Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Its cool. I get what you were saying.

And i get that somebody, no mater what, will be upset about something.

I was simply saying those people being upset is acceptable and and expected. You cant make a female led movie without them getting their panties in a twist. So good. Their anger means carol danvers is being done in a way that at least heads in the correct direction.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
"Anti feminist" is like saying "pro racist" in that, for whatever reason, you have decided that equality or representation or whatever is something that needs to be fought or have a stand taken against it.

Yeah. Equality activists have idiots amongst them. But the core message is a "no gak" thing any reasonable person is for.

Basically, who gives a gak what the anti feminists have to say?

I was attempting for a term more neutral than incel or MRA. I'm talking about a very small segment of the audience who are very active in YouTube comments. I saw the marketing as a sort of a negative dog whistle, where most people won't notice anything political but a small few will be triggered.

And for better or for worse, stirring up the anti-whatevers or tiptoeing around them is now an unavoidable aspect of marketing.

I'm with Lance on this one - that part of the audience is so small, they probably aren't worth worrying about.

This just needs to be a good/decent movie and any of that really won't matter at all.

 Lance845 wrote:
I was simply saying those people being upset is acceptable and and expected. You cant make a female led movie without them getting their panties in a twist. So good. Their anger means carol danvers is being done in a way that at least heads in the correct direction.

To be clear, this is only yet a reaction to how the film is being marketed.

We have yet to see how Carol Danvers is being presented, what her story is, what level of agency she will demonstrate, and to what extent Xth wave themes will be presented or addressed. As a USAF pilot, she can't be so deeply oppressed, as that's a pretty high profile and competitive assignment.

I think a lot of people are reading an awful lot from a two minute trailer...... and that is just fine.

I know I am willing to give it a shot. If it is even a second level Marvel movie (such as Dr. Strange), I am okay with that as I know next to nothing about Captain Marvel.

Give me a good story and I don't care if the lead is a bisexual transgender mixed race African-Asian; it's still a good story.

If the story is bad, I don't care if the lead is an empowered white male; it's still a BAD story.

The exception, of course, being when you set a story in one culture, and have a lead from another culture come along to save them from themselves...

Captain Marvel will not suffer from the problem of being inexplicably excellent at whatever she tries. Even before being turned into a super warrior by the Kree, Carol Danvers was already an elite fighter pilot. So I think we can put that aside.

The actual issue is, being really powerful doesn’t actually amount to being interesting. Hollywood forgets this simple truth all the time and, lately, especially regarding female characters.

 Genoside07 wrote:
Terminator 2 was a great film with a natural progression of Sarah Conner. She finds out a future robot is out to kill her and starts to
prepare by improving herself; training with guns, there is a reason and history shown.

Captain Marvel is looking like the new Star Wars with the Mary sue syndrome; No reason why the person is so good at something. Just natural.

Rey a homeless girl that spends her days tearing down old war equipment suddenly can fly like a ace and do powerful things with the force with no training.

That is bad story telling but people try to lump it in with misogynist and feminist to deflect the real problem .. its a bad movie.

I am hoping they don't fail but they must have a good story. the current trailer was't the best so I start to worry.

Well, to be fair, at least to a layman like me, the explanation why Captain Marvel is "good at stuff" is because she was essentially kidnapped, brainwashed, and made into a living weapon?

 Genoside07 wrote:
Terminator 2 was a great film with a natural progression of Sarah Conner. She finds out a future robot is out to kill her and starts to
prepare by improving herself; training with guns, there is a reason and history shown.

Captain Marvel is looking like the new Star Wars with the Mary sue syndrome; No reason why the person is so good at something. Just natural.

It... really isn't. That's obvious even from the just the trailers. Earth background aside (where she's at least a professional fighter pilot), she gets power (and maybe skills) pumped into her in a process that's apparently tortuous agony, and overwrites her original mind and memories.
Her power comes from somewhere specific and has a high cost attached. There isn't any Mary Sue 'just a natural' in play here in any way at all.


The challenge is making the alien warrior persona breaking under her innate humanity interesting and believable. We'll actually need to the see the film for that.

 AegisGrimm wrote:

 Genoside07 wrote:
Terminator 2 was a great film with a natural progression of Sarah Conner. She finds out a future robot is out to kill her and starts to
prepare by improving herself; training with guns, there is a reason and history shown.

Captain Marvel is looking like the new Star Wars with the Mary sue syndrome; No reason why the person is so good at something. Just natural.

Rey a homeless girl that spends her days tearing down old war equipment suddenly can fly like a ace and do powerful things with the force with no training.

