Marvel News & Notes

Daniel posted a casting list for She-Hulk which seems current. The important particulars:

Start Date: March 2021

Logline: Follows the life of Bruce Banner's cousin, attorney Jennifer Walters, AKA She-Hulk.

Cast: Tatiana Maslany as Jennifer Walters/She-Hulk

Roles:

[Jennifer Walters’ Parents] in their 60’s, Supporting roles.

[Male Co-Worker] Late 20’s-30’s, sweet, earnest, handsome in a John Krasinski sort of way, leaning diverse but open to all ethnicities. Strong Supporting

[Susie] Walters’ best friend, 30-ish, leaning Asian-American but definitely BIPOC, comedy chops are essential. Strong Supporting

[Lucy] Female villain in her 30’s, a glamorous social media influencer, Kardashian-esque with a dark side. Five to ten episodes. Strong Supporting

This seemingly confirms Maslany's casting (a disappointment for representation, but it's not a category the MCU cares about--I've mentioned before how selective their diversity is); I assume 'Krasinski handsome' means boy-next-door; the list implies a ten-episode arc for the show. I suspect "Lucy" is a revamped She-Hulk villain (the description doesn't get me anywhere; Nebens guesses Titania or Ultima, but his only basis is that those are the two main villains of the IP). What's not here is the hook--what (other than the relationship with Bruce) is going to bring casual MCU fans to the show? The casting descriptions scream sitcom (like Ally McBeal), which is horrifying for someone who generally loathes the genre. I don't think Feige is naive enough to lean on the brand alone (unless Disney+ is a proving ground for his underlings). My guess is either Bruce Banner's role is bigger than imagined or there are revelations to come for who else will be in the show. I should point out that, much like Ms. Marvel, the leading actress will not draw in casual fans, so I'm looking for the 'wow' factor that's currently lacking (and remains lacking for Ms. Marvel).

One interesting soap opera that will soon end is who is playing Kate Bishop. There are conflicting reports about whether she's on-set for filming or not (from his Trumpian bunker Conrad says she is). I'm indifferent--I don't know the character or the actress--but given how insistent insiders have been about Hailee I'll experience a certain amount of schadenfreude to have it go to someone else (the odds say she has the role, however).

Murphy talks about the current state of Disney+ productions and what's notable is that several sources mention Ironheart is in the future (echoing what he said back in May). I've talked ad nauseum about the problems with successor characters, but Disney+ is the place to put risky IP. The idea of the MCU going this way was first seriously broached by Daniel last February (who undoubtedly is one of the 'sources' Murphy is referencing). What do I think? I think asking a teenage actress to step into Robert Downey Jr.'s shoes is a bad idea, but Marvel may find a way to avoid her comicbook struggles (to me the simplest solution is to have her take over from War Machine rather than Iron Man--particularly as RDJ is unlikely to want to be a voice in her head--it avoids almost all the baggage she brings with her).

I mentioned last time that I was puzzled by the Tenoch Huerta talks for Black Panther 2 because he's Latino and I had no idea who that could be from the IP (naming Namor off the cuff). I had forgotten, for good reason, that back in May the non-credible Joshua Munn (who claims to be one of Sutton's sources, something Sutton vehemently denies, calling him a 'serial liar') said Rodrigo Santoro had been cast as Namor. While the claim is clearly not true, I bring it up because it thematically synergizes with the potential Huerta casting. The question is, if this is for Namor, why is it a Hispanic actor when the character is either Caucasian or Asian? I feel like the change would satisfy two Marvel priorities: 1) maintain diversity, 2) the Chinese market. The usual default from scoopers is that we'll get an Asian Namor, but there are reasons why the MCU might not want to use an Asian Imperialist anti-hero who inevitably loses to Black Panther. Making the character Hispanic preserves diversity while avoiding potential issues with the Chinese market (it also synergizes better with the US-market, where there's an important Hispanic audience). This is, of course, a theory based on a theory about casting--castles in the sand--and it's likely Huerta is not Namor.

Grace Randolph has proposed M'Baku and Shuri as Black Panthers who have to battle it out. I've gone over repeatedly how Randolph doesn't have Marvel sources, so her information is not credible, but that aside it's a poor premise anyway, as it echoes the plot of the first Black Panther. Sutton's objections to the idea unmask his push for Shuri, who he thinks "taps into the national zeitgeist of a black woman as Vice President." The idea is absurd (no one cares who the VP is, not to mention that Biden/Harris did worse with minority and women voters than Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris was crushed during her bid for the Democratic nomination for her appalling record in office). Sutton can be forgiven for being impacted by symbolism rather than politics (and he may be virtue signaling--a safe choice in this particular community), but it suggests his theories for the MCU are impacted by beliefs like this (explaining, perhaps, his otherwise bizarre push for Blue Marvel among others).

This dovetails into something I find odd about current American discourse (which has crept into Canada and most of the English-speaking world). Everything in the US is bluntly ideological--uncompromising and dogmatic views on social issues combined with cross-ideological obeisance to corporations. The scoopers (as Conrad has painfully discovered) cannot accept any deviations from their dogma. It's no wonder he (however ineptly) tried to hide his own views. Whatever good intentions these people have (and I believe most of them are well-intentioned), their behaviour is toxic and hurts the cause they promote. Incidentally, after a month of silence, Conrad is posting on his website (rebranding it from MCU Cosmic to Manabyte)--he has not resumed his Patreon (but I expect him too), but did delete his old Youtube channel (likely to resume it with new branding). The only question is, will he go back to parroting a political line he doesn't believe in?

Thomas Polito (formerly of GWW, possibly still at The Cinema Spot, but writing for The Vulcan Reporter), whom I haven't discussed since he said Ironheart would film in 2021 (back in May, a prediction he'd like back), said something I want to discuss. Polito used to be fed information by Daniel while at GWW (possibly indirectly), but that's not the case any longer. What this means is that Polito is not much better informed than you or I, but he has a theory about what the plot of Spider-Man 3 will be and I thought it was worth looking into.

Polito believes the film will borrow from the 2005 Brian Michael Bendis story Breakout (specifically saying it won't be a Spider-Verse adaptation, which is what's popular in fan circles right now, because it would include the prior Spider-Men). The idea of Breakout is that someone (he suggests either evil Skrulls or J. Jonah Jameson) hires Electro to stage a prison break where Peter is locked up (making him a fugitive). This seems a bit like putting the cart before the horse, since he's presumably already a fugitive, but the basic idea could work if he's simply on the lamb and Electro is hired by someone to get him.

