What I like about the MCU Spider-Man is that both Marvel and the character himself are aware of his actual position on the superhero totem pole. In general, I like Spider-Man. I have been a fan since I was a kid. I’ve played many of his games, watched multiple cartoon series, and seen three different actors portray Peter Parker, my favorite Spider person, across 10 different live action films. But I do not love Spider-Man. He is a great character. This is fact. But he is not as great as everyone seems to give him credit for. He’s relatable, sort of, and I think that’s why he’s such a fan favorite. But in the grand scheme of the Marvel universe he’s not nearly as powerful, intelligent, or important as he’s often given credit for. If anything, I’d say a great many of his greatest moments happened more as a response to fandom than as organic character developments that warranted the fandom. But there’s no way to prove that one way or the other so I guess it doesn’t matter. What does matter is that Tom Holland’s Peter Parker is fully aware that he’s not nearly as great, qualified, or important as everyone else seems to think he is. And this is true both for the viewers and within the MCU itself. That’s probably the main takeaway I got from Spider-Man: Far From Home, and I liked that aspect a lot.
What I loved about Spider-Man: Homecoming was the human aspect. But more specifically, the youth aspect. This version of Peter Parker is a 16 year old kid who genuinely thinks like a 16 year old kid. He wants to hang out with his friends. He wants to have a girlfriend. He wants to protect his Aunt and make sure she’s safe, both from monsters and from interested men. The hero aspect of his life isn’t the most important part of the character. It’s not even who he really wants to be. It’s a responsibility that’s forced onto him, which is a great way to paint the character. Because “with great power comes great responsibility”. That’s the point of the character. He doesn’t want to foil alien tech heists, fight aliens, or stop petty criminals. He has to. It’s his responsibility as a person with super powers. But he just wants to be a 16 year old kid. That’s who Peter Parker is. And while Tom Holland is not my favorite Peter Parker, this version of the character is my favorite version because of how well and realistically written it is. It is the most human Spider-Man I’ve ever seen depicted in live action and Far From Home does a great job of continuing this character’s story.
I was worried about how Far From Home was going to follow Avengers: Endgame. Just about every movie in the MCU tries to top its direct predecessor film. That’s always been the idea. Bigger, better, and more impressive from one film to the next. With the exception of the Ant-Man films, pretty much every MCU movie actively tried to top the last one and usually did. At least in terms of stakes if nothing else. But we spent 10 years building to Avengers: Endgame. There was absolutely no way a solo film about a 16 year old kid was going to top that. Especially not one with Mysterio headlining as a not villain in the ads. So I had a lot of concerns going into this movie. Thankfully Marvel was not only aware of my concerns but used them to their advantage.
Far From Home followed Endgame perfectly because it actively goes out of its way to reference Endgame and let you know that we’re no longer playing at Thanos level stakes. It’s comedic. It’s personal. The scales and stakes are small. It’s simply not a story about an Infinity War class threat. It’s about healing from the many losses incurred during the Infinity War. And laughter is the best medicine after all.
The movie does a lot of bits that are just there to make you laugh. They talk about what happened when everyone came back from the snap and it’s hilarious. They talk about how half the world didn’t age for five years so now everyone’s age is off. There’s an entire subplot about Ned’s romance life that is just hysterical. This is the stuff that a 16 year old kid would be thinking about, superhero or not. Really the actual stakes of the film aren’t even that big to begin with, similar to with Vulture in Homecoming. Yes the bad guy getting away with it would have been terrible. Yes the possible long term repercussions if Spider-Man didn’t do his job would have been a net negative. But the world wasn’t/isn’t going to end. In fact, I’d argue that Far From Home ending with the bad guy getting his way might actually have been better for the planet’s overall defenses in the long term. In any case, the stakes are pretty small. Not Ant-Man small, but small. And that’s a good thing in the case of these Spider-Man films.
Story wise, Far From Home was as good palate cleanser. It rebooted the audience back to the Iron Man one days where people were just kind of doing their own things and dealing with personal villain problems with no big picture to worry about. Yet at the same time, this movie does acknowledge that the good old days can never truly return. I’d say this movie had probably the most plot significant post credits scene of any MCU film to date. It literally affects the way you view every single MCU film except for The Incredible Hulk, Iron Man 3, and maybe Captain America: Civil War. It also possibly teases the focal point of the next phase of MCU plots.
Not only was Far From Home well written, but it was also well acted. Jake Gyllenhaal’s Mysterio was great. The character was different from the comics in a number of ways but extremely realistic and relatable. Not only did I believe that character but I sympathized with him quite a bit. As with Homecoming, the students, none of which are actually minors in real life, are extremely believable. Watching Far From Home reminded me a lot of what it was like to be a kid. The crushes, the romantic plans, the conflicts with other boys, the jealousy, and a general lack of assurance that anything you decide to do is actually the correct decision. These are the types of characters that make sense in the world of a 16 year old Spider-Man.
Visually speaking, this movie was great. The effects were top notch while also being very self-aware about the fact that they’re all fictional. The movie has many moments referencing the PS4 game, Marvel’s Spider-Man (2018), by Insomniac Games. It all comes together rather nicely to let the viewer know that not everything has to be so serious. Some things can just be fun and imaginative for the sake of being entertaining in a world constantly plagued by politics, misinformation, and greed. In my opinion, this is the entire point of the movie. It’s referencing the current issues of our reality by portraying those same problems in a post Thanos snap world.
Spider-Man: Far From Home is not the next Avengers: Endgame. It’s not trying to be and that’s a good thing. It’s just a nice movie about a 16 year old kid who just happens to be a superhero. It’s one of if not the most relatable film in the MCU because it’s simply about the struggle of balancing your life with your work and learning how to accept that responsibility without losing your personal life in the process. If you’re looking for the next epic MCU adventure, this isn’t it. But if you’re looking for a respite from all the doom and gloom from the last several movies while still having some overall plot relevance, this is the perfect film to follow Avengers: Endgame.
It seems more and more I’ve been forced to write posts defending corporations against “consumers” in recent months. This is really distressing for me. My mantra has always been “I fight for the user.” But I’ve never been one to blindly support gamers when they say/do/ask/demand stupid things. And I will absolutely never defend people trying to affect gaming, as either an industry or community, who aren’t actually gamers but want to change them for some sort of political agenda. In light of this, I find myself faced with not one, not two, but three glaring nontroversies that the gaming community, and so called “gaming journalists” have turned into the focal point of gaming discussion right now, while simultaneously ignoring much bigger issues. So today I write a post that I’m sad I even had to take the time to write.
I’ve long been a champion of transparency in the gaming industry. I hate when companies like EA feed us crap like “based on our research” and then proceed to make a statement that goes completely against consumer demand/desire without actually showing any documentation to confirm the results of this supposed research. It’s this continued lack of transparency that I think has caused many of the issues EA faces today. I’m not saying the research is false. I’m just saying that because they’ve never actually made any of it public that it’s hard to take their decisions seriously. Of course the counter argument to this transparency is that other companies will steal that research data. To me that’s a cop out answer. Because other companies having the data wouldn’t magically make EA unable to create competitive games in the market. They own multiple studios that people continue to buy from simply because of the names of those studios/franchises. But if they showed that research data, they could then justify things like paid DLC, loot boxes, and so on. Assuming of course that the data they have actually shows that these are things people legitimately want (Spoiler: It won’t.).
