Marvel News

There's a ton of news to cover (SPOILERS for all MCU films & Netflix properties): news for Daredevil, Captain Marvel, the Spider-Man sequel, The Eternals, The Punisher, and Jessica Jones.

We've learned potentially big news for Daredevil season three, as That Hashtag Show is reporting Wilson Bethel will be playing iconic villain Bullseye (something a now-deleted Instagram photo from a member of the crew seems to confirm). News of Bethel's casting came out months ago, but at that time THS thought his role was that of Sin-Eater--an idea I thought was preposterous (he's a Spider-Man villain, ergo Sony property, and he's very much like the Punisher). Instead we are getting Bullseye, one of Daredevil's most iconic villains.--it will be interesting to see how he is handled--will he be as well-developed as the Kingpin or Punisher? Or will he suffer the fate of Elektra and The Hand? His more grounded nature as an antagonist helps quite a bit--if it's done as well as Jigsaw in the first season of The Punisher it will be fantastic. Vincent D'Onofrio says the season is "really something."

Bullseye was created by Marv Wolfman and Bob Brown back in 1976, but what he's most known for is Frank Miller using him to kill Elektra in her original (and superior) storyline in 1981. That seminal event is what made him the character he is. While they could use Elektra in season three, I highly doubt they will given how poorly she's been received. I do think, however, that the general plotline (Bullseye/Kingpin from Miller's run) can work just fine without her inclusion (Karen Page could take her place for the emotional note from the story, for example).

News continues to come out for Captain Marvel. Marvel Producer Nate Moore was giving an interview and said the following about the movie:

I think there is a structure to origin films that audiences sometimes can get ahead of very quickly. So, if we do origin films, internally, we talk about how we can subvert that structure. For instance, Captain Marvel is an origin movie in that you haven't seen her before, but we think we've stumbled upon a structure there that isn't the traditional structure of what origin movies typically are, which is you meet the character, they have a problem, they get powers at the end of the first act, and the end of the second act they learn about the powers, the third act they probably fight a villain who has a function of the same powers. That's a lot of times what a typical origin movie is structured like, but as we introduce new characters moving forward, we want to find ways to subvert that structure, so at least the experience of the film feels new to audiences. We're very conscious of making sure that audiences don't get things that feel like they've seen them before.

It will be interesting to see how that expected formula is subverted. One direction they could take it is that instead of accidentally gaining her powers, Carol Danvers volunteers to get them.

McKenna Grace, who was announced as part of the Captain Marvel cast back in March, is confirmed to be playing a young Carol Danvers (sometime in the 1980s, with Kenneth Mitchell playing her father). Actress Ana Ayora has also been cast in an undisclosed role.

Physicist Dr. Spiros Michalakis was a consultant for the Quantum Realm for both Ant-Man movies and last year said this in reference to Captain Marvel:

There are different ways that some of these ideas appear on-screen in a few years. Not just for Ant-Man, but also for Captain Marvel and all of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Does this imply Danvers is in the Quantum Realm? Or that she'll being using it? It's hard to say, but the quote adds fuel to the belief that it is an element in Avengers 4.

There's some very loose speculation that Monica Rambeau will appear in the Captain Marvel film. The character has a history with Carol Danvers (and was once known as Captain Marvel herself), but the rumour is born of two very thin slices of evidence: 1) the movie filming in the Baton Rouge area of Louisana where the character is from (something I see as irrelevant), 2) the casting of DeWanda Wise and then Lashana Lynch in the role of a "contemporary" of Danvers (the belief being they are playing Rambeau). While it's possible she could appear, it's a film already cluttered with characters and as evidence this is pretty weak (you'd also have to ask what's the point of introducing Monica in the 1990s unless she's also time-travelling with Carol--or whatever it is that prevents Captain Marvel from aging).

Not surprisingly, Michael Keaton is returning as the Vulture for the Spider-Man sequel (link below; how much he'll appear is unknown--it might just be a cameo). It appears as though Mysterio is the antagonist, with Jake Gyllenhaal in talks for the role. There's no reason to doubt that Sony wants to continue planting the seeds for a Sinister Six movie (original Daredevil showrunner Drew Goddard left the show to helm Sinister Six film for Sony, only to have it cancelled). Like Keaton's character, Mysterio has never been portrayed in the movies before--he's also a fairly earthy villain (as in, doesn't have huge, dangerous powers) and I suspect he'll get the rounded treatment we saw for the Vulture. Where that leaves the hints about the Scorpian in Homecoming is uncertain (who, minus the costume, was introduced there), but I imagine Marvel won't push things the way Sony did in The Amazing Spider-Man 2. My only concern for the film is Sony's marketing, which was atrocious prior to Homecoming.

There's still no word on the actress role they've been trying to cast for some time (a woman in her 20s reportedly). Given that Zendaya's Michelle will serve as the love interest (I'm curious if Marvel will push her "MJ" nickname given how poorly it was received--Sony would double down, but will the MCU?), I don't think this will be any of Spider-Man's femme fatale's (especially given his movie-age), although nods to Black Cat or Silver Sable are possible if unlikely (the latter more so if the reported travel through Europe is correct, as she is from Symkaria, a fictional Eastern European country in Marvel which borders Doctor Doom's Latveria).

A Reddit rumour is making the rounds--ComicBookMovie doesn't offer a reason why we should trust this specific one nor does it link it, but I thought I'd go through it since it's being covered:

• the film takes place before Infinity War--this is in direct contradiction to what Amy Pascal (Sony) has said, which is that the film occurs immediately afterwards (this doesn't nuke the theory immediately, but keep it in mind), with the end of the film linking up to the beginning of Infinity War (something which, dramatically, makes no sense at all--that whole plot will be resolved before this film comes out)
• Peter is visiting a number of countries in Europe (which matches, in spirit, other rumours about the film)
• the Rhino will be a secondary villain
• both Ant-Man and Daredevil (!) will appear
• the femme fatale referenced above is apparently a version of Spider-Woman (Jessica Drew), although she's going to be based more on Felicia Hardy (Black Cat)--these are very different characters so I'm not sure in what way
• Easter Egg or cameo of Oscorp
• the film will double down on the Michelle=MJ scenario

I find this largely preposterous. It reads like someone's hopes based on the limited leaks thus far. Marvel is very careful in avoiding character clutter in its solo films, so other than hints I don't think we'll see Rhino (if he appears at all, which I doubt, it will be ala the Scorpian in the first movie); Sony's agreement with Marvel was that A-list heroes would appear in the films and neither Ant-Man nor Daredevil qualify (while I love the Netflix characters I have no idea what would be accomplished having them appear here). Other than the travel (which has already been heavily rumoured), I don't find this credible. Speaking of that MCU character, it's difficult to parse who it could be since it's unlikely to be Iron Man again--Captain America makes sense, but we'll have to see how Avengers 4 resolves before we can make educated guesses.

