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)