Count Dookkake
Member
The diversity of the DCEU is another reason it is the best.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Feige and Bautista Address The Importance Of Female Characters
- Thread starter LordOfLore
- Start date
- Status
hodayathink
Member
The only thing I'd change here is that 3 a year is the new normal. The only reason there's 2 this year is because of the Spider-Man deal, before they announced that, IIRC, Thor was the June/July movie and BP was the November movie for this year, making 3, and we still had 3 for next year.
Edit: And even with GitS bombing, I don't necessarily think it would effect what she'd command for Black Widow much for 2 reasons. One is that it would be pretty easy for her agents to blame that on Paramount and not her. The other is that she'd be the one with the leverage here, as it's not like they could/would recast the role. If they'd want to make that movie, she'd be the most important person they'd have to negotiate for it, and she'd get paid as such (which is why I made the RDJ/Civil War comparison, as he's the only one of the leads in the movie that wasn't under contract, I believe).
PHOENIXZERO
Member
Despite it being the proper spelling of his last name I'll never get use to Bautista instead of Batista, thanks WWE.
Even if we're accepting TV characters... Are we assuming that the MCU is made up of 50% women and that a graphic of the men isn't 4x the size? Obviously women exist in the MCU, but they don't comprise even close to realistic purportions for what we see in our world, let alone a fantastical world.
Edit: I replied to the wrong person but whatever. Ya'll get it.
Manmademan
Member
Evans is out of contract after Avengers 4, I believe. Using him after that would likely be pretty expensive- but Evans has turned Cap into a brand on par with Superman, if not past it. They might bite the bullet to keep him around. He IS Cap as much as Downey is Iron Man.
No one else is really on that tier in the MCU. Marvel can and probably will introduce a new crew for Avengers 4, which everyone is speculating will be "New Avengers".
As for 2 films vs 3...3 is possible but don't forget that Disney is going to want to avoid competing with itself with the Star Wars movies it makes, as well as give other high profile superhero films from Fox and DC a wide berth RE: release windows.
3 a year just might not be completely feasible.
hodayathink
Member
I could make an argument that in a society as patriarchal as this one, having more men be in the positions that would make them important characters to the point of being actively in the story is actually realistic. In other words, if we were going by literally people seen on screen, then somewhere around 50/50 would be realistic. But given that most of the people in these movies are in positions of power and influence, basing it on the current real world would mean that it would skew male, because more of those positions in the real world are occupied by men for various reasons.
Mind you, none of that means that things shouldn't change, both in the movies and in the real world.
My speculation for that (and I've heard it before, but just clicked a few days ago), is that the last line of Infinity War will finally be "Avengers, Assemble", at which point they'll announce the title of Avengers 4 to be Avengers: Disassembled.
Gentleman Jack
Member
That's a lot of dead/MIA women in that list...
Puck Beaverton
Banned
Yeah Gamora is cool and memorable.
Manmademan
Member
Avengers: Disassembled isn't actually a spoiler though, and it's indicated the title itself is a spoiler they don't want to reveal until after IW.
That aside, in regards to the rest of your post there is something a lot of people ignore that when talking about male vs. female heroes and the split between them.
Almost ALL of Marvel's high profile characters are legacy IP going back to the 60s when women didn't carry their own books. When looking at what's been published over time the male to female split in terms of who headlines a book is probably closer to 10:1 or 20:1.
Marvel DOES have high profile female characters that originated later, but unfortunately Fox owns almost all of these because they came about during the time when X-men was extremely dominant. Those books are very, VERY female character heavy but marvel can't use them.
Ensemble movies (say, inhumans, or GOTG) are possible but that wouldn't satisfy the crowd that wants to see a female headliner...and Inhumans didn't work at ALL in print so it's been banished to TV land instead of the big screen.
There's few female IPs remaining that aren't a huge risk to use as a solo blockbuster film, and captain marvel is pretty much at the top of the pile (though I wouldn't have used Carol, personally)
You want to advocate for why putting 100 million into Squirrel Girl, Scarlet Witch, or Tigra movie makes sense go ahead...but Marvel is in a tough spot with the properties they own. Getting to 50/50 without mining the D list is tough.
