Good job he's secretive, often kinda haughty, possibly a spy when he was an Avenger and always has split loyalties between protecting Wakanda and being a worldwide hero.
Captain America's flaws are pretty negligible as well, amounting to 'kind of a Dudley Do Right' and 'listens to a lot of Glenn Miller'.
BP's biggest problem is that writers have, with very few exceptions, not really known what to do with him. He doesn't, Chris Priest's run aside, have a bedrock of classic stories to rest on and say look this is who this guy is. Maybe he's a really difficult guy to make work, I dunno.
War Machine. Now that's a boring hero. Iron Man without the drinking problem and winning personality but with a shoulder mounted minigun and also his armour is gun metal grey. Queue a jaw-breaking yawn.
Marvel Studios has been unequivocal: Yes, someday. They see Tony Stark as being just as evergreen as James Bond. But the unanswered follow-up is: Will a fourth movie be with Robert Downey Jr., the star who helped launch this entire universe of interlocked superhero films?
Everyone is playing coy on that front, but we may find out more this weekend when Marvel starts filling in the blanks on all those untitled movies that have been dated through 2019.
On the set of Avengers: Age of Ultron, EW asked Downey point-blank: Does he want to star in an Iron Man 4?
His answer wasn’t so point-blank. In fact, he starts to sound a little like a Magic 8-Ball as he tries to keep it vague. But the answer I gleaned was: Signs point to yes.
“It’s down to Kevin [Feige, Marvel Studios president] and Ike [Perlmutter, CEO of Marvel Entertainment] and Disney to come to us with what the proposal is, and that’s on us to agree or disagree,” Downey said. “When things are going great, there’s a lot of agreement.”
So far, so good. Each Marvel sequel has outgrossed its predecessor, and Iron Man remains the MVP. And Downey knows it.
“Right now, this has just been swell, hasn’t it?” the actor said with a big smile, during a break in filming on Avengers sequel. “This has been a really good one and it feels good and we’re having a good time.”
If you’re counting, that’s three “goods.” But three isn’t the number that counts most.
Downey was also listed by Forbes this week as the highest-paid actor in the world, having earned $75 million over the past year—mostly from his backend deal for Iron Man 3, the highest-grossing live-action movie of last year at $1.21 billion. (Counting animation, Frozen ended up as No.1 globally with $1.27 billion.)
Until his bosses decide he’s too rich for their blood, Downey says he’s happy to hold on to the iron mask. “It’s that thing of: Why give up the belt when it feels like you can barely get jabbed?” he says—then adds a caveat. “Most people are saying that right when they get knocked out.”
He shrugs, and until Marvel says otherwise, Downey leaves fans with points of ellipses and a grin: “The future is, as usual, uncertain.”
Nintendo Console Codes
Switch (JeffConser): SW-3353-5433-5137 Wii U: Skeldare - 3DS: 1848-1663-9345
PM Me if you add me!
HAIL HYDRA
+5
Options
Brainiac 8Don't call me Shirley...Registered Userregular
Whelp, I guess we can expect one of the Phase 3 movies to be Iron Man 4. I'm ok with that because Downey is awesome as Stark.
What will really blow peoples lids is the Danvers/Rhodey relationship.
0
Options
Brainiac 8Don't call me Shirley...Registered Userregular
I know that we are talking about new heroes they could make movies on, but seriously I would love for Black Widow to get her own movie and have Hawkeye in it. Do the whole movie as a spy/espionage type story.
I know that we are talking about new heroes they could make movies on, but seriously I would love for Black Widow to get her own movie and have Hawkeye in it. Do the whole movie as a spy/espionage type story.
There's talks going on and it seems very likely. How well Lucy does in theaters will also probably help.
Nintendo Console Codes
Switch (JeffConser): SW-3353-5433-5137 Wii U: Skeldare - 3DS: 1848-1663-9345
PM Me if you add me!
HAIL HYDRA
0
Options
Mego Thor"I say thee...NAY!"Registered Userregular
I just look at Coming to America as a Black Panther prequel.
Which makes James Earl Jones the previous Black Panther.
"No, T'Challa. I am your father."
