Marvel News

Conrad claims two eight-year old twins have been cast for WandaVision (the two heroes having children has been in the rumour mill ever since the show was announced in 2018 and seems to have been confirmed by artwork shown in the Expanding the Universe featurette released on Disney+). If Conrad is right, this busts my idea that Marvel would gender swap Speed. Incidentally, it looks like LotLB's rumour of Quicksilver's return is incorrect, as Aaron-Taylor Johnson says he isn't in the show (I take him at his word since he said the same for Endgame and that was true).

Charles Murphy says pre-production on Ant-Man 3 has already started because the film is meant to have a much larger scale than its two previous entries. He says he has no proof for or against the rumoured inclusion of the Young Avengers (in October he said only one source was making the claim, so in the four weeks since that hasn't changed--my guess is his source is Daniel, who said as much a week before Murphy's scoop (people claiming the team would appear goes back at least to January (4chan and WGTC), with the idea seeded when Murphy scooped Cassie Lang was appearing in Endgame (April 2018); the most recent rumour saying the same comes from 4chan a few weeks ago). Murphy speculates how the original version of YA team could come about, but I think he's far too hung-up on the team being composed identically to its original iteration (there's no indication that Marvel feels any requirement to copy the team comp precisely).

Christopher Marcus and Stephen McFeely told Vanity Fair that the fate of Iron Man and Captain America was decided back in 2015 (prior to Civil War). Given how long that information was floating around, it's no wonder the idea of Cap dying was being pushed before and after Infinity War as a misdirect. The reasoning they offer for killing Tony instead of Steve is exactly the same that I used when making the argument that the former would die (eg; essentially that Steve sacrificing himself served no narrative purpose because he was already that kind of person--the sacrifice for Tony is a change because he's giving up on the happy family life he always wanted for the sake of others).

Murphy, after months of doing a podcast without gaining traction (why he refuses to include time stamps is beyond me), made the intelligent choice of creating a website for himself where he can post scoops and theories--it's a vast improvement over both his podcast and his intolerable Twitter feed. In that vain he's scooped that Adepero Oduye is in Falcon and the Winter Soldier (confirmed just hours after his post). He guesses she'll play either Sarah Wilson (Sam's sister) or Leila Taylor (his girlfriend), both of which seem plausible (the pictures have me leaning towards the former). I'm completely unfamiliar with Sam's lore, so I can't offer thoughts on how she'll be used.

Shortly after this Murphy scooped that Battlestar (Lemar Hoskins) will also be introduced in the show--probably serving as John Walker's partner (as he was in the comics).

Murphy also posted speculation that Songbird will appear (a cohort of Zemo). No one else, as far as I can tell, has made this suggestion (although afterwards Kinda Culty discussed it). The basis of his theory is a woman seen on set who looks like her and was in a harness.

Articles did the rounds claiming that Mark Ruffalo had pitched a Hulk vs Wolverine story to Kevin Feige. This idea has been floating around in the rumour mill since September (Sutton), although it was given life by Anthony Russo quite some time ago as he's brought it up several times. When the video came out, Ruffalo never specified what he pitched, but when asked about HvW he said he'd like to see it.

We have a 4chan rumour which I think ultimately springs from LotLB (July and August):

• Marvel Studios is currently working on the CGI for an 8-episode Disney+ series for phase-four with the working tittle been [being] S.W.O.R.D. and the first episode was written by Jon Favreau.
• Leading actors: Samuel L. Jackson [Nick Fury], Cobie Smulders [Maria Hill], Cameron Monaghan, Katheryn Winnick, and Nicholas Hoult.
• Supporting actors: Paul Mendelsohn [Ben Mendelsohn, ie, Talos], Sharon Blynn [Soren], Clark Gregg [Agent Coulson], Chloe Bennet [Quake], Ming-Na Wen [Melinda May], Natalia Buckley [Natalia Cordova-Buckley, ie, Elena Rodriguez], and Jeff Ward [Deke Shaw].
• Newcomers, Cameron Monaghan will play Victor Kohl [The Exile] as the lead protagonist who is an Inhuman, and the twin son's of Thanos will be the villains played by Katheryn Winnick (Supergiant) and Nicholas Hoult (Thane).
• I'm told the supporting actors will have less than five minutes of screen time across season one.

The main problem with this idea is that it would canonize Agents of SHIELD, and there's no indication that Feige has any intention of doing so. Feige could have the characters from that show come from an alternate dimension/reality and by so-doing they would be 'canon' (just not from the 616), but the ultimate fate of the Marvel Entertainment products remains unknown (likely to be jettisoned from Marvel history, outside of the Feige-involved Agent Carter).

