#( like nobody knew that the marvel character i wrote was actually a canon character but she was still. y'know. Marvel. ) | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

sineala · 3 years ago

Text

The gay Invaders

Hi, internet! Today I'd like to talk about one of the chronologically-first canonically-gay couples in Marvel Comics history: Brian Falsworth (the second Union Jack) and Roger Aubrey (The Destroyer). (I mean "chronological" in terms of in-universe timeline rather than RL publication date; I'm pretty sure Northstar is still the first to publication as far as unambiguously-gay Marvel heroes go.)

If you are a fan of reading or writing about Captain America being queer, you should care about Brian and Roger, because they were two of Steve's fellow Invaders in the 1940s, meaning that they are two of the people on the list of Steve's Old Gay Friends And Teammates, because, yeah, Steve sure had a lot of canonically gay friends during the war. Probably more than you'd think he would have had in the forties! (The other two are Percival Pinkerton, who's part of Nick Fury's Howling Commandos, and of course Steve's childhood friend Arnie Roth. Pinky is gay by word of Stan Lee, IIRC; Arnie was as canonically gay as DeMatteis could make him in the early 1980s, so they didn't say the word "gay" but it's really, really not subtle. Steve compares what Arnie feels for his "roommate" Michael to what Steve feels for his girlfriend Bernie. Yeah.)

I previously made a Tumblr post about Brian and Roger, rounding up some of the canonical evidence of their relationship, but that post is six years old now, and in the intervening years, Marvel has thoughtfully put the rest of the 70s Invaders run on Unlimited as well as the two Citizen V miniseries that star Roger and retcon his relationship with Brian as romantic. So I've read them now, and I've got panels.

Okay. I should probably begin by saying that Brian and Roger are not canonically gay in their first significant appearance together, which is in Invaders vol 1 #19 and #20, published in 1977. Roy Thomas does not seem to have intended them to be a couple, and they aren't canonically one in any of the original Invaders run. However, if you enjoy gay subtext, it's very nice.

This whole arc is the one that introduces Roger in modern canon. He's been brainwashed by the Nazis and the Invaders rescue him and get him back to his normal self. But in #19 we get his backstory in flashback, as related by Montgomery, Lord Falsworth (Brian's father; yes, MCU fans, the name should look familiar) and it turns out that Roger and Brian were basically best friends since childhood:

They were the dearest of friends!

Anyway, they both ended up captured by Nazis, they presumably changed their minds about appeasement as a policy, Brian got out and joined the Invaders, then they had to rescue the brainwashed Roger, and it's a fair amount of fun in a two-issue arc.

The subtext is even more prominent in Invaders #34, in which they find out that someone going by the Destroyer (which is Roger's codename) has been doing villainous deeds, and the Invaders worry that Roger's gotten himself brainwashed again. Brian immediately insists that it can't really be Roger because he knows Roger and Roger Would Never:

Unsurprisingly, Brian is right. It's not really Roger; Master Man is impersonating the Destroyer, and the villains have taken Roger captive, and the Invaders break him out and there is an extremely significant moment where it just so happens that Roger has to catch Brian, saving his life for a change, and they stare deeply into each other's eyes and Brian seems to be having difficulty finishing his sentences:

Some people who read this therefore concluded that Brian and Roger were extremely gay for each other. While ordinarily this sort of shipping is mostly confined to fandom, in this particular instance, one of the people who started shipping Brian/Roger was Fabian Nicieza, and Fabian Nicieza, as you probably know, writes comics for Marvel. I think you see where this is going.

However, first I must inform you that, sadly, Brian has been canonically dead for years. Captain America vol 1 #253-254 -- the two-parter about Baron Blood in the Stern/Byrne Cap run in the 80s -- establishes that Brian died in a car accident in 1953. (This is also the run where Joseph Chapman -- a friend of Jacqueline Falsworth's son Kenneth -- becomes the third (and current) Union Jack.)

(Roger then appears in a bunch of T-Bolts issues; I assume there's nothing interesting there on the gay front because I feel like someone would have told me. I should probably read more than three T-Bolts issues someday.)

So, anyway, in 2001, Fabian Nicieza wrote a miniseries called Citizen V and the V-Battalion. Roger, who is still superheroing as the Destroyer despite being pretty old by this point, is part of the titular V-Battalion, and he has a very prominent role in this miniseries. And in #1, we have the usual splash page of character backstory, and there's a very, um, interesting line there:

Regarding Brian and Roger's relationship, the narration informs us: "It sounds much gayer than it probably was."

This is interesting, obviously for a couple of reasons. One is that, up to this point in canon, as far as I can tell, literally nobody thought any of this sounded the slightest bit gay at all. (Other than, I guess, Fabian Nicieza.) The other reason is that, as we soon find out, it actually was as gay as it sounds. Thanks, Fabian!

In 2002, Nicieza wrote a second miniseries, Citizen V and the V-Battalion: The Everlasting. Issue #1 opens with a flashback set in 1953; specifically, we see Brian's funeral:

Roger is extremely sad, and when Lord Falsworth expresses his sympathy about the death of Roger's "friend" and saying that he knows how much this hurts him, Roger mutters under his breath that he doesn't have the slightest clue:

All is revealed on the next page, when one of the other characters tries to ask Roger about superhero business and Roger snaps at him because, as he says, "I just watched my friend die in my arms."

Except "friend" isn't the word he starts to say:

Yep. That would be "lover." So Roger nearly outs himself. So, yes, now it's absolutely canon. Hooray.

Later on in the issue, which is set in the present day, we have a couple pages of Roger staring at pictures of the two of them and continuing to be sad:

Yeah. They were a couple.

So the question you -- being a Captain America fan -- might ask yourself is, okay, did/does Steve know about any of this? (The reason I started looking all this up was because I wanted to know if Steve knew.) I don't know if we have a panel of Roger specifically admitting any of this to Steve (and if we do, I would like to know about it), but I would be comfortable saying that Steve probably knew back then -- because, well, he seems like the kind of guy who would actually have been fine with it in the 40s, what with all his gay friends -- and also that I can't think of a reason why he wouldn't know now. Because he's definitely worked with Roger again in fairly recent comics, and also Roger is very much out, these days.

In fact, New Invaders #4 (2004) opens with Roger attending Pride:

So, yeah, he's out.

(Then he has to fight, as far as I can tell, homophobic Nazi vampires. They're yelling slurs in German. Great.)

In All-New Invaders #10, which is from 2014 (and which is not the same series as New Invaders), Roger shows up to help out the Invaders, and in passing, he just happens to mention to another character (Joseph Chapman, the current Union Jack), that he is in fact gay:

He and Joseph don't really like each other much; as far as I can tell, their acquaintance in New Invaders consists of Joseph being vaguely homophobic and Roger being bitter about him being Union Jack because he actually wanted to be Union Jack himself to honor Brian's memory -- you know, that thing superheroes sometimes like to do to honor their dead superhero significant others, viz. Hank when Jan was dead after Secret Invasion -- and now Union Jack is this annoying kid and not, y'know, the love of his life. This exchange from New Invaders #4 seems pretty representative of their relationship:

Anyway, yeah, he's pretty obviously out.

Steve isn't actually present for this conversation in All-New Invaders, but he mentions in a later issue of this run that he knows what Roger and his pals have been up to, plot-wise, so I feel comfortable assuming that he's talked to Roger at some point in the previous ten years or so, and therefore, since Roger is completely out at this point in canon, there's no reason Steve shouldn't know now.

On an unrelated note, it's also a fun issue if you're a Steve/Tony fan because this is clearly running in parallel with Hickman's Avengers run, which means that he spends half a page telling Namor that he's mad at him and the rest of the Illuminati (but mostly mad at Tony because... he's just obsessed with Tony in this run, I guess?) about the mindwipe:

This is the sum total of my knowledge about Brian and Roger. No, wait, I know one more thing, which is that Brian was a character in the late, lamented mobile game Avengers Academy, in which he was also actually gay; Roger does not seem to have been there. There's a CBR article that you can read about the whole thing, which mentions some of these details from the comics in passing. (I have no idea why it says that their relationship was alluded to in the Stern/Byrne run; unless I missed something big, the only thing those issues do is establish Brian's death. As far as I can tell, no one is gay in them.)

So, yeah, that's Brian Falsworth and Roger Aubrey, the two gay Invaders. Steve sure has a lot of gay friends.

#posts i actually wrote

60 notes · View notes

uthseikoashx-inflamedme · 4 years ago

Text

What I would love to see in the next Fantastic Beasts movies

(as always, sorry for the mistakes and for my poor english, I’m not a native speaker, etc! I will continue to correct it)

If you already read other posts I wrote, you know that I’m into plans and organised texts. So here we go again.

Just to be clear:

it's neither a request, nor what I think we should or need to see, and I won't be mad if we don't have the following scenes it in the next films. (I do have an opinion on what can be interessing to include in the movies, but again, it's my opinion! just ideas, and a lot of questions without answers also, etc) (and well it’s not groundbreaking but who cares)

About Newt and his friends

About Albus Dumbledore and Gellert Grindelwald

About the Summer of 1899

About the other characters

About the Wizarding Society, Muggle world, etc

Some explanations we would like to have

1. About Newt and his friends

- Newt as a selfless and intrepid hero who loves all of the magic creatures

- To be honest, all the team as dauntless and loveable heroes and heroins facing bad guys (and Jacob - who’s already the kindest and smoothest man - being also incredibly brave)

- Newt and Tina, as a couple, loving each other, fighting together, having each other back, growing stronger and more confident with each other (like they’re fighting and are in symbiosis) (in the last film obviously)

- Queenie Goldstein as a powerful witch while she explains why she joined Grindelwald’s side - because she believes Ministry is going to do nothing for her, because she believes in a brighter future without the Statute

- (At least) some clues about Nagini’s and Riddle’s meeting

- Credence’s true family? And because his past is quite tragic and he’d already gone through awful experiences, maybe his happy end?

- Theseus not knowing how to act after Leta’s death: should he follow blindly the Ministry? Trust Dumbledore, his brother and the rest of the team?

- A character eventually agreeing with some of Grindelwald’s ideas about magic things which shouldn’t be hide and stuff, but fighting against him anyway (well, most likely Queenie)

2. About Albus Dumbledore and (or) Gellert Grindelwald

- Albus Dumbledore as the charismatic, incredibly marvellous and skilled wizard he is, while people around him are impress by his aura: imagine Albus walking in the Ministry, and people who are supposed to protect the whole country are amazed, even scared: he’s stunning, blazing with power (and with cold fury, because the Ministry obviously did something stupid and Dumbledore is mad at them)

(at this point, we finally understand why he is the most powerful, skilled, prodigious, dazzling wizard of his age)¹

- Albus with colourful and amazing clothes

- Albus facing his Boggart (which is supposed to be Ariana’s corpse, but well, who knows)²

- Gellert Grindelwald facing his Boggart (what could it be?) (ok, I’m just curious here)

- The backstory of the Deluminator: why and when Albus developed this magical device? Did he always used it to have fun with light, or was it initially a more personal object? Had Albus created the Deluminator to find Gellert Grindelwald to fight him, at the end?

- A funny and arrogant (and bitter?) Dumbledore’s rejoinder, while he’s conscious of his marvellous mind and skills (like in the books)

- Dumbledore’s reaction when he discovers who is the actual Master of Elder Wand (again, i’m curious)

- Are Grindelwald’s mismatched eyes™ a sign of something important about his past, his abilities? is his hair white - and not anymore blond - because of Dark magic?

- A moment when we see how Dumbledore is able to manipulate surrounding people, including allies and friends

- A heartbreaking and breathtaking dialogue in 1945, while they fight against each other - and I wonder if - how - they are going to talk about their past, shared ambition and dreams, sentiments, guilt, regrets, etc

3. About the Summer of 1899

- To be honest, it’s mostly: Albus and Gellert as remarkable, arrogant, impish, brillant and not wise at all young wizards in a flashback of 1899

passionate discussions about the Hallows, politics, the Statute, or complex magic things

wandless magic, non-verbal spells, forbidden and dangerous rituals³

Albus’ reactions while Gellert has his visions (was he already able to control his Seer’s abilities?)

how they have fun (common sense of humour, a bit bitter and jeering one most likely?)

And thanks those very quick scenes, we understand why Albus and Gellert fell in love with each other - they both were a freedom symbol for the other in a way, all what they always desired and dreamed of - and their common ambition elevated them, made them wanted a bright and glorious future

(ok, too much to show, yes, i know)

- Also, an already dangerous and extreme Gellert and an in-denial Albus (about the Inferi army, etc)

- A glimpse of the relationship between Abelforth and Ariana, between Albus and his family, and between Gellert and Albus’ siblings

(edit: and yeah i forgot, a kiss or something - an act only did by lovers and not best friends, because there are still people believing they are friends - and their relationship is technically still not canon?)