Polito's theory is based on what little is known about the film--ignoring (as he calls them) the 'non-trade scoopers' (which includes everyone from insider Wardell to random guys on 4chan). There's bitterness in the post that suggests a falling out with the community:

The Spider-Verse, which would include Andrew Garfield and Tobey Maguire reprising their roles as Spider-Man, has repeatedly been mentioned to feature in the film by various non-trade scoopers. This is something that had never been brought up before the involvement of Jamie Foxx and Doctor Strange in the film. Before that, the general scooper consensus was that Kraven the Hunter would be the antagonist, but that seems to have been forgotten with new trade information.

This is a good point, as it's long been clear to me how lacking in inside sources the scooper sphere is. Garfield's schedule, in light of filming Tick, Tick...Boom!, is another important note, although people supporting the Spider-Verse theory could get around that by claiming it's just a cameo.

It's a plausible theory, but there's simply not enough meat to support it (although I heartily agree with his idea of a smaller movie). I do think his points against the Spider-Verse are strong and as I pointed out when they first appeared, connecting Sony films to the MCU only benefits Sony--there's no 'win' for Feige unless a purchase of Sony is around the corner (something we've heard nothing about). For those wondering, as far as I can tell the first 'serious' scooper to propose the Spider-Verse idea was Sutton in May (someone I feel has a strong Sony slant), although he seems to be moving away from the idea of it being in Spider-Man 3 given what his buddy Lauder said recently (shifting the idea to Spider-Man 4).

4chan on Doctor Strange 2:

• Doctor Strange, Scarlet Witch, Mordo, Wong and the Ancient One return. The new characters are Clea, Jericho Drumm, America Chavez, Cagliostro, Nightmare and Shuma-Gorath.
• Shuma-Gorath is an ancient entity that feeds off people’s fear and wants to use America Chavez, a young girl who can create portals between universes, as a vessel to spread madness and consume the Multiverse. Nightmare is Shuma-Gorath’s shapeshifting, mindbending enforcer who is sent to capture America [Chavez].
• Doctor Strange and Wong rescue [Chavez] and assemble a team to protect her, formed by Scarlet Witch, Mordo, Clea and Drumm. Scarlet Witch is learning how to control her powers with Strange. Clea is the Ancient One’s estranged daughter born with a connection to the Dark Dimension. Drumm is a powerful voodoo witch doctor and former student at Kamar-Taj.
• Strange’s plan is to contact the spirit of Cagliostro, the sorcerer who originally defeated Shuma-Gorath, and learn how to reproduce his ritual. Mordo decides that Strange’s plan is too dangerous, goes rogue and sets out to kill [Chavez] before Shuma-Gorath can get to her.
• The final battle happens in Shuma-Gorath’s realm of dead universes populated by physical manifestations of people’s worst fears and nightmares.
• Benedict Cumberbatch, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Elizabeth Olsen, Benedict Wong and Tilda Swinton are returning. Xochitl Gomez is cast as America Chavez and Daveed Diggs is cast as Jericho Drumm. Bruce Campbell will play Doctor Druid, the sorcerer supreme of a parallel universe, in a small comedic role
• Jeremy Irons has been approached for Cagliostro. Charlize Theron passed on Clea, so Vanessa Kirby and Jodie Comer are the current frontrunners for Clea. Nicholas Hoult is in early talks for Nightmare after Adam Driver turned it down.

This isn't a bad plot, but one of the reasons to doubt it is that Mordo decides to go rogue now, because he's already gone rogue at the end of Doctor Strange. I appreciate the mindnumbing obsession 4chan and Reddit have with Jodie Comer in the MCU.

In what's becoming the norm for Sutton, he leans on Edward Lauder's Small Screen for news. The latter reports that Legion-actor Dan Stevens is being sought for a villain role in the MCU, which Sutton says could be for Magneto (admitting that Stevens hasn't actually been approached, so is simply on a list). As I've gone over before, the problem with using Lauder as a source is that he has no track record of success and, in the one case where he admits his source (the link), it isn't very good.

Lauder also claims that Jon Krasinski and Emily Blunt have entered talks with Marvel to play Reed Richards and Sue Storm. This idea is older than this blog and Sutton (who is echoing it) has long been on this train (he has been less committed to Blunt).

Sutton says no Daredevil in Spider-Man 3 (a primordial Conrad rumour), but says he will appear in a subsequent Spider-Man film as they face the Kingpin (he doesn't specify if it's a fourth or later film). He also repeats his old claim that the MCU wants Charlie Cox back in the role (for my issues with using the Netflix actors, go here), although he's been all over the place as to where.

K. C. Walsh, editor of GWW, offered a drunken AMA; before I go into it, it's important to note that Walsh is not a scooper. That said, he knows people who know things (which is to say, his former contributors were given info by Daniel), and he seems to be within the broader circle of scoopers. Here are his Marvel comments as summarized on Reddit (mine in pink):

• WandaVision: It's chronologically set before Spider-Man 3 and Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness for a reason. He expects Mephisto to appear. [Note he says 'expects' not 'knows' or 'has heard', so all he's claiming is his own speculation]
• The Falcon and the Winter Soldier: The Power Broker is present in the series, or at least a power broker. [I recall the second reference, but can't find it  so take my memory with a grain of salt]
• She-Hulk: Although he hasn't heard anything, he speculates that this series will likely be the first place that Daredevil could appear. [This is the old Conrad rumour from two years ago (see above)--Marvel has the rights back, but would not have had them during the script/casting process; once again he's saying this is his own speculation]
• Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness: He states that America Chavez is in it and he expects Mephisto to be involved. He personally hopes that Shuma-Gorath may appear. [Nothing of note here]
• Thor: Love and Thunder: Describes it as "the next big cosmic event" and states that it will take place in multiple Realms. [Nothing of note here]
• Spider-Man 3: The Multiverse is involved and the film will culminate in a Sinister Six confrontation--teasing [67-year old] Alfred Molina and Doctor Octopus. He's "heard things" about Kraven and Scorpion being in the movie as well. He doesn't say that he's heard if Andrew Garfield or Tobey Maguire have signed in spite of mentioning that they've had talks previously, but he personally thinks that it'd be easier to convince Andrew to come back than Tobey, given that the former had enthusiasm for playing Spider-Man in spite of his frustration over how TASM2 was meddled with, and given that the latter was ass to work with on the set of his two sequels when it came to the actual Spider-Man costume and stunt work. He says that he'd probably still do it if he were paid well enough. [I hadn't heard Molina brought up before, but GWW reiterated it came from one Disney/Marvel 'insider'--only only 'insider' GWW has ever had is Daniel and his inside information is Production Weekly--but is there a casting grid with Molina on it? I don't think so]
• Other Marvel-Sony Stuff: He expects that both companies will find ways to keep working with each other after the current deal expires. However, he's not sure how Norman Osborn fits into either company's plans (particularly since a Thunderbolts project is happening eventually and that may take precedence over a Dark Avengers adaptation), but there is definitely room for him to appear in future projects. [The expectation is shared across the scooper sphere, as indeed it must to continue to fuel the unending Sony tie-ins that are imagined; the Dark Avengers speculation was hot in early 2019 (cf), but has gone radio silent since]
• Other Marvel Stuff: He keeps hinting that a Secret Wars adaptation years from now seems to be a logical direction that the MCU is headed in with all this Multiverse stuff. Also seems to be excited about the possibility of a Nova adaptation. [Nothing of note here]

Much of what he discusses feels dated, making me wonder if, like Polito above, he no longer receives info directly from Daniel (scoops that used to appear in GWW are now in The Direct after spending some time at The Illuminerdi).

