[Agents of Shield] Thread is under quarantine for potential Captain America 2 spoilers!

Brainiac 8 · March 2014

In a world where superheroes are real, normal people have to find a way to deal with the changes. That is where S.H.I.E.L.D. comes in.

Who are S.H.I.E.L.D.?

S.H.I.E.L.D. is an espionage and law-enforcement agency in the Marvel Comics Universe. Created by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby in Strange Tales #135 (Aug. 1965), it often deals with paranormal and superhuman threats.
The acronym originally stood for Supreme Headquarters, International Espionage, Law-Enforcement Division. It was changed in 1991 to Strategic Hazard Intervention Espionage Logistics Directorate.
Within the various films set in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, as well as multiple animated and live-action television series, the acronym stands for Strategic Homeland Intervention, Enforcement, and Logistics Division.

This show is about a team of agents within that organization. Let's do a roll call...

Phil Coulson - Team leader. Died once, but got better, pretty traumatically. Nice guy who believes in his team and has formed a fatherly relationship with Skye.

Melinda May - Resident hard-case. Smiles rarely. Currently boffing Ward.

Grant Ward - Great Shield agent. Very particular about everything. Sky's superior officer and trainer. Wants to be more with May than just a bed buddy.

Leopold Fitz - Engineering specialist. Named his drones after dwarves. Been friends with Simmons since forever. Has a crush on Skye. Wants a monkey.

Jemma Simmons - Biological specialist. Super nerd. Reads a lot. Cares very much about all those around her.

Skye - Super positive. Sees Coulson as a father figure. Very much an unknown to Shield. Doesn't know where she came from. Super hacker/beauty queen extraordinaire. Divisive to fans.

If you want to know more, go here: http://www.agentsofshield.com/

Undead Scottsman · March 2014

Uhh.. What exactly were you going for with that title?

Brainiac 8 · March 2014

Arrested Development...also kind of works what with the twist in the last episode and all.

Quid · March 2014

TPI PEOPLE

IT'S A THING

DevoutlyApathetic · March 2014

Uh, what does TPI stand for?

Assuming you don't have to shoot me if you tell me of course.

DoctorArch · March 2014

Joolander wrote: »

DoctorArch wrote: »

TAHITI SPOILER
The humanoid in the tank could be a Kree, but if it isn't a trick of perspective, it looked a lot bigger than Coulson and Kree (from what we've seen in the Guardians of the Galaxy Trailer) are human-sized.

TAHITI, GotG spoilers
sure most Kree are normal human size, but a few are bigger. Ronan the Accuser is traditionally depicted as being like 8-10 feet tall and quite broad as well

Spoiler

Good point, and it certainly could be. Although from what I've read of the GotG movie, Ronan works for Thanos, which puts him closer to Ultimate Ronan, who looks like this
Ronan_(Earth-1610)_0001.jpg

instead of Marvel 616 Ronan who, as you point out, looks like this

mxmarks · March 2014

Press release for the episode after next came out, and holy shit its gonna be a SHIELD Agent spectacular.

credited are Deathlok, Agent Sitwell (Thor, Thor 2, Winter Soldier, Previous AoS episode, ect), Agent Blake (Item 42, previous AoS episode) and Agent Hand.

Basically every big gun short of Hill and Fury.

And its called "The End of the Beginning"

Tamin · March 2014

mxmarks wrote: »

Press release for the episode after next came out, and holy shit its gonna be a SHIELD Agent spectacular.
credited are Deathlok, Agent Sitwell (Thor, Thor 2, Winter Soldier, Previous AoS episode, ext), Agent Blake (Item 42, previous AoS episode) and Agent Hand.

Basically every big gun short of Hill and Fury.

And its called "The End of the Beginning"

the name aside

that's a bunch of people to cram on the bus

Quid · March 2014

DevoutlyApathetic wrote: »

Uh, what does TPI stand for?

Assuming you don't have to shoot me if you tell me of course.