4. About the other characters

- Adult Abelforth, loathing his brother, suffuring

- Tom Riddle at Hogwarts, possibly facing Dumbledore, or as a young charismatic awful future Dark wizard, or acting like he’s jealous of Grindelwald’s influence and like he already wants to surpass him

(it could be great to see him, at least few seconds, to build the bridge between FB and HP and most importantly to have a more detailed vision of Wizarding modern History, you know what i mean?)

- Ministry people who do not like Dumbledore because it’s funny

- A character who’s scared by the war and finally who gives up, and who runs away to try to be as far as possible from the political troubles

(it would show how war is an ordeal - I do not have the impression that the pressure and all were something so exposed in HP books, it could be great to see it?)⁴

- Minerva McGonagall, Alastor Moody, Cornelius Fudge, etc, being young - if they are already born in 1945? It’s not written anywhere so idk

- edit: I forgot Hagrid, it could be awesome to see him as a teen in the last movie during the events of the Chamber of Secrets’ first opening!

5. About the Wizarding Society, Muggle world, ect

- The consequences of Grindelwald’s actions around the wizarding world and in the Muggle world: how things are destroyed, how he influences the governments

- The influence of rich and conservative pure-blood families through the war: how several of the sacred-28 families supported Grindelwald, how they influenced the whole magic society, why their inaction killed people, how the Ministry is corrupted, why it didn’t really change, even after the end of the war⁵

- The same conservative influence but in the very heart of character’s life: how Nagini is marginalized, for example⁶

- Why not political opinions expressed by several characters, to show how politics is a delicate and intricate subject, and why neither Albus Dumbledore nor Gellert Grindelwald are all white / all black, how Grindelwald gain influence, etc

6. Some explanation we would like to have

- Why is Albus Dumbledore DADA teacher? We know he wrote articles in Transfiguration Today before graduating, so why teaching DADA? (guilt, will to help young people to not be tempted by Dark magic and power like he was, or was there simply already a Transfiguration teacher?)(should I mention it’s never said in the HP books?)

- When and why will Albus be the Transfiguration teacher? (edit: we have clues in FBtCoG because Travers says Albus is not going to be allowed to teach DADA anymore so I guess it explains it)

- How can Minerva McGonagall be at Hogwarts, already be a young woman - if I remember well, she’s not even born? Or extremely young?

- How Gellert Grindelwald summoned a phoenix - and more likely, let’s theorize, how might he summon and control Fawkes?

(because Credence can’t be a Dumbledore - or at least, can’t be directly related to Albus, Ariana, Kendra and Percival - or is he the illegitimate and secrete son of Abelforth? a cousin of Albus?

but if we consider Credence is not a Dumbledore, Gridelwald had been able to control a phoenix which is linked to thhe Dumbledores, right? is it thanks the blood pact? of because of Credence’s Obscurus? we don’t know

edit: or there is the theory about Credence being created by the philosopher’s stone I guess, so with Ariana’s Obscurial and most likely Albus’ blood)

- Why nobody knew that Grindelwald and Dumbledore met each other when they were teenagers, when Rita Skeeter published Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore in 1998?

(i’m not so angry, i’m mostly confused)

The Ministry knew Albus met Gellet Grindelwald in 1899, right? How can a that huge information be a secret during decades? Why Rita Skeeter only found it after Dumbledore’s death? Albus said they used to be “closer than brothers”: after that and because Travers doubted of Dumbledore’s true side, Albus had been restricted and watched by the Ministry during FBCoG. It should exist papers, files, archives which confirmed all of this. So why everybody forgot that Gellert and Albus knew each other when they were young?

- Or about Albus’ and Gellert’s former close relationship, didn’t Travers or Theseus understand they were lovers? Or if they understood, they - again - didn’t tell it? (Travers is not fond of Dumbledore, it could have been a scandal, why he didn’t say it?) Can all of that make any sense?

- Why isn’t the Blood Pact ever mentioned in Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore - or most likely, how everybody (Albus; Gellert; Newt and Newt’s friends; the Minstry; Grindelwald’s acolytes, etc) had succeed to hide it from the press and the whole magic society?

That’s already a lot so let’s stop here Half of it is not so deep but I’m a simple girl, I’m always here for characters’ and background’s (lore?) development I will be pleased to hear what are your own wishes also

Notes:

¹ : certainly one of the thing i would the most like to see in the next movies, which is also something very important in the FB and HP universe - i have the feeling his power, skills, etc are more an idea than a reality. (and i indeed used a thesaurus to describe him)

² : Boggarts, Albus’ Boggart, how - in Albus’ situation - it mirrors his Erised reflect and how it might show important elements about him is a subject i really want to broach, i already planned it, it may be great to talk about it i think?

³ : talking about forbidden rituals, i talked here about the Blood Pact and why i think it was illegal, Dark, etc :

Why Albus didn’t tell Ministry employees about the Blood Pact

⁴ : to be fair, there are elements which are reminders of the pressure of the war in the book, especially in OotP and DH, but the Golden Trio did not experienced the war like the common people did, and the story - even very short - of someone who was scared is something i will be pleased to discover

⁵ : well, i talked a bit about pure-blood conservative families, their power and their influence in two posts:

How can everyone find their true-love and still be in love after years in HP? (”magic-soulmates” theory and conservative society)

Why are the Weasleys poor? (eng&fr) (theories about pure-blood families, inheritance, etc)

(it’s theories, but it can explain my point of view - headcanons? - about those families and the Wizarding Society)

⁶ : again, check the two posts if you are interested!

Thanks for reading!

I again apologize for the mistakes - and there might be incorrect informations, even if I hope there are not

43 notes · View notes

iron--spider · 6 years ago

Photo

Worried that Tony Stark is going to die in Avengers: Endgame? Do you want proof that he logically shouldn’t and the citations needed to die on that hill in the event that the powers that be do the unthinkable? Well step right up, fans and friends, because @whimsicalethnographies and I have compiled everything you might need, from canon quotes to future promotional appearances, that prove Tony Stark is not destined to die, and if they do kill him, they are ignoring the path that they laid out themselves and are thus causing his character arc to fail.

Here we go:

Canon evidence

“Don’t waste your life, Stark”

“A man with everything and nothing”

Both of these quotes are referencing family. Yinsen was referring to his own loving family, and Tony revealed that he didn’t have one (of course it’s hinted that this is Pepper—she’s supposedly his frantic text when they’re first attacked—but he doesn’t explicitly have it or her yet). Yinsen’s sacrifice was not for Tony to become Iron Man. It was for Tony to have a life, to have a family. What he didn’t have in the beginning and what he wanted to stay alive for. Tony ultimately fulfilling Yinsen’s true wish for him to stop isolating himself and make a family would be the most satisfying way for Tony’s story to end.

Yinsen is able to die peacefully because he has family that has already passed, and he wants to see them again. There is no way Marvel can properly parallel this because Tony’s family (the ones he genuinely loves anyway, other than his mother) are still alive, or still in the future (his children). If he dies he will leave everyone behind. The love of his life will still be here, and he’ll never be able to have children. If Pepper is pregnant, this is even worse. He will have a child, as he wanted to do, as he was looking forward to doing, but he will never meet it. This is especially cruel.

This would be a gross subversion of Yinsen, and ruin any meaning the character actually had in Tony’s life. He wanted him to be more, to have more, and to Yinsen, more was a family who was waiting for him.

In IM3, a little boy in a restaurant ominously whispers, “How did you get out of the wormhole?” It’s heavily implied that that line is entirely in Tony’s head as he’s descending into a panic attack and represents his fear of the unknown, and his fear of how he’ll handle the unknown, essentially finding the man behind the Mandarin mask who is coming after the people he loves AND fear of what he’ll do if he doesn’t have his armor to protect him. He obsessively spent a year(ish) building suits (of questionable quality) to keep that unknown away. By the end, he’s faced *that* fear, the fear of who he is without the suits. His anxiety/PTSD shifts from that point to Thanos himself, but he doesn’t yet have a face or an actual explanation until Infinity War, even though the magnitude of it is ramped up in Ultron by Scarlet Witch using the power of the Mind Stone. This is the start of facing an unknown, and if it follows the narrative comparison, coming out on the other side victorious, better, and stronger as a person. Rising above and moving on, not dying in the process, continuing to carry the self-inflicted weight of the entire universe.

“A famous man once said, ‘we create our own demons.’” Dying when he comes into contact with and defeats his true demon—“my only curse is you”—is not giving Tony his good ending.

An article on Iron Man 3, arguably the most important movie in Tony’s arc https://filmschoolrejects.com/finding-the-place-of-iron-man-3-in-the-marvel-cinematic-universe/

“Tony is defined by his desire to set arms down and leave war behind; Steve is defined by his inability to do the same”

“If Marvel really wants to give Tony the ending he deserves, they’ll let him live. Fans will continue to push their predictions down the pipleline until they eventually come true, but the arc laid out for Tony, starting in Iron Man 3, is clear. He needs to let go, but he can’t. The conclusion of Tony Stark’s arc isn’t death; it’s learning to pass responsibility on not to an army of robots, but to the people he trusts. After ten years, Tony Stark deserves his time in the sun.”

Tony’s PTSD - it would be a punch in the face to those of us with anxiety/PTSD/OCD who identify with him. He's got one of the most realistic portrayals of mental illness in film, and the powers that be acknowledge that, and it would SUCK for a company like Marvel to rip it all away when he's almost to the point of letting go of the responsibility he's carried—rightly or wrongly, because Thanos would still be collecting those stones even if Tony had never been in that cave—since the beginning of his story. Dying? That's not letting go. That's saying "sorry you went through all this, it sucks and then you die, because it really was all YOUR responsibility and you have to suffer to fix it."

In Ultron, Helen Cho says Tony’s “bulky metal suits will be left in the dust”. Tony says that’s “exactly the plan”. He wants to retire. He wants to be able to stop being Iron Man so he can live his life.

“Isn’t that why we fight? So we can end the fight and go home?” Tony in Ultron. None of this has ever been continuous for Tony. He’s consistently been heading towards his future goals and fighting when he has to—he gets derailed because he feels it’s his duty to step back in. He does not seek out the fights, and he doesn’t necessarily want to be a part of them. He wants to make his life and that’s where his narrative is heading. If it doesn’t make it there, it fails. He fails.

“Maybe I should take a page out of Barton’s book. Build Pepper a farm, hope nobody blows it up.” “The simple life.” “You’ll get there one day. “I don’t know. Family, stability...the guy who wanted all that went into the ice 75 years ago. I think someone else came out.” End of Ultron conversation with Steve. Tony wants to settle down, buy a farm for Pepper (representing retirement and the start of his family). He is the one, out of himself and Steve, that is actively seeking to “tap out” of the fighting life so he can be with Pepper, and start a family. Steve says “I’m home” when he hears the soldiers chanting.

Wedding conversations in Civil War, Homecoming and Infinity War. The amount of mentions this has is huge. It would be a major hanging thread if it never happens.

The original plan was for Pepper to be pregnant during CW, however this was changed to put Tony in a darker place. They are going for Dad-Tony eventually, and that wasn’t conducive with where he was in CW. Yet.

Happy has been carrying “that thing” since 2008. Would they really do that to Happy/Jon Favreau, perhaps the other father of the MCU as he directed Iron Man—have him carry the ring for 10 goddamn years just to cut that storyline off with no resolution? Happy deserves to see this man-child he’s chased around forever get married and settle down.

Specifically, “Wong, you’re invited to my wedding.” It would be a terrible subversion if instead he goes to his funeral.

And per the writers (who also wrote the CA movies),

Markus: Things always shift in the writing, but I think we all knew where it was going and it was a matter of how best to get there so that it feels most satisfying or most earned. What was that adjustment process like? How much did the script have to change from when you were breaking it in 2015 to when they went to film it? Were there big things that you had to account for that you just hadn't had any idea about? Markus: Because of the other movies? No. I don't think there was anything massive that we had to change gears for. There were things that became better because of the value that the other movie had acquired. https://www.etonline.com/how-the-avengers-endgame-writers-arrived-at-the-most-satisfying-ending-possible-exclusive-123477 That would be an absolutely collosal shift to wipe it away entirely

The baby conversation in Infinity War. Why set all this up so blatantly if they weren’t going to use it? For a cheap emotional rug pull? Tony wants children, not just another set of his genes in the world.