One thing I wanted to ruminate on is Feige's creative control of the comics. We should expect there to be a much more synergy because of it (comics can function both as early advertising and as a testing ground for concepts). This comes to mind as I've long wondered what Marvel-Sony will do with Mary Jane Watson (since we're currently in the land of Michelle)--MJ sells merchandise and remains very popular, so it's hard to imagine never seeing her, but how to approach that? Recently it's been teased that she's a new version of Black Cat in the comics and that would be an interesting way to modernize the character and make her more dynamic (while maintaining her classic look). I'm not suggesting this will happen, but it's this of experimentation we might expect Feige to do to test ideas.

LotLB

• Claim the prison-Spidey rumour (cf) is false (I agree)
• Sutton repeated that another Sony-Disney deal is coming and it will start a second trilogy continuing Tom Holland's story (echoing an LotLB rumour from August)--covering his time in college (where he'll meet Harry Osborn); Norman Osborn will be the main antagonist of the trilogy, who will form the Sinister Six and assemble in the final film [this would come out in 2027, so Michael Keaton would be filming it in his 70s]
• Sutton repeats that Disney still wants to buy the Spidey IP (ie)
• Repeated an LotLB rumour (August) that Spider-man will appear in Venom 3

I don't believe Sutton's specific storyline in college--not that Peter in college couldn't be the focus of a new trilogy, but I feel like the basic premise is too similar to Sam Raimi's films. I also don't know why anyone at Marvel would be planning out a new trilogy before a deal is in place--why waste the energy? Is it possible this is Sony's expectation? Even that seems unlikely, since a new deal would leave Kevin Feige in creative control such that their wants have limited impact. I frankly think this is speculation from Sutton being passed off as insider knowledge (time will tell).

Debunking: back in September Production List claimed Shang-Chi would start filming November 1st--not so much!

Daniel is claiming the LotLB rumour from August that Deadpool would appear in the post-credit scene of Black Widow is false. The idea was always a long shot to begin with, since the BW script was completed before the sale of Fox, meaning a Deadpool cameo could only be inserted after that process was complete (not impossible, but making it less likely--it's also difficult to imagine a mechanism whereby his inclusion would make sense in the MCU in that film).

Because The Mandalorian has half-hour episodes, some are speculating that Marvel's Disney+ shows will be that length as well. I hope not--long form storytelling is always better.

About a month ago I wondered how Damon Lindelof's Watchmen show would fair on HBO, given his mostly horrendous track record. The show received incredible support from critics (97% on RT, which is ridiculous) and a great deal of coverage from various genre personalities on Youtube etc. But it's Lindelof--would the show work? We're six episodes through nine, so we can't be sure, but there are indicators.

First, the ratings. The show opened with a modest 0.799 viewers (0.25 in the key 18-49 demographic); this was good for 16th vs other original cable productions (for comparison The Walking Dead was 1st at 3.479). Here are the first six episodes:
1 - 0.799 (0.25) 16th
2 - 0.765 (0.25) 18th
3 - 0.648 (0.19) 33rd
4 - 0.707 (0.22) 17th
5 - 0.752 (0.26) 16th
6 - 0.620 (0.21) 20th

The show is declining in the key demographic (ep5 seems like a hiccup in the trend), while staying relatively stable in its middling opening on the general public's radar. It's not gaining traction, but hasn't bottomed out either.

As I mentioned in my earlier post, another way to gain a sense of interest is how the secondary market (like YT videos) are fairing in covering it. The weather vane that is Emergency Awesome is a great way to look at that, so what about his coverage? Here's the full list of his videos about it (chronologically):
Watchmen trailer - 347.3
Watchmen season preview - 223.3
Watchmen ep1 - 299.4
ep1 review - 157.0
Watchmen ep2 - 215.3 (this is the most viewed video about the show in the last four weeks)
Watchmen ep3 - 203.9
Watchmen ep4 - 185.7
Watchmen ep6 - 127.1

There are a few things to note here: Charlie does not skip episode reviews for shows that are popular, but he skipped episode five; he ambitiously produced two videos for the first episode, but immediately cut that with the muted response to his review. There's a pretty easy comparison of the views with The Mandalorian, which had much more muted hype with his audience coming in (his trailer review only has 152k views). The positive response has given a big bump to his episode videos (485k for the latest). Star Wars is a much bigger IP, but it's the trends that matter.

That's just one Youtuber, but you can do down the line (John Campea hasn't covered it at all; IGN's numbers are: 81k, 27k, 52k, 33k--they haven't fully reviewed an episode since 3; Screen Crush: 172k, 79k, 98k, 51k, 78k, 34k; only Think Story is bucking the trend: 120k, 115k, 110k, 126k, 135k, 79k).

I don't know HBO metrics enough to discern if his numbers (or critical response) will warrant another season, but whatever happens it's not a popular hit (even if it won't hurt Lindelof's reputation--nothing, apparently, can).

