Comics and Movies

[quickccc]

My personal opinions of Jonathan Majors and the character of Kang the Conqueror differs from others. I think Majors is a great actor. And Kang? He is one of Marvel's top villains, cosmic or not.

There is no gray area for me concerning how I would want the future of both to play out. Either: a) go 100% with Majors/Kang for however many projects were initially planned or b) cancel all Majors contractual agreements and erase Kang completely from all future production timelines (pun intended).

For me, both enrich the MCU. If Disney/Marvel disagrees, they should dissolve the intertwining working relationship in its entirety. There are PLENTY of ultra-villains in Marvel canon but that well is not as deep if they decide upon an audience preference potentially as good as or better than Thanos. That character has been central to some of comics (regardless of publishing company) most epic maxi-stories. Topping the Deviant Titan would not be no small feat (understatement)...

Korvac? Not sure general audiences will accept a character that complex, especially not after Kang.

GALACTUS! Yeah boi-ee!

The Celestials? I mean. They are already setup. Again. They are already setup. It's right there. Then again, Eternals did not fare well with a significant share of the general audiences.

The Beyonder? I would love it but it would certainly fry some brain cells. I can already read some Rotten Tomatoes reviews (paid critic or moviegoer): "Omnipotent being? Thanos killed off half the universe's living beings with an all-powerful glove. Why would some movie version of Q from Star Trek worry about The Avengers???"

I do not know. I just know not knowing how Disney/Marvel will play out this hand is bugging me something fierce. Victor Von Doom would be a great Earth-centric apocalyptic villain. Same goes for APOCALPSE (been there done that poorly). Onslaught? Gotta get the mutants rebooted and running for a while first for that to make any sense for general audiences.

Doctor Doom could go cosmic. It has been done before (e.g. Secret Wars). His world threatening rep must be constructed in the minds of the general audience first--"Hey? Who is Doc Doom?"--before he can be feared universe wide... right?

Scrap the cosmic canon completely? Keep it downsized and more comprehendible and acceptable for general audiences? Makes sense. Play it safe. The concession does not strive to match or top what Thanos established though.

Crap. My brain hurts. Gotta hit this real work and get outta here, lol

/rant

Dr. Doom would seem logical because his character is so bizarre, dark and calculating.
I thought Johnny Majors portrayal of Kang in Loki series seem somewhat comical and over-chatty.
Like he was some unsteady mad scientist, and it didn't take to me.

Flat out and simple, Doom has to be done right with the studio, director and actor and screen writes.
or it becomes like the last two Doom mistake & failures in the past Fantastic Four films.

I had thought about if it should be a solo Doom flick (much like Phoenix as Joker) .. or should we introduce Doom in the upcoming newer version of the Fantastic Four ? I think FF comes first, then the emergence of Doom.
I'm still thinking of what actor would best portray Victor Doom.

I'm always thinking of characters - whether hero or villain, that can be spinoffs into their own films.

If there's a reboot of Xmen, as a change of past Xmen films that have seen Sabretooth, Apocalypse, Magneto,
Dark Phoenix, .. what about the Hell Fire club ?
Or would that be a more suited idea as a Disney series ?

Galactus is an awesome idea. even more so than Ultron, imo. But power cosmic probably needs to come
through FF and of course Silver Surfer .. but we know how Disney/Marvel probably likes to change the course
of the comic book into their own fashion and view.

Mephisto and Mister Sinister are others that I could adding a charismatic persona to a film.
Solo i would not do so, like a studio is going with a solo Kraven the Hunter, but then Disney could see those two
as a series rather than a stand alone film.

 

[Runwildboys]

Dr. Doom would seem logical because his character is so bizarre, dark and calculating.
I thought Johnny Majors portrayal of Kang in Loki series seem somewhat comical and over-chatty.
Like he was some unsteady mad scientist, and it didn't take to me.

Flat out and simple, Doom has to be done right with the studio, director and actor and screen writes.
or it becomes like the last two Doom mistake & failures in the past Fantastic Four films.

I had thought about if it should be a solo Doom flick (much like Phoenix as Joker) .. or should we introduce Doom in the upcoming newer version of the Fantastic Four ? I think FF comes first, then the emergence of Doom.
I'm still thinking of what actor would best portray Victor Doom.