And Pepper’s response; she doesn’t want children if he’s still Iron Man, for fear that he’ll be distracted, or something worse. If she’s going to have a kid with him, she wants him there. If the point was simply a baby, not a baby AND Tony, this is pointless exposition. Also, Pepper has thought Tony was dead at least four times: IM1, Avengers, IM3 and IW. Would they really make her watch it happen for real after that? Rob her of her family and make her worst fear come true, right in front of her eyes?

Tony as Odysseus - A lot of us—who've watched and identified with this character—realize that this is an Odyssey, not a Tragedy. Odysseus makes all kinds of mistakes while trying to get home, but he gets there, after 10 years. And then,

“As for yourself, death shall come to you from the sea, and your life shall ebb away very gently when you are full of years and peace of mind, and your people shall bless you. All that I have said will come true.” He makes it home. He got super lucky a lot of times, but he made it home, to his family. He found his everything.

“You’re a hard man, Odysseus. Your fighting spirit’s stronger than ours, your stamina never fails. You must be made if iron head to foot.”

Alternate translation- “You’re a hard man, Odysseus, stronger/ Than other men, and you never wear out, / A real iron-man.” (both quotes taken from starkravinghazelnuts, http://starkravinghazelnuts.tumblr.com/post/181064173168/so-i-did-more-research-about-tony-steve-and-thor)

Promotional

https://www.themeparkinsider.com/flume/201812/6461/ Tony Stark is heading up a new rollout in Disneyland parks. Speaks for itself, they’re making Tony have a very strong presence in the parks. Disney is for kids, kids love Iron Man, and they will be aware of his death and reminded of it when they see him and Stark Industries everywhere on their family vacation. Longtime fans will also have to deal with this. If they were actually going to kill him, why would they make his presence in the future of these parks so big?

“In California and Paris, Tony Stark is retrofitting two of his father’s Stark Industries sites into new hubs for training and innovation. Through partnerships with S.H.I.E.L.D., Pym Technologies, Masters of the Mystic Arts and the new Worldwide Engineering Brigade, The Avengers and their allies will forge new global campuses to champion the next generation of heroes.” We know Hank Pym hates the Starks because he feels Howard betrayed him by trying to replicate the Pym Particle. As Scott says, “Hank Pym always said you could never trust a Stark.” How does this work, unless there is something forward that allows them to establish a better relationship? This can’t be retrofitted to anything before a potential Endgame end.

https://youtu.be/0tW77VFKQC0 https://youtu.be/EVIu43xSeYY In the Ant-Man and the Wasp ride, they collaborate with Tony/Iron Man in their ride mission. You see him, they speak to him, and it seems like a new storyline. It connects to the Iron Man Experience’s storyline, the ride they already had there in Hong Kong.

https://www.playstation.com/en-us/games/marvels-iron-man-vr-ps4/ upcoming Iron Man VR game. It would be very morbid playing this game, from Tony’s POV, if Tony is dead.

That giant Iron Man statue for Endgame in Hong Kong (https://www.timeout.com/hong-kong/news/a-giant-4-5m-iron-man-installation-and-life-sized-avengers-have-taken-over-hysan-place-041219). Imagine coming across that thing if you just saw him die. It’s staying up until May 13th. Do they want it looking like a place of mourning? A monument with flowers and notes? Shit, that’s a spoiler in itself that I don’t think they want. It would also be incredibly depressing.

https://www.tmz.com/2018/01/12/avengers-4-wrap-party-cake-drops-clues/ Endgame wrap party cake. If Tony died, he would be on this thing. It wouldn’t even be considered a spoiler because Iron Man is literally the face of the MCU, so people wouldn’t look twice at it. But his absence does say something—that they didn’t think they needed to pay tribute to him here, because he is still around to pay tribute to later, if need be. This cake is implying different characters are in peril, with certain hands shooting up out of the ground. But Iron Man is only represented with his logo on the bottom, as are all the rest of the heroes. If he died, he’d be the centerpiece. More on this theory by starkravinghazelnuts http://starkravinghazelnuts.tumblr.com/post/180160474003/the-cake-theory-proposes-that-cap-nat-and-bruce

Cast quotes regarding Endgame

Gwyneth - (on a picture of her and RDJ) “you know I will be this guy’s Pepper any time he needs me” why would she say this if he’s dead? If he was dead and she didn’t want to spoil, she didn’t need to say anything at all.

And this wasn’t a one-off referring to playing opposite him, she was referring to Tony/Pepper, after an interview in which she said she was probably done, but would come back for a day if they wanted her.

Gwyneth again - https://www.etonline.com/how-the-avengers-endgame-writers-arrived-at-the-most-satisfying-ending-possible-exclusive-123477 “Pepper and Tony have had a real long journey together. She obviously starts as his dutiful assistant, and then the relationship evolves, and now this decade later they're married, and they have a child. Their relationship has evolved in all of the ways that great romances evolve.” Now, I always saw this as—Gwyneth was done filming when this quote was given. She was aware of the end of her character’s journey, so this is obviously something that happens at the END chronologically. Why would she reference something smack dab in the middle of the film, especially if it was just going to be erased by time travel/quantum realm shenanigans? She’s also wearing an engagement ring and a wedding band in some interview photos where she’s in costume. Plus, possible/probable spoilers…….Pepper is going to be suiting up as Rescue, which really knocks off the possibility of a mid-movie child for Pepper and Tony. It would be completely against her character to suit up and leave a kid behind, considering how much flack she gave Tony for his suits before, and how her hesitation to have a child hinged on Tony re-inserting his arc reactor. Plus, on a more emotional note, Gwyneth refers to Tony/Pepper as a great romance, and it is. But I feel like she and Robert combined would not be happy at all if the writers were to destroy this great romance by killing one of its members. That way it falls flat, it never finishes, it doesn’t get its rightful end. I feel like she and RDJ (who has significant sway over what happens to Tony) would argue against this happening. This is a great romance, and those end in happily ever afters. This isn’t West Side Story. This is a Disney movie.

Evans - https://youtu.be/bH0frwdtmXM (when asked to describe the movie in one word on GMA) “Satisfying. It’s like TV shows, the final finale—how many times do they stick the landing? How many times do you walk away saying that went exactly how I wanted it to go? This movie—I think they deliver, I think they really do stick the landing in terms of, you know—addressing the arcs and really finding a completion.” I think this definitely speaks for itself. The arcs are important and we know what they are. One of our main concerns is them tossing out the true endings to these arcs for cheap, cruel emotional shocks. If Chris says specifically that the arcs are addressed, then we know what that SHOULD mean for each character. Plus, saying “that went exactly how I wanted it to go”? I don’t believe any genuine fans want deaths. Especially fans with children. People who genuinely care about these characters want to see them succeed and live to reap the rewards. So saying it went “exactly as I wanted it to go” and that they “stick the landing” bodes well for things ending up nicely for our heroes. Nothing in his speech here screams death.

Hemsworth - https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/a27110673/avengers-endgame-chris-hemsworth-interview/ also uses the word cathartic. Nothing about Tony dying would be cathartic. It would be sickening and depressing and we wouldn’t get anything out of it.

Taika Waititi https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/1082838/Avengers-Endgame-Korg-Taika-Waititi-Thor-Ragnarok-Avengers-Infinity-War-MCU-Marvel “They keep their cards so close to their chests, but from what I’ve heard, it wraps up everything in a really great way." “It feels like the fans are getting rewarded for hanging around for 10 years and watching all these films.” “Because the more you know about the characters and the stories and stuff, the more satisfying this film will be.” These feel particularly important. A reward would not be killing the biggest character in the MCU. And he mentions the fact that really knowing the characters makes everything more satisfying. We all know where Tony is heading, and what he wants. These quotes particularly point to Tony surviving, and maybe everyone surviving.

Scarlett - https://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/scarlett-johansson-calls-avengers-endgame-beautiful-valentine-decade-madness/ “a beautiful valentine to a decade of madness” Not ‘my bloody valentine’. A gift full of love for the people that have been here for ten years watching these characters grow.

RDJ - https://twitter.com/our_rdj/status/1118891286763798528?s=21 https://twitter.com/caplovesfondue/status/1118764023397249024?s=21 https://twitter.com/MCU_Direct/status/1119043210553249792 “I guarantee you that this will pay off. This Avengers Endgame, I’ve said it before, is our finest hour.” “The last eight minutes of that movie are maybe the best eight minutes in the entire history of the whole run of them, in a way. Because everyone’s involved. So I was delighted.” Both of these quotes, from the man himself, the man who loves Tony Stark with his entire being, do not feel like a Tony death at all. Because if we know Tony, we know what a payoff for him is. It’s getting the life, the family he’s been fighting for since the beginning. And as for the second one, logically, eight minutes does not feel like enough time to send Tony off in an out-of-left-field death. And I think our final battle will be longer than eight minutes. So I personally believe he’s referring to the wedding. He loves Tony/Pepper enough to hold their wedding in extremely high regard. He’s always delighted with Tony’s happiness and Tony advancing in his journey, especially with Pepper by his side.

“Cathartic” - https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/herocomplex/la-et-hc-avengers-endgame-press-conference-20190407-story.html said by the Russos at the press conference

“Satisfying” - https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/a27110673/avengers-endgame-chris-hemsworth-interview/ , https://www.etonline.com/how-the-avengers-endgame-writers-arrived-at-the-most-satisfying-ending-possible-exclusive-123477

“Earned” https://www.etonline.com/how-the-avengers-endgame-writers-arrived-at-the-most-satisfying-ending-possible-exclusive-123477 When you think about Tony, you do not think his death is earned at this stage, because so much is left hanging that his story has been calling for since moment one. What would be “earned” for Tony is him marrying Pepper. He has more than earned that. She has earned this wedding, too.

Misc (POTENTIAL SPOILERS)

Tony has sacrificed over and over and over again, in almost every movie we see him in. Doing it in Endgame would be a rehash of the same storyline, and sacrifice is not something Tony has to learn. He already knows how, he’s already willing. He needs to learn how to live. Bringing him to that realization at the end of it all would be the most appropriate route to take.

Iron Man 1 - he implores Pepper to hit the button, even though she tells him, “but you’ll die.”

Iron Man 2 - while it could be said he would be killed by the presence of the reactor itself, JARVIS explicitly says the use of the suit is accelerating the palladium poisoning that is killing him. Tony doesn’t stop. Part of this could be attributed to his reckless end-of-life attitude, but it’s clear from the Senate hearing—he wouldn’t have stopped

The new element is obviously something in itself. While the IM2 novel called it vibranium, this was retconned in CA, and then set up for more in Captain Marvel when it was revealed the project involving the Tesseract was called Project Pegasus, first called that when Fury dropped off Howard’s things at Tony’s mansion. Tony withstood the power of the Mind stone in A1 with the arc reactor, and then again in IW when Thanos unleashed the power of the Power stone on him and the suit merely blocked it. The suit is literally powered by the Space stone, much like Carol is, and for IM2-IM3, the Space stone literally powers Tony, which is more than you can say for a Mad Titan. Even Hulk doesn’t have the power of the Space stone behind him. You don’t hang a gun on the wall unless you plan on firing it later.

Also tied into IM2 - “if you could make a god bleed” … Tony is the only one to actually injure Thanos.

Avengers - Tony lays down on the wire. The arc set up by Steve’s comment is fulfilled when he flies the nuke through the wormhole. He knew it would probably kill him, which is why he tried to call Pepper.

Iron Man 3 - he sends his suit to Pepper first, when the “Mandarin” comes for him. Then in a deleted scene, he removes his arc reactor to save Harley’s bully, and nearly dies before Harley puts it back

Age of Ultron - Tony, despite wishing to go home and buy Pepper her farm, is willing to stay with Thor on the flying rock, even though he knows he could die, it’s his responsibility to fix this.

Civil War - this is a bit of subversion, as Tony is in a dark place and never needs to sacrifice his life. But as we saw in IM3, Tony IS Iron Man. And he’s willing to turn over power of Iron Man, which he wasn’t in IM2, to a higher power. He’s willing to give up his autonomy to keep the rest of the team out of jail and assuage his guilt (he’s starting to see the repercussions of bearing it all on his own). We can have discussions about who was right about which part, but Tony was willing to sacrifice a big part of himself.

Infinity War - duh. He got on that spaceship. He was planning on it being a one way trip (which incidentally, is why Pepper wasn’t keen on a kid). And then he took Thanos on one-on-one. And then, the look of despair when Strange gave up the stone to save him? He was more than willing to die.

Endgame - eventually, he will be willing to try, even if it means his death, because he’s always been willing to sacrifice himself. Remove that burden from his shoulders.