I truly believe that if all companies were more honest and transparent about their decisions, costs, and research that many people would accept their decisions peacefully even if they didn’t necessarily agree with them. Like I was really angry with the announcement that Final Fantasy VII Remake will be in multiple parts for most likely a premium price. But if Square Enix followed that announcement with pages of data and analysis showing that the company would literally lose money based on projected sales figures for doing the game as a singular $60 release then I wouldn’t complain. I wouldn’t necessarily be happy about having to buy multiple parts for a single story, but I would understand why it was happening and I’d have no justification for being angry about it. It’s because of this that I have more than once written about the need for companies to be more honest and transparent about games, their development process, and the costs of bringing them to market.
While I still think more transparency from the industry could be a good thing, recently I’ve been led to believe that maybe we, as in the gaming community as a whole, don’t deserve such honesty. Maybe we don’t deserve early announcements, developer interviews, and pre-release footage. Because it seems that all we ever do with that information is bite the hands that feed us at all the wrong moments, for all the wrong reasons. There are legitimate reasons for consumers to be angry with developers and publishers. Star Wars: Battlefront II’s ridiculous loot box system at release/right before release was unacceptable. It was not only good that we organized, protested, and made our demands met. It was just. It was the right thing to do as a collective of consumers. And I can name several other similarly righteous examples. But I can think of many more bad examples of the public attacking developers for showing us things in advance of release that people had no business getting angry about. At least not to the point of creating viral controversies. I just want to discuss three of the most recent ones I’ve seen, but there are countless more I could bring up as well.
That Cyberpunk 2077 In-Game Ad
Cyberpunk 2077 is arguably the most anticipated game set for a 2020 release. I’m still not personally sold on it, but CD Projekt RED(CDPR) has never failed me before and it has Keanu Reeves in it. Chances are this game will be amazing in every sense of the word. I won’t say that it will be better than The Witcher 3, but it will almost certainly live up to that standard. And CDPR, as well as Cyberpunk The Roleplaying Game of the Dark Future creator Mike Pondsmith, have been very open and seemingly honest about the game. They’ve showed more than an hour of gameplay, done several interviews, and have already given quite a few plot details. They’ve even announced that, like with The Witcher 3, there will be a lot of content in expansions. They’ve done more than most companies do to try to explain their game to the public almost a year in advance of its release. How did the public respond to this openness? By accusing Cyberpunk 2077 of being transphobic, willfully ignorant of the cyberpunk genre, and not meeting the original creative expectations set out by the original creator, Mike Pondsmith.
Cyberpunk 2077 is set in a dystopian future called Night City where technology, immoral behavior, and capitalism have all run amok. People no longer have value. In fact, it’s arguable that many aren’t even people anymore. In some of the released footage there’s a poster advertising some fictional canned beverage. The poster has a woman on it. The woman’s clothing and stature, to some, look like that of a trans woman. That is to say, some people think the woman in the ad has a penis. I can’t confirm if that’s true or not, but what I can confirm is that people apparently thought that this was grounds for boycotting the game almost a year before it even released. This is ridiculous. No context given. No confirmation from the company about whether or not the woman in the ad was trans. No interview with Mike Pondsmith to confirm if the game was truly meeting his vision. Just up in arms assault on the game and the company’s image based on a background decorative in-game poster. The worst part of all is that when Mike Pondsmith finally did speak about it and stated that he not only didn’t feel the poster was transphobic, but that he was very happy with the overall game and how CDPR really had captured his vision, people called him an Uncle Tom and a sellout rather than accept that his vision had actually been met.
This should never have occurred. This is a non-issue. And no I’m not saying trans rights are a non-issue. I’m saying this poster, that again isn’t confirmed to be of a trans woman, set in a corporate dystopia in the future where a majority of people have robotic parts and little to no actual value is a non-issue. To have attacked CDPR in this way in response to them giving the public so much information and content so far in advance of the game’s release is unacceptable on our part. I’m not saying everyone was involved in this, because that’s not the case. But the fact that this became a viral controversy that several gaming journalism sites covered, not favorably for CDPR I might add, is egregious. If I was CDPR, I wouldn’t say one more damn thing about the game until it releases. It’s already guaranteed to make a killing and clearly the public isn’t grateful for the openness anyway.
Marvel’s Avengers isn’t the MCU
A teaser was released for the upcoming Marvel’s Avengers game from Square Enix like two years ago. We didn’t know anything else about it until this E3 where they announced a shit ton of information. Now please note that I’m not advocating for the game one way or another. There are still many questions I need answered and I’d like to see, or ideally try the gameplay. But out of the gate they showed/announced a single player offline campaign with five playable characters, four player online coop, and free DLC expansions including additional missions, additional maps, additional Avengers characters, and supposedly no microtransactions.
This announcement presentation should have been received with a ton of positivity from the community. Instead “we” responded by complaining that the characters don’t look like the actors from the Marvel movies. Again biting the hand that feeds us. Not only that, but I am shocked at the number of plebs that willingly outed themselves as faux Marvel fans. If you saw that trailer and thought to yourself that the characters were wrong because they didn’t look like Chris Evans, Robert Downey Jr. Mark Ruffalo, Scarlett Johansson, and Chris Hemsworth then you’re not a real Marvel fan. You’re an MCU fan. All of these characters have existed for decades. The movie versions are barely a blip on the collective canon of the characters. Look at the original appearance/debut dates for these characters.
Captain America (1941)
Iron Man (1963)
Black Widow (1964)
Every one of these characters is more than 50 years old. In that time all of them have had multiple costume and appearance changes. Even Black Widow, with one of the most straight forward looks in the entire Marvel universe, has had multiple costumes and physical appearances. And let us not forget that even in the movies the costumes change all the time. That is the entire nature of comic books. The game isn’t set in the MCU. It’s not the same timeline as the MCU. Like Marvel’s Spider-man from Insomniac Games, it has literally nothing to do with the MCU. So it’s absolutely preposterous to complain that the characters, whether their physical appearances or costumes, don’t match those of the MCU. They’re not supposed to. The community could have and should have focused more on discussing the actual game announcements but of course “we” didn’t. Instead the social medias were flooded with memes and comments about how people wanted the characters to look like a bunch of actors not at all related to the project. Which is also a big “screw you” to the talented cast of voice actors being used in the game. It’s ridiculous that such a large percentage of people got up in arms to complain about something they clearly weren’t familiar with to begin with. Now unlike with Cyberpunk 2077, we haven’t seen all that much of Marvel’s Avengers and we don’t have enough confidence in either Square Enix or Crystal Dynamics for them to be able to decide to go dark with this game and hope to make a profit. But really “we” don’t deserve any more information until the game is ready to release because clearly people can’t seem to act right.
Tifa’s Boobs . . .
When I was in college, a professor assigned me (the whole class) to read an article from The Onion. Now at this point in my life I didn’t know what The Onion was. So I read it as a work of non-fiction reporting. When I voiced my opinions on the article in class, I was notified that it was satire. This article, which was very realistic because it was written back in the days when The Onion would do full on articles rather than just funny blurbs, reported that up until that point the reason female characters in games had such large boobs was because of limitations of graphics engines. The article went on to say that finally developers had pushed past this limitation and could now reduce the size of boobs in games to look more realistic. Oh how scary a world we live in where satire becomes reality and then gets blown out of proportion, pun not intended.
