Marvel Cinematic Universe

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
I did like that he appeared to be winning against Yelena - a pet peeve of mine is where different power levels are conflated. So the guy with Captain America powers should beat the unaugmented person, given both have very high levels of training too. But the group still kind of merges into each other power-wise. Guardian, Bucky, Walker - all have vaguely defined super robustness and strength. And Yelena almost might as well be. Ghost is the only one who seems markedly different
Netflix Defenders had this problem as well, with all of the characters having abilities related to punching people. The first Avengers movie actually did a good job spectating the cast, but it sounds like this movie doesn't have a hand that deft.

Funnily enough the Marvel movie with the most diverse range of powers is Eternals.
 
They have a difficult time depicting levels of superstrength onscreen. Comic Cap can knock out anyone that's unenhanced with a punch, from regular mooks to masterlevel heavyweight fighters, and Movie Cap is closer to Spiderman in terms of power delivery. Spiderman can hit a person like industrial machines can; he has to pull his punches or he'll kill the majority of folks he gets into conflict with. Thor and Superman and others at that level shouldn't even swat regular people without hurting them badly.

In the thunderbolts movie, the second Walker struck Yelena and she didn't immediately stop fighting, I was annoyed. I get that wouldn't make for a very fun fight scene, but it drains all tension from it. Sentry hit everyone, but he shouldn't even have slapped at Widow or Ghost, they're just talented people. At least the supersoldiers are shown to have posthuman durability, so he could smack them without spraying them all over their surroundings.
 
He says it sardonically and with cynicism. As if to not so much say "I was right" as to say "who are you to judge me."

Which is believable for a guy whose been beaten over the head about it repeatedly by society because he no longer expects to convince anybody.

EDIT: I presume this is what you're all talking about? Was the guy actually guilty? He says "it wasn't me" at the end. He appeared to be surrendering so does seem like he was wrong to kill the guy.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=WJ3Gf5V2B78
EDIT EDIT: Honestly, this clip makes the show look quite good.
First off, the show is complete shit, don't be tricked by several minute long clips.
Second, me calling the person unarmed would be incorrect in hindsight, considering how they were juiced on the Super Soldier Serum so their entire body was a weapon and almost anything they throw with enough force would most likely severely wound or kill an average person instantly, including the cinderblock in the video you posted.
Third, how Walker did next to nothing wrong: John Walker was given the mantle of Captain America by the Government which in itself is impossible to live up to both in universe and out so already he was doomed from the start having to fill such big shoes. But he does his best to fill those shoes and has his own equivalent of Bucky with Lemar, who has been with him since the two were in the military and in the series dies at the hands of the Flagsmashers, a ̶t̶e̶r̶r̶o̶r̶i̶s̶t̶ organization that the guy killed in the video was a part of, and was working alongside the person who killed Lemar not much earlier. Him throwing a cinderblock at Walker would have done a number if Walker didn't have the shield to destroy it, and only when cornered did he try to make a case before dying.

Now, we can make arguments about how vigilantism of this sort is more The Punisher's thing and probably not something you would want from someone taking the mantle of Captain America. At the same time, killing a single human being who was all in on a plan to murder a bunch of representatives of an International Organization full of important people is also not something that is deserving of ruining his entire fucking life over both in universe and out of it, especially when we had people like Iron Man and even the original Cap kill plenty of ̶t̶e̶r̶r̶o̶r̶i̶s̶t̶s.
 
The New Avengers all but says that killing the Flagsmasher single handedly ruined his fucking life and resulted in his wife divorcing him because he couldn't stop thinking about the events of the series. Dude got 3 Medals of Honor, something no human being in real life has gotten, and leapt on top of grenades to help people in the past in the line of duty, all of that is thrown out the window because he killed the unarmed terrorist.

Oh I'm sorry, according to Captain Wakanda, I shouldn't be calling them terrorists.
This gets a million times worse when you realize Captain Wakanda was introduced working for the VA and was trying to help Soldiers who were traumatized by the fighting.
 