0
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
A Black Widow movie would work if it is genuinely a spy movie, and not just say it's one thing when it's actually another (Cap 2 was a good movie but Feige & Co. hella oversold the political thriller angle).
And then you bring in Yelena Belova as her Russian replacement (that could be Strahovski if she's denied Carol), maybe even have Crimson Dynamo, make Jimmy Woo the US spy guy unless he's shown up in the TV show or just make him head of ATLAS, you even bring in Natasha's current lawyer from her new series, it can really work well.
0
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
I know that we are talking about new heroes they could make movies on, but seriously I would love for Black Widow to get her own movie and have Hawkeye in it. Do the whole movie as a spy/espionage type story.
There's talks going on and it seems very likely. How well Lucy does in theaters will also probably help.
I really hope that's not the case, because Lucy looks like a terrible movie. The premise of "humans only use 10% of their brains but if they use 100% they have magical powers!" has been debunked in the public for the better part of 20 years. Even if the premise made sense, the story looks atrocious based on the previews.
You can get away with Jet Li doing a ridiculous action movie plot because you just want to see him kick ass. People, unfortunately, expect more from Scarlett Johansson as an established dramatic actor, if she's going to be in her own action movie. One way to get around this is to narrow the scope, focus on the story, and let her acting chops carry the movie (a la Liam Neeson and Taken). Instead, they've opted for a crazy "blockbuster" feel with special effects and ridiculous over-the-top action with a terribad plot.
Black Panther has been ill served by comics named Black Panther, except Christopher Priest's run a while ago. I dunno how someone can look at even an outline of his character and say 'tch boring', though.
King, living embodiment of a god, acrobat, martial artist, genius scientist and very much his own man.
Don't forget Jack Kirby's Black Panther run! That was some amazing comics.
Some characters can give a writer alot more or alot less to work with then others.
For talented writers that's an opportunity for them to leave their mark on characters. Before Priest Black Panther didn't interest me, and now I'm a big fan of the character.
That's his role in Iron Man movies. When Rhodey's the star they can define him however they want. An Iron Man piloted by a soldier, that answers to the US military is a movie I'd love to watch. Plenty of fun things to do with a concept like that. Cheadle is a rock star the movies haven't given his due yet. Rhodey's had his own series in comics before, too.
The problem with Black Panther, what what I've gathered of what I've skimmed off the net, and seeing as he is characterized on EMH, is that it seems like if it came down to saving the entire world, or saving Wakanda, he would let the world burn to keep his homeland safe. Contrast that to Captain America, who I could absolutely see sacrificing the USA if it meant the other 6.7 billion people on the planet lived.
Some characters can give a writer alot more or alot less to work with then others.
For talented writers that's an opportunity for them to leave their mark on characters. Before Priest Black Panther didn't interest me, and now I'm a big fan of the character.
That implies it's a blank slate rather then simply a bland slate.
0
Options
Brainiac 8Don't call me Shirley...Registered Userregular
It's too bad that Hudlin's run and the marriage of Black Panther and Storm kinda was horrific in how terrible it all was.
Some characters can give a writer alot more or alot less to work with then others.
For talented writers that's an opportunity for them to leave their mark on characters. Before Priest Black Panther didn't interest me, and now I'm a big fan of the character.
That implies it's a blank slate rather then simply a bland slate.
Not a full blank slate, talented writers do that with amazing characters.
edit: The MCU did this with Tony Stark. He's more serious in the comics and a talented businessman.
The problem with Black Panther, what what I've gathered of what I've skimmed off the net, and seeing as he is characterized on EMH, is that it seems like if it came down to saving the entire world, or saving Wakanda, he would let the world burn to keep his homeland safe. Contrast that to Captain America, who I could absolutely see sacrificing the USA if it meant the other 6.7 billion people on the planet lived.
That's what intrigues me with BP. He's a contrast to Cap and the Avengers in many ways. He follows his own path, like Namor does.
Harry Dresden on
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
A Black Widow movie would work if it is genuinely a spy movie, and not just say it's one thing when it's actually another (Cap 2 was a good movie but Feige & Co. hella oversold the political thriller angle).