(It is interesting to note that the one time Tony is not in the position to sacrifice his life is in Spider-Man: Homecoming. When he is in the overseeing/mentor position, which could be his role in the MCU after Endgame, and when he’s starting to take up the role of “father figure”, which he should also be after Endgame, but to his own biological children as well. He is however, appalled and terrified at the thought of someone else, this crazy Spider-child who’s just a bit too much like him, being reckless and willing to sacrifice himself. Maybe Tony needs to take a bit of his own advice.)

The endings of the Iron Man movies are all tonally upbeat and to end Tony’s story for good on a “downer” note does not go along with his storyline --from starkravinghazelnuts http://starkravinghazelnuts.tumblr.com/post/181110494893/avengers-endgame-is-said-to-be-the-end-of-many-of

The Infinity Saga is Tony Stark’s arc. Every other character, including Cap, is ancillary. Every character is where they are because of a Stark. What happens to him will be the defining characteristic of the Saga, and it isn’t set up to be a Tragedy.

RDJ says the last eight minutes of Endgame has “everybody” involved, which would obviously include Natasha, who is extremely important. Which contradicts the reddit “leaks.”

https://twitter.com/stevcrogvrs/status/1118853707280601088?s=21 Chris Evans says if Steve had a choice, he would go back in time to be with Peggy. Since he was able to say this, there’s no doubt that it doesn’t happen, as the Marvel spoiler snipers would have switched from Mark to Chris and put five holes in his head before he hit the ground. This contradicts the reddit “leaks.”

https://comicbook.com/marvel/2019/04/19/avengers-endgame-hawkeye-black-widow-relationship-jeremy-renner/ Jeremy Renner also says Clint and Natasha’s relationship will last “forever”, which seems to underline their closeness and how much they mean to each other. All of this contradicts the reddit “leaks”, which describe a horrible thing happening to the two of them that wouldn’t ever actually happen if they were to stay in character. Plus, Chris Evans apparently called these dudebros out and straight up denied their “leaks”, so these “leaks” have no veracity either way.

When asked to draw their favorite characters, Anthony Russo drew Iron Man and Joe drew Spider-Man. The Iron Dad relationship is obviously going to be important in the movie, and it would bode well for these characters to get a good ending in the movie if they’re the very favorites of both directors.

RDJ is screening Endgame at his house for family and friends on Easter Sunday. Would he really ruin a holiday with a movie in which his character dies an unwarranted death?

There has not been a wedding in the MCU yet. What would be a better way to end the MCU’s first romance than with the MCU’s first wedding? We’ve had a funeral already, for a side character, and that was bad enough. Imagine how horrible it would be to witness Tony Stark’s funeral as the ending for Endgame. That does not seem like the kind of feeling the Russos want to leave us with. The wedding seems far more appropriate for a movie of this scale and importance.

The chess theory (courtesy of starkravinghazelnuts) — “The last piece to discuss on the chess board is the King piece. This piece is the game winner. Once your king is check-mated, the game is over, and your opponent wins, regardless of the score. The king chess piece is the piece you must protect the most and the one you cannot live without. Many experienced players may find themselves utilizing the king in an attempt to gain an advantage over an opponent, something weaker chess players are leery of doing. No matter how you choose to use your king piece, he must stay alive at all costs.” Tony and Thanos are the Kings on opposing sides. The king must be kept alive in order to win, which is why Tony should make it to the end of the film intact. Thor also literally mentions someone “playing an intricate game” and says that person “has made pawns of us” at the end of Ultron when discussing the Infinity Stones. http://starkravinghazelnuts.tumblr.com/post/181491397743/starkravinghazelnuts-quite-frankly-this-is-the

Two very important meta pieces by starkravinghazelnuts, who has essentially been funding my positive attitude for a while now http://starkravinghazelnuts.tumblr.com/post/182086909963/looking-back-over-everything-i-still-feel-really http://starkravinghazelnuts.tumblr.com/post/182017989478/i-agree-with-you-the-rhodey-show-sounds-good-but-i

https://fanfest.com/2018/08/16/the-russos-reflect-on-iron-man-being-the-heart-and-soul-of-the-mcu/ “I think, in a lot of ways, he is the heart and soul of the Marvel universe,” Infinity War co-director Joe Russo said during a video interview with Wired. “He’s a fascinating character, a character that we love because he is imminently flawed and we like characters that are challenging and express their humanity and I think Tony Stark does that as well as any of the characters. He started off as a narcissistic alcoholic and grew into a hero which, I think, makes him imminently relatable and signifies what the Marvel universe stands for, which is character first and the heroes are defined through the choices that they make.” The Russos love Tony. And you cannot live without your soul, you cannot live without your heart. No matter what you say about Tony, losing him to death would leave a massive, gaping hole in the MCU. Keeping him available to return is the safer bet in almost every regard.

https://youtu.be/f0Ai05cUQoM “If there were no RDJ, there would be no MCU.” - Kevin Feige. RDJ started it all, and Tony shouldn’t die, his presence should remain. He should be able to pop in and out as he sees fit. They know his star power and how important Tony is to the MCU.

https://www.newsarama.com/39526-rdj-as-iron-man-irreplacable-but-will-eventually-leave-says-avengers-infinity-war-directors.html “One closeup from RDJ is worth another actor’s entire performance, he’s incredibly gifted and insanely talented” - Joe Russo. May be a weak reason, but would they really...make him permanently lost to them? They’ve expressed interest in coming back. Would they really banish their most talented and lucrative actor to the darkness of a character death for a cheap shock?

https://youtu.be/5ljluGA4dQU (around ten minutes in) In the Jimmy Kimmel interview, they show the clip they’ve been showing everywhere of Carol’s meeting with some of the Avengers. Jimmy points out that RDJ isn’t in the clip, and he asks if that means something bad for Tony. RDJ says “No, no, no. Not in the slightest.” He could and probably is referring to the fact that Tony is definitely alive at this point, sure, but his attitude and the way he says it points to an overall confidence about Tony that bleeds over to the viewer. In fact, Robert’s whole demeanor during this press tour has been one of pure joy. He is having the time of his life, dancing and laughing, moreso than we have seen before. It could be a man enjoying his last tour with a very special group, but, somehow, I don’t believe someone who loves Tony as much as RDJ does would be this happy if Tony died. Especially if Tony’s death was unwarranted and out-of-left-field, which it absolutely would be if it happened. And this is in contrast to Chris, who has been, while not sad, far more reserved.

Some on-point thoughts from some of the few sane people on reddit:

“After Infinity War went out of its way to establish Thanos as a physical embodiment of Tony’s PTSD (“he’s been in my head for 6 years,” “My only curse is you”, *author’s note: see also above with coming to face an unknown fear like in IM3*), the idea of him ultimately defeating Thanos by killing himself is like... morally reprehensible as a message. I’d like to think Markus and McFeely would know better than that, but honestly, I’ve felt since Civil War that they don’t have the best grasp on his character. Edit: someone asked me in a PM to elaborate on this, so I’m just gonna go ahead and post what I wrote just in case anyone’s interested. Ok, this is gonna be kinda long, but I’ve been sitting on this for a while. so Iron Man 3 was the beginning of Tony’s new character arc that’s gone from phase 2 up till now. In phase 1, his whole journey was learning not to be selfish, and to be willing to put himself on the line to protect others. Avengers 1 completes that arc, and Iron Man 3 sets up a new conflict, where he’s driven entirely by his trauma from the events of The Avengers. He’s obsessed with protecting the world from threats beyond his control- we see it in Iron Man 3 with the house party suits being products of his anxiety, and in Age of Ultron with the Ultron program. He feels like it’s his responsibility to be everyone’s protector, and he’s desperately clinging to any sense of control he can still have in a world that he now realizes is much bigger than him. In Infinity War, he finds out that the event that left him traumatized was orchestrated by Thanos, and for the rest of the movie is driven by a single-minded need to confront Thanos directly and put an end to him, in order to finally be free of the PTSD that’s dominated his life for 6 years. By taking on that responsibility and ambushing him on Titan instead of reaching out to his support system (Steve + the other Avengers), Tony inadvertently puts everything he cares about at risk. In the context of Tony’s story, Thanos is his trauma- and Tony’s defeat on Titan is a direct result of his compulsive need to carry the burden of that trauma alone. So to then have him sacrifice himself to defeat Thanos in Endgame essentially sends the message that “yes, it is a good thing to bear that trauma on your own, and in fact, if you can’t see any other option, killing yourself is an acceptable solution.” It sends a horrible message in the context of the ongoing story, and it doesn’t tell us anything new about Tony as a character- we already know he’s self-sacrificing, it’s been his defining character flaw for four movies already. It’s just a really poor way to end his story.” — msg53

“This. Tony’s arc has been about letting go of his ego while learning to rely on others. His first step was handing Stark Ind. over to Pepper. He tried letting go with Ultron, but it failed cuz Ultron was just an extension of himself. Then he started seeing how being a mentor/father figure could help a kid in need of both (Peter) and the eventual next step should be family and real retirement while others defend/avenge Earth, once he’s done with his Thanos curse. Aside from Thor, His death would feel the most gratuitously out of sync with his journey of all the OG Avengers.” —VictorVonDoomBots

(special shoutout to cuddlebirb over there, consistently fighting for Tony rights)

The absolute nastiness to take out their main character, their cash cow, the one that started it all, when he’s got so much still hanging simply makes no sense. They would leave people with a sick feeling in their stomachs over this movie. People would not be happy with the turn of events, they would feel cheated out of a proper ending for the main character of the whole franchise. It would not be an event movie, it would be the movie that Killed Tony Stark. It would be tainted, and I don’t think the Russos want that. I know they say they think about their own reactions when writing these films, but they’ve gotta be smart enough to realize what a mistake this would be for the die-hard, longtime fans.

Plus, this is an ending to one generation and a lead-in to another. They don’t have Stan anymore to do their cameos, and some people will be on edge about whether to continue. Having RDJ hang around to do cameos and show up here and there to help the new heroes will put people in those seats for the upcoming films. His fifteen minute presence in Homecoming made many people go see the film that wouldn’t have otherwise. They need a hero that people know and love to remain a constant, even if he’s not in a starring role, and Tony Stark is the perfect person to do this. He always helped the younger heroes in the comics, and he’s already taken the mentor mantle with Peter. It’s a natural progression.

The amount of suffering that Tony has been through in the entirety of the MCU and in Endgame in particular, should lead to him finally getting something good in the end, a retirement where he gets to relax and let someone else carry the weight of the world instead of him, for once. Endgame will begin with Tony in extreme anguish, sick, hurt, sad and alone (save for Nebula). In the end, he should be healthy and happy, surrounded by the people who love him, with his future bright, full of possibility, and free of threats because Thanos is gone. That is simply good writing and good bookending. The writers shouldn’t be in the business of torturing Tony for torture’s sake. If he begins in such a dark place, he should end somewhere promising.

Happy’s behavior in FFH trailer. Tony is Happy’s best friend. Would the man be acting so chill, flirting with May, if his BFF just died? It is confirmed that FFH takes place minutes after Endgame. Plus, in a deleted Infinity War scene that featured Happy, Tony says that he and Pepper should set him up with someone. Would that someone be May?

Pepper is literally Tony’s endgame—he says it himself, “in the end, it’s always you.”

#tony stark #avengers endgame #avengers #marvel #endgame speculation #this is massively long but i think it really gets its point across #there is just way way too much pointing to his survival #robert downey jr #rdj

353 notes · View notes

jazon-todd · 4 years ago

Note

What, in your opinion, would have made The Rise of Skywalker a better movie? Or at least bearable?

1. get rid of the unnecessary banter. it was too... disney for me. too marvel movies for me. there’s a glaring reason that I steer clear of marvel movies (other than their whitewashing and their blatant mistreatment of women but that’s a whole other conversation), and this is precisely why. I hate banter that tries way too hard to seem natural, making it actually seem like the most unnatural thing in the world. I liked poe and finn’s banter, because that’s how their relationship always was and it was flirting you can’t tell me otherwise, but poe and rey? just seemed forced, in the worst way possible. and the banter in the middle of a fight (the whole “they fly now?” “they fly now!” even though fiNN WAS A STORMTROOPER AND WOULD ALREADY KNOW THIS STOP TRYING TO BE UNNECESSARILY FUNNY) is just unrealistic

2. KEEP PALPATINE DEAD. anakin is one of my favorite characters in all of star wars (in all of everything, really), and his whole reason for existing was to get rid of palpatine and to bring balance to the force again. but with palpatine never really dead.... or a clone..... or using his clone as his son........ whatever, I can’t - it just made his story pointless. If they just straight up said “he never died this is really him” I still wouldn’t like it, but I’d accept it. they’re trying to bend over backwards creating loopholes that don’t even exist like the fact that clones do NOT take on the force powers as the person they get their genes from, and it just makes it make even LESS sense. they did anakin alone so dirty. made essentially his whole 6-movie arc for nothing. all of episodes 4-6 were for nothing, really, considering they just cloned the plot for the sequels, but whatever. the whole “wahhh rian johnson left us without a villain when he killed snoke” is SUCH a shitty cop out, considering you have a skywalker with a red lightsaber standing RIGHT there. you have the ~heir to the sith~ RIGHT there. more on this in point 5, though.

