have usually been lead by a female in the comics and most of the adaptations. Why not the MCU? They are how most general audiences are introduced to superheroes and other comic book characters in the first place.

[The first Galactic Republic]

I think the idea that Captain Marvel is this incredibly feminist movie is a little overblown. We live in a society (to use that unironically for a second) where an action movie that high profile with a female lead is a rare occurrence, but that’s all it is. The film isn’t all in with the social themes like Black Panther.

It’s a standard action movie that imo felt more like a Phase 1 MCU movie than anything else.

[Stanmenistan]

I think the idea that Captain Marvel is this incredibly feminist movie is a little overblown. We live in a society (to use that unironically for a second) where an action movie that high profile with a female lead is a rare occurrence, but that’s all it is. The film isn’t all in with the social themes like Black Panther.

It’s a standard action movie that imo felt more like a Phase 1 MCU movie than anything else.

The quote I coloured and emboldened is my point exactly; if this film really wanted to be Feminist, the Skrulls would be both good guys AND led by a lady as they usually are. But instead, they had to have a male leader in order to be goodies in the MCU, apparently.

[Forsher]

Hmm... maybe it's because Talos is a D-lister that it's not a problem if they shake things up more? Oh, no, it can't be that Veranke is in a different league to Tells until it's suddenly convenient for your argument that they're equivalent.

[Ameriganastan]

I think the idea that Captain Marvel is this incredibly feminist movie is a little overblown. We live in a society (to use that unironically for a second) where an action movie that high profile with a female lead is a rare occurrence, but that’s all it is. The film isn’t all in with the social themes like Black Panther.

It’s a standard action movie that imo felt more like a Phase 1 MCU movie than anything else.

The quote I coloured and emboldened is my point exactly; if this film really wanted to be Feminist, the Skrulls would be both good guys AND led by a lady as they usually are. But instead, they had to have a male leader in order to be goodies in the MCU, apparently.

...What in the Hell are you talking about?

[New haven america]

I think the idea that Captain Marvel is this incredibly feminist movie is a little overblown. We live in a society (to use that unironically for a second) where an action movie that high profile with a female lead is a rare occurrence, but that’s all it is. The film isn’t all in with the social themes like Black Panther.

It’s a standard action movie that imo felt more like a Phase 1 MCU movie than anything else.

Also, it falls into a lot of the same pratfalls that bad writers think makes a strong female character, either she's one of the guys or almost emotionless. They think aspects of femininity are inherently weak so they need to be avoided, ridiculed (Not like other girls BS), and ignored. She's basically the exact opposite of how she was when she was Ms. Marvel, who was Tony's AA buddy, a people person, and had a lot of problems with her past and the very nature of her existence (And then bad Marvel writer and turned her into a literal fascist...).

Wonder Woman notably avoided this by treating her not as a strong female character, but treating her as a woman who was/is strong. And there's a big difference in how that's handled.

[Forsher]

Also, it falls into a lot of the same pratfalls that bad writers think makes a strong female character, either she's one of the guys or almost emotionless. They think aspects of femininity are inherently weak so they need to be avoided, ridiculed (Not like other girls BS), and ignored. She's basically the exact opposite of how she was when she was Ms. Marvel, who was Tony's AA buddy, a people person, and had a lot of problems with her past and the very nature of her existence (And then bad Marvel writer and turned her into a literal fascist...).

Wonder Woman notably avoided this by treating her not as a strong female character, but treating her as a woman who was/is strong. And there's a big difference in how that's handled.

Nah, Carol's always been lame. There's a reason why the most interesting things people talk about with her are:

• Rogue (something that happens to Carol and is, frankly, more a Rogue than a Carol storyline)
• that really icky storyline with her "son" they retconned (interesting because it's bad not because it's intriguing)
• evil!Carol from Civil War II (interesting because it's bad not because it's intriguing)
• being friends with Tony (defined by relationship to another character)

Basically, Carol's just someone who was there in the background... or even quasi-prominent... except in service to something else. Even now in her period of prominence, that's still how she's being used, with the weird co-opting of Alpha Flight (there must be some kind of logic there, but as I said... she's boring to read so I don't know it).

However, movie Carol is... I don't think people appreciate what they were doing. She's explicitly presented as being told to be emotional and also has amnesia. I feel like it's a nice way of representing that this character is seen as boring whilst also allowing an evolution into what people who like her (presumably you) see her as being. That is, of course, if people credit her apparent absence of personality to the circumstances of the story.