Two person integrity.

While other people are upset with the "realism" of the night night gun no one's paying attention to the much more important flaws in security!

Wraith260 · March 2014

Shadowhope wrote: »

Tamin wrote: »

that discussion made me go re-watch the scene were Fitz and Simmons are going through the files

this is a pretty cool shot:
spoilers, naturally. Also, big

full memo

I can't wait to see them go to Shangra La.

i love that the British site is just called Coventry. no codename or mystic reference, its just an old RAF base named for where it is.

DevoutlyApathetic · March 2014

Quid wrote: »

DevoutlyApathetic wrote: »

Uh, what does TPI stand for?

Assuming you don't have to shoot me if you tell me of course.

Two person integrity.

While other people are upset with the "realism" of the night night gun no one's paying attention to the much more important flaws in security!

A brief wiki later and I understand. I've actually had personal experience with the safety and financial versions of this, so it makes total sense.

I also have the answer to your dilemma:

In the far wing of the complex, behind a heavy door on a time lock sleeps two additional guards. One was dreaming of his newborn son who he looked forward to seeing after his tour of duty here was up, he hated to be away but the money would let him give his son all the things he needed to overcome his rare genetic disorder and lead a normal life. The other was dreaming of tacos. He had an empty life.

So when Coulson and company caused thousands of tons of granite to bury them in their sleep it was only half an atrocity.

Shadowen · March 2014

So since she's apparently appearing in the next ep (thpoilerth)

I want there to be just a moment where someone asks Hand, "So how's the wife?" And she responds positively. And then all business.

Tamin · March 2014

Shadowen wrote: »

So since she's apparently appearing in the next ep (thpoilerth)
I want there to be just a moment where someone asks Hand, "So how's the wife?" And she responds positively. And then all business.

two episodes, I believe. Presumably, March 18th, provided there aren't any more random breaks.

Have her be a lesbian or don't; it's fine. But if the only reasons behind her being a lesbian are either "token lesbian" or "because the character in the comics is a lesbian".

additionally, two minor points

1) there is something potentially non-pc about making an antagonist lesbian
2) I don't feel there's any reason to hold the mcu hostage to the comics.

that said, I'm perfectly ok with subtle "oh hey, <character> is [GLBT]" moments in general

I just don't want them to fall into any obvious pits, and I'd like the character's orientation to be chosen for an informed reason.

ResIpsaLoquitur · March 2014

Tamin wrote: »

I just don't want them to fall into any obvious pits, and I'd like the character's orientation to be chosen for an informed reason.

I don't that I understand your reasoning. "Because they exist" should be a good enough reason that some characters are of whatever race or orientation. "How's the husband/wife?" is perfectly normal smalltalk that you'd expect to see in plenty of settings that shouldn't need additional justification.

jdarksun · March 2014

I don't ask co-workers that sort of thing unless i know them outside of work. Especially not my boss.

Harry Dresden · March 2014

Deleted.

ResIpsaLoquitur · March 2014

jdarksun wrote: »

I don't ask co-workers that sort of thing unless i know them outside of work. Especially not my boss.

And I do, especially when they have a picture of their spouse/kids hanging somewhere in their office. Anecdotes aside, you're not trying to seriously argue that this is a type of smalltalk that just doesn't happen, are you?

EDIT: I come off as harsh, and it shouldn't be directed at you, so I apologize. It's just the underlying argument feels very much like "I'm not a homophobe, but do we really have to acknowledge that they exist on tv?" type of thing, which is utter bullshit.

jdarksun · March 2014

ResIpsaLoquitur wrote: »

jdarksun wrote: »

I don't ask co-workers that sort of thing unless i know them outside of work. Especially not my boss.

And I do, especially when they have a picture of their spouse/kids hanging somewhere in their office. Anecdotes aside, you're not trying to seriously argue that this is a type of smalltalk that just doesn't happen, are you?