With that said, in looking for the source of the above I came across another thread [originating on 4Chan] claiming to be from a reliable source which has a much more plausible set-up:

• Set after AVENGERS 4. Peter is revived, and it appears Tony Stark will indeed die and Peter will be mourning his death. The plot revolved around something groundbreaking that Stark has created, and which is stolen and Spider-Man must retrieve.
• Set mainly in London [where filming of the movie begins in July]. Peter and his friends are there for a conference sponsored by Stark Industries. Michelle, Ned, Liz, Flash and Aunt May are returning, alongside the Midtown students and staff from HOMECOMING [this is a bit odd since Liz Allen moved away at the end of Homecoming, but it's not a major issue with the theory]. Gwyneth Paltrow is also supposed to appear as Pepper Potts [which makes sense given that she would be running Stark Industries].
• Mysterio is the main villain. He is an international thief and master of illusion, who has stolen Stark’s creation at the behest of a mysterious employer. Apparently, there are plans to include the fishbowl helmet, but he will not wear it throughout the movie.
• Jessica Drew [Spider-Woman] is a MI6 operative pursuing Mysterio, who begrudgingly teams up with Spider-Man to stop him. She has no superpowers, but is a combat expert and skilled tactician.
• Peter develops a rivalry with a new student, Alistair Smythe [Spider-Slayer], a technology prodigy who is determined to upstage him. Smythe is “manipulative” and tries to turn Peter’s friends against him. His father, Spencer Smythe, works for Stark Industries.
• Vulture and Scorpion will appear in minor roles. Scorpion is apparently working for the same man who hired Mysterio to steal Stark’s creation, and they attempt to get Vulture to betray Spider-Man’s identity to them.
• Mysterio’s employer is apparently a major villain from the comics and will be prominent in SPIDER-MAN movies going forward. No word on who he is yet, but he will have a minor appearance in the movie. Marvel and Sony eyeing A-list actors. Casting won’t be officially announced. Supposed to be a surprise twist.

This is a far more plausible story that doesn't raise the red flags of the one above. Is it true? Jessica Drew has an English background, so the fluff included is correct (as would it be not having her adopt her hero identify initially--it's hard to accept a Spider-Woman when Peter Parker is still a teenager--granting that the background described here is thematically similar to Black Widow). The mysterious employer of Mysterio could very well be Norman Osborn and having Stark tech at the heart of the plot has a nice synergy with the first film. The theory would also fit my guess that Iron Man dies at the end of Avengers 4. The Smythe inclusion seems odd, although given that Flash wasn't well-received in Homecoming he might be replacing his role as the bully. With that said, there's no telling if this is accurate or not--we can judge it properly once more information comes out.

Writers Matthew and Ryan Firpo have been hired to write the Eternals movie. A question Jeremy Conrad addresses is why there's a push for new IP prior to the return of the Fox characters. He writes:

Marvel Studios cannot legally work on any of the Fox characters yet. That even means nothing as “innocent” as concept art. ... Yet Marvel still has to release a slate of movies every year. ... Marvel still needs to plan for 2020 and 2021 as it’ll take time to get those movies going and they can’t sit around hoping for the merger to complete. That’s why James Gunn is currently writing Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3, writers are working on Black Widow as the director search continues, and writers were just hired for The Eternals. Sersi, Ikaris, and the rest aren’t expected to make their big screen debut until 2021, however the rumor is that they’ll be introduced in the MCU in some way prior to then.

That legality should cool the jets of those hoping for Fox-related Easter Eggs in Avengers 4--something only possible if the deal is approved months before its release. When I went through my speculation for the announced MCU release dates my 2021 slate was filled with various sequels, imagining new IP for James Gunn's cosmic side not to show up until 2022 (with either a Nova Corps film or an Adam Warlock film). Introducing the Eternals in another movie makes a lot of sense, even if its just a tease (Guardians 3 makes the most sense in that respect). It's also a shot across the bow to DC's hypothetical New Gods movie (announced in March with A Wrinkle in Time director Ava DuVernay attached).

I mentioned previously that I was confident Jigsaw would return in season two and we now have confirmation of that. Filming has been underway since March 10th and given the usual Netflix time frame for seasons should wrap in August--I'd expect its release in early 2019, assuming we get all four Defenders in 2018 (as I've previously surmised).

Jessica Jones season three will start filming shortly, although as yet we don't have a specific start date. Nothing was hinted about what the show will be about, but Krysten Ritter did say she wanted Jessica to be less of a trainwreck--something I would like as well (as I said last time they really need to move the character forward). One thing I want to point out from that post: in it I said that in Netflix casting calls the first letter of the character's name was often the same as who they really were--Daredevil broke that connection with Bullseye such that we'll have to take speculation based on that with even more grains of salt.

Early reviews for Cloak & Dagger have been very positive, but we're well beyond the point of paying attention to reviews for Marvel properties (there's no getting around how ridiculous the 100% for Agents of SHIELD is when The Punisher is sitting at 62%). The trailers have been underwhelming, but I'm not part of the targeted YA-audience so I won't judge purely from that. As a fan of the source material the show has a pretty big mountain to climb for me (this is unlike The Runaways where I came in with no expectations). In terms of surface details I was much happier with the Hulu casting versus what we've got with Freeform, but seeing the actors act really makes all the difference.

This article is written by Peter Levi (@eyeonthesens)

Marvel TV and MCU News

Since my last post a few weeks ago an avalanche of news and speculation has come out. Below I cover Avengers: Infinity War news and theories; Avengers 4 theories; Black Widow speculation; Luke Cage, Iron Fist, The Punisher, and Jessica Jones news; Captain Marvel; Ms. Marvel news; and the status of ABC's Marvel shows.