That is bad story telling but people try to lump it in with misogynist and feminist to deflect the real problem .. its a bad movie.

I am hoping they don't fail but they must have a good story. the current trailer was't the best so I start to worry.

Well, to be fair, at least to a layman like me, the explanation why Captain Marvel is "good at stuff" is because she was essentially kidnapped, brainwashed, and made into a living weapon?

Well... it depends on a lot of things...

If it's closer to original origin Carol, she was an air force pilot and a bad ass in her own right. Then gets enhanced (Think Captain America except she wasn't a diseased weakling to begin with).
"
If it's closer to the current origin, her mother is Kree so she is a human Kree hybrid and the "enhancments" are less enhancements and more a trigger to awaken her Kree genetic potential.

It's much less shes "good at stuff because reasons" and more she has always lived a life that would have made her good at stuff and then stuff happens to her that kicks her up to another level.

As an aside, I don't think Marvel have ever actually said that she was the most powerful person in the marvel universe. I believe they said she was the most powerful hero we have seen so far. If the likes of Quasar or Adam Warlock were to arrive and be heroes I am sure they would at the very least rival her if not out class her.

 Lance845 wrote:
As an aside, I don't think Marvel have ever actually said that she was the most powerful person in the marvel universe. I believe they said she was the most powerful hero we have seen so far. If the likes of Quasar or Adam Warlock were to arrive and be heroes I am sure they would at the very least rival her if not out class her.

CM isn't be anywhere near close to the most powerful person in the MCU. That honor currently sits with Thanos, wielder of the Infinity Gauntlet, master of the Infinity Stones.

If we are talking about heroes, Guardians 2 showed the cocoon of Adam Warlock, currently work in progress. Presumably, he survived the Snap.

If we are talking about heroes who we have seen fully-formed, when the Fox-Disney merger completes, the most powerful hero in the MCU will be the Silver Surfer, master of the Power Cosmic.

Well, and that's the thing too. Marvel has plenty of cosmic level threats she can fight so she's not just curb-stomping normals. She'll be a powerful character, but with powerful opposition the film can stay interesting.

It's actually a more serious problem for the Marvel movies that already happened. Cap and the Avengers spent a lot of time kicking normals around like schoolyard bullies, because of a lack of decent villains.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
As an aside, I don't think Marvel have ever actually said that she was the most powerful person in the marvel universe. I believe they said she was the most powerful hero we have seen so far. If the likes of Quasar or Adam Warlock were to arrive and be heroes I am sure they would at the very least rival her if not out class her.

CM isn't be anywhere near close to the most powerful person in the MCU. That honor currently sits with Thanos, wielder of the Infinity Gauntlet, master of the Infinity Stones.

If we are talking about heroes, Guardians 2 showed the cocoon of Adam Warlock, currently work in progress. Presumably, he survived the Snap.

If we are talking about heroes who we have seen fully-formed, when the Fox-Disney merger completes, the most powerful hero in the MCU will be the Silver Surfer, master of the Power Cosmic.

Wouldn’t Phoenix overpower Silver Surfer?

From what I can tell, it is being coded and marketed that way.

It can be both.

There is a sub-faction of toolbags who can't stand to see non-white CIS male leads succeed, thinking the world is some sort of zero-sum game in which the presence of a non-white CIS male lead somehow directly devalues their existence as white CIS males. feth 'em.

this is not the place for that kind of thing John

On Topic: I have watched the trailer a couple more times and she is growing on me, I think I have nailed down why i did not like it, its her accent, she sounds so dim and comes across as wooden, not her fault i think its a british/american thing, yanks from certain parts of the US just sound dim to us sometimes, and vice versa of course.

"like oh ma gawwwwd"

yuck, that Cali accent

Please!

Not this again!

 Mysterio wrote:
Please!

Not this again!

Fair one, Editing previous post.

 timetowaste85 wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
As an aside, I don't think Marvel have ever actually said that she was the most powerful person in the marvel universe. I believe they said she was the most powerful hero we have seen so far. If the likes of Quasar or Adam Warlock were to arrive and be heroes I am sure they would at the very least rival her if not out class her.

CM isn't be anywhere near close to the most powerful person in the MCU. That honor currently sits with Thanos, wielder of the Infinity Gauntlet, master of the Infinity Stones.

If we are talking about heroes, Guardians 2 showed the cocoon of Adam Warlock, currently work in progress. Presumably, he survived the Snap.

If we are talking about heroes who we have seen fully-formed, when the Fox-Disney merger completes, the most powerful hero in the MCU will be the Silver Surfer, master of the Power Cosmic.