Then I hate it. Society should not want him as an Avenger with that attitude, and he should not want to be an Avenger with that attitude.
Because he should have a more heroic attitude? Not critiquing as I can see the case for that. Just checking I understand you right.

And don't worry - I've been well-warned by this thread and I wont be seduced into watching it by a few good clips. I like the actor though, I'm sticking to that.

Netflix Defenders had this problem as well, with all of the characters having abilities related to punching people. The first Avengers movie actually did a good job spectating the cast, but it sounds like this movie doesn't have a hand that deft.
It does it better than Defenders, which I saw. My biggest issues with that were focused on Danny Rand and Luke Cage (separately). You see I was the person who liked Iron Fist S1 and thought the actor did a good job with the character. Yes, you always wondered who that person was well now you know. Frankly the contrast between him and Daredevil should have been even greater. They did a big set-piece corridor fight in both series. Daredevil's was him getting battered and battering back. Danny's was more about him never getting hit and wheeling around. Honestly I feel like he should have beaten Daredevil when they fought but the iron rule in fandoms is that when two popular characters meet neither should be clearly better than the other, else the fans get mad. But following on from that, Danny vs. Luke should be Luke never being able to land a blow on Danny. They made Luke weirdly super strong, wrenching up iron security barriers and such. More than any other he blended into other people's turf. Should be Jessica with the strength, Luke invulnerable, Danny untouchable and Daredevil a kind of too-stubborn-to-die brawler who is vital because he actually understands the streets and the criminals they face. But that's just me.

FWIW, I feel Thunderbolts handles it better than Defenders. It's just that several of them are all pretty much cut from the same cloth.

Original Captain America was probably the worst for powercreep in the original MCU movies. His fall out of the umpteenth floor window was pushing it for me even though they try to justify it by him falling on the shield which I understand absorbs energy. But him going toe to toe with Iron Man was too much.

It really should be Thor + Hulk at the top (and Thor should win, imo, due to smarts), Iron Man below that. Who can in turn beat Cap. Who can in turn beat Hawkeye and Widow. Then as movies go on, we can add in Strange, Wanda, Vision, Spiderman etc. in their appropriate places.

Funnily enough the Marvel movie with the most diverse range of powers is Eternals.
Funnily enough I can barely remember what any of their powers were, save for a guy could fly and shoot lasers and there was a youngish woman who was upset because she'd never grow up and do adult things which was weird because she looked like a teenager to me; and she could do illusions. Also Angelina Jolie had the power of... weapons? I don't know - the whole movie is a vague blur by this point.

Actually, now you've got me thinking I would say Guardians of the Galaxy is the worst for undefined and undifferentiated powers. I remember in the sequel Gamora picking up the gun from a space ship that was cubic metres of metal and hoisting it on her shoulders. So she's super strong now? None of it made sense.

They have a difficult time depicting levels of superstrength onscreen. Comic Cap can knock out anyone that's unenhanced with a punch, from regular mooks to masterlevel heavyweight fighters, and Movie Cap is closer to Spiderman in terms of power delivery. Spiderman can hit a person like industrial machines can; he has to pull his punches or he'll kill the majority of folks he gets into conflict with. Thor and Superman and others at that level shouldn't even swat regular people without hurting them badly.

In the thunderbolts movie, the second Walker struck Yelena and she didn't immediately stop fighting, I was annoyed. I get that wouldn't make for a very fun fight scene, but it drains all tension from it. Sentry hit everyone, but he shouldn't even have slapped at Widow or Ghost, they're just talented people. At least the supersoldiers are shown to have posthuman durability, so he could smack them without spraying them all over their surroundings.
I do think it's pretty clear that Yelena (does she even have a Superhero name? White Widow? Who is she supposed to be?) is getting her arse handed to her. She's a kind of best of the best normal so I'm okay with her going a little distance with Walker, so long as the power difference is clear. Florence Pugh sells it with some alarmed reactions to his advance and when she's using her tasers on him and he's powering through the shocks anyway, you get a bit of the Outclassed vibe I think you're talking about. Not as much as you want though, that's fair. I lacked any context for who he was supposed to be so I didn't have a feel for how powerful he's supposed to be. I figured he was Steve Rogers-lite.
 