Speaking of rumours, Daniel claims Ryan Reynolds is getting everything he wants from Feige--creative freedom, the R-rating, a big paycheque, and more. If memory serves, I believe Bog Iger guaranteed the rating as part of his pitch to purchase Fox, but that aside, I think this is hogwash. If there's one thing we know about Kevin Feige, he doesn't give up creative control. I have seen stories like this floating around from less reputable people and over the last couple of months Daniel has started to copy/paste spicy items for whatever reason (perhaps he did this in his DC salad days, I have no idea).

I've mentioned before that there seemed to be no follow-up to the Joss Whedon complaints from Ray Fisher and it's now apparent why that was. For whatever reason, WB did not start their investigation until just a few weeks ago--since then Whedon has walked from his HBO Max series The Nevers claiming "exhaustion" and wanting to spend more time with his family (this holds as much water as when he stepped away from Batgirl because he couldn't come up with a story--which is to say, I don't buy it). Fisher believes he stepped down because of the investigation, and although we only have his word for it, I believe him. Fisher made similar claims against Geoff Johns, who is producing a Green Lantern show for HBO Max, but this has had no notable impact as yet (nor has the media covered that element of his accusations as much).

I think it's worth mentioning that the Kamala Khan-lead, Square Enix-produced Avengers game has 

lost money and is failing as a live-service vehicle. This isn't a stain on the lead character or a failure at raising her profile, simply that the game could not sustain itself on the power of the Avengers-brand alone. This is an age-old issue for video games based on movie IP, but worth noting given how much hyperbole the fan community employs when these games appear (whether Miles Morales will suffer the same fate for Sony remains to be seen--just like Avengers it's had the same "Wow initial sales were incredible!" stuff written for it--time will tell).

Speaking of hyperbole, Andre (Midnight's Edge) has been predicting the end of theaters for awhile now--his logic: a Christopher Nolan film failed at the box office, therefore cinema is dead forever. I've ignored Andre's theory because I think it's clickbait--I don't think he's that naive. While the pandemic may kill specific theater companies, it is not going to kill the public's desire for theaters anymore than the similar situation for sports meant its end. Why am I bringing this up? Daniel is now echoing this saying Feige is switching his focus to streaming and may put the next Avengers there. This is ridiculous. There's no way to recoup the cost of an Avengers film with streaming, nor could you swing investors for it the same way. I'm not saying that down the road how consumers consume media won't change--it will--but that's not right now. What's missed here (and again, I don't think Andre or Daniel believe this) is that the few films that have been released during the pandemic have all been either niche or terrible. No big, highly anticipated blockbuster has tested the waters because the biggest movie market (the US) is a basketcase. That situation will not last forever and once it changes, films will be released as usual (this reality is made clear by the Black Widow push--if Disney really thought these were the end times for theaters they'd pull the plug and put it on Disney+).

This article is written by Peter Levi (@eyeonthesens)

Marvel News & Notes

Daniel posted up casting information for Hawkeye (via Production Weekly):

• Dates: November 2020 - May 2021
• [Danil] 8-10, Male, Eastern European, athletic, speaks with an accent
• [Audiologist] Middle-aged Chinese woman, an Audiologist working out of a rundown building in New York City
• [Old Lady/Old Man] Male or Female, open ethnicity, 65+. Very short

These look lik bit parts that, by and large, confirm that Hawkeye will have hearing issues as per the adapted comic run (something one of Murphy's writers discusses). None of this is really new information, simply confirmation of what's been assumed since the show was announced.

Sutton says Kate Bishop (whom he believes will be played by Hailee Steinfeld) will replace Hawkeye in the MCU. I think this has been the general assumption (it's certainly been mine), especially given that he was originally set to die in Endgame.

Jaimie Alexander posted on instagram that she was headed to Atlanta, sparking rumours she'll be part of Thor 4. The idea of Sif returning has been around for almost two years (cf), with Discussing Film claiming a Disney+ show was coming at that time. Speculation aside (I don't think Sif, on her own, can carry a show), the idea of her returning to the MCU makes sense, but what they want to do with the underdeveloped character I have no idea. A deleted Reddit post in July claimed she dies in the film and has the same amount of screen time as Valkyrie. The 36-year actress is young enough to push beyond the tertiary element of the Thor-franchise, but she's also at that point in her career where it's unclear she can ever be more than that.

Daniel farmed off two casting items for TI (Nebens):

• 30s, female, Egyptian, lead who is strong (Nebens says 'no BS', which presumably means she's a no BS person who doesn't tolerate in from others)
• 50s-60s, male, British, strong supporting role, with Nebens saying 'potentially open to Europeans' which makes no sense (British=European), so either he left out something or isn't being clear with what he was given (what he might mean is Caucasian rather than European and that the role is open to all ethnicities--why he wouldn't just say that, I have no idea)

The news also included a note that Moon Knight's cloak will be silver rather than white--this isn't a change that bothers me (people talk about a 'silvery moon' after all), but maybe for hardcore fans of the IP this is annoying.

I'm dubious of Nebens' speculation, but for the sake of posterity: he thinks the woman could be Marlene Alraune (presumably renamed to suit an Egyptian actress), and he guesses either Bertrand Crowley or Frenchie (!) as the male character.

Just an aside: I wonder how much (if at all) Oscar Isaac playing the Egyptian Apocalypse in the horrendous Fox X-Men film played a role in being cast as Moon Knight. Probably not at all, and Marc Spector isn't Egyptian, but there is a kind of synergy to it.

Sutton says WandaVision will firm up that Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver are mutants. I think this is something everyone is expecting, given that the groundwork for mutants in the MCU has to be established.

Speaking of Sutton, he is echoing the Shuri-as-Black Panther rumour (which is not surprising given his promotion of the site behind it, cf). While it's possible and an easy solution, I think Marvel would be better off having someone else in that role (letting Shuri remain her own person). Part of the charm of Chadwick's performance is that Black Panther has a temper, is impulsive, and isn't the smartest person in the room--all of that is lost with Shuri. It's not that you can't give Shuri inner turmoil, just that it forces you to change something that might come across as forced given her set-up.