EDIT: I come off as harsh, and it shouldn't be directed at you, so I apologize. It's just the underlying argument feels very much like "I'm not a homophobe, but do we really have to acknowledge that they exist on tv?" type of thing, which is utter bullshit.

I think different work situations inspire different types of smalltalk.

Let me rephrase it this way: what part of their last interaction leads you to believe Hand is in any way interested in discussing her family with Coulson? Or that Coulson feels comfortable enough to ask her about it? Because that would seem way, way out of place to me.

Sidebar: this is a Whedon show. We can probably leave behind the fears of sexuality issues being mis-handled.

ElJeffe · March 2014

I'd be totally down with someone showing up at Hand's house, or some sort of function, and Hand (or Generic Character) being there with her wife. That's cool, it would seem natural. But "How's your wife?" as a random statement would probably be conspicuous just by virtue of the politics of sexuality in the US. Would I care? No. Would it draw attention to itself? Probably, just because that line seems entirely perfunctory and not related to the plot and only there to say, "Oh hey look guys she's a lesbian!" It would sound roughly equivalent to "Hey, how's your black husband?"

Basically, if you want to establish her as a married to a woman for reasons of fleshing out her character, there are more graceful ways to do it. Hell, just have a picture of her and her wife plopped on her desk if you're trying to be nonchalant about it.

Brooklyn 99 handled the issue really well, where I didn't have any idea Holt was gay for a few episodes and then suddenly someone mentioned his husband in a perfectly natural way and it weren't no big thang.

Taramoor · March 2014

ElJeffe wrote: »

I'd be totally down with someone showing up at Hand's house, or some sort of function, and Hand (or Generic Character) being there with her wife. That's cool, it would seem natural. But "How's your wife?" as a random statement would probably be conspicuous just by virtue of the politics of sexuality in the US. Would I care? No. Would it draw attention to itself? Probably, just because that line seems entirely perfunctory and not related to the plot and only there to say, "Oh hey look guys she's a lesbian!" It would sound roughly equivalent to "Hey, how's your black husband?"

Basically, if you want to establish her as a married to a woman for reasons of fleshing out her character, there are more graceful ways to do it. Hell, just have a picture of her and her wife plopped on her desk if you're trying to be nonchalant about it.

Brooklyn 99 handled the issue really well, where I didn't have any idea Holt was gay for a few episodes and then suddenly someone mentioned his husband in a perfectly natural way and it weren't no big thang.

It was actually the core reveal at the end of the pilot for B99.

Undead Scottsman · March 2014

Didn't the first episode of 99 have the reveal of him being gay, even having the episode flash back to earlier stuff that hinted at it, to which the main character remarked "I'm a bad detective." after he didn't notice.

EDIT: Probably should have hit post on that earlier.

shoeboxjeddy · March 2014

Tamin wrote: »

Shadowen wrote: »

So since she's apparently appearing in the next ep (thpoilerth)
I want there to be just a moment where someone asks Hand, "So how's the wife?" And she responds positively. And then all business.

two episodes, I believe. Presumably, March 18th, provided there aren't any more random breaks.

Have her be a lesbian or don't; it's fine. But if the only reasons behind her being a lesbian are either "token lesbian" or "because the character in the comics is a lesbian".

additionally, two minor points

1) there is something potentially non-pc about making an antagonist lesbian
2) I don't feel there's any reason to hold the mcu hostage to the comics.

that said, I'm perfectly ok with subtle "oh hey, <character> is [GLBT]" moments in general

I just don't want them to fall into any obvious pits, and I'd like the character's orientation to be chosen for an informed reason.

Uh the most offensive thing would be randomly making a gay character straight for TV. No contest.

TheBigEasy · March 2014

I didn't follow the discussion at the end of the other thread, so I am sorry if this has already been discussed at length.

What was that creature in the tank Coulson found? And Lorelai at the end - whats the deal with her?