And then you bring in Yelena Belova as her Russian replacement (that could be Strahovski if she's denied Carol), maybe even have Crimson Dynamo, make Jimmy Woo the US spy guy unless he's shown up in the TV show or just make him head of ATLAS, you even bring in Natasha's current lawyer from her new series, it can really work well.
I don't know how they would do ATLAS and make it at all recognizable.
The problem with Black Panther, what what I've gathered of what I've skimmed off the net, and seeing as he is characterized on EMH, is that it seems like if it came down to saving the entire world, or saving Wakanda, he would let the world burn to keep his homeland safe. Contrast that to Captain America, who I could absolutely see sacrificing the USA if it meant the other 6.7 billion people on the planet lived.
I see that as less "problem" and more "story opportunity".
That said, just on its face, a black superhero named "Black Panther" seems way blaxploitation to me, especially (unless I'm forgetting someone) being the first black superhero to get his own movie. The character himself may be entirely inoffensive, but that name just seems like baaaaaad optics.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
The problem with Black Panther, what what I've gathered of what I've skimmed off the net, and seeing as he is characterized on EMH, is that it seems like if it came down to saving the entire world, or saving Wakanda, he would let the world burn to keep his homeland safe. Contrast that to Captain America, who I could absolutely see sacrificing the USA if it meant the other 6.7 billion people on the planet lived.
I see that as less "problem" and more "story opportunity".
That said, just on its face, a black superhero named "Black Panther" seems way blaxploitation to me, especially (unless I'm forgetting someone) being the first black superhero to get his own movie. The character himself may be entirely inoffensive, but that name just seems like baaaaaad optics.
The problem with Black Panther, what what I've gathered of what I've skimmed off the net, and seeing as he is characterized on EMH, is that it seems like if it came down to saving the entire world, or saving Wakanda, he would let the world burn to keep his homeland safe. Contrast that to Captain America, who I could absolutely see sacrificing the USA if it meant the other 6.7 billion people on the planet lived.
I see that as less "problem" and more "story opportunity".
That said, just on its face, a black superhero named "Black Panther" seems way blaxploitation to me, especially (unless I'm forgetting someone) being the first black superhero to get his own movie. The character himself may be entirely inoffensive, but that name just seems like baaaaaad optics.
It makes him hard to fit into the current Avenger's/MCU mold though, without turning him into an outright villain.
Hhahahahah. Sure i like Strahovski and i like Carol Danvers. But both of them merged together on screen, in a film? Yeaaah, no thanks. Strahovski would be a bad choice for Captain Marvel.
The problem with Black Panther, what what I've gathered of what I've skimmed off the net, and seeing as he is characterized on EMH, is that it seems like if it came down to saving the entire world, or saving Wakanda, he would let the world burn to keep his homeland safe. Contrast that to Captain America, who I could absolutely see sacrificing the USA if it meant the other 6.7 billion people on the planet lived.
I see that as less "problem" and more "story opportunity".
That said, just on its face, a black superhero named "Black Panther" seems way blaxploitation to me, especially (unless I'm forgetting someone) being the first black superhero to get his own movie. The character himself may be entirely inoffensive, but that name just seems like baaaaaad optics.
It helps that there's actually such a thing as a black panther. As opposed to just putting "black" in front of any old noun, like Black Lightning or Black Goliath.
The problem with Black Panther, what what I've gathered of what I've skimmed off the net, and seeing as he is characterized on EMH, is that it seems like if it came down to saving the entire world, or saving Wakanda, he would let the world burn to keep his homeland safe. Contrast that to Captain America, who I could absolutely see sacrificing the USA if it meant the other 6.7 billion people on the planet lived.
I see that as less "problem" and more "story opportunity".
That said, just on its face, a black superhero named "Black Panther" seems way blaxploitation to me, especially (unless I'm forgetting someone) being the first black superhero to get his own movie. The character himself may be entirely inoffensive, but that name just seems like baaaaaad optics.
It makes him hard to fit into the current Avenger's/MCU mold though, without turning him into an outright villain.
Not at all. Have some conflict that threatens the world, including Wakanda. BP helps out. Midway through, it turns out that Wakanda can actually be saved by abandoning the Avengers. It'd just be a variation on the "sacrifice the many to save a few loved ones" trope, and could totally be done in a sympathetic manner.