SPOILERS below for all released MCU movies and the Netflix shows

Jeremy Conrad (who broke The Eternals story) has the following rumour about Avengers 4:

In the post-credits scene of Avengers: Infinity War, Nick Fury and Maria Hill are tracking the extraterrestrial signals being detected in Wakanda. Now neither Fury nor Hill knows about Thanos coming to Earth. But Fury does know about another extraterrestrial threat in the Skrulls due to him being around Carol Danvers in the 90s when she was dealing with them [in the upcoming Captain Marvel]. That’s why he sends the signal to Captain Marvel, because he believed the Skrulls were finally invading Earth. This then ties into Avengers 4 and Hawkeye’s role in the story. The rumor is that he’s working as Ronin in Tokyo and hunting down Yakuza, who are actually Skrulls. The casting notice for these extras apparently said they needed to be comfortable wearing a facial prosthetic, which would definitely point to them being Skrulls if true.

It sounds like the primary evidence for this rumour is the casting call associated with prosthetics. It's certainly plausible (as all good rumours should be), but if true doesn't sound like it's a major part of the story (simply background for what Clint has been doing).

Another rumour floating around is that there will be a five-year jump from the end of Infinity War to its sequel. This idea primarily comes from something Gwyneth Paltrow said (see below), but also the casting of a 16-year old Cassie Lang and the leaked photos of Avengers 4 and Zoe Saldana's instagram from last year, both of which seem to show at least some characters in their outfits from the first Avengers/Guardians films. This is the idea:

In the five years after the events of Infinity War, Tony Stark (and possibly others) are now agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.. He and Scott Lang use some kind of technology that Hank Pym has developed in order to travel back in time in an attempt to defeat Thanos in the past. [The idea is Tony Stark will be married with a child and have to give up that life in order to save the trillions killed by Thanos.]

When the photos first leaked they were dismissed as Tony using his B.A.R.F. technology from Captain America: Civil War (this is because there was a set-photo that indicated that was the case--for those who don't recall, it allowed him to re-envision the past). The idea behind the five-year gap is that the story would echo Scott Busiek and Roger Stern's Avengers Forever storyline from 1998-99 (in which Avengers from the past and future are brought together to resolve the plot). The problem with this idea is that it's hard to jive the idea with the sequence of the second Spider-Man film unless the resolution puts them back in current times--and why would Nick Fury summon Captain Marvel if it was going to take her years to respond? It also runs against the MCU's normal routine of movies happening in real time (ergo, a year later).

[The Game of Thrones image above, incidentally, references George R. R. Martin's infamous five-year gap--where he planned a time jump from the end of Storm of Swords before the fourth book of the series, then changed his mind partway through the process which has since crippled his ability to finish the series.]

Joe Russo has said about the film (echoing Kevin Feige, link below):

I don’t think there are any comics that correlate to it. I think we’re in pretty fresh territory with Avengers 4. If anything, I think it’s interesting after to go back and look at some of the Marvel films and view them through a different lens. But I can’t think of any comics in particular that would have value

While this quote seems to contradict the idea of miming Avengers Forever, Conrad adds this (from Kevin Feige):

People always will jump to that [character death]. That’s not necessarily what we’re talking about. I talk a lot, because I’m a big-ass nerd, about Star Trek: The Next Generation, “All Good Things.” That to me is one of the best series finales ever. That wasn’t about death. Picard went and played poker with the crew, something he should have done a long time ago, right?

Conrad thinks this means we'll get something like that episode where Picard is jumping through time, re-visiting events to resolve the catastrophe. I remember the episode pretty well and the idea of exploring the past to solve the problem of the present is a good one (and matches what little information is out there), although I'm not sure what's known requires this kind of interpretation (or time travel--the B.A.R.F. tech could accomplish the same thing so long as they don't need to change or retrieve something).

While I don't think a five-year jump makes a whole lot of sense, of the various time-travel scenarios I've seen none of followed this pattern: stopping Thanos by stopping Civil War--preventing the events that lead to the Avengers breaking up so that they aren't separated when Thanos comes for the stones. This would involve at least three changes:

• Preventing Loki from taking over in Asgard (Thor: The Dark World) - this would mean Odin isn't banished, Hela isn't freed (to destroy Mjolnir and cause Asgard's destruction), or Thor having to spend years running around the Nine Realms to sort out what was wrong (which might also prevent Thanos from getting the gauntlet made by Eitri)
• Cap telling Tony that Bucky killed his parents (Winter Soldier) - the pair can process their grief long before Tony's guilt for creating Ultron has him back the Sokovia Accords and cause the Avengers to breakup
• Banner making peace with the Hulk so he doesn't leave Earth (Age of Ultron)

This idea isn't perfect (I don't think it's what we'll see) and it doesn't answer some of the questions we have--like why is the team going all the way back to the first Avengers? There's even a rumour we'll see scenes from the first Captain America--how would that relate? This would also remove a lot of interesting character development and we know Taika Waititi wants to move on from the original Thor set-up, so something like this runs against what the MCU is trying to do and could take the stakes away from the consequences of earlier movies. That's the problem with time travel: avoiding confusion and making its impact felt in a way that feels earned. Ultimately I don't think we'll see anything in the past changed.

Finally we get to a rumour that comes from 4Chan. Why do we care about it? The same poster got some of Infinity War's elements correct (although looking through them most, if not all, seem derived from leaks, toy reveals, the comics and educated guesses), but its fun to go through these things anyway. So, this is the poster's version of the movie:

• Iron Man reassembles the Avengers and decides to build his own Infinity Gauntlet to undo what Thanos did. They recruit Ant-Man to help them travel through time and space using the Quantum Realm to retrieve the Infinity Stones from different time periods. Thanos finds out about their plans and becomes hellbent on stopping them
• The movie revolves around the relationship between Captain America and Iron Man
• At one point, Captain America and Thor fight Thanos. Timeline alterations have restored Mjolnir, and Cap wields it against Thanos to allow the others to escape, and is killed holding Thanos off
• At one point, Hawkeye must protect the unfinished Stark Gauntlet from Thanos' minions. He plays an "instrumental" role in Thanos' defeat
• Thor's subplot centers on him assembling an army to challenge Thanos. Captain Marvel joins him
• Hulk's subplot centers on Banner and Hulk finally merging to become Professor Hulk. He is the one that ultimately wields the Stark Gauntlet against Thanos, losing his arm in the process
• Nebula's subplot centers on her efforts to redeem herself. At one point, she fights her murderous past self
• Several MCU movies are revisited and retconned (probably not permanently), such as the Avengers retrieving the Power Stone creating a timeline where the Guardians of the Galaxy never came together
• There's a pivotal scene between Doctor Strange and a fully CGI character being shot on a secret location, with a skeleton crew, and takes up a sizeable portion of the budget.
• Only two of the original Avengers [are] meant to survive the movie. Cap dies.
• The title was Avengers: Infinity Gauntlet at one point, but it might be changed after Zoe Saldana accidentally leaked it [this happened back in April, 2017]

You can see some parallel's to my thought-experiment above (with a different emphasis--here it's a hunt for the Infinity Stones). Is the basic premise plausible? Yes. Eitri has the mould for the glove, so making another is possible--certainly the power of a gauntlet is the simplest way to undo its work, although Stark himself (as a human) could never actually use an Infinity Stone. "Professor Hulk" refers to a Hulk with the intelligence of Banner--I'm accustomed to him being called the grey Hulk and when I was actively reading comics he went by "Mr. Fixit" (beginning in 1986).