THR reports that Tenoch Huerta is in talks to play the lead antagonist for Black Panther 2. I'm not that familiar with the Black Panther IP (as a Marvel fan I was all about the X-Men), but I can't imagine Mexican (or Latino) villains have played much of a role in the lore, so I have no idea what the intention is here (I suppose he could be Namor--anyone could be). This dropped so recently the scoopers haven't tackled it yet, so there's no speculation to go through.

Ever since Johnny Depp lost his case against Amber Heard (something he's expected to appeal), rumours about Heard have run rampant. Daniel joins the fray saying Amber Heard talked to Feige about a role in the MCU. This is plausible, but given how controversy-adverse the MCU is (look at the hysteria over James Gunn's Tweets), I think nothing would come of it.

Sutton says Darkhawk will be coming to Disney+ in a few years as part of the cosmic side of the MCU. He's previously said (in May and July) that he would be attached to Nova (first as just a group of characters in an R&D list, then as his BFF). What's not clear is if he's saying those initials ideas have changed. He attached an R&D list via LotLB:

• Dargin Bokk - A villain for the character
• Portal - A Native American who begins as a Marvel villain but becomes Darkhawk's ally
• Speedball - A ubiquitous supporting hero [Sutton had him on an R&D list in August]
• Nova - Meaning that he would appear [Sutton has consistently said the character will debut in Captain Marvel 2 and the elements of that story have remained consistent (Daniel had the IP in active production in May--this is a very different claim from active development)]
• Tombstone - The iconic Spider-Man villain (I can't recall if Sony owns his rights completely or if he's shared, but I believe it's the former)
• Catastrophus - A villain
• The Sphinx - A villain [he was on Sutton's R&D list for Nova in May]
• Savage Steel - A vigilante who attacked anti-heroes (like Darkhawk and the Punisher)
• Quasar - The oft-rumoured hero (there is a male and female version--scoopers generally assume it's the male version because he's been around longer/been more significant--I agree with Kinda Culty's guess that it's more likely to be the female version since she's Moon Dragon's love interest, cf) [Sutton specifically tagged the character as coming to the MCU in July; Both Daniel and Sutton had the character as part of an Annihilation event, cf]

Darkhawk is not a major character (a C-lister); he was created in 1991 when he had his only solo comic (with iconic, horrendous 90s art) and since appeared only as part of a team (perhaps most prominently with the New Warriors). Being obscure doesn't necessarily mean the MCU wouldn't use him, but he's also low profile--there isn't the media buzz of a Kamala Khan or even an Ironheart (neither conventionally popular, but Marvel keeps trying to make them work). I think Sutton's first scoop is far more probable--that he appears as part of a Nova franchise.

Tim speculated that this will lead to a New Warriors show, which Sutton confirmed in the chat and said it would include Firestar and that the show is being revamped into something more serious than the (failed) Marvel Entertainment iteration from a few years ago (cf). Sutton had the team on an R&D list last September (this might have been related to Marvel Entertainment plans, because at that time there was still a lot of confusion from both Sutton and LotLB about what was happening with those properties versus the MCU itself--they believed Jeph Loeb was working with Feige rather than Loeb being pushed out and Feige deleting all his projects).

Going back to Firestar for a moment, here are prior rumours about her: in August, 2019 LotLB (TBK) said that the follow-up trilogy for Peter Parker would include elements of Spider-Man and his Amazing Friends that include Firestar; this idea was echoed by Daniel without attribution, and then Conrad took it from Daniel (also without attribution, cf); then in June Sutton said she was coming to the MCU. For a relatively popular character (niche, granted, but certainly better known than Darkhawk) it's interesting how little she's popped up in rumours. I'm not sure why New Warriors is the slot for her, but I'm not that familiar with that IP so it could simply be ignorance on my part.

From 4chan about Deadpool:

A new MCU Deadpool is indeed in the works. Reynolds and Feige have finally come to an agreement on what the movie will be. It's a half sequel to the established Deadpool Series and half reboot. Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick will be returning to write the script along with Reynolds, who already has a barebones draft constructed that he used to pitch the movie to Feige. It will be titled Deadpool: Retcon and will be set during the snap. The film will open with the entire established supporting cast of the Deadpool franchise getting snapped away. With Weasel getting snapped off screen to avoid using TJ Miller, which will be referenced in a 4th wall break. Deadpool will assume this happened due to him time traveling at the end of Deadpool 2 and attempt to fix it. The running joke is that Deadpool has always been in the MCU and there's definitely nothing strange about that. T-Ray is the villain. The film will be rated R and released under the 20th Century banner. It will work a lot like the Sony Spider-Man films where the MCU is canon to Deadpool but not necessarily vice versa. Reynolds signed a historically lucrative 5 film contract with Marvel Studios. This will be a big headline when this news breaks. The money is insane. Expect this news by December 10th. Likely will be announced by Reynolds on Twitter/Instagram, possibly in character as Deadpool.

It's rare for posts like this to be both so specific and so restrained. D-grade villain T-Ray has come up just once before (in a 4chan post about Shang-Chi in May). Right after this dropped Deadline (Kroll) debunked it by revealing that Wendy and Lizzie Molyneux are writing the film. He adds that Deadpool 2 director David Leitch won't return (I don't think he can be blamed for that film, but moving on from him is probably a good idea). I'm also happy we are getting new writers, as what the Deadpool sequel proved was that Reynolds cannot be allowed to do whatever he wants (this was also apparent, to some extent, with Paul Rudd and Ant-Man 2).

It's interesting watching the various narratives emerge after it was announced that Wonder Woman 1984 would debut on HBO Max in the US. To me the takeaway is this: failure. The film cost at least 200 million to produce, with millions more spent on marketing--an amount it will not recoup by releasing in this way. It is, very much, another Mulan, although I expect it to outperform the limp Disney effort (since Chinese audiences don't automatically hate it). This suggests to me that the film did not test well--that after the lengthy marketing campaign the weird choices (another prequel, Kristin Wiig as Cheetah, Pedro Pascal white-washed as some sort of weird Lee Iacocca figure, etc), the inchoate and confusing nature of the DCEU, and the soft reception of the first film (a rehashing of Captain America/Thor), combined to make most fans either indifferent or disinterested. While WB (and their sycophants) will try to put a positive spin on the move, there's no denying it's a failure (this is supposed to be a billion dollar film). What's interesting to me is what happens in the aftermath. Does Patty Jenkins get her trilogy, and if so is it directly put on HBO Max? Or is Jenkins waterboarded like Ava DuVernay, whom WB clearly wishes would go away rather than make New Gods. I feel like AT&T (who are responsible for pushing the Synder Cut forward) wants the DCEU to move away from whatever Jon Berg and Geoff Johns intended (the vastly disassociated approach to DC)--it seems like AT&T realizes part of what makes the MCU work is the connections--the DC Snyderverse failed due to poor writing, not interconnectedness.