And it'd be nice showing off more superheroes who are a little more nuanced. Most of the MCU supes are either unambiguously good or unambiguously bad. You have a few, like Black Widow, who have complicated pasts, but when she shows up on the screen, you know which side she's fighting on. Even in Cap2, you never really considered that she was going to suddenly become an antagonist. And then you have... Loki, I guess, but even when he's being good you know he's still a villain.
This is one area where I think Fox's X-Men flicks have the upper hand - you have characters whose motivations sometimes align with heroes, but sometimes don't, and it makes for interesting conflict.
I'm prepared for A:AoU to shake things up a bit with SW and QS.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
The problem with Black Panther, what what I've gathered of what I've skimmed off the net, and seeing as he is characterized on EMH, is that it seems like if it came down to saving the entire world, or saving Wakanda, he would let the world burn to keep his homeland safe. Contrast that to Captain America, who I could absolutely see sacrificing the USA if it meant the other 6.7 billion people on the planet lived.
I see that as less "problem" and more "story opportunity".
That said, just on its face, a black superhero named "Black Panther" seems way blaxploitation to me, especially (unless I'm forgetting someone) being the first black superhero to get his own movie. The character himself may be entirely inoffensive, but that name just seems like baaaaaad optics.
Meteor Man? Blade?
Forgot about Blade. Probably because Blade feels less like a superhero movie and more like an action-horror movie.
I'm hesitant to count Meteor Man, though. Partly because it was a comedy, partly because it wasn't really a mainstream film, and partly because it was terrible.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Hhahahahah. Sure i like Strahovski and i like Carol Danvers. But both of them merged together on screen, in a film? Yeaaah, no thanks. Strahovski would be a bad choice for Captain Marvel.
Why do you say that? She's been my first choice for Carol for a long time.
The problem with Black Panther, what what I've gathered of what I've skimmed off the net, and seeing as he is characterized on EMH, is that it seems like if it came down to saving the entire world, or saving Wakanda, he would let the world burn to keep his homeland safe. Contrast that to Captain America, who I could absolutely see sacrificing the USA if it meant the other 6.7 billion people on the planet lived.
I see that as less "problem" and more "story opportunity".
That said, just on its face, a black superhero named "Black Panther" seems way blaxploitation to me, especially (unless I'm forgetting someone) being the first black superhero to get his own movie. The character himself may be entirely inoffensive, but that name just seems like baaaaaad optics.
Meteor Man? Blade?
Forgot about Blade. Probably because Blade feels less like a superhero movie and more like an action-horror movie.
I'm hesitant to count Meteor Man, though. Partly because it was a comedy, partly because it wasn't really a mainstream film, and partly because it was terrible.
Blade is a superhero who happens to be black. Nothing about him is specific to a particular race or even gender.
Do they have to go "he's black! He's black!" 20 times in order for it to count as a "black superhero" or something?
Yes in that I'm drawing a difference between a superhero who just has a race (like Blade) and one who is defined by their race (like Black Panther).
Black Panther isn't just a superhero who is black, he's a character designed for maximum blackness by a couple of white guys in the 1960s. And it shows.
The problem with Black Panther, what what I've gathered of what I've skimmed off the net, and seeing as he is characterized on EMH, is that it seems like if it came down to saving the entire world, or saving Wakanda, he would let the world burn to keep his homeland safe. Contrast that to Captain America, who I could absolutely see sacrificing the USA if it meant the other 6.7 billion people on the planet lived.
I see that as less "problem" and more "story opportunity".
That said, just on its face, a black superhero named "Black Panther" seems way blaxploitation to me, especially (unless I'm forgetting someone) being the first black superhero to get his own movie. The character himself may be entirely inoffensive, but that name just seems like baaaaaad optics.
It makes him hard to fit into the current Avenger's/MCU mold though, without turning him into an outright villain.
Not at all. Have some conflict that threatens the world, including Wakanda. BP helps out. Midway through, it turns out that Wakanda can actually be saved by abandoning the Avengers. It'd just be a variation on the "sacrifice the many to save a few loved ones" trope, and could totally be done in a sympathetic manner.