ElJeffe · March 2014

Taramoor wrote: »

ElJeffe wrote: »

I'd be totally down with someone showing up at Hand's house, or some sort of function, and Hand (or Generic Character) being there with her wife. That's cool, it would seem natural. But "How's your wife?" as a random statement would probably be conspicuous just by virtue of the politics of sexuality in the US. Would I care? No. Would it draw attention to itself? Probably, just because that line seems entirely perfunctory and not related to the plot and only there to say, "Oh hey look guys she's a lesbian!" It would sound roughly equivalent to "Hey, how's your black husband?"

Basically, if you want to establish her as a married to a woman for reasons of fleshing out her character, there are more graceful ways to do it. Hell, just have a picture of her and her wife plopped on her desk if you're trying to be nonchalant about it.

Brooklyn 99 handled the issue really well, where I didn't have any idea Holt was gay for a few episodes and then suddenly someone mentioned his husband in a perfectly natural way and it weren't no big thang.

It was actually the core reveal at the end of the pilot for B99.

Haha, oh. Hey, guess which one episode of B99 I never saw!

Tamin · March 2014

TheBigEasy wrote: »

I didn't follow the discussion at the end of the other thread, so I am sorry if this has already been discussed at length.
What was that creature in the tank Coulson found? And Lorelai at the end - whats the deal with her?

Kree, Atlantean, or other; no one is sure yet. My money is on Atlantean, for reasons of glowy tattoo and watery solution in tank.

Lorelei is the sister of Amora, the Enchantress. They are Asgardian.

Shadowhope · March 2014

One thing about Victoria Hand to keep in mind: while she's certainly antagonistic by times, she's not a villain. She's no Captain America, and she was willing to get her hands dirty, and yes, she worked for Norman Osborne when Osborne was the legally appointed head of SHIELD, and she's been a triple agent, but she's never been a villain.

jdarksun wrote: »

ResIpsaLoquitur wrote: »

jdarksun wrote: »

I don't ask co-workers that sort of thing unless i know them outside of work. Especially not my boss.

And I do, especially when they have a picture of their spouse/kids hanging somewhere in their office. Anecdotes aside, you're not trying to seriously argue that this is a type of smalltalk that just doesn't happen, are you?

EDIT: I come off as harsh, and it shouldn't be directed at you, so I apologize. It's just the underlying argument feels very much like "I'm not a homophobe, but do we really have to acknowledge that they exist on tv?" type of thing, which is utter bullshit.

I think different work situations inspire different types of smalltalk.

Let me rephrase it this way: what part of their last interaction leads you to believe Hand is in any way interested in discussing her family with Coulson? Or that Coulson feels comfortable enough to ask her about it? Because that would seem way, way out of place to me.

Sidebar: this is a Whedon show. We can probably leave behind the fears of sexuality issues being mis-handled.

That can be something of a matter of perspective. For example, one of Whedon's recent tweets has been interpreted by some as transphobic.

TheBigEasy · March 2014

Tamin wrote: »

TheBigEasy wrote: »

I didn't follow the discussion at the end of the other thread, so I am sorry if this has already been discussed at length.
What was that creature in the tank Coulson found? And Lorelai at the end - whats the deal with her?

Kree, Atlantean, or other; no one is sure yet. My money is on Atlantean, for reasons of glowy tattoo and watery solution in tank.

Lorelei is the sister of Amora, the Enchantress. They are Asgardian.

Thanks.

But since I never followed the comics one bit, that explanation for the creature means nothing to me

.

I got that Lorelei is Asgardian - but again, as I am not following the comics, I don't get the significance of her appearance. And the way they set it up at the end of the episode I think that was meant as a "holy crap, what is she doing here?" moment. Which totally passed me by.

jdarksun · March 2014

One thinas bout Victoria Hand to keep in mind: while she's certainly antagonistic by times, she's not a villain. She's no Captain America, and she was willing to get her hands dirty, and yes, she worked for Norman Osborne when Osborne was the legally appointed head of SHIELD, and she's been a triple agent, but she's never been a villain.

