***SPOILERS***Captain Marvel Spoiler Thread | ***WARNING SPOILERS ALLOWED***WARNING SPOILERS ALLOWED***WARNING SPOILERS ALLOWED***

[Warhorse]

23 minutes ago, captainwondyful said:

The answer to this is pretty simple, guys. Clearly, when Tony went into the portal, the nuke he brought with him did nothing.  That fleet getting WRECKED?  AAAALL Carol.  

But, he was risking his life, willing to lay down over the wire so the other men can be saved. That is what makes a hero. Not someone who is completely invincible and risks nothing. 

[MrGlass2]

12 minutes ago, Warhorse said:

it is definitely done to shoehorn her in so she is now the center of the Avenger's universe and no longer the Starks. 

The Winter Soldier is coming.

[Cap]

4 minutes ago, Warhorse said:

But, he was risking his life, willing to lay down over the wire so the other men can be saved. That is what makes a hero. Not someone who is completely invincible and risks nothing. 

He still took the nuke out of the city, so points for that! He just didn't blow up the fleet, because he's not as powerful as Carol!  And you're right.  Carol is invincible, and she has nothing to prove to you. 

[Cap]

Re: Carol Being The Founding Avenger,

 

1.  There were plans for Carol back in AOU.  Joss Whedon wanted to cast her at the end in a teaser, and Kevin Feige said no:

 

Quote

There were drafts that maybe people somehow got their hands on and read early on that included some characters - maybe others, but certainly one, which is why it’s dangerous to read scripts early on, and talk about them early on…

 

[Captain Marvel] was in a draft. But to me, it would have done that character a disservice, to meet her fully formed, in a costume and part of the Avengers already when 99% of the audience would go, ‘Who is that?’ It’s just not the way we’ve done it before.

 

Thanos is the good ‘Who’s that,’ because he’s clearly a bad guy, for comic fans he represents a specific storyline, you can get the buzz started from fans to non-fans with that cameo - as opposed to a title character, who deserves their own story. Even Black Widow you don’t meet in the last two seconds of Iron Man 2 wearing her costume - you evolve that going forward.

 

The way we reveal Scarlet Witch [in costume] at the end of the movie? Those were Captain Marvel plate shots. Joss said, ‘We’ll cast her later!’ And I said, ‘Yeah Joss, we’ll cast her later.’ [Whispers to an invisible associate who isn't Joss] ‘We’re not putting her in there!’

 

Finally Joss was like ‘Let’s use those plates to let Scarlet Witch fly into frame, give her a big entrance?’ And that makes sense - she’s come to their side, and she deserves the cool intro, which will feed into another movie we start shooting in a few weeks.

4

 

(Kevin is so good to us.  I'm so glad he kicked Joss and Ike out of the Club.)

 

2.  There were plans for Wasp in The Avengers, but she didn't make the cut.  Which is a shame, because Janet is a founding member of the Avengers, and he NAMED them in the comics.  So I really, really, really loved that they found a way to still have a woman give the Avengers their name.

 

[JohnnyGossamer]

Did love that cat and the MIB vibes it had. Wish more in this flick had the MIB coursing through its frames. You could tell the filmmakers had two 90s films in mind in a big way, ID4 and MIB. Obviously had Galaxy Quest in mind too. Leaned a little to heavy on ID4. Wish they'd embraced the weird, unexplained of each. The visual gags too. Would've given it a more enjoyable tone. Love the wonky, wacky look and feel of MIB and Galaxy Quest.

[justvision]

3 hours ago, Warhorse said:

But, he was risking his life, willing to lay down over the wire so the other men can be saved. That is what makes a hero. Not someone who is completely invincible and risks nothing. 

Run out of like. This is what good story telling is. The stake, the vulnarabilities, then comes the courage, the responsibility, the sacrifice. Then the audience will root for you.

[cdsacken]

8 hours ago, Noctis said:

Poorly acted by who?

 

Exactly my question. People say Larson was wooden but Hemsworth got hammered by many for Thor 1 which all loved him in Thor 3. I'm all for different directors but the movie was good. Too often it seems internal biases skew peoples opinions. I went into Aquaman with so many saying it was mediocre but fun, yet I loved it. I went into this film with super negative and super positive films and fell into the middle camp, I enjoyed it but thought it could have been better. 

[cdsacken]

5 hours ago, Warhorse said:

But, he was risking his life, willing to lay down over the wire so the other men can be saved. That is what makes a hero. Not someone who is completely invincible and risks nothing. 