What are the flaws of the summary? Let's go through them:

• Stark can't actually wield the Infinity Gauntlet--Peter Quill, who is half-celestial, could only hold a single stone temporarily and then only with help--this doesn't mean he couldn't build one for someone like Thor, but that's not how the post presents things
• Thor isn't going to die--prior to filming Ragarok (2016) it's likely Chris Hemsworth wanted to die (and the MCU was probably done with him too), but its success means there are more films for the thunder god in the works
• There's very little Captain Marvel material here which would surprise me (even though Avengers 4 is meant to wrap-up the previous phases of the MCU I'd expect her to be more prominent)
• I'm less certain that so many (four) of the original Avengers will perish. In terms of characters arcs, only Black Widow has places to go that won't be wrapped up by this movie (Iron Man's arc will be finished here, I think), but while someone like Hawkeye isn't that popular the rest of the characters are and I'm not sure how many the MCU really wants to kill off (Feige's comments about deaths above serve as a caution--comics almost never kill characters either)
• There's no mechanism for how Doctor Strange returns from having been disappeared to being alive for his secret scene as described
• Bringing back Mjolnir just to destroy it again seems redundant; I also don't think someone as important as Cap dies except in the climax

I suspect this post is just like the one for Infinity War--partially accurate--but comes via educated guesses from what's known rather than leaks or access to a script. Just to follow it through, however, if the movie does go through time to collect the Stones in their first appearances, we'd see callbacks to these movies:
-Captain America: The First Avenger (Space Stone)
-The Avengers (Mind Stone)
-Thor: The Dark World (Reality Stone)
-Guardians of the Galaxy (Power Stone)
-Doctor Strange (Time Stone)

Speaking of rumours, there was a lot of speculation that Gamora was within the Soul Stone--this has been busted by Joe Russo:

And that moment when he clicks his fingers sends him into this ethereal plane inside of the Soul Stone where as part of his quote unquote hero’s journey in the film, he has one last moment to convey a sense of guilt about what he’s done. It illustrates what a complicated character he is. So, to clarify, it’s a spiritual representation of her [my emphasis] and obviously that’s something that the Soul Stone has power to do. But really it’s there to illustrate his pain and his guilt. I wouldn’t read much more into it beyond that.

This suggests she is indeed dead--which doesn't mean she can't come back in some way, but it sounds like the MCU is going to avoid the Soul World within the stone as per the comics.

Speaking of death, one of the weirder death confirmations we now have is Sif. Jaimie Alexander was scheduled to appear in Thor: Ragarok (presumably to die along with the Warriors Three), but couldn't due to her TV schedule. Apparently she is dead regardless (this time via Thanos). Betty Ross was also rumoured to appear, but she is also gone (either because Liv Tyler didn't want to come back or there was nothing left to do with the character).

The Luke Cage trailer looks pretty good. I'm a little surprised they kept Bushmaster's name (I've been assuming they wouldn't), but he was featured prominently as the antagonist. I'm curious if Netflix is going to move away from the six-episode arcs for antagonists--if not, presumably Mariah  will serve in the second half.

With more time to think about Cheo Hodari Coker's comments about Danny Rand's appearance, I suspect he's simply a single-episode cameo prior to the final battle with Bushmaster.

Iron Fist season two has wrapped filming, almost exactly five months after it began back in December. Conventional wisdom still imagines Daredevil season three appearing next (after Luke Cage), even though its filming won't wrap for another month. My opinion (which has been echoed, albeit unintentionally, elsewhere and I've expressed previously), is that we'll get Danny Rand's adventures first. I think it makes more sense to have Luke Cage and Iron Fist's releases close to one another (to capitalize off his appearance in Luke Cage). Back in October I went through how Netflix could release all four shows in this calendar year and that framework is still possible--with a September release for the next series (whichever they choose) and a November/December release for the other. What I'm truly hoping, however, is that Netflix realizes the shows need to interconnect much more to truly maximize what they can be (so no repeats of the disconnected Jessica Jones season two). Both the MCU itself and the CW DC shows prove how much this helps.

We got some casting news for season two, as veteran actors Annette O'Toole and Corbin Bernsen have been added. The latter is playing Anderson Schultz, a wealthy man, and O'Toole is playing his wife Eliza. Neither have a clear comicbook basis. This is the first casting news we've had in a couple of months. At the time the speculation was that we'd be seeing a version of "Suicide Run" which, if true, would presumably put the characters in the role of criminal bosses. I'm less sold on that idea, unless the adaptation is very loose. It would be a shame to give Jigsaw's origin in the first season and not use him as a primary antagonist in the second. I think it's much more likely we're getting an original story that simply borrows elements from the comics. I'm also curious if the restriction from Marvel to keep other Defenders from appearing in the show remains--I would hope not.

With casting news already coming out the production for Jessica Jones season three can't be that far away (to appear after The Punisher season two in 2019 presumably). That Hashtag Show has these breakdowns:

[ELLIOTT] Mid 30s-early 40s, male, open ethnicity. Must be over 5’11. A charismatic gambler and alcoholic. Attractive, quick-witted and dry. His edgy charm comes through even in the direst circumstances. SERIES REGULAR – ONE YEAR DEAL 

[COLLINS] 30-50, male, open ethnicity. He is physically spry, extremely intelligent and meticulous. Driven by a pathological need to feel superior. SERIES REGULAR – ONE YEAR DEAL

[KEIRA] 48-52, female, please submit African American, Latina, Asian, Native American, etc. A bohemian cellist and music professor. Intelligent, wry and sexy. Self possessed and able to weather any storm. SERIES REGULAR – POSSIBLE TWO YEAR DEAL

[ZELDA] 27-31, female, African American, strong, smart and driven. A rising star in her profession with the ambition and talent to propel her to the top one day. She’s earthy, beautiful, supportive and fiercely protective of those she loves. SERIES REGULAR – MULTI-YEAR DEAL