Because every English language gaming journalist can’t seem to properly translate Japanese. And because Japanese developers don’t practice the restraint that American developers do when talking about their games, boobs tend to come up a lot. Again, pun not intended. During a recent interview about the upcoming Final Fantasy VII Remake, one of the developers at Square Enix explained that Tifa, a well-liked female character from the game, would have a sports bra added to her costume to make her movements look more realistic. In laymen’s terms that means her still large breasts would now be restrained by a sports bra so that she could actually fulfill her role as a hand to hand brawler without her tits flopping around wildly. You know like real female athletes wear. But because Japanese developers don’t speak English as a first language and the translators that report this stuff almost always seem to suck, the story stated that Tifa’s breasts had been reduced in size. Once again, that’s not what the guy said. He said that their appearance would seem reduced because of the presence of a sports bra holding them in place and restraining them, as sports bras are made to do. But who cares about the actual facts?
The internet was and still is livid by the idea of Tifa having smaller breasts. Genuine rage and anger happened. And gaming sites kept reporting the story incorrectly and then following that by reporting on the outrage. Because it’s all about the clicks. Now first of all, the original model of Tifa is from 1997 on the PS1. The character models look(ed) atrocious. I don’t care what anyone says. By today’s standards the original FFVII looks horrendous. There are much better looking Final Fantasy games even on the PS1. Final Fantasy VIII, which I’m not arguing is a better overall game, looks way better. Tifa had ridiculously large breasts in that game for the same reason Lara Croft did in those days. Limited polygon counts. The only way to make sure you knew she was a female was to give her large breasts because they were unable to define chest structure subtly. It was either flat, which was used for male characters, or bulging unrealistically, which was used for female characters. There are also multiple looks for her in the original game, destroying any hope of consistency between how people view the character. Is the map mode Tifa the real Tifa? Is the cutscene Tifa the real Tifa? Or is the battle mode Tifa the real Tifa? They all look different. Tifa most likely wasn’t meant to have large breasts at all. They just didn’t have a choice. And even so, this is a remake. Square Enix can do whatever the hell they want with their characters. But internet gonna internet.
People have been asking for a Final Fantasy VII remake for more than a decade. It’s been called the most requested remake of all time for years. Square Enix refused to do it for the longest time and then finally gave in, because money, and how does everyone react? They complain about the supposed breast reduction of a non-main character. Yes Tifa is in the party and she definitely matters. But she’s no Aeris. She’s no Cloud. She’s no Sephiroth. It shouldn’t even matter that much. And yet here I am writing this article. Now honestly Square Enix doesn’t have to and didn’t have to say shit about this game. They could have kept it completely secret until the day it released and it still would probably end up being the best-selling game of its release year (2020). But Square Enix did announce it and has shown more and more information about it because they want to make fans happy. Do the fans deserve that kind of treatment? Clearly not. Again gamers bite the hand that feeds them for completely ridiculous and immature reasons.
The thing that makes me most angry is that not only are people always complaining about pointless bullshit in games today, when they should be thankful for the transparency, but that they’re putting their attention and outrage on things that don’t matter while serious issues abound and are ignored. Just last week the UK Parliament conducted a panel with reps from EA and Epic Games to discuss loot boxes and other gambling type mechanics in games. If you aren’t well versed in the details of this interview, you should definitely take the time to read about it, because it’s important. Here’s a short summary from Eurogamer as a jumping off point. Basically EA and Epic Games showed that they don’t care about consumers at all and that they will say anything to try to continue robbing gamers blind for useless skins. This is what gamers should be talking about. This is what should be trending and memeing and being covered by all gaming sites and causing uproar. People should be burning their EA game cases in the streets. YouTube should be covered in videos of people calling out EA for saying bullshit like “we don’t call them loot boxes – we call them surprise mechanics.” But that is not happening.
Yes some people are certainly talking about the UK Parliament interview. And some sites have reported on it a little bit. But it hasn’t been the main focus of the gaming community. My Twitter timeline hasn’t been covered in #SurpriseMechanics memes. But I’m still hearing about Tifa’s “small” tits. At this point, I don’t know why developers tell us anything in advance. The community continues to act childish, focus on the wrong things, and attack companies and individuals for not doing anything wrong while simultaneously letting the real criminals slide. It’s a shit show and it’s unacceptable. There’s really no other way to say it.
11 years ago I was in Thousand Oaks, California visiting a friend for his birthday. We watched Iron Man (2008). I was a freshman in college living in Philadelphia, single, and had no idea what I was actually going to do after I graduated. This past weekend I saw Avengers: Endgame. Today I have a B.A., live in Taiwan, work a full time job, and I’m engaged to be married. So much has happened since Iron Man both for me personally and the world as a whole. Like the MCU itself, there have been ups and downs. Advancements have been made, new entities have come and gone, and people have evolved at a personal level. As I walked out of the theater with my fiancé, she jokingly said “so what do we do now?” In many ways this question is extremely appropriate. If we’re honest, the MCU has had such a huge impact on popular culture that it’s hard to imagine a world where the Avengers don’t play a role in it.
This post is not a review, as plainly stated in the title. There will be some comments that would be very appropriate to place in a review, but I refuse to formally endeavor to try to review Avengers: Endgame for two main reasons. First, such an endeavor would be damn near impossible without spoilers. Because of what this particular movie is, just about every scene spoils something. What this film is more than anything is a wrap up to 11 years of interconnected films. So basically everything that happens is a spoiler or Easter egg for someone. For instance, this movie finally tells us where the name Jarvis, Tony Stark’s first AI assistant voiced by Paul Bettany who later became Vision, came from. So trying to review it with any level of depth without spoiling it is like the Hulk trying to life Mjolnir. The second, and in my opinion more important reason, is that writing a review for Endgame is pointless.
My school of thinking has always been that reviews are for people who haven’t yet experienced something. The purpose of them is to help people decide if something is worth their time and money. Reviews are not for people who have already played or watched something to circle jerk about how much they liked or hated it. That’s not the purpose of reviews and ultimately why I often avoid the comments sections for main stream reviews. Because the people there usually have no business reading the review to begin with since they’ve already seen the movie or played the game. Based on this mode of thought, I find the entire idea of an Endgame review laughable. If you’ve spent the last 11 or so years watching a total of 21 other movies, not to mention multiple other TV shows on multiple platforms, possibly read comics about newly introduced characters such as a Black Nick Fury, and all the other MCU related things I could mention, is there even a chance that you aren’t going to go see Endgame? Could anyone actually convince you that it was so bad that you’re better off not seeing the culmination of the largest interconnected film franchise in the history of the world? No. The answer to that question is an emphatic and absolute no. If you’ve watched the other 21 movies, you will absolutely go see Endgame regardless of what any and all reviews say. And honestly if you haven’t seen the other 21 movies, then I wholeheartedly recommend that you don’t watch Endgame. You owe it to yourself, and to everyone who worked on that universe, not to spoil the experience of watching that particular movie until you’re fully prepared for it.
Honestly speaking, Endgame isn’t the best MCU movie. I don’t even think I’d put it in the top five. It has time travel in it. Sorry if you consider that a spoiler, but it seems fairly obvious that would have been the case after the events of Infinity War. It’s understood that pretty much any plot that relies on time travel to fix a problem isn’t going to be a top shelf plot. But that’s OK in the case Endgame. The truth is that it wasn’t meant to be the best MCU movie. This movie was meant to bookend the largest, most impressive, and most impactful interconnected film franchise the world has even known. It didn’t need to be the best MCU film. It simply had to be the most emotionally gratifying to the audience. And again, the audience in this case is only people who have watched 21 other related movies over the last 11 years. Those people will leave the theater satisfied. Not necessarily happy, but satisfied.