3. um. maybe make ben’s family maybe care about him? what tlj got right was that luke and leia still loved him, but they knew they couldn’t save him. they always held onto hope. luke is 100000000% the type once dead to bug his dark-sided nephew through the force day and night, being petty. anakin, too. and he just..... didn’t even think of him at all? leia was fine turning her back on her son until the very last minute, when she and her brother took in a PALPATINE, of all people, and thought that their own flesh and blood was too far gone, but decided to take in a PALPATINE????? which brings me to my next point...

4. keeping rey a nobody. look. from day 1 I said she was a palpatine. I can pull up posts saying she’s a palp from 2015, so I’m not surprised that she actually is one. HOWEVER, I don’t like the way they went about it. you make her the most powerful sith in the world....... and she’s not even curious about that? she....... just doesn’t care? she finally finds out that she could possibly have a belonging with the sith, and............ just turns her back on something she was looking for her entire life? absolutely not. dark rey should have risen thank you! the possibilities we could have had with rey exploring her heritage!!!! exploring who the sith actually are!!! and don’t even get me STARTED on the last name debacle. if she just looked at that old lady and went “just rey” like... the POWER she could have had

5. the main plot as a whole. going back to keeping palpatine dead, it shouldn’t have been the plot. like, at all. kylo ren could have ACTUALLY become the big bad, instead of being a puppet for 3 movies. the resistance could have questioned rey’s loyalty to them after finding out about her weirdly sexual hand-touching relationship with the supreme leader. switch their roles to where rey falls to the dark side and ben turns to the light to bring her back. they even could have came out with a fucking godlike villain they all had to kill by blowing up the universe, I don’t CARE. like, literally anything would have worked better than the palpatine plot that has been recycled like 3 times already. when everyone is telling you you’re dead, it’s time to lie DOWN, sheev.

6. the circumstances around ben’s death. I have always said that he would die, and honestly, the death itself in a vacuum isn’t what bothers me. what bothers me is when he lay dying, his family decided to help out his girlfriend instead of him. what bothers me is that he wasn’t the one who got to kill the man who was tormenting his family for every single generation that ever existed in his bloodline. he didn’t even lay a finger on palpatine, and he was the one (aside from anakin, who would NEVER allow for his grandson to lay dying in order to help a PALPATINE of all people, fyi) who deserved to be the one to kill him. what bothers me is that they hammered home the fact that he’s the one that would save the day (“then he’s our only hope,” “kylo ren is dead, my son is alive,” the fact that leia DIED FOR HER SON SO HE COULD LIVE, WHATEVER), and ended up just..... killing him anyway. made it canon that he’s literally rey’s other half of her soul and just killed him anyway. if he died being the one to save the day, or at least helping rey save the day, and if he had closure with his parents and family, not just his fucking imagined father.......... I would have allowed it. liked it, even. I always pictured him dying, sacrificing himself so everyone could live, surrounded by the force ghosts of his family helping him find the strength to die for everyone. I think that would have been an appropriate way to end his story, both as ben solo and as the last of the skywalkers. the skywalkers deserved to have a peaceful, noble ending that they chose. it may be romantic on the surface for him to die in order to keep rey alive, but they didn’t write it to be romantic. they wrote it to keep her alive and to get rid of him, and in turn, the skywalker bloodline, and that never sat right with me

7. give rose an actual plot. my girl deserved better. period.

8. everything with finn’s storyline, really. I hated that his story revolved around running after rey. he’s apparently force-sensitive, but we never find that out until an interview after the movie. they said we’d learn more about his family but...... we never did? unless they were counting that one-off line of stormtroopers defecting and being taken from their families or whatever, but that’s precisely my point. it felt like the story focused way too much on rey, and not enough on finn (and poe, and rose, and virtually everyone else, really). they talked about all of these fabulous plot points for finn, but they never followed through on them. becoming a general and leading the charge at the end was great, but we needed more of that. the force awakens gave me so much hope....... and then the rise of skywalker just dropped those hopes hard on its ass. my headcanon that I'm now regarding as canon is that he’s luke’s son and you can pry that from my cold dead hands, THANKS

anyway that’s it, justice for literally every single character that had to participate in the sequels against their will, go watch episode 3 to cleanse your mind

#anyway here are my qualms #star wars #ask #anonymous

3 notes · View notes

emeraldnebula · 6 years ago

Text

Thoughts on the comic book industry, Part 4

Having talked about how the comic book industry is still clinging to creative and marketing tactics that are at least 2�� decades out of date, there's really only one other place to go with this line of rambling. And in the age of social media, it's the most self-evident of all.

Not only is the comics industry stuck decades in the past, but it's hopelessly out of touch with reality, both creatively and politically.

It goes beyond being unwilling to look outside the box from a business standpoint. That's bad enough on its own, but it's a by-product of the creative side of the equation. Creatively, the major publishers are not only stubbornly devoted to outdated and stagnant methods from decades past, but they're stubbornly devoted to their own pet ideas at the exclusion of all else. It doesn't matter how unpopular their ideas are even from the beginning, it doesn't matter how poorly their pet directions sell, it doesn't matter how much the vast majority of fans object to those bad ideas. It's what the company wants, therefore it's inherently good and to hell with anything else. If the audience makes it clear they don't like the company's pet ideas, that's just all the more reason for the major publishers to cram it down the readers' throats. If the readers don't like where the major publishers are going with their products, the publishers aren't above bullying, insulting, and pressuring readers into caving in and supporting them regardless.

Now keep in mind, I'm not talking about the kind of fans who scream bloody murder over an old costume design being updated sans trunks, or who throw screaming hissy fits over creatively stale and burned out creative teams being replaced with fresh blood. I'm not talking about the kind of fans who cry havoc and protest when a franchise needs to be rebooted, or just needs some freshening up. Those are the kind of fans DC and Marvel actually WANTS, and largely caters to. I'm talking about DC and Marvel actively alienating, insulting, and belittling the vast majority of what once was/should be their readership – the fans who truly love the characters and object when the major publishers actively crap all over their characters, betray everything the characters stand for, pull event-gimmicks and stunts that are just purely hateful and serve no real creative purpose, and actively reject and disregard legitimate criticism. Little by little, DC and Marvel have whittled their readerships down to the tiny, selfish minority whose tastes mirror that of the companies. And in no small part has it contributed to the downfall of the industry.

This isn't a new thing by any means. Even as far back as the Iron Age, DC and Marvel were dismissive of anybody who objected to their pet directions. Batman fans for years had objected in the letter columns to Catwoman being retconned by Frank Miller as a hooker, as well as to Batman's increasing devolution from a heroic man of honor to a paranoid, hostile asshole. DC repeatedly disregarded those concerns, insisting that Miller's conception of the characters was canon and would not be changed. (And once Miller's go-to editor Bob Schreck took over as Bat-editor and brought Miller back to DC, everything Batman fans had been objecting to got ramped up a thousandfold.) The Superman books were levied with complaints about Lois Lane's abusive behavior toward Superman before and during their Iron Age marriage, as well as nonstop objections to Lois' '90s-era loverboy Jeb Friedman. DC blew off those complaints as sexist backlash to a "strong woman," even though comic book creators had similar complaints about the direction of the books. Even before "One More Day/Brand New Day" used a satanic pact to end Spider-Man's marriage to Mary Jane Watson, the '90s-era Clone Saga was conceived primarily to force Spider-Man back into bachelorhood, even if it meant claiming the Spidey people knew for years was a clone and the real deal was AWOL. The Green Lantern books respoded to fan concerns about the Parallax-possessed Hal Jordan being reduced to a one-note crazy bad guy...by doing just that and asking fans if they were pleased with the results. And so on.

Jump forward to the 2000s, and what do we have? Stephanie Brown/Spoiler seemingly tortured to death in the Batman books for no real reason, and the writer responsible, Bill Willingham, bragging about how much he alienated the fandom and how "golden" it is to turn your fandom against you. Marvel editor Tom Brevoort claiming on message forums that angering and alienating your readership translates to better sales, because a happy fandom makes your sales too "soft." (Never mind how blatantly untrue that is, especially since the '90s comic boom ended.) The aforementioned "One More Day/Brand New Day," where Joe Quesada and Dan Slott not only went out of their way to insult, bully, and disregard anyone who dared disagree with their vision, but also opened one of the "Brand New Day" issues with a character ordering the readers to "just shut the fuck up and give me your money!" Cry for Justice/Rise of Arsenal, where backlash to the ruination of Green Arrow and Black Canary's relationship was met with a sales pitch for a new Gail Simone Birds of Prey book and where complaints over the needless deaths in the story were dismissed with excuses that DC could have killed off even more Green Arrow characters. The current situation with Marvel's SJW-leaning comics, where anyone who voices objections to bad far-left propaganda and blatant mouthpiece characters is hit with every politically charged insult in the book. Or DC's "Rebirth," where anyone who voices disagreement with DC's current direction dismissed for being "fake fans" or being mocked for calling out how nonsensical and malicious the company's pet ideas are.

Do you see where this is going? Where it's been going for the last couple decades? Over and over again, the major publishers have made a point of ignoring legitimate criticism and feedback, disrespecting a readership they badly need, and insisting on pursuing what they personally want no matter how much it fails ansd how much it drives readers away. The idea that what they're doing is wrong, or at the very least misguided, is utterly foreign to them. If sales are plunging, they don't take it as a sign that they're screwing up or that what they're doing no longer works. They take it as a sign that they're shedding undesirables and that what's remaining are the true believers. They'd rather have total control and a shrinking minority of ass-kissers whose tastes mirror their own than to make the effort to appeal to a broad audience. And for what? Deservedly bad reputations. A dying industry for which history will ultimately blame them. Franchises that have been rendered toxic, or at the very least laughable.

And what's worse, the Big 2 absolutely refuse to learn from their mistakes, instead doubling and tripling down on them. If an idea is conceived and executed in bad faith and it deservedly fails, DC and Marvel don't recognize it as such. They view it as the readers being too stupid to know what's good for them and dial it up to 11. If they lose readers with their bad decisions, they view that lost readership and that lost money as being fair weather phonies. And if readers speak up as to why they're giving up on the books, if they're lucky and don't get insulted or mocked, they'll get a sales pitch for DC and Marvel's other wares. Again, this isn't a new thing. During "Knightfall," when a fan wrote in expressing how he felt Superman's death and Batman's impending spinal injury (a leaked plot point early on) felt like cheap gimmicks, what was the response he got? A sales pitch for The Flash, Legion of Super-Heroes, and DC's Vertigo line. No reassurance that Batman's temporary paralysis would be purely a test of character, no explantion that "Knightfall" was intended to be an examination of what it truly meant to be Batman, just a cheap attempt to cajole an unhappy fan into buying books he may not want.

The prevailing mindset of the last 26 years – if not longer – is twofold. On the one hand, there's the idea that if the characters' lives are made to be endlessly tragic and miserable, the readers can feel better about their own lives. In fact, a DC editor (Kevin Dooley, if I recall) said just that in response to a fan who wrote in about his dislike of the abritrary tragedy that had piled onto Aquaman leading into the Peter David revamp. On the other hand – and this one's arguably the more pervasive – there's the idea that if you make certain characters outright selfish assholes who always get their way no matter how unrealistic it is or how many people they have to stomp along the way, the reader will be inspired and empowered by them. Again, this shows just how out of touch the Big 2 are. Nobody saw anything inspiring about Spider-Man's deal with Mephisto. They saw it for the selfish, short-sighted, cowardly act it was. Lois Lane has been regarded as a hostile and unlikable character for decades, and her reputation only worsened when DC made her a "strong" (re: abusive) woman. Batman's degeneration into a insufferable, arrogant Marty Stu figure was harshly criticized even as far back as the late '80s, with people writing in begging for his heroism and humanity to be restored. And the meanspirited treatment of Superman, Green Arrow, Arsenal, the Green Lanterns, Aquaman, and others hasn't made the vast majority of fans feel better about themselves. It's angered them. It's made them feel betrayed. People go to art forms like comics, movies, TV, theatre, and radio drama for escape. They want to take a break from the bad stuff in their lives. They don't want to go from their regular troubles and see something even worse play out before them. Again, out of touch. The publishers are only playing to a tiny minority that's more or less in total agreement with them.

