MCU's Phase 5 rumors 1 1

[theCapraAegagrus]

15 hours ago, @therealsilvermane said:

???!!??

Who's the one that doesn’t watch the movies!? At the opening of Avengers Age of Ultron, it's Captain America being the field general in the attack on Strucker's compound. He even tells JARVIS what to do. Before the Avengers go in to Sokovia, it's Cap giving the inspirational speech/general orders of what they need to do. And at the end of the movie, it's Cap who's about to say "Assemble!" to the new Avengers.

At the beginning of Civil War, it's Cap leading these same new Avengers in the Africa mission. Stark is more like an executive consultant who backs the Accords. He doesn't lead anything until Cap goes rogue, and thus the Avengers fall apart leading into Infinity War. But then Cap is the de facto leader again in the attack on Wakanda.

Since the first Avengers movie to the last battle in Endgame, Captain America has been the sole leader of the Avengers.

Nope. He asks JARVIS a question.

At the end of Age of Ultron - key phrase. At the end of the movie, Stark wants to be done (following continuity of Iron Man 3).

All of this is irrelevant to the fact that a MacGuffin byproduct with no personality will not lead an Avengers team.

[@therealsilvermane]

On 4/2/2020 at 6:43 AM, theCapraAegagrus said:

Nope. He asks JARVIS a question.

At the end of Age of Ultron - key phrase. At the end of the movie, Stark wants to be done (following continuity of Iron Man 3).

All of this is irrelevant to the fact that a MacGuffin byproduct with no personality will not lead an Avengers team.

Uh, Cap asks JARVIS a question as in getting info from an underling in order to make the next tactical decision for the team. Kind of like how George Washington might have asked a scout how things looked on the other side of the Deleware River before bringing the entire Continental Army over. Cap even says "language" to Stark because he's also the team's dad/moral leader. You are half right in that it is all irrelevant, but because Captain Marvel IS about to lead the entire Avengers universe anyway. 
Seen the new Phase 4/5 theatrical release schedule? Guess which MCU movie out of the next 7 movies is the only one to get a true summer release? Answer: Captain Marvel. I wouldn’t be surprised if her sequel movie is basically going to be the next semi-Avengers movie, like Civil War was, but where Carol has to finally take the lead. Maybe then she’ll get that personality (do you mean character development maybe?) that you keep yapping about.

Edited April 4, 2020 by @therealsilvermane

[theCapraAegagrus]

On 4/3/2020 at 4:57 PM, @therealsilvermane said:

Uh, Cap asks JARVIS a question as in getting info from an underling in order to make the next tactical decision for the team. Kind of like how George Washington might have asked a scout how things looked on the other side of the Deleware River before bringing the entire Continental Army over. Cap even says "language" to Stark because he's also the team's dad/moral leader. You are half right in that it is all irrelevant, but because Captain Marvel IS about to lead the entire Avengers universe anyway. 
Seen the new Phase 4/5 theatrical release schedule? Guess which MCU movie out of the next 7 movies is the only one to get a true summer release? Answer: Captain Marvel. I wouldn’t be surprised if her sequel movie is basically going to be the next semi-Avengers movie, like Civil War was, but where Carol has to finally take the lead. Maybe then she’ll get that personality (do you mean character development maybe?) that you keep yapping about.

Cap asked a question. JARVIS follows Tony 100%. He supplies their shelter, uniforms, technology, etc etc etc. A question is not a command.

You'd be the only one that isn't surprised. Apparently you're unaware of the MCU formula.

[@therealsilvermane]

23 hours ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

Cap asked a question. JARVIS follows Tony 100%. He supplies their shelter, uniforms, technology, etc etc etc. A question is not a command.

You'd be the only one that isn't surprised. Apparently you're unaware of the MCU formula.

So do you have like a candle-lit shrine to Tony Stark in some corner of your home to which you bring daily offerings? (for the record I don't have a Carol Danvers shrine in my home but I do have a few posters and framed OA tastefully hung on the walls in tribute)

Just because Tony Stark provides tech support to the Avengers and owns the building they're headquartered in doesn't mean he's their leader. Because he's not. That'd be like saying since Westinghouse or Northrop Grumman supplies the weaponry and tech for the U.S. Military that they're also in command. They're not. And Stark isn't the leader of the Avengers. So what if he indoctrinated Peter Parker on a space ship? Hawkeye did the same thing to Natasha and Pietro in Age of Ultron, doesn't make him team leader. Btw, Stark doesn't supply the team's costumes or weapons. Thor's gear is wholly owned and operated by Asgard. Romanoff, Barton, and Rogers' gear is owned by the U.S. Government and was so before Tony Stark entered the picture.