I had no idea there was a Charlie's Angels reboot on its way until I read that it had bombed at the box office (43 million as I write this). The film was put into production by Amy Pascal before she was fired from Sony, and was produced by Tom Rothman (who arrived after being fired from Fox). What's noteworthy isn't its performance, but what director/writer/star Elizabeth Banks said a week prior to release:

Look, people have to buy tickets to this movie, too. This movie has to make money. If this movie doesn't make money it reinforces a stereotype in Hollywood that men don't go see women do action movies. They'll go and see a comic book movie with Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel because that's a male genre. So even though those are movies about women, they put them in the context of feeding the larger comic book world, so it's all about, yes, you're watching a Wonder Woman movie but we're setting up three other characters or we're setting up Justice League.

Virtually everything in this statement is wrong, and it's a particularly odd thing to say given that in August, Banks said the film was intended for a female audience. Let's start with the premise: men won't see women in action movies. I think there's no evidence for this assertion, something especially obvious since the 1970s (Alien, Terminator, Milla Jovovich films, Mad Max: Fury Road, The Hunger Games franchise, Tomb Raider franchise, Underworld franchise, etc ad infinitum). Clearly, men will see action movies with leading women.

Next: comic book movies are a male genre. This is a strange idea--I'm out of touch with current academic feminism (not that you can really generalize about it--I think most of the current interdisciplinary battles are about and within intersectionality), but we can safely reject the idea that comics are a 'male genre'--comics are simply a format for storytelling and can serve any ideology.

Next: the idea that men only attend female-lead superhero movies because the genre is male--this didn't help Supergirl, Tank Girl, Catwoman, Elektra, or Dark Phoenix, so that's not the deciding factor in what they choose to see. Banks also claims it's the connections that brought people to Captain Marvel etc, but if connective tissue was all that was required Justice League would be a smash hit, as would Andrew Garfield's Spider-Man 2, etc; hell, The Defenders should be one of the biggest TV hits of all time.

These are bizarre assertions to make. If I was going to give Banks any credit, it's that this assessment could refer to executives, but there's not much evidence to support that either (Amy Pascal, Kathleen Kennedy, and many others in positions of power fully embrace at least the superficial elements of intersectionality in film). Occam's Razor will tell you that people didn't go to Charlie's Angels because it looked like a bad film and didn't receive positive word-of-mouth--women being involved had nothing to do it (if women as leads was a problem, how did the previous reboot succeed?).

You might read all this and think, who cares? But I think it matters--Banks comments are pernicious--they create ammunition for actual regressives the next time a film like this comes out (there are plenty of 'get woke, go broke' videos out there in the wake of how this film has done). Sexism should not be used as a shield to deflect blame for commercial failure--Banks should simply take responsibility for the box office and say, hey, I'll do better next time.

This article is written by Peter Levi (@eyeonthesens)

Marvel News

Disney announced five new MCU film dates: Oct.7/22, Feb.17/23, May 5/23, July 28/23, and Nov.3/23. The October date matches my thoughts on how good that month has become for comicbook films, while the rest fall on expected Marvel release patterns. This also indicates we'll be getting four films a year from 2020 onward, something I've been saying since 2017. Adding in the Disney+ shows, there will be at least eight IP per year, or roughly one per seven weeks, which is excellent if the quality holds up (I wouldn't be surprised if the shows, including ancillary material on Hulu, ramps up to one MCU product per month--matching, in spirit, a comic-release schedule).

When we first heard it would be five years before we saw an X-Men film, I didn't believe it--I thought the cost of buying Fox would pressure Feige to get it out sooner than later. However, as the MCU slate fills up, it gets harder and harder to see it coming out any sooner:

2020
May - Black Widow
November - Eternals
2021
February - Shang-Chi
May - Doctor Strange 2
July - Spider-Man 3
November - Thor 4
2022
February - unknown (probably Ant-Man 3)*
May - Black Panther 2
July - unknown (probably Guardians of the Galaxy 3)*
October - unknown (probably Deadpool 3)
2023
February - unknown (probably Captain Marvel 2)
May - unknown (possibly Avengers 5)
July - unknown (Spider-Man 4 if there's a renewed agreement with Sony)
November - unknown (probably Blade)

*Both properties are either confirmed (GotG3) or virtually confirmed (AM3) to be filming in 2020 [Jan, 2021 specifically for the latter], meaning that their release date has to be 2022

I have Deadpool airing before Captain Marvel 2 because the former suits the release date better (matching the R-rated Joker and 'dark' Venom), but surely CM2 won't be any later than early 2023. If I'm correct above then we are more than four years away from an X-Men (or Fantastic Four) film.