Because he should have a more heroic attitude? Not critiquing as I can see the case for that. Just checking I understand you right.
I don't think he should feel differently, I think it makes sense in the context of the dumb shit the writers put him through. But the fact that that's his attitude makes him a terrible candidate for state sanctioned superheroism. At best it shows a lack of confidence and conviction to a sense of objective morality, and any action would be motivated purely by a desire to redeem himself in the eyes of the public. At worst, he has been given a reason to resent the people he's tasked with protecting, and an active willingness to disregard questions of morality and innocence -- which would only be reinforced by appointing him an Avenger, because it shows how capricious and insincere the people smearing him really are if they're willing to ruin his life one day and then ignore the very same transgression as soon as it suits them.

I don't know, I feel like I have more to say about it but I don't have time to sort it out right now.
 
It really should be Thor + Hulk at the top (and Thor should win, imo, due to smarts), Iron Man below that.
Hard disagree. Hulk's entire schtick is being an unstoppable rage monster with no upper bound on his abilities, and Thor is not a particularly intelligent fighter. I mean, sure he's a few IQ points above "Paleolithic rage-beast" but that shouldn't be enough to win the day- if it does, you get into the Superman/Captain Marvel problem of "why even have the other characters?" The tension between him being the strongest member of the team but the least controllable is what gives the Hulk his identity in Avengers. "Puny god."

I could see Hulk being taken down by Loki or Doctor Doom, characters who have considerable power but also brains as part of their portfolio, but not Thor.

Funnily enough I can barely remember what any of their powers were, save for a guy could fly and shoot lasers and there was a youngish woman who was upset because she'd never grow up and do adult things which was weird because she looked like a teenager to me; and she could do illusions. Also Angelina Jolie had the power of... weapons? I don't know - the whole movie is a vague blur by this point
While they never spelled it out, I assumed Thena's power was force field creation. With the exception of Ikaris (who's basically superman) the whole team had a single power you could sum up in one or two words. Druig: mind control, Sprite: illusions, Gilgamesh: strength, Kingo: energy projection, Makkari: speed, Sersi: inorganic transmutation, Phastos: technological insight, Ajak: healing. Grab any 5 of those and you have a decent low-level D&D party.
 
First off, the show is complete shit, don't be tricked by several minute long clips.
Second, me calling the person unarmed would be incorrect in hindsight, considering how they were juiced on the Super Soldier Serum so their entire body was a weapon and almost anything they throw with enough force would most likely severely wound or kill an average person instantly, including the cinderblock in the video you posted.
Third, how Walker did next to nothing wrong: John Walker was given the mantle of Captain America by the Government which in itself is impossible to live up to both in universe and out so already he was doomed from the start having to fill such big shoes. But he does his best to fill those shoes and has his own equivalent of Bucky with Lemar, who has been with him since the two were in the military and in the series dies at the hands of the Flagsmashers, a ̶t̶e̶r̶r̶o̶r̶i̶s̶t̶ organization that the guy killed in the video was a part of, and was working alongside the person who killed Lemar not much earlier. Him throwing a cinderblock at Walker would have done a number if Walker didn't have the shield to destroy it, and only when cornered did he try to make a case before dying.
I remember watching a video by a veteran who said that assuming that Walker was operating under military ROE, he did absolutely nothing wrong in this situation. The Flagsmashers, including the guy he killed, are all juiced up on the Serum which gives them the ability to kill a normal person with a single punch (as unfortunately demonstrated on Lemar like two minutes before this guy bit the dust) and thus would be considered permanently armed and extremely dangerous. He then went on a mild tangent about how due to this, any supersoldier would honestly probably be considered "kill on sight" in military operations since there's not really a way for most people to safely subdue or restrain them, could make for fun worldbuilding but I digress.