That can be something of a matter of perspective. For example, in Agents of SHIELD she has been absolutely portrayed as antagonistic. Intentionally risking our heroes' lives because she was feeling grumpy is certianly very, very close to villainous.

That can be something of a matter of perspective. For example, one of Whedon's recent tweets has been interpreted by some as transphobic.

I imagine that's absolutely a matter of perspective, because I don't see Whedon's tweet as transphobic. I'm also not sure gender identity and sexuality are the same thing.

Comradebot · March 2014

jdarksun wrote: »

One thinas bout Victoria Hand to keep in mind: while she's certainly antagonistic by times, she's not a villain. She's no Captain America, and she was willing to get her hands dirty, and yes, she worked for Norman Osborne when Osborne was the legally appointed head of SHIELD, and she's been a triple agent, but she's never been a villain.

That can be something of a matter of perspective. For example, in Agents of SHIELD she has been absolutely portrayed as antagonistic. Intentionally risking our heroes' lives because she was feeling grumpy is certianly very, very close to villainous.

That can be something of a matter of perspective. For example, one of Whedon's recent tweets has been interpreted by some as transphobic.

I imagine that's absolutely a matter of perspective, because I don't see Whedon's tweet as transphobic. I'm also not sure gender identity and sexuality are the same thing.

Eh, it's pretty much impossible to talk about anyone of a different race/age/gender/sexuality/sexual identity/weight/height/religion/nationality/eye color/opinion on ass to mouth without someone finding it offensive or insensitive.

But reading the reaction, you'd think the man kicked a puppy for making a joke that was basically "women don't have balls and a wang" when the person he tweeted was asking about something that had zero to do transgender individuals. Maybe I'm a "cissexual transmisogynist" like this article calls Whedon, but I really have a hard time calling Whedon "transphobic" for making a joke based on one of the very first things every learns as a child that makes guys and gals different.

Undead Scottsman · March 2014

Transphobic implies fear or an unsettling reaction. Ignorance of a topic doesn't automatically correlate to fear of a topic.

Tamin · March 2014

TheBigEasy wrote: »

Tamin wrote: »

TheBigEasy wrote: »

I didn't follow the discussion at the end of the other thread, so I am sorry if this has already been discussed at length.
What was that creature in the tank Coulson found? And Lorelai at the end - whats the deal with her?

Kree, Atlantean, or other; no one is sure yet. My money is on Atlantean, for reasons of glowy tattoo and watery solution in tank.

Lorelei is the sister of Amora, the Enchantress. They are Asgardian.

Thanks.
But since I never followed the comics one bit, that explanation for the creature means nothing to me .

I got that Lorelei is Asgardian - but again, as I am not following the comics, I don't get the significance of her appearance. And the way they set it up at the end of the episode I think that was meant as a "holy crap, what is she doing here?" moment. Which totally passed me by.

I actually can't help much more than that, because I don't follow the comics much either.

The major Atlantean in comics is a guy called Namor; while the rights to film adaptations of that character are owned by Universal (of all studios), the MCU can probably use a public domain version of Atlanteans without much trouble.

The Kree ... have been around. In the upcoming Guardians of the Galaxy film, one of the (non-main cast) characters will be Kree. The important bit, as far as the MCU is concerned, is that one of them was called Captain Marvel for a long time. His powers were transferred to (bestowed on?) a woman named Carol Danvers. The "G.H." might stand for this guy's Kree name; though I pretty much think it's just Guest House.

Marvel fans are very much looking forward to an appearance by (either) Captain Marvel, in much the same way that DC fans want a reasonably good Wonder Woman appearance.

The Kree are also involved with a group called the Inhumans, which a lot of fans are speculating will take the place of the mutants in the MCU, as basically all mutant rights are owned by Fox. Inhumans and mutants share some similarities - they look normal, were normal for a long time (a triggering event / puberty, respectively) and have random and dangerous powers.