Wouldn’t Phoenix overpower Silver Surfer?

Full-on Phoenix isn't a hero, but an existential Cosmic threat a la Thanos or Glactus. I believe that Thanos would be more powerful than Phoenix, but it's hard to say - both villains

I don’t think Phoenix is a Villain (or hero) so much as a force of nature?

 AduroT wrote:
I don’t think Phoenix is a Villain (or hero) so much as a force of nature?

Same goes for Galactus. He's not a malicious entity trying to ruin or subjugate others. He simply is and what he does is simply a function of his existence.

Genoside07 wrote:Captain Marvel is looking like the new Star Wars with the Mary sue syndrome; No reason why the person is so good at something. Just natural.

So off base. It's been addressed already, but you should look up what it takes to first pass basic training and advanced training in the Air Force, and THEN compare that to what you have to go through to be a fighter pilot. If a woman found a Green Lantern ring, would that make her a Mary Sue right off the bat? Provided she could will constructs, of course. Now if a female anime illustrator or engineer found the ring, would they be a Mary Sue? Nope, not in the slightest. Carol's power upgrade has nothing to do with anything but chance. Her indoctrination, which I assume will come with downloaded fighting abilities, isn't any more Mary Sue than the GL example. Yelling Mary Sue at anything you don't like not only cheapens the term, but makes you look petty.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

 StygianBeach wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
For Marvel a "failure" is what others might consider a fair success. The Hulk movie, for example. Or Thor 2. Not "bad", but not especially "good" compared to the other movies.

CM is already dividing the MCU audience, simply by being a feminist film, but if it's a fundamentally good film, it'll do great like Wonder Woman.

Is CM a feminist film?

As far as I can see, so far anyway it is a superhero film.

What did I miss?

From what I can tell, it is being coded and marketed that way.

It can be both.

There is a sub-faction of toolbags who can't stand to see non-white CIS male leads succeed, thinking the world is some sort of zero-sum game in which the presence of a non-white CIS male lead somehow directly devalues their existence as white CIS males. feth 'em.

As far as the bolded: just... wow. What if the film doesn't identify as a feminist film, does it then matter how it's "coded"?

As far as the red: there is also a sub-section of toolbags who see subjugation and ostracization where none exists, thinking that any criticism of a non-white CIS male lead is automatically every applicable -ism or -phobia that can peripherally be applicable because non-white CIS male characters are beyond reproach.

See how easy that was? Wouldn't it be nifty if we could keep politics out of this discussion and simply focus on what actually DOES OR DOES NOT make a character "good" in a film like this?



All I have to say about trailers is that they can be misleading. Case in point: The Dark Knight Rises trailer made it look like the film would be good.

 Just Tony wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

 StygianBeach wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
For Marvel a "failure" is what others might consider a fair success. The Hulk movie, for example. Or Thor 2. Not "bad", but not especially "good" compared to the other movies.

CM is already dividing the MCU audience, simply by being a feminist film, but if it's a fundamentally good film, it'll do great like Wonder Woman.

Is CM a feminist film?

As far as I can see, so far anyway it is a superhero film.

What did I miss?

From what I can tell, it is being coded and marketed that way.

It can be both.

There is a sub-faction of toolbags who can't stand to see non-white CIS male leads succeed, thinking the world is some sort of zero-sum game in which the presence of a non-white CIS male lead somehow directly devalues their existence as white CIS males. feth 'em.

As far as the bolded: just... wow. What if the film doesn't identify as a feminist film, does it then matter how it's "coded"?

As far as the red: there is also a sub-section of toolbags who see subjugation and ostracization where none exists, thinking that any criticism of a non-white CIS male lead is automatically every applicable -ism or -phobia that can peripherally be applicable because non-white CIS male characters are beyond reproach.

See how easy that was?

No, I only see how stupid it was.

It is an absolute fact that the film was deliberately marketed and coded as feminist. There was no need to add explicitly feminist verbiage above and beyond the actual footage, but Disney/Marvel did so. There was clear intent to do so, in order to get a response (presumably to pull the WW crowd).

As I have said, we can wait and see what the actual film does, but to ignore a clear political intent in the marketing is just stupid. Given Marvel history, they don't market a film at odds to the actual product. They didn't market Thor: Ragnarok as dark and gritty and then surprise the audience with a buddy comedy. They didn't market Infinity war as a slapstick yuk-fest. I doubt that they are marketing CM as a feminist film, and then going to release a flim that caters to the Red Pill crowd.