The vet pointed out how the guy also never gives an indication that he's surrendering- before he's pinned Walker knocks him down twice and both times he gets up and charges at Walker again, and even when he's pinned he doesn't put his hands above or behind his head in the universal signs of surrender, but in front of him in a defensive position where he could catch Walker's shield or limbs. He never verbally says that he surrenders, but instead just says that it wasn't him, which is a stalling tactic. He was trying to get Walker to pause so he could get away or make another attack. The guy was also in the middle of a bunch of civilians that he could have killed or taken hostage and had previously displayed a complete disregard for innocent lives by participating in a bombing attack that killed civilians just a few days before and by tossing around the concrete trash can with enough force to shatter it while fleeing down a public street. By pretty much any rules of engagement, the dude was not innocent, not surrendering, and was still an active, high-level threat to John and the civvies around him, meaning that John was justified in using lethal force to subdue him.

The optics of using Captain America's shield to do the deed is a whole other thing, but he did pretty much nothing to justify the less than honorable discharge he was slapped with and his life getting completely and utterly ruined for it.
 
Last edited:
The first Avengers movie actually did a good job spectating the cast
I still say two of the great miracles of the past thirty years of cinema is the Harry Potter cast having as few irl issues as they did and The Avengers working.
before The Avengers the idea that you could make a capeshit that expected you to see at least a few other capeshits was INSANE

tbh I didn't believe they would get as far as really doing a The Avengers
I also Fatpacks-ed up a brilliant take of "oh lol ANOTHER zombie IP? I mean, that Dawn of the Dead remake was okay and 28 Days Later but wtf a black and white comic? zombies are SO fucking done already! and that title is BEYOND lame 'walking dead' lol like literally the only non trademarked zombie title right there lmao good luck with that"
that was my mockery at the Atlanta con the comic had a big debut at
 
Making Walker a "bad guy" in the Falcon and Winter Soldier series was absolute Disney clownery at its finest.

Steve Rogers/Captain America: *has no problem killing Nazis and several terrorists throughout the entirety of the MCU*

Terrorist: *kills innocent people by the dozens or hundreds by blowing up buildings* *also murders Walker's comrade and best friend in cold blood*

Walker: *kills the terrorist because he won't stop killing*

Marvel: "John Walker is unworthy of Steve Rogers' shield, and everyone should dislike him."

Yeah? Well ...Fuck you too, Marvel.
 
Hard disagree. Hulk's entire schtick is being an unstoppable rage monster with no upper bound on his abilities, and Thor is not a particularly intelligent fighter. I mean, sure he's a few IQ points above "Paleolithic rage-beast" but that shouldn't be enough to win the day- if it does, you get into the Superman/Captain Marvel problem of "why even have the other characters?" The tension between him being the strongest member of the team but the least controllable is what gives the Hulk his identity in Avengers. "Puny god."
I'm not as into comics as some here but I thought one of the long-standing tropes in Marvel fandom was Thor and Hulk being rivals in power and the debate being who would win. The MCU seemed to play into this with the fight in the first Avengers movie and again in Ragnarok where they were evenly matched right up until the last moment where it seemed that Thor might win and Jeff Goldblum sabotaged him.

Hard disagree. Hulk's entire schtick is being an unstoppable rage monster with no upper bound on his abilities, and Thor is not a particularly intelligent fighter. I mean, sure he's a few IQ points above "Paleolithic rage-beast" but that shouldn't be enough to win the day- if it does, you get into the Superman/Captain Marvel problem of "why even have the other characters?" The tension between him being the strongest member of the team but the least controllable is what gives the Hulk his identity in Avengers. "Puny god."
I'm not as into comics as some here but I thought one of the long-standing tropes in Marvel fandom was Thor and Hulk being rivals in power and the debate being who would win. The MCU seemed to play into this with the fight in the first Avengers movie and again in Ragnarok where they were evenly matched right up until the last moment where it seemed that Thor might win and Jeff Goldblum sabotaged him.