What I don't think this supports is the goofy theory (Andre's) that this marks the end of big budget films. When the Covid vaccine becomes available, there's no reason at all for theaters to either remain closed or for people to avoid them, and it appears as though we are nearing that point. All this really means is that AT&T (or WB) saw no value in delaying the film further because they didn't believe it would do well in (American) theaters.

This article is written by Peter Levi (@eyeonthesens)

Marvel News & Notes

Murphy has confirmation that a production company he's long believed was for Marvel Studios is, indeed, for the MCU. In addition, he believes that his theory that it's for Fantastic Four is born out (in this case, by the same logic as when he first reported it). I wouldn't have taken this as confirmation of the fact just yet, but Production Weekly listed Fantastic Four, which suggests it is indeed in the works.

Daniel says they are casting a strong supporting female lead (20-30) for Thor 4 with the codename "Artemisia" (coined, no doubt, on the Greek goddess Artemis), described as a leader type. His guess is that this is Thor's sister Angela, but if I recall correctly Murphy said Marvel has moved away from matching first letters of names to the actual characters in casting calls, which would invalidate the speculation. It's worth noting this does not appear to be the same casting call Daniel put out recently (even though the age range and gender is the same).

Christopher Marc (HN Entertainment etc) believes the production company 'Grass-Fed' is for the Nick Fury show Variety confirmed in September. Given Samuel Jackson's age pushing this forward makes sense.

Arlyn Murphy (Charles' wife? Sister? Unrelated Murphy?) writes about the possibility that production companies Disney created in October may hint at the Young Avengers. I think the logic is weak (she largely dynamites the idea herself), but what is interesting is the list of in-development projects she includes at the end (in brackets I've included when/if these were first mentioned by Charles):

[Young Avengers; May], Ghost Rider [May], Illuminati [July following Daniel], Ironheart [May], Secret Invasion [May] and Secret Warriors [no direct reflection previously, but GWW (aka Daniel) in May]

Note these are in development not in production, so don't actually have the greenlight yet. Rumours for these IP have sometimes appeared much earlier (LotLB and Sutton generally), although it's not clear the context is the same. As I said last time, I think Young Avengers is dependent on how its component parts (the team's characters) are received--on the surface it doesn't interest me.

Daniel says Mei Ling, Death Dealer, and Civil Warrior are confirmed for Shang-Chi. The latter two I haven't heard mentioned by anyone (I think there's actually a typo with the third, unless the character is enormously obscure or usually uses another name), but the former has been generally assumed by everyone.

Hill discusses a season two of Loki (Murphy mentioned in January that actors were having second season options written into their contracts). This comes up because Production Weekly notes that a second season is slated to begin filming in January, 2022. PW isn't always right about dates, although it's suggestive that a second season is planned. More interesting in the article is Hill mentioning the small window available for Hiddleston to film for Thor 4--indicating a fairly minor role if he appears.

Around the same time Daniel said Loki will have a bigger role in the next MCU movies (he doesn't say which films, but Doctor Strange 2 and Thor 4 would make sense, even if it's hard to see how his role would be bigger or when he'd have the time to portray the character in either production). He doesn't say why his role will increase--an obvious reason would be Hiddleston's popularity, but there could be more to it (if, indeed, this rumour is true).

An update on the Quicksilver story from Daniel: apparently the source for the information (never made clear) comes from a toy leak where the model looks like Aaron-Taylor Johnson. I haven't seen this leak (making it impossible to verify), but it's been referenced broadly (eg).

The casting of Egyptian actors in Moon Knight makes me reflect on a story from September where THR (Borys Kit), commenting on a Deadline story, claimed Jonathan Majors was playing Kang the Conqueror. At the time scoopers were assuming Majors would play the Rama-Tut version of Kang and I flippantly commented that, while the actor isn't Egyptian, Marvel wouldn't care about that. I no longer feel so sure about that utterance. If we're getting different variations of Kang, it appears the MCU does want authentic Egyptians, such that if we get Rama-Tut the character cannot be played by Majors. Keep in mind, nowhere does Kit say what iteration Majors is playing and the assumption of multiple versions is speculation. It could be that we're getting just one Kang and that he doesn't have Egyptian roots (or, if the MCU wants to be clever, they could attach him to the 25th dynasty--not a perfect fit, but that's the non-ethnic Egyptian ruling group they could point too).

Tangentially, we're getting a sense of the ethnic groups that matter to MCU casting director Sarah Finn. For standard diversity purposes, Caucasian is superfluous unless it significantly impacts merchandizing, but with the casting for Moon Knight it seems like Jewish is also unimportant, as is Iraqi (Gilgamesh), and seemingly Japanese (Kingo/Wiz Kid). The Jewish angle I get (plenty have been cast in non-Jewish roles), and Iraq is economically trivial. It's less clear to me why Japanese characters have been swapped out (for Indian/Chinese actors, respectively)--it's likely down to the minimal importance of the roles. Egypt isn't important economically, but I see the casting intended to stop media criticism about cultural appropriation. There must be clearly defined guidelines, but it's unlikely we'll ever learn what they are. How much this matters to you really depends on your feelings on adaptations--for some its irrelevant, for others its untenable. Anecdotally, it seems like if the product is good changes are forgiven, but if the product is mediocre to bad those changes become unforgiveable (therefore, high risk/high reward).

Daniel claims Marvel wants Joaquin Phoenix to appear in Doctor Strange 2 as another iteration of Doctor Strange. As many know, Phoenix was up for the role of Doctor Strange originally, but passed on it because he didn't want to commit to more than one movie. I have no idea if there's any substance behind this--Daniel has been spewing rumours out faster than WGTC, so time will tell.

About a week ago Google listed Tobey Maguire, Andrew Garfield, and Ryan Reynolds in Doctor Strange 2. This has been ignored by the big scoopers, but has fueled others (like Small Screen--see below) to claim this is a leak. I've assumed that the listing is no different than similar IMDB listings (which is to say, unreliable), given that the heavies have not weighed in on it. However, cameos (as Edward Lauder suggests) are what's plausible if we see such characters in the MCU.

I've been quite cynical regarding the idea of Feige referencing IP from other creative hands because of how hard he's ignored both Marvel Entertainment and Universal (the two he could most easily touch on). However, it's possible he see's the multiverse as the ultimate wash my hands moment where he can acknowledge other Marvel iterations while keeping them far away from the MCU (not colouring it with dreck like Electra, Fan4stic, Spider-Man 3, etc). This is possible, but we'll need something much firmer than the evidence above to take it seriously.

