Does every villain have to be a massive joke now? Even Thanos in Endgame was extremely toned down from the version we saw in Infinity War. I expect Kang to suck too because what kind of world destroying conqueror gets easily defeated by literal ants?
They were smart to go with someone vastly different to Thanos to avoid the comparisons (and to actually bring him in properly before his second to last movie) but there's still a ways to go before Kang really feels like a threat.
He's a multiverse threat whose two known incarnations (He Who Remains and Quantum Kang) both got trashed in their first appearance. Contrast that with Thanos, who was never directly confronted, and proceeded to stomp a mudhole in team good guy's ass once he finally got off his throne and began taking care of business. You need your arc villain to be threatening, and having him job for a teenage girl is not how you do that. If the plot of Quantumania had been "fuck you, Kang wins, Ant family is trapped in the quantum realm forever" that would at least have established some stakes. As it is there's an arbitrarily large number of the same two-bit multiversal loser. Quelle horreur
That's the thing though, Kang is one of those annoying guys who always wins even if he loses. He Who Remains didn't give a shit about dying because he was sick of the job, so the sacred timeline branching wasn't his problem. Hell, Kang the Conquer may not even be dead according to this article which I suspected might be the case. He's too big of a name to be a one and done variant.
How does he keep getting worse? Holy fuck.
All the dumbfuck had to do was make a body horror madman with a stretched out face and a murderboner, not a retard with early 00's graphics.
BP2 definitely performed below expectations, but it makes bank because most of its ticket sales are from American theaters. So where movies like Strange MoM or Infinity War might make more globally, Black Panther makes more domestically and therefore less of the box office gets siphoned off before it goes back to Disney.
Funny you say this - in the comics all but the Avengers' individual archenemies and the various teams' (Avengers as a whole, the FF, the X-Men) arches outside some of Spidey's gallery are largely considered jokes and have been for a while now since 00s. People noted that Bendis in particular was responsible for this, his style of writing more than willing to shit on all but the top-tier threats in terms of visuals or powers or what-have-you. Because of this it's felt even more than usual Marvel villains and rogues' galleries as a whole tend to suffer in comparison to their DC counterparts outside the said archenemies. I mean, look at it this way. How many Cap, Iron Man, Thor villains can even comic geeks name off the bat compared to say Superman, Flash, or Wonder Woman villains much less Batman's? I can even suspect one can name more Justice League or Titans villains when pressed than Avengers or FF baddies.
Fuck it, I'll take the challenge. Without looking anything up I got:
variety.com
I absolutely loathe the fact that modern media likes to talk about muh mental health as if it's anyone's business, if you can't take the heat then get the rope.Cue the cope:
Jonathan Majors Confronts Those Terrible ‘Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania’ Reviews: ‘It Doesn’t Change How I See Myself’
“Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania” introduced Jonathan Majors into the Marvel Cinematic Universe as Kang the Conquerer, the franchise’s new Thanos-sized villain. While the actor received glo…
"Jonathan Majors Confronts Those Terrible ‘Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania’ Reviews: ‘It Doesn’t Change How I See Myself’
“Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania” introduced Jonathan Majors into the Marvel Cinematic Universe as Kang the Conquerer, the franchise’s new Thanos-sized villain. While the actor received glowing reviews for his quietly menacing Kang, “Quantumania” itself was widely panned. The film is one of the worst-reviewed Marvel films in history with a 48% on Rotten Tomatoes, which nearly matches the record-low “Eternals” score of 47%. The film’s Metacritic score also stands at a paltry 48. Majors joined IndieWire’s “Screen Talk” podcast this week and confronted “Quantumania’s” low critic scores.
“It doesn’t change how I see myself, period. It’s all data,” Majors said about bad reviews. “I’m a performance within a story. One thing I will say to my team as we’re leaving a premiere if they’re reading reviews, I’ll say, ‘How’s the movie doing?’ I try to clean my plate and take care of my part. The response is: ‘You’re straight. You’re good. They like you.’ And they tell me about the movie. Sometimes the movie is also on that level, and sometimes [it’s not].”
“It’s just people,” Majors added about film critics. “They have an opinion. You always have an opinion. I’m no fool. I know these are people writing it. These aren’t my Yale professors or my drama teachers. These are people who have kids and they have a perspective, they have a religious upbringing or a lack thereof. They live in this town, or they want to be seen in this way or don’t want to be seen in this way. I look at the aggregate and, ok, 47. But what does that 47 mean when you also got this amount of box office? What do these things mean? It’s information. I am in the know. I won’t play myself. If you are a critic on a level, I probably know you and understand your politics.”
I don't speak pseudo intellectual nigger so most of this sails over my head.
They have been since the moment they decided to open a Drawer and make the Infinity Stones a joke.
He's saying "lol rotten tomatoes" and counting his money.Cue the cope:
Jonathan Majors Confronts Those Terrible ‘Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania’ Reviews: ‘It Doesn’t Change How I See Myself’
“Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania” introduced Jonathan Majors into the Marvel Cinematic Universe as Kang the Conquerer, the franchise’s new Thanos-sized villain. While the actor received glo…
"Jonathan Majors Confronts Those Terrible ‘Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania’ Reviews: ‘It Doesn’t Change How I See Myself’
“Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania” introduced Jonathan Majors into the Marvel Cinematic Universe as Kang the Conquerer, the franchise’s new Thanos-sized villain. While the actor received glowing reviews for his quietly menacing Kang, “Quantumania” itself was widely panned. The film is one of the worst-reviewed Marvel films in history with a 48% on Rotten Tomatoes, which nearly matches the record-low “Eternals” score of 47%. The film’s Metacritic score also stands at a paltry 48. Majors joined IndieWire’s “Screen Talk” podcast this week and confronted “Quantumania’s” low critic scores.
“It doesn’t change how I see myself, period. It’s all data,” Majors said about bad reviews. “I’m a performance within a story. One thing I will say to my team as we’re leaving a premiere if they’re reading reviews, I’ll say, ‘How’s the movie doing?’ I try to clean my plate and take care of my part. The response is: ‘You’re straight. You’re good. They like you.’ And they tell me about the movie. Sometimes the movie is also on that level, and sometimes [it’s not].”
“It’s just people,” Majors added about film critics. “They have an opinion. You always have an opinion. I’m no fool. I know these are people writing it. These aren’t my Yale professors or my drama teachers. These are people who have kids and they have a perspective, they have a religious upbringing or a lack thereof. They live in this town, or they want to be seen in this way or don’t want to be seen in this way. I look at the aggregate and, ok, 47. But what does that 47 mean when you also got this amount of box office? What do these things mean? It’s information. I am in the know. I won’t play myself. If you are a critic on a level, I probably know you and understand your politics.”
I don't speak pseudo intellectual nigger so most of this sails over my head.