Endgame Carol does veer towards another sarcastic arrogant hero but, um, that's the MCU more than anything else.

[Stanmenistan]

Also, it falls into a lot of the same pratfalls that bad writers think makes a strong female character, either she's one of the guys or almost emotionless. They think aspects of femininity are inherently weak so they need to be avoided, ridiculed (Not like other girls BS), and ignored. She's basically the exact opposite of how she was when she was Ms. Marvel, who was Tony's AA buddy, a people person, and had a lot of problems with her past and the very nature of her existence (And then bad Marvel writer and turned her into a literal fascist...).

Wonder Woman notably avoided this by treating her not as a strong female character, but treating her as a woman who was/is strong. And there's a big difference in how that's handled.

Nah, Carol's always been lame. There's a reason why the most interesting things people talk about with her are:

• Rogue (something that happens to Carol and is, frankly, more a Rogue than a Carol storyline)
• that really icky storyline with her "son" they retconned (interesting because it's bad not because it's intriguing)
• evil!Carol from Civil War II (interesting because it's bad not because it's intriguing)
• being friends with Tony (defined by relationship to another character)

Basically, Carol's just someone who was there in the background... or even quasi-prominent... except in service to something else. Even now in her period of prominence, that's still how she's being used, with the weird co-opting of Alpha Flight (there must be some kind of logic there, but as I said... she's boring to read so I don't know it).

However, movie Carol is... I don't think people appreciate what they were doing. She's explicitly presented as being told to be emotional and also has amnesia. I feel like it's a nice way of representing that this character is seen as boring whilst also allowing an evolution into what people who like her (presumably you) see her as being. That is, of course, if people credit her apparent absence of personality to the circumstances of the story.

Endgame Carol does veer towards another sarcastic arrogant hero but, um, that's the MCU more than anything else.

I've read the 90s Avengers Comics and the X-Men Brood Saga, plus I'm watching EMH right now. Carol is a lot more likeable and has much clearer personality in those IMO. She's confident yet emotional, aggressive yet capable of compassion and understanding, and it shows.

[Stanmenistan]

Hmm... maybe it's because Talos is a D-lister that it's not a problem if they shake things up more? Oh, no, it can't be that Veranke is in a different league to Tells until it's suddenly convenient for your argument that they're equivalent.

*Sigh*

Talos maybe a D-Lister, but like I said, the Skrulls can still be led by a woman and be goodies. Just look at Marvel Ultimate Alliance 1.

Hell, they could have turned Veranke into a decomposite character. One could be Veranke, the leader of the heroic Skrulls. The other could be Queen *Something*, the religious fanatic and leader of the Evil Skrulls who plan to conquer Earth.

They didn't have to use Talos or Veranke at all. They could have invented a new Skrull queen who is a heroine instead.

The quote I coloured and emboldened is my point exactly; if this film really wanted to be Feminist, the Skrulls would be both good guys AND led by a lady as they usually are. But instead, they had to have a male leader in order to be goodies in the MCU, apparently.

...What in the Hell are you talking about?

Just questioning if Captain Marvel can truly be called a "Female Empowerment Superhero film", if it replaces a traditionally female role with a male one whilst also making said role more heroic. That kind of demonizes Female leaders and the concept of female leadership, doesn't it? It really sends a bad message to women and girls that the Skrulls stop being evil as soon as they are led by a man instead of a woman.

[Alvecia]

Hmm... maybe it's because Talos is a D-lister that it's not a problem if they shake things up more? Oh, no, it can't be that Veranke is in a different league to Tells until it's suddenly convenient for your argument that they're equivalent.

*Sigh*

Talos maybe a D-Lister, but like I said, the Skrulls can still be led by a woman and be goodies. Just look at Marvel Ultimate Alliance 1.

Hell, they could have turned Veranke into a decomposite character. One could be Veranke, the leader of the heroic Skrulls. The other could be Queen *Something*, the religious fanatic and leader of the Evil Skrulls who plan to conquer Earth.

They didn't have to use Talos or Veranke at all. They could have invented a new Skrull queen who is a heroine instead.

...What in the Hell are you talking about?

Just questioning if Captain Marvel can truly be called a "Female Empowerment Superhero film", if it replaces a traditionally female role with a male one whilst also making said role more heroic. That kind of demonizes Female leaders and the concept of female leadership, doesn't it? It really sends a bad message to women and girls that the Skrulls stop being evil as soon as they are led by a man instead of a woman.

I think you're reading too much into it. It doesn't need to be all female, all the time. And not being so doesn't make it "not feminist" or "not empowering".