Typically the first letter of the name matches that actual name in the show. THS' guesses for season two postings were hilariously wrong and they acknowledge that there just aren't many characters from the character's comic past to draw from (all the additions last season were original to the show), so these are probably show-creations. That said, they made these guesses:

• Edward Garner - this immensely obscure character (10 appearances debuting in The Thing, which makes me wonder if he's owned by Fox) ran the Unlimited Class Wrestling Federation (superheros wrestling each other), many of whom got their powers from the Power Broker (see below); this sort of storyline would be a lot of fun, something Jessica Jones avoids at all costs; my guess is that he's a love interest for Jessica (hopefully we will be saved from the awful Oscar in the next season)
• The Power Broker (Curtiss Jackson) - a slightly more notable villain (31 appearances) who debuted in Captain America; his selection was to match Garner, but while I do think he's an antagonist I don't think this is who he is--I'm guessing it's another original creation
• Unknown - the description suggests a possible love-interest for Hogarth; she certainly doesn't seem to be an antagonist
• Member of the Unlimited Class Wrestling Federation - This connects to the UCWF idea above, which I don't think is on the table, so I think she's either a lawyer and part of Hogarth's storyline, or else a love interest for Malcolm

I still have PTSD from season two (my review isn't up yet, but I thought only the C and D plots worked, with A and B being derivative and occasionally bad--season one remains my favourite from the Netflix offerings, while the second is the worst--the complete lack of impact from the second season in the fandom indicates the show didn't miss just with me). Course-correction is always possible and perhaps showrunner Melissa Rosenberg can bring the show back to the heights of season one (the absence of Brian Michael Bendis material makes me doubtful, but it is possible). If the plot of the third season again revolves around previously unstated problems from Jessica's past I think that will asphyxiate the show. To quote Pops (Luke Cage), "Always forward".

I was feeling like a voice in the wilderness bemoaning the idea of the Black Widow movie being a prequel (as I said last time there's no new ground for it to go over, so what's the point?). Finally someone else out there agrees with me.

I've been thinking about where Captain Marvel has been since the 1990s (when her film is set). Has she simply been off in space leaving the problems on Earth to Nick Fury?  My guess is that she has been in suspended animation or that her abilities slow the aging process. My original suspicion was that she, like the original Wasp, was trapped in the Quantum Realm, but that's clearly not the case.

My familiarity with the Captain Marvel is quite limited--I know her mostly from her impact on Rogue in The Uncanny X-Men when I was reading the comic (1987-92). For those who don't know that story: Rogue takes Carol Danvers' powers in Avengers Annual #10 (1981) while she was still a villain working with Mystique; Danvers subsequently becomes the Phoenix-like Binary and joins the X-Men (#163; 1982), which Rogue joins not long after due to the trauma of absorbing so much of Carol's psyche (#171; 1983); this causes Danvers to leave in a rage. Carol regains her typical powers many years later (X-Men #269, 1990), but goes "off-page" for a considerable time afterwards (finally reappearing in 2000), joining the Avengers and re-branding herself as Warbird (2001). She returns to her old name (Ms. Marvel) after the disbanding of the Avengers (2005) and winds up on the Mighty Avengers (2007). The Captain Marvel moniker only became hers in her own comic in 2012. This complicated history will, I think, be ignored other than elements of her origin (but instead of Ms. Marvel she'll start as Captain Marvel). Whether any of the interaction with Rogue will happen once Marvel gets the X-Men back is hard to know (it's a great storyline, so maybe?).

Speaking of Ms Marvel, Kevin Feige recently said:

Ms. Marvel, which is another character in the comic books, the Muslim hero who is inspired by Captain Marvel, is definitely sort of in the works. We have plans for that once we introduce Captain Marvel.

I think this is part of the reason why the Carol Danvers film is in the past--there's plenty of time for Kamala Khan to have become a fan. Rumours about this being John Ridley's secret project for Marvel go back to April of 2015 (assuming this is his project for them), but those rumours were about him getting a television show with her. Feige, with the exception of Agent Carter, doesn't work with the TV-branch of Marvel (Marvel Entertainment), so putting aside whatever "sort of in the works" means, this suggests a film version of the character is on its way (presumably Kamala would be earth-based and Carol would be in space). This makes a lot of sense to me for both popularity and representative purposes. For those unfamiliar with the character, she was introduced in 2013--a teenage Inhuman character whose powers are similar to Mister Fantastic; before those powers manifest she's a fangirl of Danvers.

As expected Scott Buck's disastrous Inhumans officially got the axe from ABC. Agents of SHIELD remains hanging in the balance--will it be cancelled, retained, or moved to another platform? For myself, until the show actually becomes connected to the MCU/Netflix I won't be tuning in (as I've mentioned before). [Hours after I originally posted this it was renewed for an abbreviated sixth season.]

There's a great comment from Joe Russo I want to touch on:

I think all of this — Netflix, Marvel, ‘Star Wars,’ this massive moment of disruption we’re in — is really a function of audiences craving new kinds of storytelling. I think we had a really nice run for 100 years of two-hour, two-dimensional storytelling, but I think over the next decade, decade-and-a-half, you’re going to see a radical shift in how stories are told.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. The attachment to traditional movies is one reason why some people struggle so much with Marvel movies--there's a sense of exasperation and resistance to change (Mike Stoklasa from Red Letter Media expresses this quite plainly--although it's worth noting he liked Infinity War). Those who struggle with it sometimes have the other problem you see with critics who find the entire genre ridiculous (people in capes fighting crime?). Those with the latter view get into fights with fans over the silly elements in these kinds of films (Star Wars: The Last Jedi is an example of this--for someone who thinks the film is aimed at 12-year olds, why should it matter if something in the movie doesn't make sense?). Critical conservatism is nothing new--to use literature as an example, it took 150 years for William Shakespeare to be acknowledged as anything more than popular entertainment (we can thank Samuel Johnson for that); decades for Charles Dickens, Edgar Allan Poe, H. P. Lovecraft, J. R. R. Tolkien, and so on to get their due--just as many of their genres (horror, fantasy, etc) were long rejected. Comicbook movies are another rung on the ladder of critical appreciation (as, indeed, were comics themselves).

This article is written by Peter Levi (@eyeonthesens)

Marvel News

No SPOILERS below--I haven't seen Avengers: Infinity War nor have I had it spoiled--anything related to it is just speculation.

