MCU announcements and Civil War
Oct. 31st, 2014 12:17 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
schneefinkMarvel movie announcements! I'm very excited about Captain Marvel and Black Panther. I only know both of them from Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes and fannish osmosis, but I like them a lot.
Captain America 3, Thor 3, Guardians of the Galaxy 2, as expected. I really hope they get the casting right for Doctor Strange (and the story, of course), and I'm not sure what to expect from Inhumans. I doubt they're planning it right now, but if Kamala Khan does have an appearance it would be fantastic. I'm also still not interested in Ant-Man, especially if they really fridge Janet van Dyne. They can't do that, right?
I'm disappointed there won't be a Black Widow movie in the next four years. But at least there'll be Wonder Woman and Aquaman. (Wow that's a lot of superhero movies.)
About the Age of Ultron trailer: I'm surprised how annoyed I am by the Quicksilver&Scarlet Witch casting. Wanda doesn't even have curly hair!
I have no idea how the pieces fit together, but that's intentional. (Also I have no idea where Tumblr gets the farm thing from.)
They announced that the subtitle of the next Captain America will be Civil War. I was surprised at fandom's negative reaction to that.
Sure, the comic event wasn't well executed, but that doesn't mean the basic idea was bad. I actually thought it was very interesting. And they've already shown that they just take the parts of comics canon that they like and adapt them for the screen.
Many people claim that they can't do Civil War in the MCU because superheroes' identities aren't secret. In my opinion that's not actually what Civil War was about. It started with superhero registration, but it was actually about government control over superheroes, and the registration was just how they wanted to do that. Superheroes vs. superheroes only happened because some superheroes were on the side of the government. And government vs. superheroes is something that you could do very well in the MCU.
You already had some of it in the Iron Man movies, with the military wanting control of the suits. You had SHIELD in the background in all of the movies, a government agency. You could say that Captain America: Winter Soldier was a big step in the government vs. superhero conflict: Steve decides that the government agency SHIELD should be dismantled, something that he has no real authority whatsoever to decide. (And we see in Agents of SHIELD that they're rebuilding it.) He makes it very clear that he is willing to go against the government for the principles he believes in. We know that the same goes for Tony Stark, Bruce Banner, Thor (who's not even an Earth citizen), and Natasha, and I'm willing to bet on Sam Wilson, Clint Barton, and Rhodey (although they might be more hesitant.) We'll see about Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, but I don't think they're likely to blindly support the government either.
The prospect of seeing a superhero vs. government conflict in CA 3 is very exciting. It's easy to think of scenarios involving Bucky - does the government want to arrest him? Kill him? Use him? Or it could be something different.
Civil War as superhero vs. government also explains why Civil War will be a Captain America movie instead of an Avengers movie, which you would expect if it was superhero vs. superhero. A Tony Stark cameo, as rumored, could work very well because of all the MCU Avengers he has the most experience of straddling the line as a superhero without getting in too much trouble with the government.
Government vs. superhero is also great because it's not an easy question especially if you portray both the government and superheroes as well-meaning. We the audience know that Steve Rogers and Tony Stark are good people, but the government/general public has no guarantees. (Remember, the first test subject for the serum almost wasn't Steve Rogers, but a jerk.) There's a reason why we have a democracy.
And the directors for CA:Civil War will be the same ones as for Winter Soldier, so that's another reason for optimism. I'm really looking forward to that movie. :)
Captain America 3, Thor 3, Guardians of the Galaxy 2, as expected. I really hope they get the casting right for Doctor Strange (and the story, of course), and I'm not sure what to expect from Inhumans. I doubt they're planning it right now, but if Kamala Khan does have an appearance it would be fantastic. I'm also still not interested in Ant-Man, especially if they really fridge Janet van Dyne. They can't do that, right?
I'm disappointed there won't be a Black Widow movie in the next four years. But at least there'll be Wonder Woman and Aquaman. (Wow that's a lot of superhero movies.)
About the Age of Ultron trailer: I'm surprised how annoyed I am by the Quicksilver&Scarlet Witch casting. Wanda doesn't even have curly hair!
I have no idea how the pieces fit together, but that's intentional. (Also I have no idea where Tumblr gets the farm thing from.)
They announced that the subtitle of the next Captain America will be Civil War. I was surprised at fandom's negative reaction to that.
Sure, the comic event wasn't well executed, but that doesn't mean the basic idea was bad. I actually thought it was very interesting. And they've already shown that they just take the parts of comics canon that they like and adapt them for the screen.
Many people claim that they can't do Civil War in the MCU because superheroes' identities aren't secret. In my opinion that's not actually what Civil War was about. It started with superhero registration, but it was actually about government control over superheroes, and the registration was just how they wanted to do that. Superheroes vs. superheroes only happened because some superheroes were on the side of the government. And government vs. superheroes is something that you could do very well in the MCU.
You already had some of it in the Iron Man movies, with the military wanting control of the suits. You had SHIELD in the background in all of the movies, a government agency. You could say that Captain America: Winter Soldier was a big step in the government vs. superhero conflict: Steve decides that the government agency SHIELD should be dismantled, something that he has no real authority whatsoever to decide. (And we see in Agents of SHIELD that they're rebuilding it.) He makes it very clear that he is willing to go against the government for the principles he believes in. We know that the same goes for Tony Stark, Bruce Banner, Thor (who's not even an Earth citizen), and Natasha, and I'm willing to bet on Sam Wilson, Clint Barton, and Rhodey (although they might be more hesitant.) We'll see about Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, but I don't think they're likely to blindly support the government either.
The prospect of seeing a superhero vs. government conflict in CA 3 is very exciting. It's easy to think of scenarios involving Bucky - does the government want to arrest him? Kill him? Use him? Or it could be something different.
Civil War as superhero vs. government also explains why Civil War will be a Captain America movie instead of an Avengers movie, which you would expect if it was superhero vs. superhero. A Tony Stark cameo, as rumored, could work very well because of all the MCU Avengers he has the most experience of straddling the line as a superhero without getting in too much trouble with the government.
Government vs. superhero is also great because it's not an easy question especially if you portray both the government and superheroes as well-meaning. We the audience know that Steve Rogers and Tony Stark are good people, but the government/general public has no guarantees. (Remember, the first test subject for the serum almost wasn't Steve Rogers, but a jerk.) There's a reason why we have a democracy.
And the directors for CA:Civil War will be the same ones as for Winter Soldier, so that's another reason for optimism. I'm really looking forward to that movie. :)
no subject
Date: 2014-10-31 01:58 pm (UTC)The clip I saw, though, was filmed by hand off a phone probably in a theatre, so it might have been taken down by now if it wasn't intended to be leaked.
no subject
Date: 2014-10-31 03:21 pm (UTC)Now we just have to wait until May.
no subject
Date: 2014-10-31 08:02 pm (UTC)I'm well aware how many ways it could go wrong, but it could also go so very right.
no subject
Date: 2014-10-31 11:21 pm (UTC)