I never cried in a comic book movie before. I’ve cried in tons of other movies. More so the older I get. But of the more than 60 comic book movies I’ve seen over the course of my life, Avengers: Endgame was the only one I can remember crying in. And I didn’t just cry once. I cried three separate times from three separate emotions. The first time was when my favorite Avenger did something that everyone had been waiting to see happen at least once. I was overwhelmed with excitement, awe, and happiness to the point of tears. The second was in the climactic moment when probably the most epic reveal scene in the history of film we’ll ever see happened. I was overwhelmed not by the majesty of the moment or emptions of the scene. I was overwhelmed by the history that scene represented. In one moment, more than 10 years of my life came crashing down on me. In a single sequence I relived every instance that the MCU had affected in my life over the last decade. Every movie viewing. Every nerdy conversation. Every date. Every debate. Every fan theory. It hit me like a wave at that moment. And I don’t think I’ll ever experience anything like that moment ever again in my life. Maybe if I have a kid I’ll feel that way when he/she graduates college. Maybe . . . The third and final moment that made me cry was near the end of the film in a deep moment of sadness that by all rights needed to happen. I didn’t predict it but it was the right decision and was meant to make you cry.
The feelings I felt while watching Endgame were supposed to happen. Those tears weren’t a coincidence. They were the intention of the movie. Like I said, this wasn’t meant to be the greatest MCU film ever made. That’s what Infinity War was intended to be. This movie was meant to thank people like me for being a committed and diligent fan for 11 straight years. It’s like playing The Citadel DLC in Mass Effect 3. It didn’t fully make sense that all these characters were in this location at the same time. But it didn’t have to make sense. It was fan service to thank the players for five years of hardcore fandom and literally hundreds of hours of story focused gameplay. That’s what Endgame is. There are plenty of plot holes. I left the theater debating my fiancé about time travel paradoxes. There were questionable plot decisions. Like why were so few aliens involved in a plot following half of all life across the universe being destroyed? But none of that detracted from the intense feeling of satisfaction you get when you reach the end of the credits. You leave the theater with a sense of completion.
The franchise isn’t even over. They’ve already confirmed multiple TV shows, at least two of them were set up in Endgame. They’ve already said Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 is for sure happening, showed footage of Spider-Man: Far From Home, and have teased a number of other movies as well. But honestly this was the bookend. This was the last MCU film you absolutely need to watch. I do not see the next phase of the MCU being able to recreate what was done with this first collection of 22 films. Especially considering the characters that are now obviously retired for one reason or another, what ultimately happens to the Infinity Stones, and the lack of an all-encompassing villain that can truly affect all characters within the universe simultaneously. I’ve been trying to figure out who the next Thanos could even be and all I could come up with was Galactus or the Celestial(s)/Eternals. But those characters don’t have a wide ranging effect on the universe as a whole all at the same time. There’s no snap risk. Galactus eats one planet at a time. That might be sad for those people, but it’s a drop in the bucket to the rest of the planets and their inhabitants at any given time. Celestials potentially have that level of threat. Like with how Ego tried to destroy all planets at the same time. But there was no long term build up to that plan and he was taken down by just eight characters, only three of which had anything close to actual super powers. So really I think for all intents and purposes, it ends with Endgame. Everything else will just be icing on an already fulfilling cake.
The movie had something for pretty much everyone. No matter who you Stan in the MCU, if your character wasn’t already killed in a previous movie, there was a moment where they were honored in some way during Endgame. Even the female characters had an epic moment of feminism which I know lots of sexists will complain about online, but really it was just a nod to the A-Force and I’m fairly certain that all serious comic book fans appreciated it for what it was. That’s the point of the movie. Every fan gets a nod to their character. I Stan Cap. I was happy. I even got my wish fulfilled to have it confirmed that he wouldn’t die a virgin.
The only question I have left is where do we go from here? Not just in terms of the MCU. I’ve already made those predictions in a previous blog post. I would actually be careful about reading that post if you haven’t seen the movie yet because many of them were half confirmed and/or half correct in Endgame so it unofficially contains spoilers. But I pose the question more generally. As a culture. As a planet. As nerds, where do we go from here? Let’s not pretend the DCEU has even the slightest chance of rivaling the MCU for quality, longevity, or impact. Lord of the Rings is done and has been for several years now. Star Wars ends this year, and honestly for many people it ended with The Last Jedi if not before. Harry Potter, which was semi-niche to begin with, has been death rattling since Deathly Hollows Part 2. X-Men has never really had the impact of other franchises because of its continuity issues. What do we do with our time now? What do we nerd over as a culture. We all have our individual fandoms, but there’s really nothing else that sort of brings “everyone” together around the world. Arguably we haven’t had WWIII yet because literally everyone wanted to see what would happen with Thanos. Now that’s gone. And while the ending was necessary, poetic, and beautiful, the world is a little less bright because of it.
It’s over guys. This was the finale. I don’t think we’ll ever see something as beautiful and impressive as the MCU Infinity War ever again. I’m thankful to have been a part of it in my own small way. I’m thankful that each of these actors, many of which were quite famous before Iron Man (2008), stayed with it the whole time. This whole endeavor was, in the words of Taneleer Tivan, “Magnificent! Magnificent! Magnificent!”
I wanted to end this post with a quote from Avengers: Endgame that really stood out to me. I think it sums up the entire MCU quite well and also should inspire all the people who did watch these movies from start to finish over the last 11 years. I can’t actually say who the quote is spoken by in the movie because that in and of itself would be a spoiler, so I’ll just leave the quote anonymously.
“Everyone fails at who they are supposed to be. The measure of a person, a hero, is how they succeed at being who they are.” –Marvel Cinematic Universe (2008 – 2019)
As promised, I did not include any real spoilers in my post. But there are a few things I wanted to say about Avengers: Endgame that are spoilers. Some of them are jokes. Some of them are questions. Some of them are just statements I felt needed to be voiced. I wanted to put these here because I didn’t want to publish an entirely separate post of these. I also wanted to get them out as quickly as possible so other people couldn’t steal my thunder by publishing these thoughts first. There’s nothing I hate more than having an original idea that someone else gets famous for. So if you have not seen Endgame yet, definitely stop reading now.
Sam Wilson: I’ve been waiting five years to say that line to you, Cap.
The unsung hero of Avengers: Endgame is the rat in storage unit 616.
Did the planets that had already been halved by Thanos before the snap get affected again by the snap in Infinity War or did he give them a pass?
What about the Extremis in Tony Stark’s DNA?
Can Hulk finally have sex?
So that’s the Loki who will be featured in the TV show?
That boy you didn’t recognize at Tony’s funeral was the kid from Iron Man 3.
Cap returned Mjolnir to Thor with the time machine.
When did Pepper get that suit?
How the hell did that entire spaceship go through the time portal with 1 tube of Pym Particles?
If they each only had enough Pym Particles for one jump roundtrip each, how did Nebula get back and then bring Thanos’ ship back when she gave the tube of particles to Thanos?
How is it that absolutely no one else knows how to make Pym Particles after all these years and no records of the formula were kept by Hank Pym?
I really hope Thor is in Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 and that it starts with an epic battle sequence that doesn’t have Thor in it and then after the title appears on screen Thor drops in and saves the day. Then in hand written letters “AS” is added to the title changing it to “Asguardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3”.