I'm always thinking of characters - whether hero or villain, that can be spinoffs into their own films.

If there's a reboot of Xmen, as a change of past Xmen films that have seen Sabretooth, Apocalypse, Magneto,
Dark Phoenix, .. what about the Hell Fire club ?
Or would that be a more suited idea as a Disney series ?

Galactus is an awesome idea. even more so than Ultron, imo. But power cosmic probably needs to come
through FF and of course Silver Surfer .. but we know how Disney/Marvel probably likes to change the course
of the comic book into their own fashion and view.

Mephisto and Mister Sinister are others that I could adding a charismatic persona to a film.
Solo i would not do so, like a studio is going with a solo Kraven the Hunter, but then Disney could see those two
as a series rather than a stand alone film.

Didn't Natalie Portman's character die?...I hope!

 

[VaqueroTD]

My personal opinions of Jonathan Majors and the character of Kang the Conqueror differs from others. I think Majors is a great actor. And Kang? He is one of Marvel's top villains, cosmic or not.

There is no gray area for me concerning how I would want the future of both to play out. Either: a) go 100% with Majors/Kang for however many projects were initially planned or b) cancel all Majors contractual agreements and erase Kang completely from all future production timelines (pun intended).

For me, both enrich the MCU. If Disney/Marvel disagrees, they should dissolve the intertwining working relationship in its entirety. There are PLENTY of ultra-villains in Marvel canon but that well is not as deep if they decide upon an audience preference potentially as good as or better than Thanos. That character has been central to some of comics (regardless of publishing company) most epic maxi-stories. Topping the Deviant Titan would not be no small feat (understatement)...

Korvac? Not sure general audiences will accept a character that complex, especially not after Kang.

GALACTUS! Yeah boi-ee!

The Celestials? I mean. They are already setup. Again. They are already setup. It's right there. Then again, Eternals did not fare well with a significant share of the general audiences.

The Beyonder? I would love it but it would certainly fry some brain cells. I can already read some Rotten Tomatoes reviews (paid critic or moviegoer): "Omnipotent being? Thanos killed off half the universe's living beings with an all-powerful glove. Why would some movie version of Q from Star Trek worry about The Avengers???"

I do not know. I just know not knowing how Disney/Marvel will play out this hand is bugging me something fierce. Victor Von Doom would be a great Earth-centric apocalyptic villain. Same goes for APOCALPSE (been there done that poorly). Onslaught? Gotta get the mutants rebooted and running for a while first for that to make any sense for general audiences.

Doctor Doom could go cosmic. It has been done before (e.g. Secret Wars). His world threatening rep must be constructed in the minds of the general audience first--"Hey? Who is Doc Doom?"--before he can be feared universe wide... right?

Scrap the cosmic canon completely? Keep it downsized and more comprehendible and acceptable for general audiences? Makes sense. Play it safe. The concession does not strive to match or top what Thanos established though.

Crap. My brain hurts. Gotta hit this real work and get outta here, lol

/rant

I personally would have put in Galactus. Hmmm… how do we top that Thanos battle royale stuff? OK, let’s put in a villain bigger than Godzilla who only wants to devour the Earth. As others said, simple B&W story, no multiverse nonsense, and gives you a segway for Fantastic Four and any other rights you just received by purchasing FOX.

I'm not sure what Tarantino meant.. but actors performances can stand out the characters:
Here are some character acting performances whether Hero or Villain that stood out big time, imo.
As you've mentioned Josh Brolin's Thanos ..
Heath Ledger with the Joker...
Chadwick Boseman as T'Challa/ Black Panther
Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark

Tom Middleton with Loki ...
Both Ian McKellen and Michael Fassbender as Magneto
Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn
Alfred Molina as Dr. Octopus
Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne
Huge Jackman as Wolverine


The Worse ? (hold on to your arm chair !)
Alicia Silverstone as Batgirl
Tom Hardy with Eddie Brock (Venom)
Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor
David Twewilis with Ares (Wonder Woman)
Nicholas Cage as Johnny Blaze (Ghost Rider)
Val Kilmer as Bruce Wayne/Batman
Jaime Foxx as Electro
George Clooney as Bruce Wayne/Batman
Toby Kebbell as Dr. Doom
Vinnie Jones as Juggernaut
Oscar Isaac as Apocalypse
Jessica Alba as Susan Storm (Invisible Woman FF)
January Jones as Emma Frost
Taylor Kitsch as Gambit

Remind me if I am missing one or two ..