Frank Palmer at Screen Geek is claiming a major Marvel character dies:

The beginning of Avengers: Infinity War features the death of a major Marvel character. Some fans will be expecting it, while others will be blindsided.

Palmer himself echoes Kevin Feige's statement that deaths in the film will be permanent (looking, no doubt, to avoid the of Phil Coulson situation--dying in The Avengers only to spend five seasons on Agents of SHIELD). I agree with Palmer that, if true, the most logical character to die would be Loki--there's really no other major character that makes sense (and no, Heimdall does not count)--but this speculation isn't new as his death was rumoured weeks ago (eg). If this is true it will be a hard pill to swallow as Tom Hiddleston has been excellent in the role and there seems to be plenty of room for growth--admittedly his transformation from villain (Thor and The Avengers) to ally (Thor: Ragnarok) is a pretty complete character journey.

Feige, who was talking to everyone about everything in the run-up to Infinity War, told Mike Ryan:

I knew some about him [Captain Mar-Vell], but it was definitely Carol Danvers who was most interesting to us and why we choose her. [Mar-Vell will play a role when it comes to Carol Danvers’ origin story.] But as that character connects to the origin of Carol Danvers’ Captain Marvel? We’re pulling from some of that for inspiration.

This turned into other sites saying "Kevin Feige isn't familiar with Captain Mar-Vell" which isn't what he said at all. To unpack this, let's briefly go over the origin of the film itself. Back in 2013 a Ms. Marvel script (pre-Kamala Khan, who first appeared in August of that year) was mentioned (Carol Danvers became Captain Marvel in 2012, so the script process presumably began no later than that), with Marvel looking for female-driven films (something Marvel Entertainment head Ike Perlmutter kept rejecting (passim; 'women and minorities don't sell toys' being his rationale--thus no Black Widow toys with the Avengers, cf). The announcement of a Captain Marvel film came in October, 2014 (alongside Black Panther, whose development history has a similar trajectory--both films delayed about a year after their announced date).

What this means is that in 2013 (at the latest) Kevin Feige had decided on a Carol Danvers film and, as a huge comicbook fan who is very involved in the MCU, he would know her origin story when she became a hero (as Ms. Marvel) in 1977 (the character dates back in 1968). Briefly, a former pilot and CIA agent who joins NASA, she befriends the Kree Mar-Vell (who debuted in 1967), who was using the identity of Dr. Walter Lawson as a cover--she becomes romantically and tangibly involved with him and via an accident gets her powers. Mar-Vell eventually gets cancer and dies (1982)--like every superhero in the comics his death doesn't last, but that's not our concern here. While the MCU is going to keep the Kree part of this story, along with Danvers having been an pilot and friend to Mar-Vell, I doubt how she gets her powers will be the same.

My assumption about the film (which takes place in the 90s and involves conflict between the Kree and Scrulls) is that it will end with Danvers trapped in the Quantum Realm, freezing her in time (much like Captain America), although how and why I have no idea. Because the film takes place in the past and it's expected she will be a major part of Avengers 4, it's not clear what will happen in her sequel as the version of the character the MCU is presumably going to draw from is the very modern (2015+) leader of S.W.O.R.D. and there's not many stories to draw from that (although I would enjoy her having adventures with Alpha Flight, the Canadian mutant superhero team who become part of SWORD).

As expected Jeremy Conrad is more reliable than Umberto Gonzalez, as less than three weeks after his scoop about The Eternals coming to the MCU Kevin Feige confirmed to Gonzalez (of all people) that they are having those discussions at Marvel. Gonzalez says 'insiders' have told him "multiple screenwriters have taken meetings and have been asked to come up with a story that focuses on the female Eternal known as Sersi"--I'd take his speculation with a grain of salt (especially in the immediate aftermath of his "insider knowledge" blowing up in his face).

Speaking of comments from Feige, he said the following about Nova:

Nova is… if we have a big board with a bunch of characters that have more immediate potential, Nova is on that board. Because of the connection to the Guardians universe, because there are more than one example to pull from in the comics that are interesting [Richard Rider and Sam Alexander]. And you’re absolutely right, he was in the earliest drafts of the [Guardians of the Galaxy].

This is no surprise given that the Nova Corps itself was featured in the first Guardians film. With the second Guardians film teasing Adam Warlock and James Gunn teasing Quasar on Twitter last summer, there's a host of cosmic characters around for the MCU to play with.

That Hashtag Show is claiming actress Emma Fuhrmann will portray Cassie Lang (Scott Lang's daughter) in Avengers 4--they don't know why it's an aged-up version (Fuhrmann is 16), as original actress Abby Ryder Forston (who is 10) will appear in Ant-Man and the Wasp. If the report is accurate it's also not clear if this change reflects events happening in the aforementioned film or Avengers 4. In the comics Cassie is known as Stature and Stinger and was a member of The Young Avengers, becoming a hero after her father's death. This makes me wonder if the Phase Four change that's been referred too isn't just the addition of the Fox characters, but the addition of something like The Young Avengers (it's had a varying composition, but began with Iron Lad, Hulkling, Patroit, Wiccan, the Kate Bishop Hawkeye, and Stature--I don't think Marvel would feel beholden to this lineup, but its spirit of young characters with some connection to the original Avengers makes sense).

Speaking of That Hashtag Show, they claim the Black Widow film will be a prequel (which I'm not a fan of). Specifically:

Late last year, I was told that this film would take place in the past; today, that was confirmed by a second source. The film will find Natasha living in the United States 15 years after the fall of the Soviet Union! That timeline places the film firmly in the mid-2000s [the USSR dissolved in 1991, meaning the film would take place in 2006], meaning we’ll meet up with Nat prior to the events of Iron Man 2. That time frame opens up plenty of options, and while many fans seem to want a Black Widow/Hawkeye team up in Budapest [cf The Avengers], we’ve been told that early discussions about the film involved Sebastian Stan’s Winter Soldier. Stan seemed to have some ideas about a potential Black Widow film recently and their unique comic book history could make for a VERY interesting adaptation. Though no director has been officially attached to the film, we can report that Brad Winderbaum will serve as the film’s executive producer, following his time in that role on Thor: Ragnarok. While rumors place the film on Marvel Studios slate of 2020 films, we were unable to confirm that release date.

While I'm a fan of Black Widow, I think re-treading a background already spoiled in other films (particularly Winter Soldier and Age of Ultron) is not the right move, so hopefully it's not the plot we get.