Did Cap still live the hero life while married to Agent Carter or was he fully retired and living his best life for those 70+ years?
Edward Norton probably kicking himself right now.
The Ancient One said when you make a major change to the past you create a new branching reality that can only be removed from existence by reversing that change at the exact moment it was made. If Cap inserted himself into the timeline and married Agent Carter wouldn’t that have created a branching timeline? And if it did how did Cap end up on that bench at the end of the movie? Wouldn’t he have been in an alternate timeline and thus not been able to return to that same moment in time in that original reality?
If you read my post from last week then you know my predictions for Avengers: Endgame and some of the developments I believe we’ll see in the next one to two phases of the MCU. If you haven’t read that post, you definitely should, but for the purposes of this post all you need to know is that I believe Captain America will die in Endgame. I’m not going to delve into why and how again so if you want that explanation you’ll have to go read that other post. From here on out I won’t make reference to any information contained in that or any other post so you can read on comfortably.
I’m fine with Captain America dying in Endgame. In fact, I think it’s the right way to go for dramatic effect. The First Avenger gave up his life to save the world from the Red Skull and the first Infinity Stone to reach Earth, assuming we don’t count the Reality stone as having been placed on Earth in Thor: The Dark World. He was then resurrected to protect Earth again because of the threat of the same Infinity stone(s). (Technically two stones are featured in The Avengers.) It would be so poetic if he died dealing the killing blow to Thanos, ultimately saving the galaxy from the threat of the Infinity stones. So him dying is not just OK with me, but it’s the right decision.
Let us also remember that, as has been reported, Endgame will supposedly be Chris Evans’ last performance as Captain America. Of course these sorts of things are always intentionally vague and up in the air. And things change in the movie business, just like in comic books, all the time. But considering how long Evans has played the character, I tend to believe that he is tired and the writers are fine with letting him go permanently. So yes I do fully believe that this will be the last time we see Chris Evans carry the metaphorical shield. I of course say metaphorical because of the events of Captain America: Civil War.
Captain America dying is fine for me. But what isn’t fine is Captain America dying having never really lived. I’m of course being hyperbolic here, but my point is that to the best of our knowledge Steve Rogers is still a virgin. Before everyone gets their underoos in a bunch, let me clarify a few things. There’s nothing wrong with being a virgin by choice. There’s nothing wrong with waiting till you meet the right person, or till you’re married, or whatever else you may be waiting for. I’m not trying to make some sort of high minded political statement about sex politics in 2019. I’m saying specifically Captain America, the representation of American ideals, honor, and exceptionalism, dying a virgin after serving not just his country but his planet honorably and faithfully for more than 70 years, if you count the ice nap as a form of active service, and missing out on the person he was actually in love with, Agent Peggy Carter, dying a virgin doesn’t sit well with me.
To further clarify, Captain America choosing to remain a virgin isn’t a problem. But that’s not really what’s happened here. Steve Rogers, pre-transformation, says he has given up on trying to find a woman because they overlooked him due to his lacking physical appearance in a time period where shrimps just didn’t get any. He later says that he’s interested in women, but hasn’t found the right “dance partner” yet. He then goes on to tell Agent Carter that he is interested in her but loses out on the opportunity because he gets frozen. So it’s not really that Cap has chosen to remain a virgin. His circumstances have forced him to.
But what about the end of Avengers: Age of Ultron when he tells Tony Stark he’s not looking for that anymore, you might be asking. To clarify (using that phrase a lot today), he says he is done looking for a family and stability. At no point does he say he’s lost interest in women as potential love interests, either physical or emotional. Here’s that scene in case you don’t believe me.
*Skip to 01:05.
What we have here is a man who has served his time, paid his dues, and then some who, based on my prediction, will ultimately die in service. Call me old fashioned, but that man deserves to get the/a girl. That’s not to say that it has to be a girl for all parties in all scenarios. It just so happens that Cap has verbally identified himself to be a heterosexual male, so in his specific case it would be a girl. All that is to say that Cap deserves to get laid before his final watch is ended. (Look I made a Game of Thrones reference in a Marvel post!).
Let me be clear, I’m not calling for Marvel, currently owned by Disney, to toss a Captain America sex scene into Endgame, though I’m sure many viewers of whatever gender and sexuality wouldn’t mind. I’m not even saying he has to get laid during the events of Endgame. I just need them to clarify for me on screen, either verbally or visually, that at some point in his life Steve Rogers got it in. That’s all I want. It could be as simple as Cap gets an email from a snap survivor no one knows about and when asked about it he admits that there was one night in Wakanda, or whatever. I don’t actually care how it’s shown, done, or clarified. I just need to know definitively that Captain America doesn’t die a virgin.
I don’t care who the girl is. It could be any consenting, of age female from any time period, planet, species, realm, or dimension. It could even be that pre-Cap Steve Rogers lied to Agent Carter all those years ago and actually did get laid in high school once. It could be the girl on the news at the end of The Avengers. It could be Black Widow after The Winter Soldier because she decided she really did enjoy that kiss. It could be Nebula in a grief stricken bender after the snap. Hell, I’d even take an A’askvariian who came calling looking for Peter Quill and took a stop on Earth, because she knew he was Terran. It really doesn’t matter who it is. I just don’t want to see Captain America die a virgin.
If we go down the list we can assume that pretty much every other Avenger (notice I said Avenger and not character/hero) isn’t a virgin, except for possibly Wanda Maximoff who’s a little younger, but we know she’s at least working toward that with Vision if it hasn’t happened already. The only unconfirmed ones would be War Machine and Falcon, but we’ve been given clues to assume they have some background experience with women/sexual interest. Some examples would be how Falcon talks to Black Widow when he first sees her drive up in The Winter Solider and how War Machine impresses that group of women with his story at the party in Age of Ultron. And those aren’t even founding Avengers anyway.
Tony Stark (Iron Man) – Countless/Pepper Potts
Bruce Banner (Hulk) – Betty Ross pre-accident
Thor – Jane Foster
Clint Barton – Laura Barton
Natasha Romanoff – It’s implied that as part of her work she has had to seduce men and was sterilized by the KGB because of it.
Captain America – ??????
I find this disagreeable, depressing, and downright unfair. If there’s one person who’s earned a pity lay, it’s Captain America. While I’d never argue that any particular female character owes Cap a piece, I will absolutely argue that the MCU as a whole does. And it’s already been confirmed that there are plenty of women in this universe that would be more than happy to oblige. (Remembers Private Lorraine (Natalie Dormer) in The First Avenger.) So it’s not like I’m arguing “hey who’s gonna bang the talking raccoon?” Because that would be weird for some reason.
This is a comic book universe, so as is customary; let’s go back to the comics to justify my argument. It is canon that Cap has gotten down and dirty with at least a few women. He’s no Wolverine, but it has happened. Here’s a list of lovers I found that will have some surprising names on it for people who only know Captain America as played by Chris Evans. And no I don’t consider number 15 as an acceptable argument without some form of verbal confirmation. What makes The First Avenger so sad and impactful is the fact that Steve and Peggy never got to realize their romance past that kiss before he boards the plane.
I don’t think I’m asking too much of the MCU. In fact I’m not asking for anything that isn’t already comic book canon. I just need them to tell me that Captain America didn’t die the same lonely boy he started out as. Give me that and the most epic death scene imaginable and I’ll have no complaints no matter what happens in Endgame. Except for some bullshit time travel retcon storyline a la Days of Future Past. I would most likely complain about that.