This does not mean we won't see characters appear beforehand. Indeed, I've been arguing for a gradual approach to an X-Men film. The earliest such appearances can occur are Doctor Strange 2 and Hawkeye (the films/shows before that were written prior to the sale of Fox completing). Certainly DS2 is a logical place to start introducing them.

I've theorized that we'll see Storm in Black Panther 2 and possibly Rogue in Captain Marvel 2. Neither Thor 4 nor Guardians 3 seem particularly ripe for X-inclusions (particularly given that the latter was written before the Fox sale completed), but Ant-Man 3 could include a character. None of the Disney+ shows (Ms. Marvel, Moon Knight, and She-Hulk) have obvious X-connections, but they could take the Hulk vs Wolverine idea and have it be with She-Hulk instead (or simply have it as-is and be part of that show). I doubt a major character like that would debut there, but it's possible.

Variety is reporting that the soon to be 37-year old Sophia Di Martino (who I'm not familiar with) is in talks to join the cast of Loki in an undisclosed role. The only female casting suggestion prior to this (from 4chan in January) was for Karnilla [correction: there was a Reddit rumour in October that posited Amora the Enchantress]. A different 4chan post weighed in on Di Martino and said she's slated to play "Sigyn, a friend from Loki’s past who comes along him to mess with time." Sigyn is a very minor character, but had an involved role in Loki's past. The normally reliable Deadline (Nellie Andrew and Geoff Boucher in this case) said she's going to costar as a female version of Loki, but carefully looking at the wording of the article, only costaring is confirmed, whereas the other idea comes from just one source 'close to production,' making me uncertain about it (Boucher is the guy who erroneously put out a Deathlok rumour back in April).

The new 4chan post also claims:

Tom Hiddleston, Karl Urban (Skurge), and Rene Russo (Frigga) reprise their roles from previous MCU films. Helena Bonham Carter, Will Forte, and Ali Wong are in negotiations to play new characters. Helena is being looked at to play Karnilla, the main villain of the series. Anthony Hopkins is set to film scenes as Odin.

Given the time travel element, an appearance by familiar characters only makes sense (and any chance to see Karl Urban I'm happy with). As for Karnilla, the only reference we've had to her previously is the aforementioned 4chan post from January. She is queen of the Norns and her relationship to Loki in the comics isn't inherently antagonistic, but that background doesn't immediately debunk the idea. There's a strong chance this is someone's fan casting.

Also on the topic of Loki, one of the official things said about it (via Stephen Broussard) is that it will have a 'man on the run' quality to it. Kinda Culty plausibly suggests that while Loki will have multiple antagonists (something already revealed), there will be an overarching villain (wondering if perhaps Gorr will be that person, with Loki going through a similar journey that Thor does in the Jason Aaron series that Thor 4 is borrowing from--that concluded with several different Thor's facing Gorr). KC also suggests that each episode will occur in a different time period and that seems likely. He also suggests Morgan le Fay will be one of the antagonists, which is interesting because about a month ago it was revealed the character will appear in the upcoming season of The Runaways. KC thinks Feige won't care about that appearance and do what he wants and while I'd like that to be true, it would be the first time Feige directly re-cast a Marvel Entertainment character (if they wanted le Fay for the show, why give Loeb permission to use her in Runaways?--keeping in mind it's possible that the decision was made before Feige knew he needed her). Incidentally, as expected, season three of The Runaways will be it's last (Hellstrom has a decent chance of being one-and-done).

We have another 4chan supposed breakdown of Black Widow:

• Natasha runs to escape the accords and heads to Budapest to retrieve the "Foxcharge," which is a sort of clean slate digital eraser that gets rid of your prints, face, DNA in any government databases. Super spy McGuffin.
• She finds Yelena there who has been assigned to kill her. Yelena didn't know she would be the target, and backs off after a playful fight. The family dynamic between them and Alexei, who they break out of a gulag, is very strong and fun throughout.
• The plot basically has 3 threads, getting Foxcharge, Nat being chased by every government, and stopping "Melina", who eventually suits up as a revamped Iron Maiden in a suit very akin to Matt LeBlanc's in Lost in Space, from reactivating the Black Widow program.
• Natasha, Yelena, Red Guardian and her old partner/lover Mason have to sneak across borders and fight all the remaining Black Widows who get sent after them.
• Taskmaster always seems to know where they will be. The film makes you think all of her allies could be him. He is able to perfectly mirror all the combat styles. Has a memorable fight with Red Guardian. a dirty bar fight version of Cap vs Cap in Endgame.
• He has a tank/mobile command center that drives itself. Think Idris Elba's badass motorcycle in Hobbs and Shaw. This is gonna steal the show in the same way.
• The Arc of the film is very much this wild world calling Natasha back to it, and her trying to get her family out of it.
• Mason is revealed to be Taskmaster and kills Red Guardian in front of Natasha and Yelena during a climatic fight between all of them and Melina. The remaining Black Widows turn on Iron Maiden and she ends up locked in the red room torture chamber to get her justice.
• Yelena kills Taskmaster by shooting him through his broken mask as he is about to kill Natasha. Nat is pissed but understands and gives Yelena the Foxcharge so she can disappear. Nat says she has unfinished business, and the movie ends with her meeting up with Falcon and Cap in Italy.