Joe Russo was asked to expand on his comments about potentially adapting the "Secret Wars" storyline and he said the following:

Listen, my second favorite character growing up, and one of my prized possessions in my comic book collection is Incredible Hulk #181, which of course is the first appearance of Wolverine [November, 1974]. I feel like the mission of the Marvel Universe is to keep expanding and surprising people. Surprise them with casting choices, surprise them with story choices. If we’re moving into this world of crossover events, certainly that affords opportunity for other large-scale stories from the books like Secret Wars [1984] — which was another favorite comic of mine as a kid.

CBR, the source of these comments, believes that because the original version of Secret Wars was one of Joe's favourites as a kid that that's the version he'd adapt (as opposed to the Jonathan Hickman version in 2015). I think the key element is "surprise them with story choices"--I seriously doubt the Russo's would want to simply have the Beyonder force heroes to fight before eventually defeating him themselves.

Antonique Smith's character role has been revealed: Detective Nandi Tyler, who was a childhood friend and then professional rival of Misty Knight. She's an original character (as in no comic book basis). This is very similar to the Diamondback plot from the first season and I worry it's going to fall into the exact same cliches--Smith's performance, of course, could give it much more weight.

The never-ending Moon Knight rumours (the last being Jon Schnepp's erroneous prediction that he'd appear in The Punisher) got a boost of sorts from Kevin Feige when he said:

Yes. Does that mean five years from now, 10 years from now, 15 years from now? There are stacks of character cards that we have in our, in our development offices, which we look at. Which we pull for him, which we discussed.

This is pretty vague and doesn't suggest any kind of immediacy--indeed, he's always seemed like a character more suited to television, although this suggests he's not coming to TV any time soon (if at all).

Speaking of rumoured characters, last February Namor was rumoured to have a TV show or movie in production (the former seeming most likely) and at that time speculation was Marvel had reacquired the rights to him. Talking to IGN recently Kevin Feige made comments suggesting Universal still had some control over the character (likely the same distribution rights they own for the Hulk since Universal owns them both), meaning using the character would have similar complications. Given that Universal (owned by Comcast) is unlikely to ever sell the character back (who presumably isn't under the same seven-year reversion clock that the Fox characters were), the MCU ought to use him like the Hulk if they want to include him.

Deadline put out a story that said the following:

[Peter] Rice told Fox employees that the transaction will most likely [my emphasis] be completed by spring-summer 2019 and end of summer 2019 at the latest

This lead to innumerable outlets (eg) saying the deal is going to be done in the summer of 2019 if it goes ahead. There are two things to point out here: Rice said "most likely" (so the timeframe could be shorter or longer), and that it's "mostly likely spring-summer"--a period covering roughly April-August, which is pretty broad and whose precise timing has a major impact on what movies Fox could release beforehand. I can't imagine that Rice has insider knowledge of how fast the courts are going to move, so I take this as him simply telling his employees what's already known--these decisions take at least 12-18 months--and he has no reason to imagine the sale not happening.

Speaking of that impact, Brent Andrew claims to have talked to some high-level Fox production crew members who told him the following:

• X-Men: Dark Phoenix is the last proper Fox Marvel movie (meaning adhering to the muddled Fox continuity beginning with Bryan Singer's X-Men in 2000)--they also seemed to confirm re-shoot rumours for the film (which I discussed a month ago and make sense given the release date change)
• The X-Men characters (and everything else Marvel at Fox) will be integrated into the MCU ASAP and all are planned for Phase Four

None of these revelations are surprising (some pundits were speculating on a much longer integration, which I think is ridiculous), but it's added fuel to what's already been rumoured. It's also yet another sign that New Mutants is just never going to be released.

After writing the above Kevin Feige provided some fuel to the ridiculous fire by saying it will be a long time before the Fox characters appear. I believe this is him both being prudent as well as some deliberate obfuscation--the same way I viewed his Spider-Man deal denials (something Sony and Marvel adamantly denied right up to the official announcement). Until the sale to Disney is complete Feige isn't going to say anything about what Marvel will or won't do with the properties--I'm pretty sure that's viewed as tampering if he did. The plans are in motion and once the sale is complete we'll see those characters ASAP.

More updates from DC as apparently Birds of Prey is taking Suicide Squad 2's production date to be the next film in active production for the DCEU. I mentioned a month ago that it was unclear if Birds of Prey was happening at all, or if it instead was going to be the Harley Quinn movie or Gotham City Sirens. At that time rumours suggested Suicide Squad 2 was filming this fall, but if this is correct it appears that indeed we are getting the film Margot Robbie mentioned back in November, 2016. To me the decision makes a lot of sense--Suicide Squad was a mess and not an easy movie to make a sequel to. Birds of Prey, on the other hand, takes an element people liked (Harley Quinn) and puts it in a fresh context which could serve as a launching point for a Batgirl film (however weird it will be to have Batgirl before we get the Matt Reeves' Batman movie). Since this report came out Variety is reporting there are two scripts for the film and the only constants in both are Harley and Barbara Gordon (aka Batgirl). The report also indicates Suicide Squad 2 might film immediately afterward. It makes sense for DC to double down on female-lead films when the MCU is only just getting there, but whether they can actually put out a good film remains an open question (signing Ava DuVernay to direct New Gods is not a positive sign).

The other rumoured DC film, Blackhawks (if it ever happens given Spielberg's age and busy schedule), isn't connected to the DCEU, so I won't get into that.

The leaked Venom trailer wasn't that bad except for the look for Venom itself (I've seen mixed reactions to it, positive and negative). I'm still not sure how the film will work out for Sony--detaching the character from its Marvel context. As a trailer it's an improvement on the very bland teaser the preceded it.

This article is written by Peter Levi (@eyeonthesens)

Marvel TV and MCU News

Jeremy Conrad (known for breaking the Deadpool 2 story) has a scoop where he claims the MCU's next big team series will be the The Eternals. Here are the key points from his article:

Through confirmation from multiple sources [three], Marvel is looking to launch The Eternals as a new franchise post-Guardians of the Galaxy 3 [2020] and the wheels are already in motion to find Marvel’s new team of heroes. The decision to do them came after the success of the very Kirby-esque Thor: Ragnarok and DC developing their New Gods movie [in active production but with no release date], but they’ve been preparing for them for a while and we’ll see a moon-sized hint at them in Avengers: Infinity War this month [presumably referring to Thanos' home of Titan]. The rumor says the movie is currently on the Phase 4 schedule for 2021 or 2022, and there’s a possibility some of the Eternals could pop up in Guardians of the Galaxy 3 before being spun off into their own franchise. As Guardians 3 is the final outing for this team, introducing new cosmic characters prior spinning them off into their own movie would make a lot of sense.