BTW, i'm not one keen on an actor/actress portraying two different superhero/super villain
- Brolin as Thanos and Cable
- Halle Berry as Storm and Catwoman
- Ryan Reynolds as Dead Pool and Green Lantern
- Michael Keaton as Batman and Vulture
- Christian Bale as Batman and God Butcher
- Wil Smith Hancock and Dead shot
- Adewale Akinnuoye- Agbaje as Killer Croc/Kurse

I think he meant some of these fictional characters are our modern-day mythologies, and the character itself is what brings people in, not which star actor is in the role. Some of the most popular ones like Superman, Batman, and Spider-Man are good examples. There are a million movies, TV shows, streaming services, cartoons, video games — just pick your media. Most played by actors that were relatively unknown before the part. Going back to the original Superman movie, a popular strategy is to cast an unknown into the main hero role, and surround them with a bunch of great veteran actors. I don’t remember which interview I saw Quentin Tarantino’s comments, but I believe it was when they were talking about how the studios were struggling with the franchises, and paying all these actors to come back In Marvel. His theory gets to be tested by James Gunn and DC. LOL

 

[DallasEast]

Kang may be a top villain in the comic books, but he just doesn't feel that way in the movies or series, he just doesn't have that menacing or compelling nature that warrant so many MCU movies revolving around. I realize they want to capture the magic(and money) from the Thanos type villian, but would it be so bad to have some stand alone movies that don't have an arc related to Kang? I know they want to prolong it to build up the anticipation for future movies, but it doesn't feel like it's working, it feels forced. There tons of great comic stories that are not intertwined into other comics or characters. The casuals are the fans they are losing, give them some single or two movie arcs without feeling like homework for future movies. Just make a couple fun superhero based adventure movies. They are losing some of the character building and individual stories while trying to world build.

Spoiler: Is Kang really that threatening

Really, how big of a threat can Kang really be if he's already been defeated by Ant-Man? Do they really need the Avengers to assemble, just call Scott up and have him handle it again.......

i will simply say this, and admittedly it will likely mean more to me than anyone else, but it is not Kang's fault, or Majors fault as I see it, for how Kang has disappointed some MCU fans to date. That is on creative 'masterminds' producing what we see at the theater and on television in my highest opinion.

 

[Roadtrip635]

i will simply say this, and admittedly it will likely mean more to me than anyone else, but it is not Kang's fault, or Majors fault as I see it, for how Kang has disappointed some MCU fans to date. That is on creative 'masterminds' producing what we see at the theater and on television in my highest opinion.

I don't doubt that one bit, they took what could have been a pretty cool villain and made him boring. That's a huge sin, heroes regardless of the medium or type of story are defined by their villains, you just can't have a great story without a great villain. They just made Kang feel ordinary.

 

[DallasEast]

Dr. Doom would seem logical because his character is so bizarre, dark and calculating.
I thought Johnny Majors portrayal of Kang in Loki series seem somewhat comical and over-chatty.
Like he was some unsteady mad scientist, and it didn't take to me.

Flat out and simple, Doom has to be done right with the studio, director and actor and screen writes.
or it becomes like the last two Doom mistake & failures in the past Fantastic Four films.

I had thought about if it should be a solo Doom flick (much like Phoenix as Joker) .. or should we introduce Doom in the upcoming newer version of the Fantastic Four ? I think FF comes first, then the emergence of Doom.
I'm still thinking of what actor would best portray Victor Doom.

I'm always thinking of characters - whether hero or villain, that can be spinoffs into their own films.

If there's a reboot of Xmen, as a change of past Xmen films that have seen Sabretooth, Apocalypse, Magneto,
Dark Phoenix, .. what about the Hell Fire club ?
Or would that be a more suited idea as a Disney series ?

Galactus is an awesome idea. even more so than Ultron, imo. But power cosmic probably needs to come
through FF and of course Silver Surfer .. but we know how Disney/Marvel probably likes to change the course
of the comic book into their own fashion and view.