Sutton says Marvel is considering a villain role for Wesley Snipes. This echoes a very old LotLB rumour from July, 2019, and I believe that's ultimately his source for the information.

Sutton has slightly changed his tune regarding the Iron Fist IP. Let's first look at the antecedents: last November he said the character would appear in Shang-Chi 2 as the Chuck Norris to Shang-Chi's Bruce Lee ala Way of the Dragon, and then be spun off into his own Disney+ show; in May he repeated the Disney+ idea, where Shang-Chi would presumably appear, but there was no mention of Shang-Chi 2 (this appears to be an unintended slip). In both cases Sutton said the show would follow Fraction/Brubaker, which always seemed impossible because Shang-Chi is already doing the tournament of champions from that run. His latest theory:

If Shang-Chi is the massive success Disney is hoping for, Iron Fist is waiting in the wings to be their next martial arts blockbuster. Keeping the character on Disney+, Hulu, or FX would leave money on the table if the market is hungry enough for martial arts IPs.

Shang-Chi 2 is looking increasingly like the movie for Iron Fist to make his cinematic debut. … I'm told that Marvel Studios is visualizing a Bruce Lee vs. Chuck Norris fight recalling 1972's Return of the Dragon (or Way of the Dragon). … For Iron Fist's solo movies, if they are greenlit, Marvel Studios is heavily interested in adapting the acclaimed run by writers Ed Brubaker and Matt Fraction with artist David Aja

We can see that the essentials of what he said a year ago have only changed in that instead of Iron Fist transitioning to Disney+, Sutton now thinks films could be on the table. There are a few key elements here. The comment about 'if the market is hungry for martial arts IP' is particularly pertinent, because as I discussed in 2018, martial arts films aren't in demand--there hasn't been a hit in over twenty years, despite the popularity of MMA. More importantly, reading Sutton's phrasing, most of this is his surmise--it 'looks like' he'll appear in Shang-Chi 2, and 'if' it's successful then we get spinoffs. The actual scoop element seems to be that they are considering Iron Fist and want to use the Brubaker/Fraction run (which is the sort of thing most people would speculate regardless).

This brings me to The Immortal Iron Fist run and its limitations. As lauded as it is, for those who have not read it, it's important to understand its limited scope. What the storyline does, primarily, is firm up the lore of the Iron Fist, introduce the tournament of champions, and contextualize Iron Fist in an Asian setting. The run is broken up by clunky, one-issue visits to prior Iron Fist's which are so hamfisted none have had any resonance (the problem with successor characters also afflicts past representations when they are introduced late). While many fans like the Seven Cities of Heaven, they aren't well-developed or that interesting--even K'un-Lun isn't that interesting--Danny Rand only works when he's on Earth dealing with the issues here (which is why Marvel comics has never repeated the IIF run). This doesn't mean the MCU couldn't spruce this up, but since Shang-Chi is borrowing so many of its beats, you can't repeat them with yet another martial arts character. Let me reiterate what I've said before about the IP: the only way we see Danny Rand again is via his classic portrayal, and I don't see a rush from Marvel to bring him back (however much I'd enjoy a Heroes for Hire Disney+ series).

Daniel: Feige wants a majority female Avengers (my emphasis); this is a very different claim from the A-Force rumours we've heard in the past (eg) and makes much more sense--again, the problem with this idea has always been: what happened to the male heroes? You could have a story where, for whatever reason, the men are incapacitated or away, but that has limited utility. I think the reason a lot of 'Girl Power' films fail financially is by eliminating competent male participation (making them villains and fumbling side characters)--it misses the point entirely and alienates half the audience (or, for this genre, two-thirds of the audience). One of the reasons Captain Marvel succeeded (and it's not a particularly good film), is that Nick Fury was still an important and useful character.

Sutton repeats a Small Screen (Edward Lauder) rumour about Deadpool and before I get into that I want to talk about Lauder as a serious source: he recently used YTer The Cosmic Wonder as a source for a scoop and TCW's theory is based on an MCU fluff book The Wakanda Files (the idea boiling down to Shuri is really important in that book, therefore she's the next Black Panther, cf). Given that Lauder thinks he's a quality source, his word has very limited weight (particularly as he's not had a scoop that I'm aware of). That aside, Lauder's claim is that Deadpool will have a cameo in Doctor Strange 2 (as indicated by the Google result mentioned above). This is a plausible idea, but we need more evidence before accepting it.

Daniel continues to make odd claims: he says Feige wants Spider-Man to be the face of the MCU even with Sony's involvement--either Peter Parker or Miles Morales. The latter assertion makes me disbelieve him. Economically it's a bad idea to lean heavily on IP you don't control, but that aside, why on earth would it not matter which iteration of Spider-Man? This idea, that Miles is interchangeable with Peter, is absurd and seems part of the general push from the scooper gang that they are equally popular with the public. Miles is very much Peter 2.0 (he even has the relationship with Gwen Stacey), making him less distinctive as a different Spider-Man (this isn't just my opinion, it's born out by comparative sales from the comics--after a couple of years of sustained hype for Miles barely reaches 35% of the sales for Peter; his animated film barely registers in comparative box office). Other than the Flash, copy-pasting a popular character with a new iteration just doesn't seem to work.

Interestingly, Small Screen (link above) bucks the trend of claiming Maguire/Garfield will appear in this film, saying Sony wants them for Spider-Man 4 (a film that has no pre-existing MCU-deal), and that their appearance in the MCU is via cameos in Doctor Strange 2 (see above). This makes much more sense to me, but despite plausibility it still lacks the punch of strong evidence.

Speaking of odd, Daniel claims Shia LaBeouf is interested in a Marvel project--I'm sure he is, but I have no idea why Marvel would want him. I can't take him seriously, so the only thing I could see him as is a comedic side character (but really, why bother?).

Speaking of casting, I wanted to re-visit my discussion from a month ago because something occurred to me related to The Eternals (an expansion on thoughts I had in February). I'm underwhelmed by that cast, as I've gone over before, and couldn't figure out what the MCU was trying to accomplish with it. I now have a theory of sorts. There's a lot of comparisons of this IP to Guardians of the Galaxy--another obscure group with a none-blockbuster cast. Both groups are introducing (or, rather, expanding) bits of MCU lore (the cosmic side with Guardians, the past with Eternals), and both are seen as big gambles. That aside, I think the reason we don't see a Benedict Cumberbatch, Oscar Isaac, Brie Larson, etc leading these films is so that if they fail the MCU isn't losing out on talent it wants long term. If Guardians had failed (and therefore Chris Pratt's career doesn't take off), Marvel isn't losing anything by washing their hands of the film (the one big star, Vin Diesel, was simply VO, so could have been re-cast as something else). I believe that's why The Eternals is filled with actors who have either never had box office appeal or haven't in a long time (eg Kit Harrington's film career is infamously atrocious; Angelina Jolie's last hit as a lead was in 2014 and that's the only blockbuster where that was the case). Should The Eternals underperform, it's very easy for Marvel to walk away--there's a through line for Black Knight, but he's not dependent on that IP and doesn't need to shoulder his own films. Food for thought.