I totally get the MCU formula. Maybe you don't understand that practically every MCU movie operates as a team movie now. Black Panther had his Wakandan Team and the CIA guy, Ant-Man has the Pyms and the X-Cons. Even Ragnarok was almost a mini-Defenders movie. The Avengers, though, is the main story driver of the MCU. The ongoing storyline can't go on too long without an Avengers movie somewhere down the line. Obviously, Shang Chi or Eternals won't be that. Doctor Strange or Love and Thunder won't be that. Black Panther 2 will most likely deal with some threat to Wakanda. That leaves Captain Marvel 2 as the only MCU theatrical film down the road that will most likely be a kind-of Avengers movie, much like the Captain America sequels were. If you have any questions as to how the MCU formula works, I'll be here all week.

[theCapraAegagrus]

1 minute ago, @therealsilvermane said:

So do you have like a candle-lit shrine to Tony Stark in some corner of your home to which you bring daily offerings? (for the record I don't have a Carol Danvers shrine in my home but I do have a few posters and framed OA tastefully hung on the walls in tribute)

Just because Tony Stark provides tech support to the Avengers and owns the building they're headquartered in doesn't mean he's their leader. Because he's not. That'd be like saying since Westinghouse or Northrop Grumman supplies the weaponry and tech for the U.S. Military that they're also in command. They're not. And Stark isn't the leader of the Avengers. So what if he indoctrinated Peter Parker on a space ship? Hawkeye did the same thing to Natasha and Pietro in Age of Ultron, doesn't make him team leader. Btw, Stark doesn't supply the team's costumes or weapons. Thor's gear is wholly owned and operated by Asgard. Romanoff, Barton, and Rogers' gear is owned by the U.S. Government and was so before Tony Stark entered the picture.

I totally get the MCU formula. Maybe you don't understand that practically every MCU movie operates as a team movie now. Black Panther had his Wakandan Team and the CIA guy, Ant-Man has the Pyms and the X-Cons. Even Ragnarok was almost a mini-Defenders movie. The Avengers, though, is the main story driver of the MCU. The ongoing storyline can't go on too long without an Avengers movie somewhere down the line. Obviously, Shang Chi or Eternals won't be that. Doctor Strange or Love and Thunder won't be that. Black Panther 2 will most likely deal with some threat to Wakanda. That leaves Captain Marvel 2 as the only MCU theatrical film down the road that will most likely be a kind-of Avengers movie, much like the Captain America sequels were. If you have any questions as to how the MCU formula works, I'll be here all week.

Co-leader, bud. #fact

Co-led them in Age of Ultron, led them after Cap became a criminal in Civil War, and again in Infinity War and Endgame.

Apparently you don't. Captain Marvel was released in March. Marvel likes to release all of their movies in the same month for the same title. It means literally nothing.

[@therealsilvermane]

18 minutes ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

Co-leader, bud. #fact

Co-led them in Age of Ultron, led them after Cap became a criminal in Civil War, and again in Infinity War and Endgame.

Apparently you don't. Captain Marvel was released in March. Marvel likes to release all of their movies in the same month for the same title. It means literally nothing.

When it comes to a military team, you can't have two leaders. Can't have it. It spells doom for the team, which is why the team ended after Civil War.

So here's the Avengers leadership time line:

-Captain America was the one and only leader of the Avengers in the first movie and Age of Ultron.

-Captain America was leader at the beginning of Civil War. When Rogers refuses to sign the Sokovia Accords, he is fired and Stark takes over as leader, which leads into a Civil War and with Rhodes paralyzed and most of the team in a SuperMax prison.

-In Infinity War, there basically was no Avengers. The team was splintered. It's sort of how Thanos wins, because, as Stark said, Cap wasn't there when we needed him.

-Five years later in Endgame, Natasha Romanoff is the leader of the Avengers. But when Steve Rogers tells Stark we're getting the team back, the wounds are healed, and Captain America is once again the rightful leader of the Avengers.

And the next time we see the Avengers in Phase Five, Carol Danvers will be that leader. Well maybe there will be two teams, an Earth based and a cosmic, with Sam Wilson leading the Earth team.

[theCapraAegagrus]

The Avengers are not a military team.

I never thought it was possible to be so wrong, but damn you did it.

[@therealsilvermane]

1 hour ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

The Avengers are not a military team.

I never thought it was possible to be so wrong, but damn you did it.

The Avengers are totally a military team. In the MCU, The Avengers Initiative was a U.S. Government sanctioned program started by Nick Fury, head of SHIELD. Though the team was autonomous, it was still a government sanctioned program. The Avengers became even more military when Ross and the Feds took over governance of the team in Civil War.