Mephisto and Mister Sinister are others that I could adding a charismatic persona to a film.
Solo i would not do so, like a studio is going with a solo Kraven the Hunter, but then Disney could see those two
as a series rather than a stand alone film.

Kang is not one time lord. He is many. Having Majors portray Kang in Loki one way and then seeing him play Kang in Ant-Man and The Wasp: Quantumania another way was expected by me.

Agree 1000% about getting Victor right. That 2015 rendition was... hideous...

I am sure @Roadtrip635 would agree in a standalone Doom film, especially as an introduction but I find it extremely doubtful Disney/Marvel will go the WB/DC Elseworlds route with the character. They certainly could with a multiverse concept they are currently using but it would not be logical to do so without tying the antagonist directly with the characters in the main reality. They teased Thanos early on before bringing him in front and center at the end. However, that Thanos was that reality's bad guy, not another version of him.

Hellfire Club would be a huge reach if Marvel returns to their successful formula from the first three phases, at least initially out of the gate. For example, The Avengers' first movie was reminiscent of a 1960's story. Same goes for all those Phase One films.

On the other hand, Hellfire Club was introduced in the SECOND in-series reincarnation of the mutants in the late seventies--after Wolverine, Storm, Nightcrawler, etc., were created. That leap forward would be atypical of what we have seen produced thus far.

It just makes too much sense for the birth of characters like Galactus and Silver Surfer to be central to the Fantastic Four reboot. How anything is presented from The World's Greatest Comic Magazine is the only question for me.

Mephisto and Mister Sinister are great suggestions but here is a serious question. Are both of them too complex in nature to grab general audiences? Even if the movie or television show is well-done? A knockoff Satan is causing mischief. A genetics scientist messes with the DNA of guys with super DNA. I do not know. What I DO know is that none of the bleepity bleep bleep Mephisto nonsense from Ghost Rider better not show up in the MCU.

 

[DallasEast]

I don't doubt that one bit, they took what could have been a pretty cool villain and made him boring. That's a huge sin, heroes regardless of the medium or type of story are defined by their villains, you just can't have a great story without a great villain. They just made Kang feel ordinary.

Your opinion is shared by a significant portion of the Kang related productions' audience BUT not the entire audience. Majors' legal problems will likely kill any future opportunities for those of us who want to see Kang continue in the MCU though. I, myself, will be sorely disappointed, especially after seeing the second cut scene that ran during the Ant-Man 3 ending credits. Pissed off actually. Oh well.

 

[Roadtrip635]

Kang is not one time lord. He is many. Having Majors portray Kang in Loki one way and then seeing him play Kang in Ant-Man and The Wasp: Quantumania another way was expected by me.

Agree 1000% about getting Victor right. That 2015 rendition was... hideous...

I am sure @Roadtrip635 would agree in a standalone Doom film, especially as an introduction but I find it extremely doubtful Disney/Marvel will go the WB/DC Elseworlds route with the character. They certainly could with a multiverse concept they are currently using but it would not be logical to do so without tying the antagonist directly with the characters in the main reality. They teased Thanos early on before bringing him in front and center at the end. However, that Thanos was that reality's bad guy, not another version of him.

Hellfire Club would be a huge reach if Marvel returns to their successful formula from the first three phases, at least initially out of the gate. For example, The Avengers' first movie was reminiscent of a 1960's story. Same goes for all those Phase One films.

On the other hand, Hellfire Club was introduced in the SECOND in-series reincarnation of the mutants in the late sixties--after Wolverine, Storm, Nightcrawler, etc., were created. That leap forward would be atypical of what we have seen produced thus far.

It just makes too much sense for the birth of characters like Galactus and Silver Surfer to be central to the Fantastic Four reboot. How anything is presented from The World's Greatest Comic Magazine is the only question for me.

Mephisto and Mister Sinister are great suggestions but here is a serious question. Are both of them too complex in nature to grab general audiences? Even if the movie or television show is well-done? A knockoff Satan is causing mischief. A genetics scientist messes with the DNA of guys with super DNA. I do not know. What I DO know is that none of the bleepity bleep bleep Mephisto nonsense from Ghost Rider better not show up in the MCU.