This article is written by Peter Levi (@eyeonthesens)

Marvel News & Notes

Denise Petski (Deadline) reports that Jolene Purdy will have a recurring role in WandaVision. This is simply an aside in an article about something else, so no details were attached. My guess is it's not a role we're likely to see in other contexts (at this stage, given how cast-heavy the show is, how could it be?).

Daniel says Quicksilver is confirmed to return in WandaVision (presumably via casting sheets, although he doesn't specify). This is among the oldest rumours for the show (something Daniel has said before, as have anonymous people on Reddit, 4chan, LotLB (TBK), and speculated by Murphy as a result of Evan Peters appearing). Daniel doesn't say which actor it is (Aaron-Taylor Johnson or Peters--potentially both could appear). The general idea always made sense--if Wanda is going to resurrect Vision, why wouldn't she bring back her brother? One theory I haven't heard anyone express: if Johnson doesn't want to return to the MCU, Peters would be an easy replacement. I've never heard him suggest any reluctance to return, but it would be a reason to replace him (if, indeed, that happens). It's far more likely that Peters is playing a different character or is another iteration of Quicksilver.

Aaron Beelner, a veteran actor around Peter Dinklage's height, will appear in the first and fourth episode of Loki. No telling the role, although the short episode count indicates a tertiary one.

Daniel claims Loki will have a male and female love interest in the MCU (he doesn't specify if that will be in the show or later, but the show makes the most sense). Whether this will involve Loki's female form or not isn't made clear. I'm not sure if Loki is bisexual in Marvel, so I'm a bit fuzzy on what would be canon.

Caleb Williams (Knight Edge Media) copy/pastes a Tweet from Daniel in September where he was told Hugh Jackman was offered a role in the MCU (cf, which he posted on his Patreon over six weeks later)--subsequently he referenced it was for Doctor Strange 2 (which is what Williams echoes here). The Tweet looks like it might be cropped from something official, but it's hard to say. We know Feige met with Jackman a year ago, with most people speculating it was for Wolverine, but we frankly have no idea.

Speaking of Daniel, he says a mentor figure is being cast for Doctor Strange 2 to help navigate the Multiverse. Whether this role is what they sought Jackman for (if that rumour is true) isn't made clear.

K. C. Walsh (of GWW) says Doctor Strange 2 will borrow from Doctor Strange and the Sorcerers Supreme. I've mentioned before that Walsh is not a scooper. What he is, instead, is (on some level) buddies with Daniel--is that where this comes from? I don't think it is--I think Walsh is just speculating.

Murphy posted a theory for Falcon and the Winter Soldier where he believes the show will introduce the Commission on Superhuman Activities, likely meaning we'll see Valerie Cooper and Henry Peter Gyrich. The latter has a very colourful history with the X-Men. As for the group itself, it's somewhat similar in effect to the Sokovia Accords. This would fit what's going on with the show, so it is plausible if nothing else.

Pierre Chanliau (The Direct via Daniel) has a casting call for Moon Knight:

[FEMALE LEAD] 20s-30s, Egyptian, strong, intelligent and self-sufficient, she's always two steps ahead.

[CHARACTER 1] Female, All ages, Egyptian, fun, witty and lovable.

[CHARACTER 2] Male, All ages, Egyptian, dignified and powerful.

[CHARACTER 3] Male/Female, All ages, Egyptian, eccentric with a sharp wit and interesting physicality.

Chanliau has no idea who these characters are, guessing possibly deities. More broadly, it's likely that they are 1) Revisions of characters from the IP, or 2) Original creations. Without a better idea of what Marvel wants to do with the IP it's hard to speculate. What I think this means is that Moon Knight will lean heavily into Khonshu (which was never in doubt), making it less likely that identity disorder will also be on the table for Marc Spector. I'm interested to see how the Egyptian deities are handled--Thor and the Asgardians have become comical in the MCU, so if we get a serious tone in Moon Knight it could create some incongruity (similarly, goofy Egyptian gods strip away the edge that Moon Knight can have). It's going to be interesting to follow developments.

One thing this announcement does is illustrate how Marvel will try to avoid accusations of cultural appropriation for Moon Knight. Along with the aforementioned actors, they've hired Egyptian director Mohaeed Diab. This kind of representation has worked well for the MCU in terms of eliminating criticism, and I expect it to work here.

Sutton says Oscar Isaac's contract includes Avengers films, which not only fits his narrative that Moon Knight will be an Avenger (cf), but makes sense given the caliber of the actor, so it seems plausible.

Daniel says if Hailee Steinfeld can't be Kate Bishop, Elle Fanning is the back-up. What's funny to me is he remains slightly uncertain about Steinfeld despite saying she is locked in the role. This confusion seems to go back to whether that casting sheet is old or not (The Direct's Jack McBryan says it is and Conrad said Steinfeld hadn't signed yet; we also know from Variety that her Amazon show was renewed, meaning she wasn't bought out of her contract and will have restrictions to her availability). The fact that no one knows means Marvel is keeping things tightly under wraps, although given how soon the show will be shooting that can't last much longer.

Daniel claims Thor 4 will be bigger than Infinity War/Endgame, which is the third film (behind Doctor Strange 2 and Spider-Man 3) where he's made that claim. It's ridiculous. I'm not sure if his social media personality is bleeding into his scoops, but I'm not used to him using this much hyperbole.

Kat Dennings says she isn't in the film as far as she knows. In the days of dismissing actor denials, Murphy and others are accepting this as fact. I have no idea what makes the scoopers accept or dismiss these things, because if NDA's are as powerful as we've been told, her denial is meaningless.

More tangibly, Daniel claims they are casting a 20-30 year old female supporting role (open ethnicity), but without further information (and given the MCU's tendencies, this could be anyone). He adds that Thor vs Mighty Thor will happen (by which I believe he means Chris Hemsworth vs Natalie Portman, something we all assume), and that Thor will continue to butt heads with Peter Quill (also something we're all expecting). 