Now, you could argue that during the '90s, the big comic book boom more or less gave DC and Marvel the freedom they needed to pull off this kind of crap. Event-gimmicks and shock value being big sellers at the time and all. But 26 or more years later, what's the excuse? The industry is bleeding readers not just by locking itself decades in the past, but also by actively driving away anyone who isn't of the exact same tastes as the Big 2 or isn't a social media ass-kisser. Bad press doesn't equal big sales anymore. Aside from the odd milestone issue and maybe #1 issues of certain titles, people aren't buying anymore. And even at comic book conventions, talking to comic book creators past and present...they're fully aware of how far the industry has fallen, and they have their own horror stories to share about some of the bad decisions that have led to this point. But those who are still in the industry have to go along with those bad decisions simply because they've got to pay the bills. And those who aren't so active in the industry know full well that it's unwilling to change for the better.

What makes it even worse is that beyond the creative stagnation and selfishness, there's also a political bent to the way the industry carries itself. In the age of bad feminist/SJW/PC politics, comics have swung very hard in that direction, with Marvel going whole-hog into it. Many of the more prominent creators are very openly far-left, and very active in the social media mob mentality. Some, like Mark Waid, have been very open about running anybody – creator or fan – out of comics if their political leanings aren't far-left. Again, this is an industry that's wildly out of touch with reality. Not everybody shares the same political beliefs. Not everyone who's right-leaning or a centrist (my own stance) is a monster. Not every far-left talking point or goal is a good or even practical thing. Art – a even commercial form like comics – as with all things, NEEDS differing viewpoints, needs differences of opinion, needs all walks of life to be full-bodied and valid. Nope, the current comics industry wants a hive mind in all respects, politically aligned in one direction and mindlessly cheerleading whatever it is the Big 2 decide they want.

None of this is remotely viable. Aside from the major publishers going out of their way to do stuff they know the vast majority of people do not want at all, how do they expect to sustain themselves on an audience that's purely of their preferred political stance? Especially when, as social media and even the behavior of some comic book pros has shown, the far-left is just as extremist and reprehensible as the far-right? (Aside from admitting to leading purges against creators who aren't far-left, Waid also recently violated anti-trust laws to shut down an indie comic called Jawbreakers simply because its creator disagrees with Waid's/the comics industry's politics.) Speaking from personal experience, it gets really tiresome listening to comics creators you like endlessly bitching and moaning about anything even slightly center-of-left, or mindlessly spouting anti-Trump propaganda regardless of whether or not it's true. I as a fan don't like being talked down to, and I as a person don't like anyone trying to bully me into converting to their personal politics. Most people, when they read a comic, listen to music, or watch movies, TV, or plays, just want to be entertained for a little while. If you keep hammering away with bad far-left bullshit and getting mad when people don't just fall in line at your say-so? You're out of touch. You're ignoring the reality of your audience, and of day-to-day life in general. And you're alienating fans and/or potential fans in that way as well.

"But," you say, "if the Big 2 are this far gone, why not just support other publishers? Surely there's other stuff out there to devote your time to!" And that is true to a degree...but with the decline of the comics industry has also come a major atrophy of what's available out there, and how the distribution monopoly has limited the playing field in favor of the Big 2. And this will be where we go next.

1 note · View note

theamazingsallyhogan · 6 years ago

Note

So a while back, like almost 30 pages back on your blog, you corrected a misleading post regarding Captain America's shield and how it's component materials were obtained from Wakanda. It was a very good read that got me interested in the series, and I would love to know the name of the comic parts you showed. I wanna know more about Steve's history with T'chaka.

With T’Chaka, you’ll want to check out Christopher Priest's Black Panther Vol 3 #30 (the comic I posted pics from) - I posted the climax, but there’s a little more buildup. It's a very cleverly written encounter, but it's necessarily a one time thing - Steve respects T'Chaka's wishes to leave Wakanda alone.

To the best of my knowledge the only other time anyone wrote them meeting was a mini by Reginald Hudlin, but I wouldn't recommend his comics to anyone under pain of torture. His main approach is to try and make Black Panther look good by making everyone else look bad, which actually backfires and makes his Panther look snobby and unpleasant as well. His Steve is a thug, the story has been ignored, and the darn thing never made sense in the first place. The Christopher Priest issue is pretty much it for solid Steve-T'Chaka interaction.

As for T’Challa and Steve...

The American comic industry is a bit weird because every new writer is expected to treat comics written decades ago as canon, and very often those old comics were written by people who put way less of a priority on showing interpersonal dynamics.

So you’re left with a situation where the new writers have to come in and take over characters that have interacted for decades… but if you look at the comics where those characters first started hanging out you don’t always see much in the way of friendship. Modern writers have to read between the lines and conclude “well heck, they were fighting gods every week, it seems to me they’d be buddies…”

That said, it made sense for Christopher Priest to assume a strong friendship between Captain America and Black Panther.

Stan Lee (co-creator of Black Panther and like half of the classic Marvel heroes) wrote the first time that Steve and T'Challa met, a story saved for the milestone 100th/1st issue of Steve's book back in 1968 (”Tales of Suspense” was 50% Iron Man 50% Captain America. After its 99th issue it turned into 100% Cap and was retitled Captain America).

Leftover Nazi spies hoping to resurrect the Reich invaded Wakanda and managed to do a lot of damage. Black Panther managed to figure out the villains were connected to Captain America (the famous WWII hero that had only recently reappeared) and sent out a distress call. The two teamed up and kicked Nazi butt, then Steve asked Black Panther a huge favor: Steve needed some time away from the Avengers, and badly needs someone to give the team help while he's away. After one adventure Steve knew there was nobody on the planet he would rather have take his place on the Avengers.

The two had many more adventures of course, but that’s a pretty cool way for their friendship to start. 100% trust right from day 1.

#paraclox #Captain America #Steve Rogers #Black Panther #T'Challa #T'Chaka

3 notes · View notes

fadedtoblue · 7 years ago

Note

Ive seen a lot of meta saying Elektra is toxic for Matt, she brings out the darkness inside him...Like Matt didnt have his fair share of problems before Elektra shows up—the dude runs at night and beats up bad guys. Elektra had nothing to do with that & Matt’s a grown ass white man, he can make his own decisions. What am I gonna ask is whats ur opinion on what Elektra needs? People worry about Matt’s mental health & happiness but nobody takes time to analyse El, so what’s ur hot take on that?

Oh this is a GOOD one. I already see myself spending too much time working out my thoughts on it (I apologize!!!) – this is what you get when you actually ask me for my hot take lol.

(Edited while writing to add: yeah, this took way too long! I’m so sorry, it was the damn holiday week. Between cooking, shopping, and entertaining guests at my home most of the week, I maybe spent a total of 10 minutes on Tumblr in the last few days! Basically not much time for thoughtful writing, only quick answers and mindless likes!)

As anyone who follows my blog should know, I have a lot of Feelings™ about Elektra Natchios but even so, I probably tend to deconstruct her character and behaviors more often within the context of her relationship with Matt. Which isn’t wrong or unusual b/c she’s a supporting character in his universe, but damn it, I sure love her enough that I really should write more metas focusing on her needs and perspective, so…thanks for giving me an opportunity to do that Anon :).

Back to El, my darling El. When you hang out around fandom long enough, you’ll inevitably hear the argument pop up that not all bad / villainous characters are meant to be good*. That not every character needs (or deserves) to be redeemed. That some characters are just bad. Are toxic. Are no damn good. And maybe that means I read too much into Elektra’s character and her backstory and how that affects her personality and motivations and relationships. To which I say, nope, I think I read just enough, in fact, maybe even not enough? Maybe it’s because I spent 13 hours last week watching a show about an extremely morally grey anti-hero who racks up a body count that should read as horrifying and see him engage over and over and over again in violence as a way of life but damn it, they make us feel for him. They give us a sense of uneasy hope that he’ll find a way out of it. And even though it’s unlikely he’ll leave the Punisher mantle behind for long, we know that he has people in his circle who will continue to be fiercely loyal to him – Karen, Micro, Curtis, and to a lesser degree, Dinah. I go off on this minor tangent because if someone like that, with such a black and white view of the world can be considered in so many shades of grey but still found to be redeemable in the face of all their sins, why the hell not Elektra Natchios.

*Sure, some characters. I just don’t think Elektra qualifies as one of those characters, like…at all.

I’ll try to not go into too much extra detail on why Elektra is the way she is (I also wrote about that here if you want more of my thoughts) but let’s talk about what she needs, or what I think she needs. To start, I always go back to the scene where Elektra finds out she’s Black Sky and has that heartbreakingly honest moment with Matt:

When you consider the upbringing she’s had – raised as a child soldier, conditioned for violence, then being embedded into a rich and influential family and experiencing the opposite lifestyle? but knowing that it’s not really her home, not really her family, that it’s just another training ground to build up skills she’ll need to better serve the Chaste – is it any surprise that she views love and affection as something conditional? Not something given without strings attached? Or perhaps, even, something that she doesn’t truly deserve? Stick gave her encouragement and affection whenever she was sufficiently vicious and unyielding in a fight. The Natchios’ probably gave her love and affection when she put on the face of an obedient daughter. I’m sure that in a life of being a diplomat’s daughter and debutante, she roped in many a unsuspecting young man into her orbit – for fun, or whatever else, and I’d guess that “love” was empty too.

And then Matthew comes along, and I’m willing to bet he was the first person who didn’t pre-judge her based on her background, her looks, etc. They may have appeared to be opposites on the surface, but it was clear that he knew her and she knew him, in a way that was strangely honest and real? And against all expectations, they could stand as equals – I’m sure it was a feeling that was marvelously new for both of them. Yes, Elektra had a mission, but her mission had nothing to do with her love for him, nor his love for her. If the mission had never existed, I think she would have been perfectly content continuing the way they were, and it was clear she’d allowed herself to revel in it…their future together. Of course, it comes crashing down when she gives him Roscoe Sweeney on a platter and he refuses to kill. For Elektra, there is once again a conditional line drawn in the sand. Elektra the killer cannot have real love, doesn’t deserve real love. And I think this is why she runs away from Matthew, because it validates, yet again, this awful view of herself that she has inside – that being the person she is, she doesn’t deserve real love, much less from him.

So fast forward to closer to present day Elektra. This is a woman who has spent years of her life fighting. Fighting for a mission she thought she believed in. Fighting for respect. For love. For devotion. But the fight has always been in the context of someone else’s war, someone else’s mission. It’s no surprise she always finds herself lacking when the fight is never for her benefit, never on her terms. I imagine she always believed that as long as she did as she was told, she would find what she was looking for…but obviously she learns a hard lesson about this, not just once, but twice. It makes sense that she so violently disavows her connections to both Chaste and Hand – no, it’s not conventional response, but nothing about her life has been conventional. The language she is most familiar with is violence, and therefore it makes sense that her grab at retaking her agency is told through violent action.

But where does this leave her now? I think that for all of shit she’s gone through between DDS2 and Defenders, all of which have undoubtedly left her changed, at her very core she is still looking for the same things. Love. Acceptance. Understanding. It’s not entirely clear where her head is going to be at in a post-Defenders world. She’s spent so much of her life being told what to do and given no choices so I imagine there’s an urge to explore what life looks like on her own terms. Sure, it’s possible she might choose bad over good or whatever, but Elektra has never been a character beyond redemption. Canonically, she isn’t. And so I think she’s still going to be looking for someone who is willing to believe in her her, willing to love her despite all of her flaws, her mistakes, her sins. And I honestly think that even with all the drama and angst they’ve put each other through, the person who can give her that is still Matthew. Matt has his own issues to deal with, yes, but I think in the context of his relationship to Elektra, they’ve consistently proven that even when they are at odds, there is still a bond of love and understanding that can’t be broken and ignored, and given the work he put in to better understand and accept her for who she is by the end of S2 (and still, by the end of Defenders), I think there is a lot of possibility for their future that may not have been there before.

And this is why I always have and always will believe that Matt and Elektra work uniquely well for one another. In their dark, unhealthy moments, it’s a mutually destructive force in both of their lives, but if that same force were channeled into good, into accepting the things about the other that can’t be changed but helping each other be better in the ways that can be fixed, it could be quite freeing for them both. The Defenders proved that they still love each other fiercely and at this point Matt is probably her only tie left to any kind of family, not to mention the only person she knows who would encourage a positive view of life and humanity. And this may be wishful thinking on my part, but I hope he can play a part in supporting her through this new stage of her life because I think what she really needs is not to go through it alone. She deserves to have loyalty and friendship and support, even if it’s just one person to start.