Superman often risks nothing until he faces something so great he dies in the process. She has incredible power and with that comes incredible responsibility which I believe will be put to good use in End Game.

[terrestrial]

16 minutes ago, cdsacken said:

Superman often risks nothing until he faces something so great he dies in the process. She has incredible power and with that comes incredible responsibility which I believe will be put to good use in End Game.

Agree.

Superman has many fans, some statements like invinceable makes him boring to read here and elsewhere, but no one is invinceable, not even him.

At the end of the movie she got a grasp about what she can do.

Now she has to get her 2 lives aligned, fine-tune her abilities, find a home for the Skrulls, maybe is one of the reasons the Krees had to sign the peace treaty

As said, there are many forms of power in the MCU world, maybe her weakness is something no one here had thought about, maybe....

We do not now her weaknesses yet. MCU intro movies do not show all (fortunately).

 

Edited March 12, 2019 by terrestrial

[justvision]

51 minutes ago, cdsacken said:

Superman often risks nothing until he faces something so great he dies in the process. She has incredible power and with that comes incredible responsibility which I believe will be put to good use in End Game.

Very funny people defending this movie by imagining what future movie may improve on or fix, thus actually admitting that there are major faults in this movie.

[Legion Again]

6 minutes ago, justvision said:

Very funny people defending this movie by imagining what future movie may improve on or fix, thus actually admitting that there are major faults in this movie.

I mean, it’s a prequel. A lot of the reaction to Captain America 1 was also focused on how they would fit him into Avengers and further movies. Heck, a lot of the reaction to Black Panther was about how he’d fit into IW, and Doctor Strange, and Ragnarok, and GotG2. That’s how it goes with the TV series model of movies.

[justvision]

13 minutes ago, Thanos Legion said:

I mean, it’s a prequel. A lot of the reaction to Captain America 1 was also focused on how they would fit him into Avengers and further movies. Heck, a lot of the reaction to Black Panther was about how he’d fit into IW, and Doctor Strange, and Ragnarok, and GotG2. That’s how it goes with the TV series model of movies.

This does not take away the fact that a movie should be judged on its own merit/quality. E.g for many (including me), Thor the characters has grown in acceptance, liking and popularity since Thor (2011) the movie, but Thor the movie still remains in the mid to lower tier of MCU movies for many (13th or 14th for me, around CM).

 

In hindsight, we may say a character may gain more acceptance as subsequent movies come out. But more often than not, a character make it or break it in the first movie, or at most the second. E.g the Amazing Spider-Man (2012, 2014) was aborted after the second installment; worse, the rebooted Fantastic Four was aborted after the first.

 

CM surely will do better than the two examples I gave above. Firstly it is certainly not as horrendous as rebooted F4, and probably comparable to Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014). Secondly she is fortunate to be in the big family of MCU, and slated to play a major figure in future team-up MCU movies. However, if her acceptance is not great, then her "front and center" position may somewhat downgraded subtly to "front but at the corner" position.

Edited March 12, 2019 by justvision

[terrestrial]

3 minutes ago, justvision said:

This does not take away the fact that a movie should be judged on its own merit/quality

yes and no.

For an average movie without a world like the MCU I agree to that.

For an origin movie within a good sized amount of movies we know will add later on a lot of ordeal, chalenges,.. to the characters?

I still judge it for the movie, but I do not see it as 'has-to-be' a complete story (= does not man CM is incomplete).

See the usual 3 act stories, to me MCU title 1 to 3 are in a way act 1 to 3.

An origin story can also be a kind of ... forgot the word, a kind of lengthy intro, like the opposite of an epilogue.

In my POV I judge it with that in mind without seeing that as a minus point per se.

 

[terrestrial]

I read here a lot of remarks like it should be more like the other phase 3 movies. I disagree strongly to that.

I do understand people want more more more.

To me its waves, more exitement, followed more quiter moments or approaches.

Like the skaled down Ant-Man is in my POV very much needed to be able to continue in a ~ healthy way for the complete picture, to not focus only on an explicit movie every time.

An introduction is still needed, an origin movie is still needed.

An origin movie with too high a scale, too powerful of an enemy,... gets boring fastly in the next installments, when an increase in threat level,.... is no longer noticeable, too small a difference and so on.

Introduction of a new character. Intro. Act 1 😉

[Legion Again]

49 minutes ago, terrestrial said:

like the opposite of an epilogue.