Edit: also noteworthy is that Wasp was intended to be in Avengers 1 but couldn't be used because Edgar Wright's "Ant Man" was stuck in development hell
If you ask me that monster line was about her being trained into a ruthless killing machine, not the 'can't have kids' stuff.
edit: From Whedon's mouth
http://www.avclub.com/article/joss-whedon-finally-explains-black-widows-monster--245621
I love the lengths people are going though to discount that "women of the MCU" list. Though I suppose it's down to how one defines 'Current'. If it means the character has to have an ongoing or upcoming role in something, then, yeah, I suppose "oh, that person is dead" or "that person's contract ran out" are valid critiques. Though I still think that the list shows that there have been a lot of solid women in the MCU.
Case in point: Pepper Potts. When we first saw Iron Man in the theater, one of the biggest praises my wife gave the move (and something we heard from others) is that Pepper was a real character. That she was strong, that she wasn't there just as the typical love interest. Heck, she wasn't even a love interest. She was placed as a character who is, in many ways, as strong as the main. This continues through the second and the third, when she is positioned as "damsel in distress" only to turn things around and for her to become the hero. Granted, Paltrow's contract didn't carry through the non-IM movies, but there's no question that her character is solid in that trilogy.
Oh, but it's easier to just say "Written out off screen".
Case in point: Pepper Potts. When we first saw Iron Man in the theater, one of the biggest praises my wife gave the move (and something we heard from others) is that Pepper was a real character. That she was strong, that she wasn't there just as the typical love interest. Heck, she wasn't even a love interest. She was placed as a character who is, in many ways, as strong as the main. This continues through the second and the third, when she is positioned as "damsel in distress" only to turn things around and for her to become the hero. Granted, Paltrow's contract didn't carry through the non-IM movies, but there's no question that her character is solid in that trilogy.
Oh, but it's easier to just say "Written out off screen".
hodayathink
Member
I personally don't think New Avengers is any more of a spoiler than Avengers: Disassembled is in terms of being purely a title (both would tell you the team becomes different, and New Avengers doesn't necessarily mean the old ones are dead, just not involved with the team anymore).
I agree with all of this (and you have to admit that a Monica Captain Marvel movie would be an even harder sell than the current Carol one already is). You also reminded me that, IIRC, Pym was actually supposed to be Ultron's creator, but Ant-Man's delay screwed that up as well.
Manmademan
Member
Monica is absolutely a harder sell (and let's not get into discussions about racism, demographics, the Chinese market, etc for now) but as a character she's always been a lot better fleshed out than Carol who is quite frankly a mess.
Interestingly enough, Marvel has done their damnedest to turn Carol INTO Monica as much as possible- playing up her military background, giving her Monica's powerset (or close to it), ignoring all the embarrassing crap about being the girlfriend of Mar-Vell entirely and dressing her in something that doesn't look like it came from Strippers R Us.
That's exactly what the line meant. It calls back to her talk with Loki in the first Avengers film. The whole "she's a monster because she can't have kids" thing was an interpretation out of left field that got traction because it hits a very sensitive issue. The accusation that Whedon, of all people, would write a woman like that is absurd. You'd have to ignore his entire body of work, you'd have to ignore his personal convictions, you'd have to ignore the history of the character, and you'd have to ignore Whedon's own explanation of the line. So, yes, once you ignore all of that, the 'can't have kids' interpretation becomes valid.
Rate - she would ask for 40-50 million plus points on that movie. Also, where the heck do you fit it in, with Marvel doing 3 movies a year already for a while? Iron Fist I think showed that you can overdo even MCU.
I believe that action was necessitated due to contract / future shows of the actor?
The fact that we can go off on MCU even with that list is probably some of the biggest proof of the progress we have actually made in representation. Perfect, no, but progress is definitely being made (plus, May and Jones are the two best characters out of the core Avengers cast)
Pai Pai Master
Banned
Maybe listen to that conversation again because that's not at all what she was saying. Almost every character in that movie calls themselves a monster at one point - she's singling herself out because she's an assassin trying to be reborn as a superhero, not because she was sterilized.