It's been about a month since our last (and only other) breakdown of Black Widow (also from 4chan). The descriptions are similar, but the plots are not, although both agree that Mason is Taskmaster (something Murphy speculated back in July)--this almost has to be true because Natasha can't have a romantic attachment when she makes her sacrifice in Endgame (for her to want Hawkeye to have his life, she can't have one she feels is worth returning too). Both plot breakdowns sound plausible to me, although the first reads better (killing off Red Guardian seems like a waste, but Marvel does have a history of throwing away characters, and it would explain his absence in Endgame).

Shortly after I posted the WandaVision stuff, Charles Murphy weighed in that his information was that Kathryn Hahn's character was Agnes. There's no significant Marvel character with that name and Murphy throws out a couple of suggestions that seem like he's reaching--it's far more plausible that "Agnes" is a placeholder and that Hahn is an established character--the much-rumoured Agatha Harkness makes a lot of sense, although it cuold be someone else. Let's remember: Murphy's speculation is usually terrible, but his scoops are excellent.

Daniel claims Moon Knight will connect to Blade. This idea, as far as I can tell, seems to borrow from the original Hulu (Jeph Loeb) Spirits of Vengeance plan, which Deadline mentioned back in May. It's certainly possible (making it a safe guess).

LotLB put out a spec list and it includes a few I ignored because were meant for Hulu as well as one I just missed last time: Soulfire (from Hellstrom), Fathom (a member of the Thunderbolts), and Black Air Team (they referenced this previously--it's connected to the Excalibur scoop from last post).

A Redditor, in a now deleted post, posted this supposed early breakdown of 2021's Spider-Man 3:

• Peter is raided and arrested at his home by cops and SWAT teams very early on in the film.
• Peter is tried in court and sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole in a maximum security prison.
• Much of the first act is court proceedings and Peter adjusting to life in prison before all the convicts and even guards start trying to kill him. Think ending of John Wick 2.
• Peter discovers there was a huge contract put out on him from someone on the outside calling himself the Benefactor.
• A massive brawl breaks out, leading to Peter being transferred to a different prison.
• The bus carrying him and other prisoners is intercepted in the middle of the city by Kraven The Bounty Hunter as they call him in the film. Kraven coldly kills the prisoners and dukes it out with Peter.
• Peter manages to escape Kraven, badly beaten. He is free, but now a fugitive from the law and being chased by people who want him dead.
• Peter disconnects himself from everybody he knows, only ever reaching out to Happy via payphone to ask him for help if possible and to leave a message for his friends and family. He is otherwise resourceless.
• We find out the mysterious Benefactor is actually Quentin Beck, who is still alive and working behind the scenes to get rid of Spider-Man before returning as the renowned Mysterio.
• Much of the second act plays similarly to No Country for Old Men where it’s a cat and mouse game between Spidey and Kraven.
• Peter spends much of the film with no web shooters in a new but rough, handcrafted Spider-Man suit.
• This is Kraven’s first time being tasked to kill a superhuman and he is clearly having his fun with it. Almost taking it easy.
• Peter is caught in a race between trying to clear his name upon discovering that Beck is alive and also trying to avoid the law and Kraven, along with other small time hit men and villains who pop up along the way.
• Happy points Peter in the direction of agent Jessica Drew who believes that Peter is innocent and is willing to help keep Kraven off his tail. He also gets him his webshooters and OG homecoming suit back.
• Beck becomes increasingly frustrated with Kraven’s failure to kill Spider-Man. We find out this is Kraven’s last hunt as he’s been diagnosed with terminal cancer and he’s “savoring” it. He honestly just doesn’t want to kill a kid though.
• Beck threatens to kill Kraven if he doesn’t get the job done. Afterwards, we discover Quentin himself has a benefactor. None other than Norman Osborn, who is running for senator.
• Norman eventually exposes Beck as a fraud and proves Peter Parker’s innocence, which swings public opinion his way in the election. Norman gets the credit for reopening the investigation and finding the truth.
• The final battle between Kraven and Spider-Man is brutal, they get sandwiched by police, and it ends in Kraven nearly being killed by an extremely angry Peter. Kraven tells Peter where Beck is hiding and Peter lets him live.
• Peter goes to Beck’s hideout which turns into a big illusion which Peter defeats. Quentin is arrested, all his belongings and evidence seized, and Peter is exonerated.
• Peter reunites with Michelle, Ned, and May. He visits Doctor Strange who offers to make “the world forget”. Peter ponders the question and the credits roll.