Prologue?

[Warhorse]

4 hours ago, justvision said:

Run out of like. This is what good story telling is. The stake, the vulnarabilities, then comes the courage, the responsibility, the sacrifice. Then the audience will root for you.

People are just too blind to understand. It's why movies like The Hunger Games, Star Wars, Harry Potter and LOTR were so huge. The heroes were up against unbeatable odds, and their spirit and determination helped them win out, not invincible power, and it makes for a more compelling story.

 

Heck, let's look at Thor in IW. Argue with me all you want, but the Thor movies and Thor in particular has been a miss with the audience. His only saving grace was that Loki was always a part of his story, and people loved Loki and would flock to his movies for Loki, not Thor. If you doubt me, go watch a comic con when all of the Avengers come on stage, and Loki get's the louder applause and cheers over Thor. It's also why they shoehorned him in so many times, is because of the fans. Can't say I blame Marvel for doing this. But, it took Thanos defeat of Thor, the loss of his eye, his hammer, his home, his family. It took him nearly dying, for the audience to cheer like crazy when he makes his grand entrance in Wakanda. Do you think he would have gotten that if he was already super powered and strong throughout the whole franchise?

Edited March 12, 2019 by Warhorse
Had an epiphany.

[Warhorse]

3 hours ago, cdsacken said:

Superman often risks nothing until he faces something so great he dies in the process. She has incredible power and with that comes incredible responsibility which I believe will be put to good use in End Game.

And, I was never a fan of Superman for that very reason. He's too powerful and kind of boring and bland as a character. Same with Batman. With Batman, it's always been the villains that were more compelling. But this is just my take on things. 

[NamakFiskKa]

3 hours ago, terrestrial said:

Now she has to get her 2 lives aligned, fine-tune her abilities, find a home for the Skrulls, maybe is one of the reasons the Krees had to sign the peace treaty

She better not pull a Wonder Woman on Earth..

 

I get that she a doorway to more cosmic adventures and that they'll handle her like Thor that is more space adventures less earth time but she's HUMAN who's the most powerful hero the earth had and it makes more for her to be THE line of defense for her own planet rather than wandering light years away fighting for Inter Planetary Peace.

 

[NamakFiskKa]

Also getting huge Roman Reigns vibe from CM after she went full super saiyan.

 

They better not Roman Reigns her in IW 

[DeeCee]

MCU films simply aren’t traditional standalone films and should not be treated as such.  They don’t exist in a vacuum.  They are part of a larger whole. Elements of the film payoff internally within the movie, elements will payoff in future films and elements of the film will have payoffs in previous films. 

 

This is the film makers intention. It’s not an accident. It’s not a mistake. This is what is intended. If you go into an MCU film expecting something different then the error is on you not the filmmakers. 

 

Does it always work? No. Iron Man 2 is an example of where there was to much of the greater mythology and not enough focus on the “standalone” film. 

 

For me personally, Captain Marvel works on all three levels, as an internally consistent, enjoyable and interesting film, as a payoff for previous films (Fury’s eye as an example) and as a foreshadowing of things to come. 

 

I liked that they played with the structure of an origin film. The audience discovers her origin as she herself is discovering it. At the start of the film both the audience and the character are both in the dark as to who she really is.  Basically her origin has already happened and the film is about rediscovering it. 

 

For the audience the payoff at the end is twofold when she breaks free of the Kree control and realises her true powers. There’s the internal progression within the film of her realisation of who she is and where she came from but there is also an unspoken (and unknown within the film) elephant in the room, Thanos. 

 

I’m going to go out on a limb here and assume that every single person in every single session of Captain Marvel has watched Infinity War.  They know that Thanos is unmatched and the payoff everyone gets as Captain Marvel displays almost unmatched power is that out there in the future is Thanos. 

 

This is just my opinion. You can choose to view a film anyway you wish but for me I feel you’re missing something if after 21 films and counting you continue to go into an MCU film expecting something different. 

 

[A bit of background to my thinking.  I’ve never read the comics and pretty much had no idea about the character before watching the film. I pretty much think of the MCU as a hybrid film/mythology based TV series on a big budget. I just think we can exist in a world with regular films, hybrid film universes like the MCU and quality TV with each having equal value and merit. And when it does come to TV series I much prefer ongoing mythology type shows rather then procedurals or shows with mostly standalone episodes. This is probably what predisposes me to like the MCU style of film.]