This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"That was watercooler vengeance!"
11977 members | you are not logged in | 15 September 2019




Tweet













April 08 2015

(SPOILER) EW's Avengers issue - Joss Whedon and Kevin Feige reveal a few more details. This shortened version of Entertainment Weekly's article for their current Avengers issue contains several comments from Joss and Kevin, mostly confirming plot details hinted at in the trailers for the movie. There are more details about how Ultron is created.

Why would they reveal The Vision like that? That was the perfect thing to save for the movie!
Awesome covers.
There have been leaked images of The Vision floating around for months.
Yeah - I think we'll all need to move into an communications free bunker to avoid all the spoilers/images that will soon be flooding the media markets. I guess the critics will be seeing it this weekend (Drew @ Hitfix mentioned that today) so you may start to see Twitter reactions in advance of actual reviews, and with it opening overseas first you'll get plenty of press/reaction ... which medias markets here will offer THEIR reactions to and it will all be a hurricane of PR spin ..

I figure Disney at this point, outside of a major plot twist or two they've kept hidden, is saying, "the hell with it, time to unleash the hounds"
@libradude - I think Ricardo L. was complaining about the Vision reveal referring to the fact that the article pretty much just outright explains Vision's entire origin, i.e. "Ultron destroys all of Stark's AI including JARVIS and builds Vision out of the scraps." While those facts could have been inferred from all the information we know, it's a little jarring to have EW just flat out announce it like that. Could have just let us wait and see if Marvel was gonna throw us a curve ball.

On another front, anyone else irritated they just kinda put Betty Ross on a bus? Like, I know Banner is out of contact for her safety, and I know Banner is - as the client referred to Angel - supposed to be a eunuch (because of his heartrate transformation issues), and I know Betty is dating Doc Samson, but still . . . Hulk and Widow? Neat, unexpected character development, but kinda shafts the established love interest, don't it?
Perhaps, but I kind of take the LOTR view on that. There are the books, which I love, them and Star Wars were pretty much my gateway to this world. And the films, which I also love, and which deviate significantly from the books, the films don't negate the books, they're a different medium. Done respectfully (and given who's made this film, how could it not be?) I am sure it'll be fine.

On another point Drew @ Hitfix also mentioned that while a fair bit of "sizzle" from the film has been seen Disney/Marvel have kept a shedload in reserve, and the ending which he read in draft a while ago has apparently completely changed, so it sounds like there's a hell of a lot of stuff that's been kept back.
@Batman1016 I agree with you, it does kind of throw Betty Ross under a bus, and it is a slap to the face to people who buy comics. I get Joss wanting to make original story lines, love interests, and ways to get past the MCU not having rights to X-men, but making a Hulk and Widow romance when they have had only a platonic history, white-washing the Maximoff twins and making these Jewish characters volunteer for a Hydra program and making Ultron created by Stark is a let down to Marvel comic readers who were into Marvel before Iron Man jump started the MCU. Honestly, I'm glad the Russo's are taking over, they are drawing inspiration from the Earth-616 comics, where as Joss seems to be drawing inspiration from the Earth-1610 comics when it comes to Hawkeye (these ones have Natasha being straight up evil, Hulk tries to rape Betty and Wanda and Pietro have an incest relationship).

But honestly, this is all part of the comic book industry. Comics are constantly being rebooted, retconned, appearing in what-if/au and shuffled amongst different writers and artists. So, none of these character's background is set in stone, and as readers there are going to be issues you like more and ones you hate.
I don't think it's really fair to lob a criticism of "white-washing" the half-Jewish/half-Rom Maximoff twins (why aren't they the Eisenhardt twins, nowadays?) at the movies when the comics never portrayed them as looking anything but white. Indeed, even Max never looked anything but white, with his glittering blue eyes (which he passed on to both kids) and Nordic-appearing bone structure. Further, regardless of their father's heritage, Pietro and Wanda have never practiced Judaism, .

I was once a hard core X-book collector, and I certainly don't feel like I've been slapped in the face. The MCU is just another AU. You like it, or not, just like any other AU.
You make some great points QingTing. I'll try to hold off any judgments until I watch the movie. But I do believe that the MCU is being hurt from the lack of diversity (gender, ethnicity, sexuality and disabled) in their characters. I don't think that this is Joss' fault, but the higher ups.
SHIELD has done a much better job with the diversity, but yeah. The movies are still woefully behind.

This thread has been closed for new comments.


You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.



joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home