This reads like fanfiction to me, even though it touches on various rumours we've heard about the film over the last year. Kraven's role looks terrible and there's no reason to include Osborn until there's a long-term deal signed with Sony.

Speaking of Spider-Man, Daniel is engaging in some speculation: if there's a new deal with Sony and if Captain Marvel 2 is the beginning of Secret Invasion then that will be the crossover film for Peter Parker. That's three qualifiers before his conclusion, so grains of salt are required for this one.

There's been a 4chan post claiming to know the plans for Phase Five:

• Norman Osborn is introduced as the new Tony Stark, with Oscorp establishing their new RnD tower in Avengers tower's stead. Their new military equipment and medical advancements earn them a huge endorsement from the U.S. government. Norman begins a romantic relationship with Pepper and earns her trust, so she signs a lot of Tony's research over to him.
• Osborn also researches Howard Stark's past and attempts to recreate the super soldier formula, which is done somewhat successfully. However, when Norman tests it on himself, it mutates his skin in a similar way that it mutated Red Skull, by turning him green and goblin-looking...
• Kang resides in the quantum realm city and is introduced in Ant-Man 3 where he exists outside of time.
• High Evolutionary is responsible for Rocket and his girlfriend Lylla. He also helps Drax find his daughter who ended up surviving Ronan's attack. She is pale with green marks on her skin similar to what Drax has and goes by Moondragon.
• Namor is introduced in Black Panther 2.
• There is an alternate timeline out there now where Tony ends up surviving well beyond 2023 due to 2014 Thanos disappearing and never returning. This timeline's version of Tony and Reed [Richards] end up making contact with alternate realities eventually, sparking the interest of the Beyonder who notices the Tony and Reed before him are not the original versions. Due to this, Beyonder sets all the alternate Earths on a collision course leading to Secret Wars.

This reads like someone's guess based on various popular rumours--there's no real thread and little indication where most of these storylines will take place on screen. While individual elements of this might, ultimately, have some truth in them, I don't take the post seriously.

James Gunn debunked a 4chan rumour from September which claimed Mark Hamill would play the High Evolutionary. Gunn says he hasn't discussed the role with Hamill, which, while not excluding him from having it, means the 4channer's claim is wrong.

I've been ignoring the criticism of the MCU coming from older filmmakers, other than one oblique comment a month ago, because I think it's irrelevant. Now that the garrulous Alan Moore has weighed in, it seems like it's a debate that won't go away soon so I might as well address it.

First, the obvious: you (and I) are welcome to like or dislike whatever we like. Subjectively, anything can be great, anything can be awful--no opinion is better than any other. There's only debate when you start making claims about the importance or quality of a work beyond personal enjoyment. What is or isn't creatively important is ultimately decided over time (which is to say, those creative works that are still consumed decades later or are the basis of future consumption are what's worthy of veneration and study).

Let's start with the obvious: those criticizing the MCU are creative people whose best days are decades behind them (some will argue 2013's Wolf of Wall Street bucks that trend, but rather than getting caught in the weeds of nuance, let's accept that what they are best known for goes back to the 1980s and earlier). Why is this important? Because it means they have lost touch with the public--their stories no longer touch a nerve--they have drifted off into irrelevancy. That doesn't invalidate their criticism necessarily, but it does indicate they aren't able to communicate to modern audiences the way they used too.

Context. It's extremely common for new, popular works to be called (dangerous) trash by critics of the time. Let me provide a few famous examples:

• William Shakespeare - 'The Bard' himself was considered popular trash until well over a century after his death; he's now considered the playwright of his era and remains popular to this day (of the three examples here, his is the most apt for Marvel and comics in general)
• Edgar Allan Poe - father of modern horror and detective stories, he was derided in his time and even in the 1920s had to be defended as a figure of literary importance; now he's as much a part of academia as Sheakspeare is
• J. R. R. Tolkien - both his major work, The Lord of the Rings, and the fantasy genre as a whole only gained academic acceptance recently (ie, when Peter Jackson's films came out a slew of books accompanied it to defend it against such attacks)

This isn't to say all popular work has academic value--most of it doesn't and there's a long list of popular authors and filmmakers whose works have vanished into the dustbin of history. The point is that academics tend to push back against popular tastes that arise when they are adults, blinding them to its merits. This is also often the case for the older creators, whose works are superseded and put aside for what's new.