And it'd be nice showing off more superheroes who are a little more nuanced. Most of the MCU supes are either unambiguously good or unambiguously bad. You have a few, like Black Widow, who have complicated pasts, but when she shows up on the screen, you know which side she's fighting on. Even in Cap2, you never really considered that she was going to suddenly become an antagonist. And then you have... Loki, I guess, but even when he's being good you know he's still a villain.
This is one area where I think Fox's X-Men flicks have the upper hand - you have characters whose motivations sometimes align with heroes, but sometimes don't, and it makes for interesting conflict.
I'm prepared for A:AoU to shake things up a bit with SW and QS.
And you don't see any potential issues with the idea of the black guy abandoning the team to protect his own interests?
The problem with Black Panther, what what I've gathered of what I've skimmed off the net, and seeing as he is characterized on EMH, is that it seems like if it came down to saving the entire world, or saving Wakanda, he would let the world burn to keep his homeland safe. Contrast that to Captain America, who I could absolutely see sacrificing the USA if it meant the other 6.7 billion people on the planet lived.
I see that as less "problem" and more "story opportunity".
That said, just on its face, a black superhero named "Black Panther" seems way blaxploitation to me, especially (unless I'm forgetting someone) being the first black superhero to get his own movie. The character himself may be entirely inoffensive, but that name just seems like baaaaaad optics.
It makes him hard to fit into the current Avenger's/MCU mold though, without turning him into an outright villain.
Not at all. Have some conflict that threatens the world, including Wakanda. BP helps out. Midway through, it turns out that Wakanda can actually be saved by abandoning the Avengers. It'd just be a variation on the "sacrifice the many to save a few loved ones" trope, and could totally be done in a sympathetic manner.
And it'd be nice showing off more superheroes who are a little more nuanced. Most of the MCU supes are either unambiguously good or unambiguously bad. You have a few, like Black Widow, who have complicated pasts, but when she shows up on the screen, you know which side she's fighting on. Even in Cap2, you never really considered that she was going to suddenly become an antagonist. And then you have... Loki, I guess, but even when he's being good you know he's still a villain.
This is one area where I think Fox's X-Men flicks have the upper hand - you have characters whose motivations sometimes align with heroes, but sometimes don't, and it makes for interesting conflict.
I'm prepared for A:AoU to shake things up a bit with SW and QS.
And you don't see any potential issues with the idea of the black guy abandoning the team to protect his own interests?
Not really? He wouldn't be the first black guy in the MCU, and every other one has been pretty bad-assed and unambiguously working for the greater good. My only qualm is in giving the first MCU film devoted to a black guy a title that has "Black" in it.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Posts
Writers can be inherently incompetent.
Good job he's secretive, often kinda haughty, possibly a spy when he was an Avenger and always has split loyalties between protecting Wakanda and being a worldwide hero.
Captain America's flaws are pretty negligible as well, amounting to 'kind of a Dudley Do Right' and 'listens to a lot of Glenn Miller'.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
War Machine. Now that's a boring hero. Iron Man without the drinking problem and winning personality but with a shoulder mounted minigun and also his armour is gun metal grey. Queue a jaw-breaking yawn.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
he's basically Iron Man jr.
Some characters can give a writer alot more or alot less to work with then others.
Switch (JeffConser): SW-3353-5433-5137 Wii U: Skeldare - 3DS: 1848-1663-9345
PM Me if you add me!
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
There's talks going on and it seems very likely. How well Lucy does in theaters will also probably help.
Switch (JeffConser): SW-3353-5433-5137 Wii U: Skeldare - 3DS: 1848-1663-9345
PM Me if you add me!
"No, T'Challa. I am your father."
And then you bring in Yelena Belova as her Russian replacement (that could be Strahovski if she's denied Carol), maybe even have Crimson Dynamo, make Jimmy Woo the US spy guy unless he's shown up in the TV show or just make him head of ATLAS, you even bring in Natasha's current lawyer from her new series, it can really work well.
I really hope that's not the case, because Lucy looks like a terrible movie. The premise of "humans only use 10% of their brains but if they use 100% they have magical powers!" has been debunked in the public for the better part of 20 years. Even if the premise made sense, the story looks atrocious based on the previews.