So…yeah. That’s what I think she needs :).

#anonymous #asks #answers #elektra natchios #mattelektra #my thoughts #meta #p talks about stuff

42 notes · View notes

aprilmillerphd-archive · 7 years ago

Text

This is a Bias List. Because I am Biased, and also a Follow Forever. For reasons. Mostly that April hit a milestone and that’s friggin’ amazing in my book.

So I have to start with @darcywho who has been my main and exclusive Darcy since... well actually since I took April from the private rpc into the independent rpc something like four or five years ago. I know Mariah IRL (and will soon be living within easy driving distance of her)-- and basically. Mariah is bombtastic. She’s hella smart and funny, and when I’m having a crappy day (or given how the beginning of this year went, a crappy year) -- she texts me incessantly to talk about what Darcy is doing, and what April and Darcy should be doing, and I have so much character history, and Important Events, and developmental experiences just from talking and writing with Mariah, that I honestly don’t think April would be the character she is, without having had Darcy’s mitigating influence. We’ve just done so much that we’ve reached a point in our friendship and writing relationship where I literally feel as if Mariah could write April, and do her justice and vice versa. If y’all don’t follow her already, you should get on that because seriously, she is the absolute best take on Darcy Lewis that I have ever encountered in the Marvel RPC, and I know the PC rp com is going to jump down my throat for ‘making comparisons’-- but again. THis boo is my main and exclusive Darcy Lewis, also I do whut I want. @scarsearned MANGOOOOO. Okay so funfact; this brat used to have a diff url and we chat on dis/cord and it STILL took me like three days to realize on tumblr they were the same person. I FOLLOW YOU ON FOUR BLOGS MANGO. THis is what you signed up for all those years ago. I’m sorry. SO TO THE POINT! Mango has a bevy of blogs she runs, I met her when she wrote almost exclusively on Rummers here, and what I say ‘met her’ I mean I started sending her asks talking about Brock Rumlow, reread her rules and realized she had a password, at which point we were already talking over Skype, and then I sent in her password and she teased me relentlessly for it. (I deserved it, I’m a total goob)-- Mango is right up there with Mariah in terms of IMPORTANT character development shit. Mango writes a CANON DIVERGENT Brock Rumlow, and has put so much time into developing him, I think Marvel should give her a fuckin’ job. She’s also like... insanely smart. I say this as someone who likes to play at being really intelligent. Mango talks and I feel like I’m back in grade school and I want to hide myself away in shame. So obviously it’s no wonder we ended up shipping. (Actually no, I still have literally no idea how or why THAT happened tbqh I’m a fuckin’ potato) -- but Mango and Mariah go hand in hand because I introduced them and now their Brock and Darcy are inextricably linked forevermore as siblings and it’s fuckin’ A Plus. @russkiyuragan YET ANOTHER PERSON I MET BECAUSE OF MANGO. But also hella quality child of canon OC. Like, legit we started talking because Mango dragged us into a group rp and it turned into us mutuall talking about character development and now basically Seamus is one of April’s smols. Even though he really ISN’T one of hers. She’s basically claimed him as a child who needs mothering and dammit she is going to give him all the mothering ever. Even if he doesn’t need or want it. AND BASICALLY THEY ARE A FUCKING SWEETHEART WHO NEEDS ALL THE FUCKING LOVE because they’re really insanely smart and super sweet and friendly and I heart them. @phxtxn PHIL!!! OKAY SO I MET PHIL IN A CLOSED RPC FOR-FUCKING-EVER AGO. And immediately Genis and April butted heads. (He destroyed like half her office, ruined a couple PRICELESS books and then offered to buy her lunch in apology. Suffice to say April was less than impressed) -- except over the years, they’ve gotten really close. Occasionally Phil and I delve into the divergent canon where April and Genis actually end up romantically involved but it always ends in heartache because April is bad at being happy and Genis is bad at... well.. mitigating April’s more extreme bouts of self-loathing. BUT they are exceptional friends and Phil has a fantastic knack for finding the fun and funny in every situation and driving April absolutely UP A WALL. Phil’s also another rp partner I dragged into the collective with Mariah, because I like it when my writing partners all write together because I’m a spoiled princess. Phil’s a total sweetheart though and his Genis Vell is motherfucking spot on. He’s spent a lot of time with the character and it shows, but he also understands pragmatic, human interactions from a writing sense so it’s always a joy when we write together or chat. @askprofessorx NAAAAYYAA -- Naya’s another of those rpers I sort of. Grew on. Like a fungus. I wooed her with poetry first and then introduced her Charl to April and what I consider to be one of my more beautifully painful plot ideas. It involved time travel and the overhanging possibility of April dying. And because April was from the modern era trying desperately to get back, it was that much more painful when she started developing connections. And basically Naya and I plotted everything out over IMs and asks and now we have the most ridiculous tiny person ship in the history of ridiculous ships and Naya’s Charles is like... the cornerstone of my favorite Charles’s. She’s got this beautiful grasp of our fave telepath’s charming flirtatiousness and paired with the very Serious way he views morality and the world, which combined with April’s general cynicism (and it should be noted, our mutant verse involves April being a touch-telepath who can’t actually touch people without destroying their brains because control? what is that)-- and you have an April experiencing her worst fear. Which is not being in-control of herself. It’s beautiful and Naya is beautiful bean. @iremembereveryonethatleaves AHAHAHA Lilo was the first ‘child’ April ever like. Accidentally adopted. And it happened entirely because of my age of aquarius verse, wherein instead of April seeking out Charles Xavier, she looked for Magneto instead. She found him. And his kid. And I literally have no idea WHY OR HOW April ended up becoming surrogate mom to Lilo since there’s no rational reason for Magneto getting along with April who is a cynical, borderline nihilist with Serious Rage Issues. But-- April and Lilo. Mommy and daughter and just. LITERALLY ALL MY HEART AND LOVE FOR THIS PERSON WHO MADE WRITING MUTANT APRIL FUN AND NOT PAINFUL. Until you (you asshole) made it painful. I still go through our tags to read all th angst, and I didn’t do it half so well as you and Tori did so.. @actually-i-prefer-magneto frick me so apparently I did my mutant crew in a triumvirate. The flipside of the age of aquarius verse, where April found Magneto instead and became part of his Brotherhood. Because who wouldn’t have a need for a hyperpolyglot, with genius level intelligence and touch-telepathy? Magneto knew what he was getting out of the bargain, I just don’t think he expected April Miller. TBQH. Nobody ever expects her which is great, and this basically started as an incredibly painful, probably tragic plot that I had (sort of) intended to result in April’s death and it didn’t go that route. Like. At all. probably because these two babes understand that good angst is hard to come by and with the persistent low-hanging threat of April’s head getting blown off, or even worse, her returning to her own time, it meant that every interaction was always charged with a lowkey kind of desperation and tension. Even when Erik and April got that ‘happy’ ending. It took an actual fucking lifetime to get there. And the best thing about Kristy is that she’s smart as fuck, I seem to surround myself with people who make writing look easy, and whose ability to thread together a long arching plot is so absolutely bafflingly amazing I am often struck stupid. @captain-outoftime AaBbbbYyyyYyy. So like- I met Abby through Mariah. Abby is the Steeb to Mariah’s Darcy. They’re hitched. It’s great. April helped Steve propose to Darcy even though April seems to have a PERPETUAL ISSUE with Steve Rogers that defies all explanation. IDK-- it’s probably something to do with the fact that April is a giant pain the ass and a tiny, fight-y blonde? WTF knows. Steve tolerates April. Abby tolerates me. Abby is a goddess. Beautiful, smart, funny as fuck, and like. Constantly busy. How she manages to balance RL shit with rp is beyond the scope of my ability to grasp yo but she’s the bomb-diggity. @americanasitgets MOTHERFUCKIN’ GABBY! My DC babe. Light of my liiife, fire in my loins, (not really but I was on a roll yo) -- I also met Gabby because of Mariah. And Gabby’s Clark. Gabby’s Clark is made of fucking sunshine okay, and the best part is, is that we’ve had like a sustained rp universe where April harasses Clark and doesnt know he’s superman, WHILE TASH-TRALKING SUPERMAN TO CLARK’S FACE. It’s comedy gold. Poor April. But I love Gabby, because she’s smart as shit and fuckin’ hysterical, and will literally snowball crack scenarios over IM into the wee hours of the morning. Even better, I’ve found someone whose as bad at keeping track of threads as me. (I say, as I eyeball our New Krypton thread that’s been in my drafts folder for like. Six months. Oops). @talonscourt D I KNOW THROUGH MY TIM BLOG-- but who I first met on April and then promptly FORGOT ABOUT because I’m a total dipshit. D writes Jason Todd, April surrogate son. This is a recent development. Tim loves Jason, April loves Jason. D is amazing as Jason. D is like... my platonic lover from Narnia. They’re smart as hell, and incredibly sweet even when I’m shit at keeping in contact because my real life is a hot-fuckin-mess and I’m always sick and on the verge of nuclear collapse. I would be TOTALLY LOST WITHOUT YOU. @galaeus Echo. As written by the ever talented Amy who I’ve known since April’s very first incarnation. Which... is a long ass time, Amy’s seen April through several character developments and rewrites, and has legit known April as a character since like. Legit. Post Tim. When April was a baby. Echo is April’s other southern, raised by a pageant queen biffle. They shoot the shit together, Echo is also legit the only person in existence whose allowed to give April nicknames, or turn April into a diminutive. Amy’s basically like... hands down the reason why i never gave up on writing an Indie female OC, and that’s because Amy’s a boss and she also happens to be a spectacular writer, both in the RPC and in real life. @agentharrisonofshield and last but not least, this girl. Right here. April has like... a bevy of Awesome Girl Squad frands. All of whom are infinitely more talented and bad ass than she is, like. Legit. April’s smart. but in a fight? She’s basically cannon fodder by comparison. She just isn’t built for the field. April and Viv became friends because they got locked in a closet together. I’m not sure HOW that happened, but now they get together and chat in other languages and April feeds her, and basically this s the woman April goes to when she wants someone shot. I literally love all the headcanons we’ve put together and that Agent Harrison is invariably the first ‘shield agent’ April casually mentions outside of Echo, in threads of mine. That’s how you know you’ve found an awesome rp partner and friend. When their own characters start casually infiltrating your threads in the form of namedrops.

#bias list #how the fuck did I hit a milestone y'all?#im confused #follow forever

12 notes · View notes

mjwatson · 7 years ago

Note

who is michelle supposed to be? people were saying she's mj then they say she's not mj when I thought she was michelle gonzales? Haha

ok, i still get constant messages abt this and i stopped replying to them, but i think i am just gonna reply with a long, girthy answer so i can stick it in my FAQ so i can redirect people to it.

so prepare yourself with a long ass response!

zendaya was one of the first people to be cast in spider-man homecoming, so we knew that either she would play a big part in the films, or she’s just a big star and marvel wanted to create hype.

she was announced to be playing a character named michelle, and people were a bit confused because nobody really of importance in the comics is named that.

then it took someone to dig around the comics and find a ‘michele gonzales’ from the comics. but she was a very minor, insignificant character that peter knew in college. but because it’s the internet, that theory blew up everywhere, and then a lot of people and news sites took that to be fact rather than speculation.

the michele from the comic books only had one L in her name, and she was a latina character. they wouldn’t cast a black woman for a latina role, cause woc aren’t interchangeable. she never was intended to be gonzalez, that was just a theory, but unfortunately people are still confused even after the movie has been out.

about 8 months later after z was cast, a news site released an article stating that her character will be mary jane watson, despite it being announced that zendaya would be playing a michelle.

that news article wasn’t the most reliable source, as they had also reported the asa butterfield was cast as the new spider-man way back when that was still happening. but again, people took that as fact rather than a news site wanting views.

when we finally saw some set pics, we saw how zendaya had brown hair and drabby clothes when she was in character, so i kind of wrote of her being MJ. it was a long shoot, let’s just say that, for MJ fans, speculating if she was or wasn’t haha. at first i didn’t want her to be, because MJ is my absolute favourite character, and ‘michelle’s’ look, and the descriptions of her character (zendaya constantly said she’s a nerd, has no friends, awkward, etc) was nothing like my favourite character.

but as time went on i started warming up to the idea because, nobody in their adulthood is who they were in highschool anymore. so i was completely fine if they decided to do a fresh take on mary jane, and show her become the character we always knew and loved. eventually get the red hair, step out of her shell, etc. my only thing was, the name ‘michelle’ needs to be fake. a placeholder. because i can’t have them changing my favourite characters name as well. that’s just one too many changes for me.

then when the movie was a few weeks from being out, press tours started, and zendaya, tom, jon, literally everyone constantly said that zendaya is not playing mary jane watson. they were so adamant about it and kind of got frustrated, because instead of answering questions about her character, zendaya just constantly had to fight off those rumours.

finally, the movie comes out.

every time i see zendaya’s character i laugh. literally. she was the best part about that entire movie besides tom. but then somebody in the movie called her michelle and i was like NOOOOOOOOOO. i wanted her to be mary jane so bad at this point.

then at the end of the film, ‘michelle’ says “my friends call me MJ.”

everyone is like……….?????????????????? wat.

