While I haven't been writing about it for months, I keep an eye on scoops leaking out about the MCU. I haven't commented because they've repeated things I've heard before or that I don't consider interesting. However, two items come across my desk that I want to comment on. The first of these is from Daniel regarding Doctor Strange 2:
Here's everything I know about Doctor Strange 2: Wanda is [the] main villain and is trying to get America Chavez to travel the multiverse and get back her kids. Rintrah (ie) has a big role in it. A lot of cameos. The Illuminati play a big part as peace keeping force of the multiverse [too big to appear in Loki apparently]. Charles Xavier is one of them. Strange is traveling the multiverse with Chavez to run away from Wanda who's trying to get them.
On paper this isn't a bad premise (ignoring all the continuity and logic problems that Loki causes the MCU--god bless the Russo brothers for making fun of it). Wanda should be a villain after selfishly torturing an entire town (with Monica Rambeau chastised for being an idiot). I don't expect this story to be told with any subtlety or depth (how can we at this point?). Given the low standards of Phase Four I expect Wanda to be given an excuse for her bad behaviour (perhaps a man will be behind it--Nightmare?) and Chavez will go full Mary Sue throughout the film (think of Rey from the Star Wars sequels, particularly The Force Awakens). In terms of background, in January Sutton claimed Xavier would appear in the film (he now says Feige wants James McAvoy in the role), but this basic idea of a prior actor returning in the role is something we've known forever because Patrick Stewart talked about, we just didn't know where. The idea of the Illuminati also goes way back as a grid for its own IP that was floating around in the summer of 2020 (via Daniel), but Sutton was the first to put them in Doctor Strange 2 months before that.
Speaking of Sutton, he's claiming the dumbass Doctor Strange in the No Way Home trailer is actually Mephisto and at this point I hope so--I'm getting so desperate for something good out of Marvel and even average writing would be a welcome respite.
The next item, also from Daniel, is in regards to the Echo show that's forthcoming in relation to Daredevil:
There is a plan to give Daredevil his own project again down the line with [Charlie] Cox but for now the Echo show will serve as sort of Daredevil season 4 with most of the main cast of Daredevil returning. To be clear this is still very much Echo's show. When I say it's gonna feel like season 4 of Daredevil It's because we'll get to see all these characters from that show coming back and play big parts in it. BUT Echo is still the lead and it's her show. Also another thing that is important to note is the characters will be somewhat soft rebooted into the MCU but will still have a history with one another. So they'll look somewhat different with a bit of different backgrounds but still played by the same actors.
I'm one of the few Marvel fans who does not think maintaining continuity with Netflix's Daredevil is a good idea--that show goes off the rails in season two and while season three is better the character arcs make no sense and should be ignored. It's not clear what a 'soft reboot' really means, but we can expect Echo to be just that much better than Daredevil and lack character flaws to overcome. It's too bad, because you could do something interesting with her, but grafting her into the Daredevil universe is just a cheap way to try to make people interested--how much nostalgia remains for the Netflix show I don't know (clearly this is meant to echo--heh--the Hawkeye show with Kate Bishop--let the old white guy hand things over to a much better diverse young female). Incidentally, the basic idea about the show fits my speculation back when it was first announced, which Sutton repeated not long after.
Whatever I think of Shang-Chi (could they have found a less charismatic cast? Other than Tony Leung it's baffling), I have to credit Disney for it performing well in the anemic US market, as the film has passed Black Widow domestically (keeping in mind that the latter made 125 million via streaming), 197 vs 183, despite failing internationally, 167 vs 195. It's improbable that Shang-Chi can catch Black Widow's final tally (378), as another 10 million is virtually impossible now that it faces actual competition (Venom 2 etc). I wouldn't call either film a success, but internally I imagine Feige will argue that due to Covid and with comparisons, everything is fine--no need to upset the applecart. I believe he'll win that argument short-term, which means more horrendous writing to come. I hate being pessimistic, but Phase Four hasn't managed coherent writing yet, so expecting it requires special pleading.
Speaking of Shang-Chi, in September some old social media posts from Simu Liu came to light and the most salacious is relating to his opinion of homosexuality (above). I think this ghoulish exploration of people's past posts is ridiculous, but that's less important than the impact it could have on Liu's career (something unclear at the moment). The Marvels director Nia DaCosta was much more careful about her past, nuking her entire social media profile when she was hired. Will this impact Liu's future at Marvel? The story disappeared from the media quickly and while that's suggestive, these things tend to crop up again (James Gunn comes to mind). What's more obviously harmful for Liu is that his films can't be released in China, a market I'm not sure Disney is willing to give up on. If Feige still wants that lucrative Chinese box office, not only will he have to jettison his star, but the laissez-faire identity politics approach that works in the US will have to be toned down for that market--I think that would only happen if dictated by Bob Chapek, given how entrenched it is among Feige's executive group.
With a new Bond film out I wanted to briefly comment on it generally: to my mind, a new character playing 007--the James Bond designation--could be anyone. I don't see an argument against that, since it's simply the designation for a British secret agent--there's plenty of freedom there. What I would disagree with is swapping Bond himself--the identify of that character is firmly established so changing it is pointless--create a new character instead. Similarly, I have no issue with swapping out Doctor Who--if the Doctor changes bodies on the regular, there's no in-lore reason to be concerned with what that body is like. What you don't want is characters from the originals to be erased or treated with disrespect. I bring all this up because the fandoms of these IP tend to fight over this regularly and I wanted to draw a distinction over what I'm fine with and what I'm not.
This article was written by Peter Levi
No comments:
Post a Comment