The vet pointed out how the guy also never gives an indication that he's surrendering- before he's pinned Walker knocks him down twice and both times he gets up and charges at Walker again, and even when he's pinned he doesn't put his hands above or behind his head in the universal signs of surrender, but in front of him in a defensive position where he could catch Walker's shield or limbs. He never verbally says that he surrenders, but instead just says that it wasn't him, which is a stalling tactic. He was trying to get Walker to pause so he could get away or make another attack. The guy was also in the middle of a bunch of civilians that he could have killed or taken hostage and had previously displayed a complete disregard for innocent lives by participating in a bombing attack that killed civilians just a few days before and by tossing around the concrete trash can with enough force to shatter it while fleeing down a public street. By pretty much any rules of engagement, the dude was not innocent, not surrendering, and was still an active, high-level threat to John and the civvies around him, meaning that John was justified in using lethal force to subdue him.

The optics of using Captain America's shield to do the deed is a whole other thing, but he did pretty much nothing to justify the less than honorable discharge he was slapped with and his life getting completely and utterly ruined for it.
As you allude to at the end, the optics is another issue and I can totally see the media and political side playing out how it did. That photo of him standing with blood dripping from the shield would be as iconic as the famous "Saigon Execution" photo. And as a nice parallel, that photo used by the American media to portray the brutality in Vietnam is of a a man who had just murdered a police officer who, in a further parallel, was the close friend of the man who then executes him. (Or so the account goes). So as a telling of such a story it actually works quite well.

The question then becomes whether the narrative of the story takes Walker's side as someone unfairly blandished by the media, or takes the media and optics side of things. Which it appears to do.
 
Last edited:
I'm not as into comics as some here but I thought one of the long-standing tropes in Marvel fandom was Thor and Hulk being rivals in power and the debate being who would win.
It used to be for awhile. Eventually Hulk eclipsed Thor in many aspects and Thor lost alot of his esoteric powers via mjolnr or ended up losing mjolnir altogether. Then theres recent stories like Hulk going to biblical hell or Thor becoming the herald of galactus. I would say if you're just using the general versions i.e. Savage Hulk and Worthy Thor, the rivalries still present.
 
I would like for Walker to be a victim of fake news.
He kills a terrorist but it's caught on video and presented exactly like George Floyd's death and his life is ruined.
He could have a whole arc for multiple movies with this setup.
But for some reason, we're meant to see him as evil for killing that guy.
Meanwhile, Steve in the intro sequences to Age of Ultron, Cap 2 and Cap 3 is brutally murdering dudes left and right, sometimes unarmed, and the movie treats this as a fun positive thing.
When Walker did the same thing, they had different camera angles and ominous music, that's why it was bad.
i really like that he's a fan favorite now despite Marvel trying to make him a shitty character.
He has the hardest fight in the entire MCU.... against the writers.
 
They should have done the Jellicoe with him; write him so he might seem untoward at first, but eventually you're shown that he's a good guy, just uses different approaches from the original with different means to achieve what Steve would. Instead they have no idea what the fuck they're doing and it shows.
 
Doom going in for the chokeslam.

454529166_470515529225846_5089897040697491070_n.webp
 
They should have done the Jellicoe with him; write him so he might seem untoward at first, but eventually you're shown that he's a good guy, just uses different approaches from the original with different means to achieve what Steve would. Instead they have no idea what the fuck they're doing and it shows.
In fairness, I can't think of better marketing for Doomsday than doubling down on all the retardation and making these characters completely irredeemable and then telling us that Tony Stark is going to come back and smack the shit out of all of them.

The only reason I saw Thunderbolts was to watch awful characters get steamrolled by The Sentry. And it was the only good scene in the movie.
 
Back
Top Bottom