I'd definitely be game for a Dr. Doom stand alone maybe with a end credit scene way to tease the FF introduction. Why not put a twist on it a bit, tease the heroes at the end, a little reversal on how they would noramlly do it.. Dr. Doom movie with his many facets maybe getting the best of another Marvel hero and show just what he is capable of, intrigues people makes them wonder....... just who could go against him. End credit scene with FF and The Thing saying "It's Clobberin' Time"

 

[Roadtrip635]

Your opinion is shared by a significant portion of the Kang related productions' audience BUT not the entire audience. Majors' legal problems will likely kill any future opportunities for those of us who want to see Kang continue in the MCU though. I, myself, will be sorely disappointed, especially after seeing the second cut scene that ran during the Ant-Man 3 ending credits. Pissed off actually. Oh well.

He doesn't have to go away forever, he goes off to lick his wounds and works on his plans and the studio to recast and re-think their strategy with the character. In the meantime, introduce a different baddie and use what they learned from Kang to get it right. The Dr. Doom movie!

 

[joseephuss]

I've said it a few times, Dr. Doom needs a series to introduce him to the MCU. He has a big back story. Show him growing up learning magic, developing his technological skills, dealing with being part of the ruling class of his country and other things that lead to his character. All the past Fantastic Four movies try to cram Doom's background into their own introduction. There just isn't enough time to fit both into one single film. Plus those previous movies forced Doom to gain his powers in the same manner as the FF, which is a bit weak and not comic book accurate.

Majors is great as Kang and I don't like Kang at all. I thought he was a goofy character in the comics.

 

[DallasEast]

He doesn't have to go away forever, he goes off to lick his wounds and works on his plans and the studio to recast and re-think their strategy with the character. In the meantime, introduce a different baddie and use what they learned from Kang to get it right. The Dr. Doom movie!

That is a good alternative but I think it is a fair prediction that Kang (in all his variations) will be gone forever if-and-when Disney/Marvel pulls the trigger.

 

[DallasEast]

I've said it a few times, Dr. Doom needs a series to introduce him to the MCU. He has a big back story. Show him growing up learning magic, developing his technological skills, dealing with being part of the ruling class of his country and other things that lead to his character. All the past Fantastic Four movies try to cram Doom's background into their own introduction. There just isn't enough time to fit both into one single film. Plus those previous movies forced Doom to gain his powers in the same manner as the FF, which is a bit weak and not comic book accurate.

Fantastic (pun intended) idea for introducing Victor Von Doom.

 

[VaqueroTD]

He doesn't have to go away forever, he goes off to lick his wounds and works on his plans and the studio to recast and re-think their strategy with the character. In the meantime, introduce a different baddie and use what they learned from Kang to get it right. The Dr. Doom movie!

Agreed. They can bow out now and still make it feel like it was the plan since Kang was already a major villain with big screentime in so many projects. I like the Dr. Doom idea too. But I'm also a Fantastic Four homer. The only Marvel TPB I still read.

 

[DallasEast]

Didn't Natalie Portman's character die?...I hope!

COMIC GEEK POWERS! ACTIVATE!!

Spoiler

The answer is YES! Jane died and went to Valhalla as depicted in Thor: Love and Thunder and in the comics.

Now, prepare yourself.

Jane returned from Valhalla as a VALKYRIE in the comics.

Personally, I doubt Portman wants to return to the MCU. And Disney would likely not support her returning after the subpar box office of T:L&T. So, it is highly likely Jane will stay dead.

... or WILL she?

 

[quickccc]

I personally would have put in Galactus. Hmmm… how do we top that Thanos battle royale stuff? OK, let’s put in a villain bigger than Godzilla who only wants to devour the Earth. As others said, simple B&W story, no multiverse nonsense, and gives you a segway for Fantastic Four and any other rights you just received by purchasing FOX.