What do I think? Comicbook films (not just the MCU) have largely replaced older forms of escapist entertainment ('escapism' isn't a negative--virtually all creative output is escapist). Rather than rail against the change, it's more interesting to ask why the public prefers this type of entertainment over (for example) the dated pseudo-realism Scorsese represents (Moore's criticism is more idiosyncratic and, I think, largely worthless). I believe the change has something to do with increasingly depressed economic circumstances and the even poorer outlook of the future--audiences want stories that address issues in a positive way (there was a similar trend during the Great Depression).

The expected confirmation of a Black Adam release date has arrived (Dec.22/21). It'll be interesting to see how much hype Dwayne Johnson can bring to the franchise. There's a perception that he guarantees box office gold, but here are his last six films:
The Fate of the Furious 1.236
Baywatch 177.9
Jumanji 962.1
Rampage 428
Skyscraper 304.9
Hobbs & Shaw 758.9
To me this says he not a big enough draw to float a bad movie--or even lift an average one. The film will presumably tie-in with Shazam, which did poorly at the box office, so it'll be interesting to see how this is received. Personally, the only upcoming DC film that looks interesting to me is James Gunn's Suicide Squad.

This article is written by Peter Levi (@eyeonthesens)

Marvel News

Kevin Feige confirmed Loki will tie-in to Doctor Strange 2, or rather (looking at the schedule) the reverse. This makes sense as it's an alternate Loki who remains alive and Doctor Strange is about opening up the multiverse (ergo, presumably, opening it up for his return). Executive producer Stephen Broussard also confirmed that Loki will include a 'huge' time travel component (to what end remains unclear).

Also in official news, Jessica Gao (of Rick & Morty etc) was announced as the head writer of She-Hulk, while Jeremy Slater (who wrote the screenplay to 2015's Fantastic Four among other things) landed the same role for Moon Knight. For the most part I don't know either's work, so have no strong reaction (I don't think we can blame Slater too much for FF--clearly Feige doesn't).

Here's a 4chan post about WandaVision from a guy claiming to be working on the show in Atlanta (I've fixed some of the weird capitalization etc in the post):

• After the events of Avengers: Endgame, Wanda (Elizabeth Olsen) is depressed and homeless. A mysterious woman named Agatha (Kathryn Hahn) comes across Wanda and offers her a deal. Agatha could make a pocket dimension of the perfect world for Wanda as long as Wanda stays there forever. Wanda agrees
• Wanda’s perfect world consists of Vison with her two newborn babies: Wiccan and Speed. Agatha appears as a noisy [I think he means 'nosy'] neighbor to keep an eye out on Wanda, as she plans to kill her after the two babies grow up (which they do in a span of a week)
• On Earth, FBI Agent Jimmy Woo (Randall Park) with his recruits of Darcy Lewis (Kat Dennings) and Monica Rambeau (Teyonah Parris) are hired to solve a case regarding Agatha, leading to where they get sucked into Wanda’s pocket dimension.
• Guest Stars and Cameos include Lashana Lynch as an elderly Maria [Rambeau] using CGI, James Spader as Ultron with archive footage from Age of Ultron, and Benedict Cumberbatch as Doctor Strange, with the final episode leading into Multiverse of Madness. Dick Van Dyke and Carol Burnett were offered cameo roles of a elderly couple in Wanda’s Perfect World [both of whom I was surprised to discover are still performing regularly].
• Ben Barnes and Dominic West are cast as Chthon and The Grim Reaper, Agatha’s two minions who are tasked to kill Vision and the babies.

Hahn's roll hasn't been officially revealed, but both an earlier 4chan (October) rumour and one from Reddit (October) have made the same claim that she's Agatha Harkness (the idea that the character would appear goes back to 4chan in January). Neither of those rumours, nor Daniel's (October) included the opening premise and the only way to rationalize Wanda being homeless is if General Ross continues to impose the Sokovia Accords, thus forcing her into hiding--it's a stretch, but not impossible. The plot with Vision and the children echoes the idea about the show that goes all the way back to when it was announced. The rolls for Woo etc are a new idea, but plausible. No one, that I'm aware of, has proposed the two supporting villains listed here. The Grim Reaper is Wonder Man's brother and participated in the Tom King Vision series that forms part of the inspiration for the show. Chthon has a history with Wanda in the comics and certainly makes sense as an antagonist. Could this information be real? There's a decent chance, but we'll need to hear more to be sure.

A related note: imdb isn't the most reliable place for casting information, but they've listed the John Walker character on the cast list (who is appearing in Falcon & the Winter Soldier). What his role is, if included, is hard to say (is he part of Woo's team, for example?). It's also worth noting the above does not mention Quicksilver, who has been heavily rumoured to appear in the show.

Conrad says early development of the Thunderbolts has begun--this echoes a very old (December) Roger Wardell rumour, which subsequently LotLB repeated in September. Conrad offers no specifics other than it's years away and given his track record I doubt he has an actual scoop here, but it's a safe guess to make. Wardell's claim was that the IP was being discussed.