[theCapraAegagrus]

4 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

The Avengers are totally a military team. In the MCU, The Avengers Initiative was a U.S. Government sanctioned program started by Nick Fury, head of SHIELD. Though the team was autonomous, it was still a government sanctioned program. The Avengers became even more military when Ross and the Feds took over governance of the team in Civil War.

Did you even watch Civil War...?

"...unlimited power and no supervision..."

SHIELD was a government entity. Not the Avengers. The Avengers took 0 cues from any governing agency in the 2012 movie. They had literally nothing to do with any supervision in Age of Ultron (because Tony and Cap led the team). Stark didn't even consult anyone prior to chasing down the Maw and knighting Parker an Avenger. No one was consulted by Nat, Cap, or Stark in Endgame.

I would ask you to try again, but, I don't think you understand what's going on in these movies.

[fantastic_four]

Another toxic thread!  I sense a common element...  

[@therealsilvermane]

26 minutes ago, fantastic_four said:

Another toxic thread!  I sense a common element...  

How is debating the leadership of the Avengers in the MCU a toxic thread? 

[@therealsilvermane]

8 hours ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

Captain Marvel was released in March. Marvel likes to release all of their movies in the same month for the same title. It means literally nothing.

Release date is everything. Marvel Studios saves the event films for the late April/early May Memorial Day slot or the July 4th slot. Previously opening in February or Black History Month, Black Panther 2 is now getting the May slot that Avengers movies normally get, and Captain Marvel 2 is getting the July 4th slot where the MCU Spider-Man has been opening. That's symbolic and also evidence that they're expecting BP2 to be big and equally that Captain Marvel 2 is going to be a big movie. Trust me. CM2 is going to be essentially the next Avengers movie which will force everyone to go see it.

[@therealsilvermane]

5 hours ago, @therealsilvermane said:

How is debating the leadership of the Avengers in the MCU a toxic thread? 

I'm wrong. It's not so much debating as it is trying to talk sense into.

[Bird]

5 hours ago, @therealsilvermane said:

How is debating the leadership of the Avengers in the MCU a toxic thread? 

its toxic all right! there seems to be no debate, just on and on and on back and forth. No, no , no ,no

but have fun if it is fun, but it puts me off like it apparently does FF

[media_junkie]

1 hour ago, @therealsilvermane said:

 CM2 is going to be essentially the next Avengers movie which will force everyone to go see it.

Never saw CM1 so I won't be seeing CM2.

Straight up just do not like Brie Larson she is one of those actors that just gets on my nerves.  I feel the same with Jessie Eisenberg, straight up don't like the dude.  Both of them rub me the wrong way.  When Brie is in a background role (like in Avengers Endgame) I don't mind it so much, but front and center, I choose not to go.

[@therealsilvermane]

6 minutes ago, media_junkie said:

Never saw CM1 so I won't be seeing CM2.

Straight up just do not like Brie Larson she is one of those actors that just gets on my nerves.  I feel the same with Jessie Eisenberg, straight up don't like the dude.  Both of them rub me the wrong way.  When Brie is in a background role (like in Avengers Endgame) I don't mind it so much, but front and center, I choose not to go.

You mean you never saw all those movies Brie Larson was in before Captain Marvel? Oh wait, she's hardly been in anything before that except some indie movies hardly anybody saw (except Scott Pilgrim) like Room for which she won a Best Actress award. And she walked through Kong. 

[@therealsilvermane]

20 minutes ago, Bird said:

its toxic all right! there seems to be no debate, just on and on and on back and forth. No, no , no ,no

but have fun if it is fun, but it puts me off like it apparently does FF

I don't think anyone else can argue against Captain America being the main leader of the Avengers in the MCU, but there's theCapraAgregious indeed telling me No no no no. He's the one being toxic. I'm more like the toxic avenger.

Edited April 7, 2020 by @therealsilvermane

[Bird]

6 minutes ago, @therealsilvermane said:

I don't think anyone else can argue that Captain America isn't the leader of the Avengers, but there's theCapraAgregious indeed telling me No no no no. He's the one being toxic. I'm more like the toxic avenger.

we're comic book readers, c'mon! The villain almost always thinks that he is in the right!!!!! 

[Bosco685]

23 minutes ago, Bird said:

we're comic book readers, c'mon! The villain almost always thinks that he is in the right!!!!! 

 

[Xenosmilus]

5 hours ago, Bird said:

The villain almost always thinks that he is in the right!!!!! 

So do the hero's 

Edited April 8, 2020 by Xenosmilus