(you can read my entire review of the movie when i first got out of the theater here if you’d like).

so anyways, after that, people were like, is she mary jane? is she not? what is happening.

a lot of people who don’t really care about mary jane watson as a character were all for it, because zendaya is so loveable that they just welcomed the new character, even if it was on the back of another one. i don’t blame them. if a character i wasn’t invested in changed dramatically, i’d just be like, k cool.

but unfortunately a lot of mary jane watson fans wereupset, me included. i finally got to a point where i accepted all the changes they were gonna make with mary jane watson, with the hopes that throughout the films, we got to see the classic MJ grow more and more. but the name thing was the only thing holding me back. her entire character, and then her entire name being different was just… not sitting well with me.

also let me just put this rumour to bed too: michelle’s last name isn’t ‘jones’. i keep seeing ‘michelle jones’ everywhere, people thinking it’s canon, news sites reporting it, but nowhere has it ever been announced ‘jones’ is her last name. that was just yet another rumour started by the internet. the end credits in homecoming even just said ‘michelle’ with no last name. at this point, michelle doesn’t have one yet.

then not even 12 hours after the film was out, kevin feige made a statement saying that, michelle is not meant to be mary jane watson or MJ, and that, that line in the movie was nothing more of a homage to the character.

which leads us to the present. we don’t know who the fuck michelle is, or what the hell is happening lol.

and i doubt we will know anything until the next movie, because marvel and sony like to keep everything so annoyingly secret to the point where it’s not enjoyable. that’s the answer though. we don’t know who zendaya is. marvel had said time and time again that michelle isn’t MJ, and that she’s just an original character. but marvel has lied SO many times, so i don’t know whether or not to believe them on this. they would have HAD to know calling her ‘MJ’ would spark confusion, and people wouldn’t be like “AW COOL TRIBUTE TO ANOTHER ICONIC, ESSENTIAL CHARACTER”????

if you want my two cents, which i know you didn’t ask for but i am gonna use this ask as an umbrella ask to just show people who ask me about this topic bc i am tired of answering it so many times lol

i want zendaya to be mary jane watson so badly. at this point, i literally can’t envision anybody else playing the character or doing her justice. i have grown to love zendaya so much as i started following her throughout this entire casting process/filming/press tour/etc. she is one of my favourite actresses and she’s honestly just mary jane through n through.

i just… can’t wrap my head around the michelle thing, if she’s going to be MJ still. i’m not sure if i will ever come to terms with that. that’s just altering my favourite character too much. so i am still holding onto hope that some weird ‘oh btw i’m not michelle, i’m actually mary jane’ moment happens, though i know that’s unlikely.

the more likely scenario is that she isn’t MJ at all, and just an original character, or that they’re combining an original character and mary jane together to make a hybrid character, which would break my heart lol.

anyways. this is so incredibly long, i warned you. if you’ve read up until now you’re a trooper, i love you, and you should give this a like to let me know if you did. 😊

you should also send me a direct message about your theories on the character. i would love to chat with you!

#mary jane watson #zendaya #mj watson #spiderman #spiderman homecoming #anonymous

68 notes · View notes

thiscrimsonsoul · 5 years ago

Note

Do you think that pietros death could be considered a "women in refrigerators" death. Basically his death was solely for Wanda's emotional pain and to an extent growth? Genuinely curious, because a friend and I were discussing that trope and how it could be done vice versa when that death popped into my mind. Thoughts and thank you!

{out of parikash} Hmm… I honestly don’t believe that’s the reason they killed Pietro off, but I will argue it in both ways because I have arguments for both, heh.

Okay so basically, this is about the idea that authors or moviemakers will sometimes build in throwaway supportive characters into a main character’s lives for the sole purpose of having them die horribly or provide some other sort of motivation for the character to then go in a desired direction. So think about… Batman for example. If Bruce Wayne’s parents hadn’t been murdered, he never would have had the motivation, drive, interest, desire, what have you for revenge and the truth. One could argue that he never would have become Batman at all, that it wasn’t some innate destiny of his, but rather it was fueled by the grief of losing his parents.

So… in the same vein… did MCU set Wanda up to be driven by grief and pain by killing off her parents, Pietro, Vision, etc. for the purpose of then seeing her through to the next arc of her character, whatever that might be? For the purpose of character development, if you will?

Argument Against This Concept

So… I don’t believe that they were actively trying to do this sort of thing with Wanda because at least her (adoptive) parents’ deaths and Vision’s were canon in the comics. Pietro lived well past when he died in the MCU, but even so, I think they were mostly sticking to comic canon for the others. Were they trying to force the issue with Wanda by adding another source of grief nd pain with Pietro? I don’t think so. And here’s why…

I think there are two major reasons why Pietro was killed off so early. One… is an IC issue and one is an OOC issue. The OOC reason I believe might actually be the reason, although I can’t find this actually confirmed anywhere. I think ATJ did not want to be in multiple Marvel movies. There are two reasons for this. One, he was reluctant to do any Marvel movies at all and had to actually be heavily convinced to play Pietro. It wasn’t anything about Pietro that he didn’t like, but rather it was that he didn’t want to get into a movie-making machine like MCU that makes movies with so many top- or high-billed actors. He was still up-and-coming at the time, and he felt like there were better ways to break out and showcase his talent than being lost in a sea of a hundred other people, heh. It wasn’t until he found out that EO was playing Wanda that he was finally on board, because he knew and respected her from Godzilla, and if she was giving MCU movies a serious look, then he felt like okay, maybe it won’t be such a bad thing. The other reason is that ATJ is very adamant about not being type-cast as any one character or type of character. He said in an interview that he looks to make each one of his roles very different from anything else he’s ever done. It’s the reason why he looks so different in each role with different style and color hair and outfits and such, different accents, different time periods, etc. It’s the reason why he can play a hero type character like Pietro in Ultron and then turn around and play a psychopathic killer like Ray Marcus in Nocturnal Animals. So ATJ may very well have said that he didn’t want Pietro to be a recurring character, I don’t know. I suspect it, but I have not seen or heard that confirmed anywhere.

The IC reason is… Pietro is a freaking game-breaking character, haha, but unlike Wanda nad several others that MCU dumbed down (she could have mind-controlled or –numbed Thanos way better and longer than Mantis, so wtf… she could have killed him in Infinity War, and AGAIN in Endgame), there is no way to dumb down Pietro’s powers. He runs fast and is superhumanly strong. *shrugs* That’s it. You can’t really… change that or alter it or delete it or whatever because it’s already so simple. Now… think about it… Pietro would have screwed up umpteen number of things that the MCU had planned. He would’ve read the entire Sokovia Accords in minutes, read the clause about imprisonment at the Raft, and both twins probably would have left and gone off on their own at that point because BULLSHIT.

Even if the twins did stay through Civil War, there is no way they would’ve gotten hold of Pietro to put in the Raft but let’s say they did… once Steve busts them out, he would convince Wanda to leave them all behind, including Vision. Because nobody puts his sister in restraints in a cell and drugs her. Like that would have been the ultimate betrayal and he never ever would have put up with that. Vision… did nothing to stop her imprisonment and didn’t come rescue her with Steve, so… he would convince her to forget him. That… would have made Infinity War interesting… but let’s tackle that.

Let’s say everything does somehow remain the same, only with superfluous added Pietro, heh. Geez, it’s like we’re talking about adding a spice or something, lol. But okay, so… fast forward all the freaking way to the end with Thanos trying to get the stone from Vision. Eh-hem. What-all… is stopping Pietro… from just walking up and taking the damned gauntlet right off Thanos’ hand? Hmm? Somebody explain this to me, haha. Like… Thanos literally would not see him coming, Pitro would run right up, grab the gauntlet, and use his superhuman strength to yank that sucker right off. Thanos would not be trying to stop him, wouldn’t be clenching his hand or anything because he wouldn’t have time to react to it. Once Pietro had the gauntlet, he could run anywhere he wanted with that shit and all he has to do is play keep-away from Thanos until the other Avengers can manage to kill him and boom. No need for Endgame, haha.

BUT… let’s say Pietro does die in Ultron… but they decide to bring him back with Clint during the time test. Same problem! At the end of the movie, Pietro can just run up to Thanos’ purple ass, take the gauntlet, they can kill him, he can run Tony’s ass to whatever power source he needs to use this gauntlet and not freaking die, and there we go. I mean, admittedly this is not as clean a fix-it as the Infinity War one, but STILL. XD My point is that they probably killed Pietro off because his powers were too much of a plot-breaking, purple-raisin-punching issue for the future.

Argument For This Concept

HOWEVER… having said ALL of that up there… what if MCU is trying to fuel Wanda’s guilt, grief, pain, etc. to drive her toward an end? And end… we might see in WandaVision or Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness? Here’s my theory for this…

Wanda becoming dangerous unhinged from reality, becoming delusional, and creating an alternate reality in which Vision is still alive and she has twins with him is canon in the comics. It was the result of Vision’s death having a huge effect on her psyche but also her mental instability reaching a breaking point. Why is Wanda so canonically mentally unstable? Chthon. So… Disney/MCU decided not to go the mutant way with Wanda and Pietro because Sony owned the rights to the whole mutant thing. In addition to scrapping that part of the twins’ genetics, they also inexplicably wrote out Wanda being influenced by the primordial god/archdemon Chthon at her birth, which infused her with his power, as he wanted to use her as a vessel which he planned to later return to and through which he intended to exert his power on earth.

Because Chthon is an evil, selfish, powerful, magical, and often chaotic force, Wanda gained her mental abilities to alter reality, read thoughts, and induce nightmares. Her telekinesis and other things are generally understood to be from her genetics as a mutant. So… in changing Wanda’s mutant status, Disney had to change her background and make her adoptive parents her actual parents to cut out her dad (Magneto) and her mom (who gave birth to the twins near Mount Wundagore, where Chthon’s home base was and where the High Evolutionary’s base was. In the comics, Wanda was affected by Chthon as birth and the twins were later experimented on by the High Evolutionary, but Disney omitted all of this and instead placed Strucker and Hydra in charge of the experiments. So it would seem that deleting their mutant heritage also caused Disney to remove Chthon, making Wanda’s tendency toward mental instability nonexistent. Or at least… not supernaturally caused.

Where am I going with this? Well… if they then intended all along to bring in the canon plot of Wanda creating this alternate reality so she could live happily ever after with Vision (as they seem to be doing with WandaVision), they needed some reason for her proverbial cheese to not just slip on her cracker but fall all the way off it, haha. The whole crux of that plot is that Wanda is so broken by the grief of losing Vision that she can’t stand to not have him around anymore, and thus she creates a reality in which she can be with him and have the family the always wanted. Well… MCU Wanda was never going to be that mentally fragile unless something else drove her to it. Just killing Vision alone wasn’t enough. So they set her up for a lot. Her parents die in this horrific event that traumatizes her. Then Pietro dies in an equally traumatic battle. Then Vision dies… at her hands… and then is brought back…and killed again in front of her. I could be wrong, but that would be enough to drive me off the deep end, heh. Not to mention Tony and Natasha being gone which I’m sure also had some effect on her, and Steve being… well… whatever the friggin’ frack they did with him in Endgame. So… one could make the argument that Disney needed to really hurt Wanda a lot, and very pointedly and repeatedly, in order to set up her mental breakdown in WandaVision. So in the absence of Chthon’s volatile and powerful influence on her mental stability, Disney decided to just break her down through tragedy, trauma, and loss… to bring her around to the same point she would have been at in the canon comic world.

*shrugs* Since WandaVision isn’t out yet, all we can do is speculate, but… given that the title of Doc Strange’s next movie is In the Multiverse of Madness… Haha, I mean… whose multiverse and madness are we talking about here? Wanda’s? Could be. ;)

Okay you know what? I kinda convinced myself, and now I think it’s both hahaha. I think that there were other reasons why they had to kill Pietro off specifically, but that he may still have been part of a setup for Wanda to come back around to her canon comic place in preparation for WandaVision and Multiverse of Madness. That’s my final answer, lol.

0 notes