As we are just a week away from Avengers: Endgame, I thought it appropriate to do a post about the future state of the MCU. This upcoming and highly anticipated film is called “Endgame” but let’s all be honest in saying that there’s no end in sight. The comic book business is dying, Marvel games are at the low end of the spectrum for quality and profit, and Marvel animation has played 2nd fiddle to DC animation since like the 90’s. Movies are the bread and butter of Marvel now and predictably moving forward. So it should surprise no one that the MCU will absolutely not be ending with Endgame.
They’ve already confirmedGuardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 (woo James Gunn!), Spider-Man: Far From Home, and a Black Widow movie. Black Panther 2 was unofficially confirmed after the success of the first one. Plus now that Disney has acquired FOX, they have the ability to introduce the X-Men and Deadpool into the mix, among other properties. So there’s no question that Marvel plans to keep churning out MCU films. At the same time though, we’ve already been promised high stakes in Avengers: Endgame. For instance, it was basically confirmed that this will be Chris Evans’, among other actors, last performance in the MCU. I’m sure we might get some cameos down the road from some, but for all intents and purposes some top tier characters are being retired, whether by death or some other means. So I wanted to make a few predictions of my own about the future of the MCU based on things I’ve seen and heard as well as my own understanding of how the industry works.
Avengers: Endgame Predictions
Someone or more likely multiple characters are going to die by the end of this movie. I don’t mean the snappening. Personally I predict that they reverse the snap by the end of the second hour and everyone comes back, ultimately all working together to kill Thanos, who will certainly be dead by the end of the movie. But after the snap is reversed there will be people permanently dead by the end of Endgame.
Spider-Man, all the remaining Guardians of the Galaxy, Captain Marvel, Black Panther, and Black Widow will all surely survive. They’ve all got movies confirmed in the future so let’s assume they aren’t going to die. Ant-Man isn’t going to die because they just reintroduced Janet Van Dyne, flipped Ghost into a potential protagonist, and gave us our first adventure with The Wasp. There’s simply too much potential to keep that team going to remove any of them now. I could see Hank Pym dying though, but I doubt it. I don’t see Falcon dying because for one you can’t kill off one of only two African American (T’Challa is African) heroes before either of them gets a solo movie in the current political climate. It just doesn’t happen. I don’t think Valkyrie is dying either, for the same reason. Even more so when you consider that she’s not just Black, but the only Black Asgardian still living and one of only two living Asgardian heroes/warriors, unless you’re in the Lady Sif is still alive camp. And if you were going to kill off one of the Black characters it would be War Machine, because the character has already appeared in more movies, is much older, and has already gotten injured critically in the field previously (Captain America: Civil War). And the character can be easily replaced while preserving the suit as a character. Not to mention that Falcon becomes Captain America in the comics once Steve Rogers retires. I could see a similar occurrence happening in the MCU where Falcon takes up the shield.
Hulk won’t die because for one it just doesn’t happen, but more importantly they haven’t yet introduced a replacement for him yet. Eventually they will most likely introduce a She-Hulk or Amadeus Cho replacement and allow Banner to retire, but that hasn’t happened yet. I’m also waiting to see them mention whatever happened to Abomination, which would require a Hulk to be present in the universe, because of course it would. I’m also going to assume Doctor Strange won’t die because they sort of teased a Doctor Strange 2, have introduced magic, which means there needs to be a master of magic within the universe, and the character has been heavily under used to just kill off so quickly. Those are the characters I’m fairly certain won’t die.
As far as retirements, that’s a little trickier. Retiring characters are interesting to predict because they’re essentially deaths with the potential to come back, as Iron Man did after Avengers: Age of Ultron. But in the case of Endgame, I also think most retirements would have to be considered semi-permanent both from a plot stakes standpoint as well as from a contractual obligation standpoint. It’s safe to say that a number of these actors, such as Chris Hemsworth and Robert Downey Junior, are probably tired of playing these roles. They’re both physically and mentally grueling as well as I’m sure repetitive after this many years. Even Stephen Amell is retiring from Arrow and that’s not nearly as big of an enterprise as any of the first generation Avengers roles, nor has it been running as long. So while it’s hard to specifically guess based on any hard evidence which characters will retire, but not die, it’s safe to assume that a number of them will.
I believe Tony Stark is retiring. Not dying but hanging up the suit permanently. I think killing him off doesn’t work because if we go back to his vision in Age of Ultron, he lives to the end. The fact that he wasn’t snapped away also leads me to believe this. The first trailer tried to imply he might die in space, but then they did away with that theory with the latest trailer showing him in the white suit with the rest of the team. I say he makes it to the end and walks away so he can finally have a family with Pepper. I wouldn’t be surprised if Rhodes died as a straw that finally broke the camel’s back moment though.
Hawkeye is retiring. It’s way past time. Especially after introducing a wife and not two, but three children, including a new born. I’m sure at least some if not all of his family was snapped away, leading him to become Ronin, but as I already said, I don’t believe the snap is permanent. Hank Pym is either retiring or dying, but I see no value in killing him off after introducing his wife who was believed to be dead, so I think retirement is what ultimately happens. Hulk will most likely imply some form of retirement but Banner will still be around a while longer, until they’ve introduced a Hulk replacement. Sadly, I don’t think we’ll ever get a Planet Hulk scenario after the events of Thor: Ragnarok.
As I said, I could see Rhodes dying, but retiring is more likely in my honest opinion. Loki will be revived, which I think is garbage because he wasn’t killed in the snap. But as he is both the trickster and has a show coming in the new Disney streaming service, it’s just impossible that he’s dead unless the show is a flashback, which I doubt is the case. So while he should be dead already and remain as such, I think he’s coming back to life. Gotta love those Infinity stones.
Vision is currently dead, but I see him getting revived at the end once they’ve defeated Thanos and gotten the Infinity stones back. Or possibly half way through when they reverse the snap. In any case, I don’t think a character of that power level that’s only been in three movies and has an established romance that’s only just started to bud is getting killed off this quickly. In the same way, Scarlett Witch ain’t dying either. But let’s talk about actual deaths.
Bucky Barnes is dead. I’ll get into why later, but for me he’s easily on the chopping block. Gamora is staying dead. While I hate the fact that she’s dead, her death was a requirement of the Soul stone being found and as such she can’t be brought back to life or the Soul stone is taken out of play. And that’s not going to happen. So unless they do some garbage time travel story and just retcon the whole thing a la Days of Future Past, she’s done. But because she’s dead I absolutely believe Mantis and Nebula not only survive but become permanent Guardians of the Galaxy members for Vol. 3. I’m not nearly caught up enough on Agents of Shield to confidently make a prediction for Coulson, but assuming the show isn’t on its last legs, I don’t see him dying again after already having been resurrected once. You also need some continuous Shield members in the MCU for continuity into the next Phase. Maria Hill I could see being permanently killed off though. Nick Fury will survive but there’s a reason for that which I’ll get into later. If he is actually a Skrull though, I could see the Skrull version of him dying and the real version being revealed to still be alive. You are going to lose a lot of B and C recurring characters, but which ones I can’t say for sure.