Daniel: Amy Pascal wants the previous Spider-Men in a Sinister Six film; if the two sign Pascal wants to give closure to the The Amazing Spider-Man 2 storyline; she also wants Tobey to play Uncle Ben so that Tom Holland thinks that's who it is when he meets him as Spider-Man; Daniel claims Garfield is reluctant to return due to his prior treatment (as revealed by the Sony hacks). Does Daniel have the kind of sources needed at Sony to know this? I doubt it, but if it's true what it suggests is that all the talk of bringing back the former actors is coming from Sony/Pascal rather than Feige/MCU. The idea would be to apply pressure to Feige by trying to stir up popular interest in such an event. Would Feige want that? I doubt it (due to his reluctance to use IP he wasn't involved with)--barring getting something significant in return from Sony. I do think this general narrative is similar to what Sutton is selling (someone I think does have good contacts at Sony), although he hasn't made it quite as clear cut (see below).

Daniel says Ryan Reynolds wants more heroes in Deadpool 3. This makes sense, although if this is true it suggests the film is a long way away before it appears. I'm not sure how long you want to sit on the 44-year old Reynolds before you slot him into the MCU.

Emre Kaya (formerly of GWW and The Cinema Spot among others) says that the Miles Morales audition tape Murphy discussed a couple of weeks ago was actually for Tim Drake in Titans. If that's true it's a big yikes from Murphy (granted, as I've gone over before, his speculation is heavily hurt by what he wants to happen). I'm unfamiliar with Kaya, but his comment makes more sense than Murphy's theory.

Sutton says Miles will be recruited to be part of the Young Avengers. He says Sony and the MCU are planning a cinematic franchise for him, and while I believe this is true for the former, the latter would require a new deal between the two entities. If he's cast very young maybe you can get away with two young Spider-Men, but it seems like an odd choice to me. Miles would beef up a lackluster Young Avengers roster, but I feel like they are only a potential Phase Five thing, dependent on how well the various members are received (I've gone over before how this is one of many IPs scoopers are in love with that are not popular with the public).

There was a 4chan post I wanted to look at from a purported MCU/Sony insider. Let's begin with the obvious: the odds of this person actually having inside information is slim (I would say none), but I find their responses interesting:

• Taskmaster will appear in Deadpool 3 after Black Widow [This is a recent Sutton rumour]; says Deadpool will start as largely its own thing and slowly integrate into the MCU; he says Sony wants the character to appear with Spider-Man down the line [It sounds like the poster means he'll remain Multiverse, which would make using him much simpler for Marvel--it also matches Sutton's recent post where he says the Deadpool films will be designed such that they aren't required viewing for the larger MCU story to avoid the issues an R-rating would create]
• The X-Men team will focus on: Iceman, Cyclops, Night Crawler, and an Asian-Psylocke; no mutant-menace element at all; team will be young, but they are nowhere near the casting process; no plans for a Captain Britain appearance [The lineup sounds horrendous--I'd actually skip this iteration--but it is distinctive; skipping the 'mutant menace' would make the approach distinctive from Fox, but would also make them a generic Avengers-imitation, so I don't buy it (so many iconic X-Men stories would be lost without that as well)]
• There's going to be an R-rated, Sons of Wolverine film, that will be like Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and have a 3-film arc [This is so weird; I've never watched a TMNT movie, but none of them are R-rated; I also have no idea why you'd aim for a Sons of Wolverine film when you don't have Wolverine yet; and why make it R-rated and lose the MCU's typical audience?]
• A Storm film or Disney+ show has been discussed [This is something I'd expect to be considered]
• Songbird: will be very distant with a fear of abandonment; compares her powers to Sindel in Mortal Kombat and later gets construct powers [The comparison means nothing to me, but looking into it it's easier to say she'll have Songbird's powers]
• Doesn't know when (ie, which IP) Monica Rambeau gets her powers
• Black Panther will be killed off and replaced in his own film, but not by Shuri (they want her to remain her own thing) [This echoes my theory]
• Has heard nothing about Scarlet Spider [This reflects an old Sutton rumour]
• No Norman Osborn or Kraven in Spider-Man 3; says Marvel has floated several fake scripts to throw off scoopers [The Osborn rumour-mill has largely died off, but Kraven is still pretty hot]
• No Sentry to keep Captain Marvel distinctive/powerful; he says Marvel wants to lean on her heavily because Ms. Marvel and She-Hulk aren't as 'strong' (not sure if he means popular or powerful, as both are likely true) as she is [This is an interesting argument and does make some sense; I've said before that Fox had virtually all the best female Marvel characters, leaving the MCU scrambling with lesser lights]
• Thunderbolts coming and will bring back some villains [This is not new, going back to the original Wardell scoops]
• Doctor Doom coming and will be the next Thanos-level villain [This echoes, to some extent, Sutton, cf]
• Nova appearing is dependent on how well The Eternals does--if that movie doesn't do well, Marvel will scale back the cosmic material [I've never heard this before--it's an interesting opinion, although I think the character will appear no matter what]
• The Fantomex rumours are true [I've heard no rumours about him at all; it seems to originate from James Gunn's ridiculous X-Men list from August]
• Has no idea how Khonshu will be portrayed
• Lockjaw and Inhumans will appear in Ms. Marvel [The general idea of Inhumans appearing is broadly accepted among scoopers; Lockjaw specifically echoes 4chan from last November]

What's distinctive about this is: 1) He admits not knowing things, 2) These aren't all drawn from just one or two scoopers, so it's distinctive. That doesn't make it believable (I don't buy it as an inside scoop), just interesting.

One of the most prominent scoopers of the last few years has been excommunicated from the community. Jeremy Conrad, who made his hay with The Eternals scoop in 2018, got exposed by Christopher Marc (from HN Entertainment, The Ronin, and apparently IGN) for rightwing comments he's made on NeoGAF. As a result of this, beyond getting crushed on social media, he was banned from the relevant Marvel sub-Reddits and shut down his (tiny) Patreon. His website (and Youtube channel) remain.

What's fascinating to me is that this was the bridge too far for the scooper community--not him stealing content, lying, or acting like a jackass--all of that was only worth derisive comments. This is an excellent illustration of the unspoken (spoken?) contract that all the Marvel luminaries have to mouth certain talking points. I find this groupthink disturbing and Conrad's duplicity is one of the obvious issues that comes from having a closed circuit. A diversity of opinion should always be welcome, but the days of the 'big tent' approach seems long gone.

That aside, should Conrad be pushed out of the hobby? Probably--his behaviour has always been childish and he hasn't had a genuine scoop post-2018. Unfortunately, Conrad's temper tantrums are extremely common within this group of people (as I've referenced from time-to-time); we've also established that almost none of them have genuine sources themselves--as I went over in August, Daniel is responsible for supporting most of the scooper outlets, meaning that outside of Murphy and Sutton, virtually all 'serious' Marvel material is coming from him (this is only occasionally transparent as well, which I find interesting).

This article is written by Peter Levi (@eyeonthesens)