You can get away with Jet Li doing a ridiculous action movie plot because you just want to see him kick ass. People, unfortunately, expect more from Scarlett Johansson as an established dramatic actor, if she's going to be in her own action movie. One way to get around this is to narrow the scope, focus on the story, and let her acting chops carry the movie (a la Liam Neeson and Taken). Instead, they've opted for a crazy "blockbuster" feel with special effects and ridiculous over-the-top action with a terribad plot.
Not a recipe for success.
Don't forget Jack Kirby's Black Panther run! That was some amazing comics.
For talented writers that's an opportunity for them to leave their mark on characters. Before Priest Black Panther didn't interest me, and now I'm a big fan of the character.
That's his role in Iron Man movies. When Rhodey's the star they can define him however they want. An Iron Man piloted by a soldier, that answers to the US military is a movie I'd love to watch. Plenty of fun things to do with a concept like that. Cheadle is a rock star the movies haven't given his due yet. Rhodey's had his own series in comics before, too.
That implies it's a blank slate rather then simply a bland slate.
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
Not a full blank slate, talented writers do that with amazing characters.
edit: The MCU did this with Tony Stark. He's more serious in the comics and a talented businessman.
That's what intrigues me with BP. He's a contrast to Cap and the Avengers in many ways. He follows his own path, like Namor does.
I see that as less "problem" and more "story opportunity".
That said, just on its face, a black superhero named "Black Panther" seems way blaxploitation to me, especially (unless I'm forgetting someone) being the first black superhero to get his own movie. The character himself may be entirely inoffensive, but that name just seems like baaaaaad optics.
Meteor Man? Blade?
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
It makes him hard to fit into the current Avenger's/MCU mold though, without turning him into an outright villain.
Blade is a superhero who happens to be black. Nothing about him is specific to a particular race or even gender.
Hhahahahah. Sure i like Strahovski and i like Carol Danvers. But both of them merged together on screen, in a film? Yeaaah, no thanks. Strahovski would be a bad choice for Captain Marvel.
Hancock?
Not at all. Have some conflict that threatens the world, including Wakanda. BP helps out. Midway through, it turns out that Wakanda can actually be saved by abandoning the Avengers. It'd just be a variation on the "sacrifice the many to save a few loved ones" trope, and could totally be done in a sympathetic manner.
And it'd be nice showing off more superheroes who are a little more nuanced. Most of the MCU supes are either unambiguously good or unambiguously bad. You have a few, like Black Widow, who have complicated pasts, but when she shows up on the screen, you know which side she's fighting on. Even in Cap2, you never really considered that she was going to suddenly become an antagonist. And then you have... Loki, I guess, but even when he's being good you know he's still a villain.
This is one area where I think Fox's X-Men flicks have the upper hand - you have characters whose motivations sometimes align with heroes, but sometimes don't, and it makes for interesting conflict.
I'm prepared for A:AoU to shake things up a bit with SW and QS.
Do they have to go "he's black! He's black!" 20 times in order for it to count as a "black superhero" or something?
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Forgot about Blade. Probably because Blade feels less like a superhero movie and more like an action-horror movie.
I'm hesitant to count Meteor Man, though. Partly because it was a comedy, partly because it wasn't really a mainstream film, and partly because it was terrible.
Why do you say that? She's been my first choice for Carol for a long time.
bite your tongue meteor man was amazing
6 year old me knew this for a FACT
There was an entire gang devoted to Slinkies. And the leader had a golden Slinky
At least I'm pretty sure that happened
Yes in that I'm drawing a difference between a superhero who just has a race (like Blade) and one who is defined by their race (like Black Panther).
Black Panther isn't just a superhero who is black, he's a character designed for maximum blackness by a couple of white guys in the 1960s. And it shows.
And you don't see any potential issues with the idea of the black guy abandoning the team to protect his own interests?
Remember fun?
Not really? He wouldn't be the first black guy in the MCU, and every other one has been pretty bad-assed and unambiguously working for the greater good. My only qualm is in giving the first MCU film devoted to a black guy a title that has "Black" in it.