The one debatable character for me is Thor. I don’t believe Thor will be killed off for two main reasons. The first is that he is the only surviving member of the Asgardian royal family. I just can’t see the entire bloodline being killed off. Especially after he finally got his full power mastery in Thor: Ragnarok and got a new boss level axe in Infinity War. I also think his presence is extremely important for continuity. The next Phase is going to focus heavily on space, from what I’ve heard. Thor would absolutely be a main link between space and Earth, at least for establishing the foundational transition to this new Phase. Yes there are other characters relevant to space such as of course the Guardians of the Galaxy and even Captain Marvel, but the link between Earth and space was established in the MCU by Thor. I think he’s the ambassador into the next Phase. I predict he ends up retiring a small ways into the next Phase and ultimately reestablishing Asgard on a new planet. Killing him off kind of prevents this.
At the same time though, a very good argument can be made for why Thor will die. For starters, there have been multiple clues/threats going back to at least Thor: The Dark World about the extermination of the Asgardian royal family. Removing Asgard as a main player also opens up a new world of possibilities in space rather than focusing on the same characters/races. Chris Hemsworth is also one of those first generation actors that is probably ready to hang up the cape. So while I don’t see him dying, in this film at least, I absolutely understand why people would predict that he will.
For me the most important death that I believe absolutely will happen is Captain America, or more specifically Steve Rogers. Captain America is The First Avenger. He has served his country and the world for more than 70 years, if you count the ice nap as active duty. He starts off by saying that he has the right to die for his country just like any other man (not an exact quote). He is the first super hero that ever lived. At least until Wolverine finally gets introduced. It would be poetic, logical, and emotionally moving for him to be killed in action saving the world. Especially if Bucky dies first. Because as has been said multiple times, and was the theme of The Winter Soldier, they’re in it together “till the end of the line”. What more impactful ending could there be than Bucky Barnes and Captain America dying together in the line of duty after having both been resurrected from death at different times? I believe that Captain America will ultimately be the one that kills Thanos but that he will die in the process. It will be a glorious moment that will make us all cry.
Post Endgame Predictions
As I’ve already said, Avengers: Endgame is not the end of the MCU. It’s just the end of Phase 3. Phase 4 will happen and we already have a number of movies confirmed. So I just want to quickly give a rundown of some of my predictions for the next one to two Phases of the MCU to occur in no particular order.
Thor establishes a new Asgard with Valkyrie taking his place as an on call Avenger from space.
Iron Heart is introduced as the next generation Iron Man/Person.
Captain Marvel becomes the new front man of the Avengers in place of Iron Man.
She-Hulk is introduced and then Hulk/Bruce Banner retires fully.
Nick Fury dies or retires, not in relation to Endgame, and Black Widow becomes director of Shield. I could see Maria Hill also taking over Shield but that seems too small a move.
Vision and Scarlett Witch have a child/children.
Falcon becomes the new Captain America.
Nebula becomes a permanent member of the Guardians of the Galaxy.
Mutants will be introduced but not as a full on X-Men franchise.
The next great villain will be Galactus which means Fantastic Four will be introduced into the MCU.
*Even since I wrote this post, but before publishing it, a host of new announcements have been made my Disney/Marvel about future MCU content. It seems that a number of characters are getting their own show including The Winter Solider, Scarlett Witch/Vision, Falcon, and others. While I have not altered my original predictions here, I now am more inclined to believe we’re going to get some kind of time stone scenario where everything is reversed because way too many characters seem to be getting shows. Granted it’s quite possible that some of these will be set in the past/before Infinity War/Endgame.
Sadly it took me longer than I expected to finish Spider-Man (PS4) so my review didn’t get published until last week. So now this post, which I had actually starting planning a couple weeks ago, looks like an unoriginal idea in response to the recent Insomniac Games interview where they said “Spider-Man is the Iron Man of Marvel console games.” The idea behind this quote is that Spider-Man, with its 3.3 million units sold in the first three days of release, is only the start of what I guess I’ll call the MGU (Marvel Games Universe). Due to its success, we can now expect to see a whole host of, hopefully interconnected, games set in the same Marvel universe following some of our favorite heroes.
I like the idea of an MGU. I think it’s a wonderful idea that hasn’t been done well before. We have some franchises that connect several characters and games indirectly like Castlevania, Final Fantasy, and of course Super Mario. We also have countless franchises that connect many games together directly like Uncharted, God of War, and Yakuza. But what both of these types of games fail to do is connect multiple playable characters directly across several games while also allowing each game and character to stand alone in their own right. The only franchises I can think of that do both even relatively well are Devil May Cry and Metal Gear, and I don’t necessarily think either does it exceptionally well. Certainly not compared to how plots work in the MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe).
I imagine such an endeavor being implemented in a big way, making use of multiple studios and quite possibly spanning to multiple platforms. But that’s not really what I want to talk about in this post. What I want to discuss is what else can be done by Insomniac Games with the Spider-Man map.
I was very impressed by the map/world in Spider-Man. I felt like it was a fairly well done recreation of New York that also integrates Marvel landmarks into it quite well. I did feel like it was smaller than ideal, but it was still quite the impressive, realistic, and highly interactive map. Some time ago, I wrote a post about how I thought it was extremely wasteful that game maps tend to get used only one time even if they have the potential for multiple projects. The original post focused on the map in Assassin’s Creed IV: Black Flag and how I thought it could easily be reused to make a completely unrelated pirate game, but I think the general concept of map reuse applies even more to that of Spider-Man.
Even without the idea of creating an MGU, I think the Spider-Man map can and should absolutely be reused for more Marvel games. Insomniac Games can make a great Marvel game. They’ve already proved that with Spider-Man. But there’s no reason the next Marvel game from them needs to take two plus years of development. Not because they should rush out more Marvel games, but because they already have a wealth of usable assets. They have a working New York City map complete with both Marvel and real world landmarks and a bustling, interactive population of NPCs. More specifically, they already have hideouts/bases of operation for multiple would be MGU characters, big and small.
The Spider-Man (PS4) Marvel themed map locations I’m aware of:
Nelson and Murdoc Law Office (Daredevil)
Alias Investigations (Jessica Jones)
Sanctum Sanctorum (Dr. Strange)
Embassy of Wakanda (Black Panther)
Rand Enterprises (Iron Fist)
E.A.R.T. Clinic (Cardiac)
Damage Control HQ (Iron Man)
Avenger’s Tower (Iron Man/Every Active Avenger)
This wealth of Marvel Easter Egg locations can be the staging area for countless other games set in New York. And with the Avenger’s Tower other characters not usually based in New York can visit the city for an adventure as well. Even Stan Lee appears in the game. So the question becomes why make an entirely new map for the next game when they can rightfully save the time and just change out the character and gameplay for a fraction of the development time and cost?
Let’s take Daredevil as a prime example. Hell’s Kitchen is a district on the map. Matt Murdock’s law office is already located in the game. Daredevil operates on the streets and rooftops of New York City. His main means of transportation is on foot mostly by climbing, hopping, and occasionally swinging from building to building. His fight style is mixed martial arts that’s fast paced, fluid, and a bit heavier than that of Spider-Man. He operates solely at night, which exists in Spider-Man, and even fights Kingpin, the first boss in Spider-Man. If they reuse this map, much of the game is already done. They would just have to change the character render(s), climbing, and fighting as far as gameplay. Most of the development would just need to go into writing a new story and altering the current enemies and bosses. Is that still a lot of work? Of course. Is it as much work as building an entirely new map from scratch including NPCs? Absolutely not.