The Charles Murphy's hint of "Limbo," which I and most others thought was about Ant-Man 3, has been clarified to say it's about the untitled February, 2022 MCU film--from there Murphy subsequently put out a Tweet declaring it either means: Fantastic Four, Captain Britain, Blade, or Deadpool 3. Murphy loathes the Deadpool films and loves Fantastic Four, but I consider neither suggestive. GWW then discovered a Disney-created LLC called "Limbo Productions I LLC," which they claim is for the Loki series. I have to wonder if Murphy is referring to the LLC and drawing different conclusions for it (in this particularly case I'd agree with GWW's interpretation, due largely to scheduling of announced properties--Limbo could refer to the state Loki is in during his show).

Possibly related to this, HN Entertainment notes that Disney has set-up a production company called Finger Guns Productions LLC, guessing this is for Marvel and Deadpool 3 specifically; others think it's for the Hawkeye show (I lean towards the latter just because of the timeframe).

Discussing Film is scooping that Ms. Marvel's family is being cast saying "Marvel Studios are eyeing to cast Pakistani American actors for all three roles," which casts doubt on the 4chan post from a couple of weeks ago that claimed Mindy Kaling and Riz Ahmed had been approached for those roles (neither are Pakistani, as I mentioned at the time).

GWW also has a casting scoop for the show: a villain code named 'Birdman,' whom they believe is The Inventor (an early Ms. Marvel antagonist). I have no strong opinion as I'm unfamiliar with her rogue's gallery.

A 4chan post came out afterward claiming:

• [Pakistani actress] Arisha Razi is in final negotiations to play Kamala Khan
• Omid Djalili [British actor of Iranian descent] and Mindy Kaling are in talks to play Khan’s overprotective parents, Yusuf and Muneeba Khan. Marvel is still on the search for a actor for Amir, Kamala’s older brother
• The Inventor and [Inhuman] Maximus the Mad are the two main villains of the series. Ben Whishaw is in talks to play The Inventor. Freddie Highmore has been approached for Maximus.
• Finn Wolfhard has recently been approached for Bruno, Kamala’s Best Friend
• Black Bolt and Lockjaw appear. [Deaf actor] Nyle DiMarco is in early negations to play Black Bolt
• Brie Larson will have a minor role as Carol Danvers/Captain Marvel
• Riz Ahmed has been offered a role
• Filming begins in August 2020, for a release in Late 2021.

While this fits the above, it could easily be fan casting. I do think Marvel will try to find a deaf actor for Black Bolt (makes perfect sense for him and it would be a slamdunk for representation).

Conrad says an Iron Heart Disney+ series is in early development--this echoes a WGTC rumour from September, which was derived from LotLB in August (who claimed she'd appear in Phase Six). Both ideas (the character and format) are very safe guesses, as despite not being very popular with comic readers (Brian Michael Bendis created Riri Williams for his kids and she's tended to be a Mary Sue because of it), she fits the MCU's push for diversity. My only issue with this idea (I believe Conrad is guessing btw), is that if the MCU wants to move forward with Morgan Stark (Katherine Longford), it would make much more sense for her to pick up her father's mantle.

More from LotLB/Mikey Sutton:

• Via Sutton: there's a planned Excalibur trilogy featuring Black Knight, Captain Britain, Deaths Head, and others
• An Excalibur-related Spec list: Kitty Pryde, Lockheed, Cerise, Longshot, Pete Wisdom, Widget (who was Kitty), and Daytripper

LotLB had an Excalibur scoop back in August, but that came via their original source ("The Black Knight") rather than Sutton. In that rumour the team was very close to the original, consisting of Captain Britain, Kitty Pryde (she was briefly Widget, incidentally; presumably Lockheed would be with her), and Nightcrawler, with Black Knight and Psylocke added (both of whom have been on the team). In the new list, Cerise (one of the Shi'ar) was a member of the team, but is very obscure; Peter Wisdom is a less obscure minor character who has been on the team; Daytripper is also known as Jimaine Szardos, Magik (the second with that name after Colossus's sister), and Amanda Sefton--she is the Sorceress Supreme of Limbo and has a close relationship with Nightcrawler (she's also been a member of the team); Longshot has never been a member of the team, although given that his usual partner Dazzler has been sent to the animation ghetto, it frees him up to move around. I'm still very uncertain about this idea, as it's unclear how Marvel will approach using mutants and how quickly they will roll out various teams. It's certainly plausible to do so, however (I don't think a Captain Britain solo vehicle was ever likely and none of the rest of the roster could ever hope to shoulder a film or show).

This article is written by Peter Levi (@eyeonthesens)