Maybe it's because I never read the comics, but I liked her character, and I thought she did a great job in the role. I never even got the sense of "female empowerment" being a big thing with her, because all the flashbacks of her falling and getting back up didn't seem like it was "in spite of, or because of her being a girl". It was just who she was as a person.
I am definitely an outlier when it comes to overall comic book character appreciation. For example, Guardians of the Galaxy was one of my favorite titles decades before it was revamped with Groot and Rocket.
Well said.
What? You were not a fan of the Batman nipple costumes Clooney, Alicia Silverstone and Chris O'Donnell had to wear?Ugggh .. Val Kilmer and George Clooney era .....
Is it the light show surrounding Danvers that gives you the impression she is displaying Binary powers?
I don't know if it's really necessary to try and build a singular Batman into a DCEU type world, that seems to be in vogue these days however.. He may be the only hero that I can say that about. The character has been explored in comics in about every conceivable way, different versions, timelines, time periods etc. and trying to limit him to one timeline seems too confining. I like seeing different interpretations of the character, the Kilmer/Clooney versions were regrettable though
I agree IF Warner Brothers Discovery abandons the DCEU and fully adopts an Elseworld type strategy. Then they can have as many unique Batman stories and multiple actors to play the character as often as they want because there is no continuity to link anything together.I don't know if it's really necessary to try and build a singular Batman into a DCEU type world, that seems to be in vogue these days however.. He may be the only hero that I can say that about. The character has been explored in comics in about every conceivable way, different versions, timelines, time periods etc. and trying to limit him to one timeline seems too confining. I like seeing different interpretations of the character, the Kilmer/Clooney versions were regrettable though
) with the same male lead actor playing the villain. If that will become WBD's strategy, it would suggest Robert Pattinson will get more movies as Batman also. Not saying Joker and Batman will intersect with each other. Just saying it would be doubtful multiple actors would play Batman within a short timespan because the actor would finish their run first before another actor would take over.
My bad. You introduced Spider-Man, Superman and Batman into the discussion and I misunderstood since I did not see any correlation.
Now Terrence Howard for Don Cheadle was a 100% replacement, so I agree. That was unfortunate in my opinion because I really like Howard.
However, Rhodey is a supporting character in the Iron Man franchise. That change would not be equivalent to the transition of a main character. I doubt many of the franchise's audience base thought very much of the switch. And Cheadle has done a fantastic job after taking over.
No. I disagree.
Shuri is not replacing T'Challa. Letitia Wright will not be assuming Chadwick Boseman's role.
Shuri would be taking up the mantle of the Black Panther, just as her brother and their ancestors did before her. Perhaps that is the point I am not communicating very well. Disney, Marvel and Coogler are not allowing another actor to assume the role of T'Challa, King of Wakanda, who was played by Boseman. That is what my comments have been based upon and underscore why I agreed with the decision to not replace Boseman in the MCU.
Honestly, I am confused by that assumption. I was under the impression that most fans of al the Netflix series did not understand Disney's delay incorporating those shows into its streaming service library.
After Disney rectified that circumstance, I thought public discourse centered upon whether the studio would revive those series and their cast under its streaming umbrella. Then
appearances by Charlie Cox as Matt Murdoch in Spider-Man: No Way Home and Vincent D'Onofrio in Hawkeye
...seemingly squashed all speculation about the integration of the Netflix shows into the Disney MCU. I thought overall reaction changed from doubt to satisfaction that Disney was finally doing "the right thing."
However, you were stunned. I am curious. I mean, yeah. It is a fact that Disney revamps their stuff all the time. Sleeping Beauty. Cinderella. The Lion King. Beauty and the Beast. The Little Mermaid next year. Etc. There is no denying Disney's retro tendency but they have been applying the process to re-energize and attract newer and bigger audiences.
Yet, that tendency has historically involved its own previously produced material. These series were under the Netflix umbrella. And they were worked for Netflix. Why would the studio redo what worked, with actors and characters audiences well-remembered from a very recent past?
Heck. I would be very puzzled why Disney would re-cast Charlie Cox. To me, he is very "Disney friendly." I think the same of Mike Colter and Krysten Ritter (even with the alcoholism).
Now, Jon Bernthal is debatable as Disney friendly. The question is still unanswered whether the studio will assimilate Bernthal's series level of violence into a reboot of that series. I would think they would be utter ignorant to "revamp" The Punisher but it would not be surprising they would replace Bernthal within the show's continuity to "lighten" its viewing quality (vomit).
I am really rambling.
Disney can re-cast Finn Jones for Iron Fist. Although I like Jones, a replacement would not surprise me and I doubt many in the audience would care. I would care if they replaced Jessica Henwick though.
Yeah. I'm rambling bad.
Honestly, I am confused by that assumption. I was under the impression that most fans of al the Netflix series did not understand Disney's delay incorporating those shows into its streaming service library.
After Disney rectified that circumstance, I thought public discourse centered upon whether the studio would revive those series and their cast under its streaming umbrella. Then
appearances by Charlie Cox as Matt Murdoch in Spider-Man: No Way Home and Vincent D'Onofrio in Hawkeye
...seemingly squashed all speculation about the integration of the Netflix shows into the Disney MCU. I thought overall reaction changed from doubt to satisfaction that Disney was finally doing "the right thing."
However, you were stunned. I am curious. I mean, yeah. It is a fact that Disney revamps their stuff all the time. Sleeping Beauty. Cinderella. The Lion King. Beauty and the Beast. The Little Mermaid next year. Etc. There is no denying Disney's retro tendency but they have been applying the process to re-energize and attract newer and bigger audiences.
Yet, that tendency has historically involved its own previously produced material. These series were under the Netflix umbrella. And they were worked for Netflix. Why would the studio redo what worked, with actors and characters audiences well-remembered from a very recent past?
Heck. I would be very puzzled why Disney would re-cast Charlie Cox. To me, he is very "Disney friendly." I think the same of Mike Colter and Krysten Ritter (even with the alcoholism).
Now, Jon Bernthal is debatable as Disney friendly. The question is still unanswered whether the studio will assimilate Bernthal's series level of violence into a reboot of that series. I would think they would be utter ignorant to "revamp" The Punisher but it would not be surprising they would replace Bernthal within the show's continuity to "lighten" its viewing quality (vomit).
I am really rambling.
Disney can re-cast Finn Jones for Iron Fist. Although I like Jones, a replacement would not surprise me and I doubt many in the audience would care. I would care if they replaced Jessica Henwick though.
Yeah. I'm rambling bad.
That's the thing. Why would reboots of the multiple Netflix series be considered? From my own personal perspective, I was not stunned because I did not expect Disney to produce reboots of them. Why would the studio fix what was not broken?