I don't think there's meant to be any special significance to Lorelei's appearance. The sense that there may be something you're missing kinda bugs me, because I think it stems from an expectation you have, that all interesting characters must be from the comics, ergo they come with baggage. I haven't been able to word that quite right.

But, treat it (and any future things) like any other show - she's here, has kidnapped some guy to serve as tour guide, and we'll be treated to an explanation next episode.

as an aside, I very much prefer this sort of stinger. It meshes closer to most of the films, and (as I actively avoid previews) works well as a replacement.

Shadowhope · March 2014

Comradebot wrote: »

jdarksun wrote: »

One thinas bout Victoria Hand to keep in mind: while she's certainly antagonistic by times, she's not a villain. She's no Captain America, and she was willing to get her hands dirty, and yes, she worked for Norman Osborne when Osborne was the legally appointed head of SHIELD, and she's been a triple agent, but she's never been a villain.

That can be something of a matter of perspective. For example, in Agents of SHIELD she has been absolutely portrayed as antagonistic. Intentionally risking our heroes' lives because she was feeling grumpy is certianly very, very close to villainous.

That can be something of a matter of perspective. For example, one of Whedon's recent tweets has been interpreted by some as transphobic.

I imagine that's absolutely a matter of perspective, because I don't see Whedon's tweet as transphobic. I'm also not sure gender identity and sexuality are the same thing.

Eh, it's pretty much impossible to talk about anyone of a different race/age/gender/sexuality/sexual identity/weight/height/religion/nationality/eye color/opinion on ass to mouth without someone finding it offensive or insensitive.

But reading the reaction, you'd think the man kicked a puppy for making a joke that was basically "women don't have balls and a wang" when the person he tweeted was asking about something that had zero to do transgender individuals. Maybe I'm a "cissexual transmisogynist" like this article calls Whedon, but I really have a hard time calling Whedon "transphobic" for making a joke based on one of the very first things every learns as a child that makes guys and gals different.

I agree! But I'm also pointing out, opinions on Whedon are somewhat mixed in certain spheres.

Kipling217 · March 2014

Shadowhope wrote: »

Comradebot wrote: »

jdarksun wrote: »

One thinas bout Victoria Hand to keep in mind: while she's certainly antagonistic by times, she's not a villain. She's no Captain America, and she was willing to get her hands dirty, and yes, she worked for Norman Osborne when Osborne was the legally appointed head of SHIELD, and she's been a triple agent, but she's never been a villain.

That can be something of a matter of perspective. For example, in Agents of SHIELD she has been absolutely portrayed as antagonistic. Intentionally risking our heroes' lives because she was feeling grumpy is certianly very, very close to villainous.

That can be something of a matter of perspective. For example, one of Whedon's recent tweets has been interpreted by some as transphobic.

I imagine that's absolutely a matter of perspective, because I don't see Whedon's tweet as transphobic. I'm also not sure gender identity and sexuality are the same thing.

Eh, it's pretty much impossible to talk about anyone of a different race/age/gender/sexuality/sexual identity/weight/height/religion/nationality/eye color/opinion on ass to mouth without someone finding it offensive or insensitive.

But reading the reaction, you'd think the man kicked a puppy for making a joke that was basically "women don't have balls and a wang" when the person he tweeted was asking about something that had zero to do transgender individuals. Maybe I'm a "cissexual transmisogynist" like this article calls Whedon, but I really have a hard time calling Whedon "transphobic" for making a joke based on one of the very first things every learns as a child that makes guys and gals different.

I agree! But I'm also pointing out, opinions on Whedon are somewhat mixed in certain spheres.

The same spheres that think men are rapists in training when they look at naked pictures of girls on the internet?

Houn · March 2014

So how 'bout that SHIELD show, huh? Anyone else hoping for a Guardians of the Galaxy crossover?