The rest of the piece is Jeremy giving his opinion on why this is happening. The notorious Umberto Gonzalez has already dismissed the idea, but his own track record is a mixed bag (his colossal error on who Zendaya was playing in Spider-Man: Homecoming is just the latest example, but you can see an old list of others here), so his dismissal on its own doesn't amount to much. James Gunn is pretty quick to point out incorrect rumours so he's the one I'd watch in terms of the validity of Conrad's claims (the news broke on April 4th and so far there have been no denials--Rich Johnston is reporting an official announcement is coming soon--this runs contrary to Kevin Feige's statement that none of the Phase Four films would be revealed until after Infinity War, so my guess is the change is a reaction to Conrad's scoop).

As for who The Eternals are: Jack Kirby's creation back in 1976 when he returned to Marvel from DC (where he had created the New Gods which is the DC film mentioned above) and there are a lot of similarities between the two (both companies cancelled the run before he finished the storyline, illustrating their limited public appeal at the time). Briefly: when the Celestials visited Earth five million years ago and performed genetic experiments on early proto-humanity, they created two divergent races: the long-lived Eternals and the genetically unstable and monstrously grotesque Deviants (very angels/devils). The Eternals are long-lived and in general protected the human race, especially from the Deviants, with whom they've always had an enmity. Eventually the Eternals develop godlike powers.

How much of this the MCU would keep is hard to say. If the focus is the cosmic there's less need for the Eternals to be from earth's past. Thanos, who is an Eternal in the comics, may or may not be connected to them in the MCU--generally the MCU simplifies things (eg Ego becoming a Celestial) and that's what I'd expect with the Eternals.

A thought to add to my Infinity War speculation: is Tony Stark going to be the Uncle Ben moment for Spider-Man? I don't mean replacing it necessarily, I just mean as the dramatic moment--the emotional scene that serves as the cinematic touchstone for Peter Parker? There's certainly something about Tony wanting Peter to be better than he is that has some resonance with Ben's declaration in the comics. Just a thought.

Speaking of my speculation, we've had a comment from co-director Anthony Russo related to some of it:

We were considering showing [Thanos’] backstory, but ultimately felt it wasn’t necessary for the movie

My speculation was that we'd see Thanos' call to action (as in the event which begins his quest to balance the universe), so does this debunk that idea? It may, but Russo could also be talking about his origin in particular (growing up and developing) which is not quite the same thing.

I've also seen speculation that the fourth Avengers film will be in some way be the "Secret Wars" storyline--an idea that makes no sense to me whatsoever and fortunately the Russo's recently made comments that saves me going through why, as they expressed an interest in doing Secret Wars once the Fox properties are back with Marvel (see below).

For those unfamiliar with Secret Wars it refers to two two series in the 1980s from Jim Shooter (1984-86) and then a series of the same name from Jonathan Hickman in 2015. The two stories are very different--in the former an omnipotent being called the Beyonder is at the heart of the plot (which was written at the behest of Mattel to sell toys), whereas in the latter it's a merging of the various Marvel universes (bringing the Ultimate universe together with the default 616-universe, among others). The motivations of both are vastly different and when the Russo's refer to them I think they mean Hickman's (a sentiment echoed by others). While I no longer believe we'll ever see TV characters in the MCU, if we do this would be the place.

On the more take-it-with-a-grain-of-salt side of things the same Conrad has a one-source rumour that the Black Widow movie will be in 2020. This isn't much of a leap to make (it was my guess when the dates of phase four were announced). While Scarlett Johansson isn't old by any means (33), as a character she'll have had seven major appearances beforehand (I'm excluding her cameo in Thor: Ragnarok) and there comes a time where the interest in a solo appearance might fade away. Given how much Sebastian Stan has talked about such a movie it wouldn't be a surprise if he was in it (seeing the MCU tackle an espionage film would be fun).

On the Netflix side of things more news is coming out about Luke Cage season two (which is just two months away). Talking to Empire Magazine, showrunner Cheo Hodari Coker said:

Danny [Rand] helps Luke channel his chi in a fight to end all fights that was just one of the most fun things we've done.

This doesn't specifically give us much of an idea for why Luke seeks out Danny's help (to deal with the Bushmaster perhaps? see below), but it does suggest fun is part of the process, which is what you want from a nascent Heroes for Hire. It also doesn't provide any hint at how long Danny is in the show--what's described could be one episode or it might be part of a story arc (my guess is the former).

Coker also described Bushmaster's powers as being virtually the same as Luke's. Speaking of villains he deflected addressing the specific problems the first season had with Diamondback as a villain (implying it was largely a matter of comparative performance, ie, Mahershala Ali was so much better than Erik LaRay Harvey that it made his character seem poor by comparison--something not very fair to Harvey who, I think, was at minimum a victim of bad material).

In talking about Luke's journey Mike Colter said:

Luke is his own worst enemy, and that's something I enjoy playing about him, because he doesn't necessarily understand the results of his actions. He's fallible and he makes mistakes. He's got an edge, he's got a chip on his shoulder, he's got to discover his own popularity and enjoy it a bit. He's learning on the fly what it is to be someone everybody recognises, to be someone everyone in Harlem looks to for answers. It's a lot of responsibility

This is a good arc to follow since it's so distinctive from two of the other Netflix characters (Daredevil is a secret identity and Jessica Jones doesn't want popularity). Comments from Simon Missick were a bit more vague:

How does this person who is identified by her strength and her power as a cop do that job [without her good arm]? She can't. So we see Misty at the top of the season walking away from the thing that defined her.

So it seems Misty leaves the police (something presumed when we heard Daughters of the Dragon was going to be in Iron Fist season two), but it's not clear what she leaves the police for and discovering that seems to be her journey for the season.

Despite mixed reactions to the latest season of Jessica Jones it has been confirmed for another. The speedy renewal (about a month later) suggests Netflix had already made up its mind prior to the release of two (much as it had, say, with a Punisher series or Daredevil season two). What will be interesting to see is how showrunner Melissa Rosenberg reacts to the mixed feelings fans had about the second season--comments after the first showed her very concerned with audience reception (citing Dexter's collapse) and she can't be happy with how the second season was received. The obvious change to make would be to push Jessica's story forward rather than triple-dipping into her past, but we shall see (and it is a long way away).

This article is written by Peter Levi (@eyeonthesens)