I think his point is more than there is in fact a pretty wide gap - chasm-like, even - between producing a full fat feminist allegory in superhero movie form, and "catering to the Red Pill crowd".

I agree they're playing up the "this is our Wonder Woman" angle in the marketing(the "With Her" text wasn't exactly subtle), but that doesn't(and hopefully won't) necessarily mean the film itself will be a ludicrous sledgehammer.

Yes, let’s not confuse “I have concerns about this film” with “I ammhoping my concerns all prove correct.” I think there are some red flags here but I will be glad to be wrong.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
As an aside, I don't think Marvel have ever actually said that she was the most powerful person in the marvel universe. I believe they said she was the most powerful hero we have seen so far. If the likes of Quasar or Adam Warlock were to arrive and be heroes I am sure they would at the very least rival her if not out class her.

CM isn't be anywhere near close to the most powerful person in the MCU. That honor currently sits with Thanos, wielder of the Infinity Gauntlet, master of the Infinity Stones.

If we are talking about heroes, Guardians 2 showed the cocoon of Adam Warlock, currently work in progress. Presumably, he survived the Snap.

If we are talking about heroes who we have seen fully-formed, when the Fox-Disney merger completes, the most powerful hero in the MCU will be the Silver Surfer, master of the Power Cosmic.

Wouldn’t Phoenix overpower Silver Surfer?

Full-on Phoenix isn't a hero, but an existential Cosmic threat a la Thanos or Glactus. I believe that Thanos would be more powerful than Phoenix, but it's hard to say - both villains

Phoenix would easily overpower Thanos and could go toe to toe with Galactus on a regular day. Phoenix in Jean Gray could tangle with Infinity and Eternity.

The most powerful person in the MCU isn't even Thanos with the Infinity Gauntlet. Since this is a Marvel Universe that would be The One Above All and even then, there are 2-3 tiers of people still above Thanos fully powered up.

It appears your knowledge of the MCU and Marvel Universe in general is as good as your stunning social analysis of this film. Good work, as always.

The MCU isn't the Matvel Universe, and it hasn't shown anyone more powerful than Thanos,.so it's obvious that your comprehension and ability to understand context is far below your presumption of my knowledge of thing Marvel.

Yeah, it’s important to note that so far in the movies Phoenix hasn’t been PHEONIX, but rather regular Jean Grey getting cranky, which is still strong, but not like PHEONIX levels strong.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The MCU isn't the Matvel Universe, and it hasn't shown anyone more powerful than Thanos,.so it's obvious that your comprehension and ability to understand context is far below your presumption of my knowledge of thing Marvel.

Dude...could you write that post any more condescendingly and like you were channeling Comic Book Guy from the Simpsons? I mean...pull back a little there.

 timetowaste85 wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The MCU isn't the Matvel Universe, and it hasn't shown anyone more powerful than Thanos,.so it's obvious that your comprehension and ability to understand context is far below your presumption of my knowledge of thing Marvel.

Dude...could you write that post any more condescendingly

No, though I did try. Dude was being a dick, so I replied accordingly.

Hmm, somehow I missed that line. Yeah, apologies. He was definitely nastier!

 AduroT wrote:
Yeah, it’s important to note that so far in the movies Phoenix hasn’t been PHEONIX, but rather regular Jean Grey getting cranky, which is still strong, but not like PHEONIX levels strong.

Yeah, its also important to note that we were talking about the most powerful heroes in the marvel universe, which thanos, galactus, and the pheonix force along with all the universal entities like eternity and the one above all are not.

Trying to show boat your deep comic book knowlege about power levels of obscure characters is meaningless when they dont fit the criteria of the thing actually being discussed.

And to THAT end, the pheonix force couldnt do gak to galactus. Galactus is the sole survivor of the previous iteration of the universe who cannot be truely harmed by anything that is not the universe itself or the ultimate nulifier or his own power the power cosmic.

Likewise the inifity gems are actual fragments of a living entity that is the universe. The pheonix force is less than those gems. Anyone with the gauntlet could unmake the pheonix force if they desired. What impact that would have on reality is something else.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The MCU isn't the Matvel Universe, and it hasn't shown anyone more powerful than Thanos,.so it's obvious that your comprehension and ability to understand context is far below your presumption of my knowledge of thing Marvel.

Dude...could you write that post any more condescendingly

No, though I did try. Dude was being a dick, so I replied accordingly.

So how about both of you knock it off - you've both been around long enough to know better.

It's Christmas, so I'm going to leave it be - but, seriously, knock it back a notch, and let's all get along, m'kay?