Wraith260 · March 2014

Houn wrote: »

So how 'bout that SHIELD show, huh? Anyone else hoping for a Guardians of the Galaxy crossover?

think we might have to wait for that one, isn't GotG meant to be pretty separate from the Earth based stuff? yeah there's the connection with the Infinity Gems, but i don't think we should be expecting the Guardians to show up on Earth just yet. also, unlike with Thor 2 and Cap 2 the show may not be airing when GotG releases. by which i mean season 2 may not have started yet.

Kipling217 · March 2014

Has the show been renewed yet?

Cause that would put a kibosh on the whole Crossover thing.

Undead Scottsman · March 2014

It's still doing decently in ratings, despite the critical and fan backlash (deserved or not) against it, so it's likely to be renewed.

Espcially if it get's another major bump in ratings when Captain America comes out. So long as it doesn't go down the shitter, I can see it being worth ABC's time enough to keep it around solely to draw in a wave of viewers every time a movie hits.

Wraith260 · March 2014

i think the current arc and its apparent tie in to Cap 2 may have a factor on the shows future. if the direction they're taking the show proves popular(and i'll bet that it will), then i think the show will have a very bright future ahead of it.

Comradebot · March 2014

Kipling217 wrote: »

Shadowhope wrote: »

Comradebot wrote: »

jdarksun wrote: »

One thinas bout Victoria Hand to keep in mind: while she's certainly antagonistic by times, she's not a villain. She's no Captain America, and she was willing to get her hands dirty, and yes, she worked for Norman Osborne when Osborne was the legally appointed head of SHIELD, and she's been a triple agent, but she's never been a villain.

That can be something of a matter of perspective. For example, in Agents of SHIELD she has been absolutely portrayed as antagonistic. Intentionally risking our heroes' lives because she was feeling grumpy is certianly very, very close to villainous.

That can be something of a matter of perspective. For example, one of Whedon's recent tweets has been interpreted by some as transphobic.

I imagine that's absolutely a matter of perspective, because I don't see Whedon's tweet as transphobic. I'm also not sure gender identity and sexuality are the same thing.

Eh, it's pretty much impossible to talk about anyone of a different race/age/gender/sexuality/sexual identity/weight/height/religion/nationality/eye color/opinion on ass to mouth without someone finding it offensive or insensitive.

But reading the reaction, you'd think the man kicked a puppy for making a joke that was basically "women don't have balls and a wang" when the person he tweeted was asking about something that had zero to do transgender individuals. Maybe I'm a "cissexual transmisogynist" like this article calls Whedon, but I really have a hard time calling Whedon "transphobic" for making a joke based on one of the very first things every learns as a child that makes guys and gals different.

I agree! But I'm also pointing out, opinions on Whedon are somewhat mixed in certain spheres.

The same spheres that think men are rapists in training when they look at naked pictures of girls on the internet?

Shit. That must mean I'm one incredibly skilled future rapist.

Harry Dresden · March 2014

Wraith260 wrote: »

Houn wrote: »

So how 'bout that SHIELD show, huh? Anyone else hoping for a Guardians of the Galaxy crossover?

think we might have to wait for that one, isn't GotG meant to be pretty separate from the Earth based stuff? yeah there's the connection with the Infinity Gems, but i don't think we should be expecting the Guardians to show up on Earth just yet. also, unlike with Thor 2 and Cap 2 the show may not be airing when GotG releases. by which i mean season 2 may not have started yet.

Separate from Earth while being crucial to the

Thanos story line. The orb Quill finds that everyone wants has got to be an Infinite Gem Stone thingy. Gamora, Ronan and Nebula all are connected to Thanos himself. Prime material for setting up Avengers 3.

Kipling217 wrote: »

Has the show been renewed yet?

Cause that would put a kibosh on the whole Crossover thing.

It got the green light for a full season. No word on it being renewed.

skeldare · March 2014

I would honestly be surprised if Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. doesn't get renewed.

Penny Arcade

Quick Links

[Agents of Shield] Thread is under quarantine for potential Captain America 2 spoilers!

Posts