Jump to content
passwords have all been force reset. please recover password to reset ×
MFGamers

Marvel Cinematic Universe


Jimboxy
 Share

Recommended Posts

Moving on... [As the creepy fanboy thing didn't really need further elaboration. Hence why I continued the thread, on topic]?

 

Spider-Woman-1.jpg

Jessica Drew

 

663c4cf77a4474e7c2aec1e3e3babf8b.jpg

Julia Carpenter

 

Which Spider-Woman is more likely as a MCU character?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t think Olivia Wilde’s film will be Gwen Stacey. I think they’ll let the Spiderverse team keep doing what they’re doing since the first movie was so successful. If I had to bet money I think they will go with standard Jessica Drew Spider-Woman. There’s so much material, she’s the most famous, and it’s divorced enough from Spider-Man itself it can get the name association without having to worry to hard about how fits in with Far From Home or whatever. 
 

The Spider-Woman/Spider-Girl names are thrown around so much and given to everybody in Marvel it could be a range of people. Realistically I think it’s standard Jessica Drew, though.

 

EDIT: If I had to give really outside chances I think maybe Silk or May Parker are also contenders but not likely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I know there’s very few options but my gut doesn’t feel good about any of them. There’s no answer that seems right. 
 

Damn, the guy was robbed. Seems like he did everything right, worked hard, earned his spot, and got it taken away from him anyway. Cancer continues to suck shit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It reminds me of Andy Whitfield from the Spartacus TV show. He too died from cancer and was eventually recast. In popular roles, that is the default option when it comes to high profile series, unfortunately. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vqpcv31558m41.png

 

The New Mutants

 

Important to note: No after credits scenes at all

 

It's good. Taking off the nerd glasses, it is a good film with a strong cast that doesn't overstay its welcome. You can tell it has been in production for a while, when Stan Lee is still listed as Executive Producer. Meanwhile, from how it is done, this can easily exist within the timeline of the prior X-Men films or MCU. Much like the first Deadpool could. A solid film that isn't going to set the world on fire, but further proof that even secondary to third tier Mutants are strong enough to star in standalone films. 7/10

 

Nerd Glasses On: My one gripe with the film is the hamfisted Buffy the Vampire Slayer references. New Mutants even predated the Buffy Movie by ten years, so the overt nature of these moments is jarring. On the plus side, every character is very well realised on film, complete with accurate accents and untweaked powersets. I'm reminded that this is the onscreen debut for all but one of the Mutants in this film. No one has code names in this, as it isn't that kind of film. But Sunspot did debut in Days of Future Past, as one of the doomed future X-Men. He is handled a bit better here, in terms of characterisation. However they still keep his powerset as "fire guy", which it technically isn't but that is just splitting hairs.  You can tell this is a lower budget film and the cast is basically seven people. I think that hints that this was a bit of a gamble and the end result is better than I expected. New Mutants is a bit different to typical X-Men fare and I think that too works in it's favour. I was quite impressed by all the lore references and cameos too.

 

Oh and it isn't quite the "horror" the initial trailers suggested. There was a scene of hands and faces pawing through the walls, that is absent from the film altogether.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

?

Kang, is a good choice. If done properly, a suitable big bad to replace Thanos. But his back story/origin will have to be seriously streamlined for the MCU. He is a bit too timey-wimey as he is.  Even though the FF are now a part of it (technically speaking), to patch what would have been a plot hole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ant-Man 2 was a step up for me but step up from bad to fine. 
 

I don’t need a 3rd Ant-Man movie. To me he is Marvel’s Aquaman, like who gives a shit. But if you are going to put Kang in it I can’t say I’m not curious as to why and what for. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Maf said:

But if you are going to put Kang in it I can’t say I’m not curious as to why and what for. 

Cynically, I'd say because Ant-Man doesn't have the biggest roster of villains.

By the same token, Kang is also a big name Avengers villain. Without a new Team film on the immediate horizon, this is likely going to be how they are going to make it onscreen.

4 minutes ago, Nag said:

Ant-Man can do one, Wasp on the other hand... hmm hmm.?

...

 

tumblr_muifh8RDMg1re6b1fo2_250.gif

 

There you go!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@OCH Yeah, I get that, I mean for story purposes why. Obviously Ant-Man is where they introduced the Quantum Realm which was all about time. Does Kang just have a problem with that or something deeper. 
 

I don’t think Kang will be the new big bad for the universe, either. I think he will be a one and done. If I had to hazard a guess I think Celestials and Eternals are going to be key going forward. But pure speculation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see what you're saying. While Kang does have the potential to be the new big bad, so did Baron Zemo. And Red Skull. And Arnim Zola etc etc

 

Maybe Kang has something to do with the fallout of using the Time Machine? Anything Quantum Realm related would therefore be Ant-Man centric. Pure guesswork for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's worth it alone for how good the Symbiotes look. Or at least I think they look good – it's always a flattering comparison when the only other Venom appearance in a movie was Spider-Man 3...

 

Everything else in the movie can be summarised with "well, okay then" but I wouldn't say it's bad. It's just not doing anything special and it's rather shallow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Maryokutai said:

It's worth it alone for how good the Symbiotes look. 

Everything else in the movie can be summarised with "well, okay then" but I wouldn't say it's bad. It's just not doing anything special and it's rather shallow. 

Considering Venom's 90's origins, that is quite apt for his film to reflect that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jennifer Walters:

 

body_3_5.jpg?interpolation=lanczos-norma

 

I suppose Jen's more about how she's written than how she looks so it's hard to say if the casting choice is good or not. She does not not look like her so that's a good sign at least.

 

In any case, She-Hulk's design will make or break this for me. Can really go either way at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...