Is Marvel's shared cinematic universe doomed to collapse?

[enyawd72]

I think it is...much as I hate to say it.

I've lost interest in SHIELD, mostly because of Clark Gregg. I like the Coulson character a lot, but I just don't feel he's a strong enough lead. I liked him much better as a supporting character. But the biggest problem with trying to tie all these films and TV series together are the glaring absences that constantly appear. They create plot holes, confusion, and lapses in logic and are very noticeable.

In the comics, you can throw any and all characters together at any time to have things make sense storywise. In the reality of film and television, you just can't, and the problems it's creating are only going to get bigger and bigger. Where were the rest of Tony Stark's teammates in IM 3 when his home was blown sky high? Where was Tony when Cap and Black Widow were being manhunted in WS? Why haven't Black Widow or Hawkeye ever appeared on SHIELD? They're two of the best agents. Nobody has seen the Hulk anywhere since Avengers.

And it's only going to get worse. The more films they make and the more characters they introduce, it's going to get to the point where it's just impossible to juggle them all, and I fear the Marvel cinematic universe will eventually collapse under it's own weight. Today's comics are convoluted enough...add to that the restrictions of the film and television mediums, and it not only won't work, it literally can't work.

[MegoSteve]

It's the same reason Superman doesn't save the day in every DC story: no character can be everywhere. Even though they aren't onscreen, they still exist somewhere with their own set of problems to deal with.

[enyawd72]

^I get that...and you're right. But these films aren't every story. Supposedly they're the big events that occur within this shared universe, so it only makes sense that other characters would be around. I mean, nobody came around to help Tony Stark when he was attacked. Not even to check on him. Ditto with Cap. And people DO notice. I heard people in the theatre during both IM 3 and Cap 2 saying...where's Thor? Where are the Avengers? Why aren't they helping?

I know that they can't all be around all the time, but for these supposedly major events storywise, they should be. In the comics, they can be and usually are. They've even mentioned Dr. Strange a few times as an "asset" but haven't called on him even once to counter Loki's magic, against which even Thor is pretty much powerless? It's little things like that.

[palitoy]

The problem with this logic is you assume everyone cares about such things. The general public just wants to be entertained, the Transformers movies are paved with continuity errors and problems, they still make more money than better written movies.

I pick and choose the Marvel Universe, I'm not alone. I don't follow AOS and I probably won't go see another Thor movie, Dr Strange? I'll wait for cable.

[ubermanx]

I don't foresee a problem here at all. The sheer amount of characters to pull from is ridiculous as are the potential stories. If Robert Downey Jr pulls out and never does another Iron Man appearance they can make three Avengers movies with Ant-Man or the Vision or with War Machine and never have to reference a single Iron Man continuity thread. What works in the comics can and will work in the movies. I guess I am also not seeing the very noticeable plot holes that you see. Mind you, I have been raised on 35 years of comics where each new creative team makes their own tweaks and twists with characters. So I'm okay if the same happens in the movies (up to a point).

I also fully agree with Palitoy ... the average person doesn't care and are not hung up on minutia continuity. My wife loved Avengers and Guardians but has not watched a single episode of Marvel's Agents of SHEILD. She doesn't even know Coulson is alive. If he shows up in Avengers 2 she'll look at me and I'll say "He came back in the TV show using alien blood" and she'll nod and go back to watching Thor's golden locks and rippling abs as he hits things with a hammer.

- Marty

[Earth 2 Chris]

Marvel and DC have continued publishing comics in shared universes since 1940, so I think we're good. There have been comic storylines that pushed the boundaries of the shared universe with little to no interference from "outside" characters (Batman: No Man's Land, I'm looking at you), but it's fairly well accepted that in Iron Man's movie or comic, Iron Man is the hero, and he's going to get the job done. Same for Cap and Thor. Heck, I thought Cap: Winter Soldier did a great job pulling in Black Widow and Fury, the former having not been in the previous film, and the later only for a cameo.

I don't watch AoS, and had dropped out of season 1 by the time Winter Soldier hit, and I never missed a beat. The failure or success of that show really doesn't affect the movies. To me, it's bonus features for the films I haven't gotten to yet...and don't really need to, if timing doesn't work out.

Chris

[MIB41]

I look at the television piece as a more detailed (day to day) kind of telling that doesn't have the responsibilities of the theatrical franchise which operates on a different story arc that cherry picks events to advance the narrative so people will want another sequel. In my eyes, television is going to offer allot more throw away stories for the sole purpose of immersing you in that world,(which I think is it's prime objective). From a story plot analogy, television are subplots in a chapter, whereas the theatrical movies are accumulative chapters covering a greater space in time. They each have a function, but advance at different speeds. It would be difficult to connect one with the other.

[hedrap]

Dwayne, I've said what you're pointing out from the start, but it's a futile argument.

Clark Gregg is just the next in a line of fanboy overhype. The show should have been built around Cobie Smulders, as Hill tries to replace Coulson after his death. You then could have had a mystery around "is Coulson really dead", and tie it into the AI stuff of Arnim Zola/Jarvis/Vision/Ultron. He could have been a more advanced Majel Barrett of the Helicarrier and fill a Deus Ex Machina role.

I think he was supposed to be Vision, but that was scrapped and now he's what...possibly Mar-Vell? I'm not sure if any of it matters. The best ratings this year equal the worst from last year. If Whedon's wife and brother weren't the producers, ABC wouldn't consider a third season.

Either way, I still see it ending up on Netflix. Defenders is the real make or break of the MCU. Netflix should get a massive boost from those shows, but if they don't, then Marvel will have some big decisions to make.

And everything rests on Cumberbatch. RDJ is long gone after Civil War and Infinity War. They're looking to Benedict to fill the quirky/handsome smart-arse role.

What's really interesting to me, is last year, once I realized they were placing the Inhumans in the MCU role for the X-Men, I finally saw the logic in Guardians. GoTG is their Fantastic Four. You can see how the mix-n-matched the different parts of the FF to come up with GoTG.

Star-Lord - Johnny as the Leader.

Groot - Thing's monster-aesthetic/good soul with Rocket as Ben Grimm's persona.

Drax - Thing's strength plus Reed's persona.

Gamora - is Space Elektra, except her adopted daughter background now parallels the FF reboot's Sue's adoption, as Ultimate FF Sue has an large Father figure presence, though not as amped as Thanos.

As for Spidey, he's a cash cow so they can't replace him like they have with FF and X-Men. But at the same time, Sony is killing his value. Maybe that's why they keep pulling Nova off the slate. If they can't get Spidey back and Sony goes ahead, they'll use him to fill the Super-Powered Teen void.

[madmarva]

Eventually, the super-hero or Marvel genre will lose inertia. I don't think it will burst or collapse, but deminish and possibly dry up like Westerns did in the 70s and 80s.

I totally agree that the continuity will eventually get wonky, really it already is. While I like the idea of AOS connecting with the films, the WB might have made the right play keeping them separate. Flash and Arrow are successes without being weighed down by the films, which may do well, flop or in some cases never happen. A Flash film is planned, but it could easily be scrapped.

But I'm With Brian and Chris in that I don't think the general public sweats the continuity or logic of the films or at least not to the degree many of us who have so much invested in the characters.

At some point the characters will have to be recast if not rebooted and that will be interesting, but it doesn't necessarily doom things. A lot of folks swear by Sean Connery as Bond, but the franchise has worked for decades to varying degrees. Same with Batman. Spidey's not going away either no matter who produces the films.