Maybe he should have made a scene that doesn't require him to explain what she is talking about after the fact instead of just throwing sterilization and monster into the same basket and hoping for the best. It doesn't matter what Whedon says, it matters how the scene reads. And yeah, I have watched the movie more than once, thanks. My friends thought the same about that part, and from that article posted it sounds like a lot of other people did too.
Pai Pai Master
Banned
I think some people went out of their way to read what they wanted to in that scene. She very clearly states that she is still struggling with her transition from the killer to the hero. She didn't even bring up infertility, that was Banner. She revealed her condition to relate herself to him and tell him that he wasn't alone. But "not the only monster" refers to them both having killed people and her thinking she can call herself a hero after all she's done.
Jest Chillin
Member
You see what you want to see. Writing it any more plain that what was in the film comes across heavy handed because it's talking down to his audience. Like he has to spell out everything and can't have any nuance, subtlety, or creativity in the dialogue.
You seriously have to not be paying attention to what is being said and when it's being said during that scene to get to the infertility = monster takeaway.
There are people that think Walter White is a hero. Not the writer's fault.
Most people more or less got what he meant
BlazinSkatinAxel
Member
Black Widow / Bobbi movie when?
Keyser Soze
Member
T
Transhuman
Unconfirmed Member
It's important to have good secondary characters
I love how this scene is still an issue with some people.
God yes please
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
To play Devil's Advocate here...
But yes, it's about high damn time we finally got ourselves a female lead movie.
LOL at the amount of small supporting characters here.
If it weren't for TV, it would be a wasteland.
Not only does AoS have one of the most diverse casts in the MCU, they're also the single most willing piece of media in the MCU to get political.
Like, blatantly. They've taken jabs at Fox News since season 2 but this entire final arc is a blunt attack on the Trump administration. The writers don't give a damn and it's lovely to see them using their entertainment to take a stand.
Finn of Ooo
Member
Bautista so tone deaf, talking about the importance of making complex female characters and he chimes in with "guys are happy there are sexy women in the movie too huehuehue"
This scene the other day was hilarious, completely caught me off guard
Angelus Errare
Banned
UltimaPooh
Member
I think there is plenty of positive diversity within the MCU. Some roles are small and some are big... They are working on a movie for a woman lead.
I've seen DCEU brought up as doing it better. They'll have what? Three films by the end of May? Only one being about a female character? And that's better automatically?
I've seen DCEU brought up as doing it better. They'll have what? Three films by the end of May? Only one being about a female character? And that's better automatically?
The Broken Ska Record
Member
Suicide Squad had quite a few female characters in various personality types. Amanda Waller, Harley, the Enchantress,...
Not to mention SS had quite a diverse lineup.
UltimaPooh
Member
Oh right. Jeez. I blocked that movie from my memory.
The Broken Ska Record
Member
Yeah, I didn't expect to champion SS, but here we are.
UltimaPooh
Member
I mean it has those characters that check off the diversity box but outside of Deadshot which ones were positive and not stereotypical?
Regardless, it's a bad scene either way. Felt forced and out of character. Was very awkward to watch.
broncobuster
Banned
It was pointed out recently how Tessa Thompson as Valkyrie in Thor Ragnarok is the first black actresses to have a prominent role in the MCU movies. While I thought it was some BS exaggeration, that image is showing it may not have been far off.
Thankfully Black Panther is coming sooner than later.
Fancyarcher
Member
Female characters in the MCU have always had a problem of largely supporting characters, but I think with Perlmutter's power being demented we're gonna see more female driven superhero films, as long as Captain Marvel is a success & better use of female characters as well. At least I hope anyway.
The only issue I have with AOS getting political, is that sometimes it can come off as being a bit too much or potentially preachy, but they've managed to do the parallels well.
The only issue I have with AOS getting political, is that sometimes it can come off as being a bit too much or potentially preachy, but they've managed to do the parallels well.
Amanda Waller. Best casted character in the DCEU, imo.
Fancyarcher
Member
And most of the great female characters are owned by Fox particularly the X-Men ones. Plus a Carol Danvers Captain Marvel film makes a lot of sense at this point.
Blank slate personality. Maybe more interesting to re-invent for film.
ElBoxyBrown
Banned
Gotta scrape the bottom of the barrel.
Gordon Shumway
Banned
She's a MONSTER! 😂
- Status