I think he meant some of these fictional characters are our modern-day mythologies, and the character itself is what brings people in, not which star actor is in the role. Some of the most popular ones like Superman, Batman, and Spider-Man are good examples. There are a million movies, TV shows, streaming services, cartoons, video games — just pick your media. Most played by actors that were relatively unknown before the part. Going back to the original Superman movie, a popular strategy is to cast an unknown into the main hero role, and surround them with a bunch of great veteran actors. I don’t remember which interview I saw Quentin Tarantino’s comments, but I believe it was when they were talking about how the studios were struggling with the franchises, and paying all these actors to come back In Marvel. His theory gets to be tested by James Gunn and DC. LOL

Hopes the Aquaman sequel shows that from Gunn,.. but are we getting the early vibe if it will be a big hit ..or miss
come release time ?

I think Marvel's early plans are being questioned,.. for example as much as i am trying to keep an open mind, I have not got onboard with Mackey version of Captain America... why not just re-cast a new Steve Rogers ?

We've seen a new Superman, Batman, Spider Man .. so what's the harm of a trying a new cast of a very popular comic character ? (Capt. America)

 

[nobody]

Hopes the Aquaman sequel shows that from Gunn,.. but are we getting the early vibe if it will be a big hit ..or miss
come release time ?

I think Marvel's early plans are being questioned,.. for example as much as i am trying to keep an open mind, I have not got onboard with Mackey version of Captain America... why not just re-cast a new Steve Rogers ?

We've seen a new Superman, Batman, Spider Man .. so what's the harm of a trying a new cast of a very popular comic character ? (Capt. America)

He was always one of Steve's choices for successor, but didn't actually become Captain America until 2015 in the comics if I recall. Bucky was his first choice. I could say the choice was diversity and I'd be right, but let's not pretend that Falcon isn't deserving of the shield (at least in comics).
They could always have an old Steve become head of SHIELD, and bring in an alternate reality young Steve at some point (recast of course)

 

[Runwildboys]

He was always one of Steve's choices for successor, but didn't actually become Captain America until 2015 in the comics if I recall. Bucky was his first choice. I could say the choice was diversity and I'd be right, but let's not pretend that Falcon isn't deserving of the shield (at least in comics).
They could always have an old Steve become head of SHIELD, and bring in an alternate reality young Steve at some point (recast of course)

I like that Falcon got the shield. We know he has similar morals to Steve. I just wanna see him get the super serum.

 

[quickccc]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/ne...r&cvid=26234988b40b4a589f41fc63d3df865d&ei=10

Marvel mania is over: How the comic book super-franchise started to unravel in 2023​

“The Marvels,” the follow-up to 2019’s “Captain Marvel” starring Brie Larson, had the franchise’s worst-ever opening weekend box office, with $47 million domestically.

" Even Disney CEO Bob Iger recently acknowledged that Marvel has "diluted" its brand (without admitting that it was mostly his strategy that got the company here).

 

[quickccc]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/ne...r&cvid=26234988b40b4a589f41fc63d3df865d&ei=10

Marvel mania is over: How the comic book super-franchise started to unravel in 2023​

“The Marvels,” the follow-up to 2019’s “Captain Marvel” starring Brie Larson, had the franchise’s worst-ever opening weekend box office, with $47 million domestically.

" Even Disney CEO Bob Iger recently acknowledged that Marvel has "diluted" its brand (without admitting that it was mostly his strategy that got the company here).

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/ne...r&cvid=26234988b40b4a589f41fc63d3df865d&ei=10

" Quality has been an issue for Disney since it launched its streaming service in late 2019. In increasing its output to feed Disney+, Iger said the company "diluted" its quality, particularly when it came to its Marvel Cinematic Universe features. He said pandemic-related restrictions made it difficult for executives to oversee its increased number of film and television productions. "

(Me: This "Quantity" over "Quality " was the leading reason why I thought Marvel has been sure slacking it ..and it's cost them big time among audience viewers)

 

[Roadtrip635]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/ne...r&cvid=26234988b40b4a589f41fc63d3df865d&ei=10

" Quality has been an issue for Disney since it launched its streaming service in late 2019. In increasing its output to feed Disney+, Iger said the company "diluted" its quality, particularly when it came to its Marvel Cinematic Universe features. He said pandemic-related restrictions made it difficult for executives to oversee its increased number of film and television productions. "

(Me: This "Quantity" over "Quality " was the leading reason why I thought Marvel has been sure slacking it ..and it's cost them big time among audience viewers)

Honestly, would having more executive oversight made it any better?