Because of the interconnected nature of comics, this is a rare opportunity where it not only makes sense, but is the right decision within the canon of the world to reuse the same map to make multiple Marvel character games. The shorter development time also means lower production costs which allows for an opportunity to create games for more obscure characters that might not be able to get a game greenlit with a AAA budget. Take Jessica Jones for instance. The idea of putting in the same amount of time and resources as was used for Spider-Man to create a game for her is unrealistic. It wouldn’t sell as well and probably wouldn’t be action heavy enough to appeal to a wider gaming audience. But Spider-Man already has a working camera/photography system and a perfect map for a game starring her, so why not make one with recycled assets?
While not every Marvel character could have a game set in this map, there are a host of characters that it would work perfectly for. Even characters not normally based in New York could still work as visiting heroes staying at the Avenger’s Tower.
Some characters that could work well in the Spider-Man map:
Venom (if we want to go down that road)
All the other Spider-Totems
I don’t know what games are in the works or projected to be made in the MGU, but I think it would be a real waste to just throw out a perfectly good map just because we’ve already played a game on it. If implemented well, I would have no problem playing any number of different games featured on the same map. Especially if they were all connected via story and Easter Eggs. They could even have the games be interactive where if you’ve played one it affects things in other maps.
Let me be very clear on one key issue within this discussion. I’m fine with playing multiple games on the same map, but I expect those saved development costs to be transferred to me, the end user. Spider-Man cost me $80 (Deluxe Edition). If you read my review then you know that I felt that was too high for such a short game. Especially considering that Insomniac Games usually releases games in the $30 – $40 price bracket. So if they do start reusing that map to save time and money, which I believe they should, I would also expect to see lower release prices. Even more so if these Marvel games will continue to be in the 20 – 30 hour category for the platinum completion.
It’s a good map and it definitely has the potential to spawn a number of other great games. How did you feel about the map in Spider-Man? Would you like to see other games produced on it and how much would you be willing to pay for them?
I really liked the first Ant-Man (2015). It’s a very small, pun not intended, very personal story about a man just trying to do right by his kid while also trying to do the right thing and be the hero his kid wants him to be. And I think the story is made even stronger by the fact that he, Scott Lang, is ultimately recruited by Hank Pym, because he’s literally in the exact same situation. In a lot of ways it’s a story about fathers trying to give their daughters the lives they deserve. It’s not a huge plot with a super villain that’s threatening the whole world. The antagonist is just a scientist trying to make a name for himself with a technology that if put in the wrong hands could have terrible consequences. And yes it could end up changing the world, but the narrative keeps the story very enclosed within San Francisco to a small number of people. But that’s not what I wanted from the sequel.
Ant-Man & the Wasp is set about two years after Captain America 3: Civil War and at the same time as Avengers: Infinity War, which Ant-Man does not appear in. In fact, it’s not until the very end of Ant-Man & the Wasp that they even make reference to Thanos and it’s very clear that’s it’s already too late for Ant-Man to even consider getting involved with that problem. Ant-Man & the Wasp is also a small scale plot with a limited number of players that again centers on the idea of fathers trying to protect and please their daughters. The difference is that in this film, romance, for both fathers from the first film, plays a larger role in the narrative. In many ways I would say this plot is even smaller than the first film. It’s not about trying to protect the world from a certain technology. There’s no evil scientist. Really there’s not even a proper villain. The film plays a lot more like Snatch (2000) where you have a number of different groups all seeking the same object for their own purposes, but none of them are out to do anything particularly good or bad with said object.
One character, and his cronies, is out to sell the object for profit, but he’s not a super villain or particularly threatening. He doesn’t even really hurt anyone. He just wants the money. And at the beginning of the film he sincerely offers Team Ant-Man the chance to work together with him for profit, but they say no. The second group, which was sold as the villain in the marketing, is by no means a villain. She has a legitimate problem that is life threatening and she believes that it can only be solved by robbing Team Ant-Man so she’s trying to do that. But she doesn’t have some nefarious end goal and she doesn’t actually want to hurt people. She’s just in a bad situation. Finally, you have Team Ant-Man and they’re just as selfish as everyone else. They have a goal that won’t help anyone outside of Hank and Hope. It’s not going to hurt anyone, but by no means is it heroic or particularly noble. It’s just a self-serving goal that will enrich their personal lives. And it won’t even help Scott. In fact, the entire film is about how Hank and Hope are forcing Scott to help them even though he’s on house arrest with a few days left in his sentence and if he gets caught using the Ant-Man suit or leaving his house he’ll have to go back to prison and lose his daughter. So really the movie isn’t even about Ant-Man being a hero. It’s about Hank and Hope making Ant-Man help them get something they really want.
The problem with this small, in many ways pointless narrative, is that it takes place after having already seen Captain America 3: Civil War, which is mentioned a number of times, and Avengers: Infinity War. In terms of Ant-Man, I wanted more. This is no longer the ex-convict just trying to get his life back together. This is a man who fought alongside the Avengers, against other Avengers, and lived. This is a man who we believed had escaped with Captain America at the end of Civil War. Not to mention, we’ve already seen Avengers: Infinity War. Who cares about this little vignette about the lives of the Pym family? I expect Ant-Man to be playing at Avengers level now. That doesn’t mean every Ant-Man movie needs to have other Avengers in it, but it does mean that the stories have to really matter. In Thor: Ragnarok, Asgard was destroyed. In Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, the entire universe was saved from a mad celestial trying to replace all life with himself. In Doctor Strange, an infinity stone was revealed and the world was almost plunged into darkness by an evil being from a magical dimension. Ant-Man & the Wasp, which is not a debut film for the main title character, is about the same scale as Spider-Man: Homecoming as far as importance. Except Scott Lang isn’t a high school kid. And even in that Iron Man shows up. This film just under does it in a time where the MCU and the character are way past the kid gloves.
I don’t want it to seem like the film was badly written, because it wasn’t. It was much funnier than the first one. The acting was great, including that of Michael Peña reprising his role as the over talkative friend. And most importantly, they really leaned into technology in this one. In the first movie, shrinking is used sparingly. It’s an origin film where Scott is just learning how to use it and really it’s under-utilized outside of a few fight sequences and sneaking around. In Ant-Man & the Wasp they use shrinking and growing a ton and it’s great. It was used realistically, as in they actually use it for pretty much all the things you would use it for if you had that technology at your fingertips. My only real complaint about the technology aspect was that way too many malfunctions occurred. It’s fair for a malfunction to happen once, especially at a really crucial moment. But there were multiple scenes where Scott’s suit, and only Scott’s suit, was malfunctioning. This was used for comic relief multiple times. But this is the second movie. By now the bugs should have been ironed out. Especially when they’re doing stuff like shrinking entire buildings and growing ants to the size of people. It just felt very lazy to keep playing the suit not working card over and over.
As per all MCU films, the movie looked great. The shrinking and growing effects were very clean. The cinematography was solid. The costumes looked good. The sound was fine. I was happy with the soundtrack. It’s by every measureable standard a modern day Marvel film. But it was by no means in the top five or probably even top 10 MCU films. In a lot of ways it felt pointless. It introduced the Wasp and possibly a couple other important reoccurring characters, but the film itself didn’t accomplish much. Like they very well could have sent the Wasp with Ant-Man in Civil War, which is brought up in this film, and it would have accomplished exactly the same thing. Unless they really leverage the two other possibly important characters introduced in future films, this was pretty much the same thing we got in Ant-Man except now he has a partner. Ant-Man & the Wasp is not a bad film, but I could literally tell you everything you need to know about it in one sentence. In a lot of ways it’s one of the only films in the MCU where I could say you could really just skip it and it probably won’t affect the rest of the MCU, or your experience of it, that much.