{TV} The Falcon and the Winter Soldier

[Syegfryed]

Thanos was not prepared when Thor showed up with Stormbreaker. It had less to do with how powerful Thor was and more to do with catching Thanos off guard.

“Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger.” - Gandalf (J.R.R. Tolkien)

"No matter how subtle the Wizard, a knife between the shoulder blades will seriously cramp his style" - Vlad Taltos (Steven Brust)

No, not rly, Thanos in that movie without the stones was just fucking everyone up, it made no sense.

Thor with both weapons should have demolished him without the power stone.

[Egomaniac]

No, not rly, Thanos in that movie without the stones was just fucking everyone up, it made no sense.

Thor with both weapons should have demolished him without the power stone.

Based on what? I mean, if anything, Movie Thanos is completely underpowered in comparison to his comics version.

[Adamas102]

yes, it is a step too far, specially when thanos used twice to get a fucked up arm.

It is hulk, the best healing factor in the universe marvel, sure, let him have a crisp army for a bit, but later, especially in Tony funeral, it should be healed already. Hulk was done rly dirty in the Mcu and is nothing like his movie with norton.

Thanos' arm was badly burnt after the first snap and completely unusable after the second (much worse than Hulk with one snap). Meanwhile Hulk was still swinging that arm around in the big final battle.

You seem to be fine with him having a crisp arm "for a bit", but then just arbitrarily decide how long that should be. No one else has been shown to fully recover from using all 6 stones to snap, so why is a week/a month/a year too long? If he recovers from the damage partway through the next movie he's in, that still solidifies him as having the most impressive healing factor we've seen.

[Shadowferal]

No, not rly, Thanos in that movie without the stones was just fucking everyone up, it made no sense.

I agree. But this is the MCU. Most anyone that is de facto a power in the comics isn't so much in the movies. I wouldn't be surprised if they have Shang Chi going toe to toe with the Hulk. Ridiculous, I know. But that's how they've been doing things.

[Syegfryed]

Based on what? I mean, if anything, Movie Thanos is completely underpowered in comparison to his comics version.

MCU? previous fights? Thor and hulk are also A LOT underpowered compared to comic versions

Thanos' arm was badly burnt after the first snap and completely unusable after the second (much worse than Hulk with one snap). Meanwhile Hulk was still swinging that arm around in the big final battle.

But he use the stones to destroy the stones, that pulse of energy is what made his arm fucked up, it was too much, after the first snap he was in better shape than hulk

You seem to be fine with him having a crisp arm "for a bit", but then just arbitrarily decide how long that should be. No one else has been shown to fully recover from using all 6 stones to snap, so why is a week/a month/a year too long? If he recovers from the damage partway through the next movie he's in, that still solidifies him as having the most impressive healing factor we've seen.

the dudes who wrote the movie said it is forever, is bullshit, and yes for a bit, it should not last long, because is motherfucking hulk

[Egomaniac]

MCU? previous fights? Thor and hulk are also A LOT underpowered compared to comic versions

So is Thanos... so it works out

But he use the stones to destroy the stones, that pulse of energy is what made his arm fucked up, it was too much, after the first snap he was in better shape than hulk

He really wasn't. The first snap fucked him up. Watch Infinity War again.

[Ausr]

First of all, I'll refer you back to my comment on basic AF storytelling. Literally storytelling 101 for these things.

Secondly, he wasn't nerfed. Refusing to make an appearance plays into the first point. Its a storytelling tool to shift focus to other characters... it is an ensemble cast, after all. And his power level was no less than what it normally is, just because Banner was the dominant personality, doesn't mean he was any weaker.

This is basic bitch stuff, and I'm not looking to repeat this again. You'll either get it or your won't. Again, that's a you issue.

I have a feeling Winter Blossom did not pay attention at all throughout the MCU if s/he's missing the most basic bitch story telling and backstory about why the characters are the way they are. Like not even getting why Hulk refused to come out during Infinity War. Or dumb shit like why Vision wasn't as powerful in that movie as well.

Like I'm sure if Bruce explained it to a 5 year old, he would still miss it. Don't know why people are even replying him.

[Syegfryed]

So is Thanos... so it works out

not much, since again, thanos without the stones seemed stronger than thanos with stones.

He really wasn't. The first snap fucked him up. Watch Infinity War again.

one may think it was the giant fucking electric bugaloo empowered axe deep into his chest, but sure i guess.

[Adamas102]

But he use the stones to destroy the stones, that pulse of energy is what made his arm fucked up, it was too much, after the first snap he was in better shape than hulk

No, that's simply wrong. Presumably Thanos used the Time Stone to heal the chest wound from Stormbreaker (since the wound and damage to the armor is completely gone), but the damage he sustained from doing the snap wasn't reversed. In the final scene of Infinity War he was limping and stumbling, the only damage visible being what the one snap did to him. He doesn't do the second snap to destroy the stones until later and the damage is even more extensive after that, his arm completely withered and unusable.

Meanwhile Hulk is sprinting into battle (after helping to save those trapped under the rubble of the Avengers compound). He might have been more affected by putting on the gauntlet (because unlike Thanos who added the stones one by one, Hulk was taking them all at once), but after one snap he was in FAR better shape than Thanos.

[Egomaniac]

not much, since again, thanos without the stones seemed stronger than thanos without stones.

You wanna run that one by me again?

one may think it was the giant fucking electric bugaloo empowered axe deep into his chest, but sure i guess.

Sure, the Axe fucked him up too. But you can clearly see his condition gets far worse after the snap

[Endus]

yes, it is a step too far, specially when thanos used twice to get a fucked up arm.

Thanos is canonically stronger and more resilient than Hulk, in the MCU.

It is hulk, the best healing factor in the universe marvel, sure, let him have a crisp army for a bit, but later, especially in Tony funeral, it should be healed already. Hulk was done rly dirty in the Mcu and is nothing like his movie with norton.

This is just wrong, on every stage.

Hulk's healing factor isn't firmly established in the MCU. The closest they really get to talking about it, if I recall, is an offhand comment by Banner that he tried to kill himself and "the other guy" spat the bullet out, and that's not necessarily healing, the change could've happened as he pulled the trigger and the bullet might have just rattled around in his mouth.

Also, the movie with Ed Norton is literally the same character, the same way Rhodie is played by Don Cheadle and is the same as the character in the first Iron Man film. Both roles were re-cast. The Ed Norton film is literally the 2nd film in the MCU.

You seem to be confusing stuff from the comics, particularly Earth-616, with the character that exists in Earth-199999. And that's not how Marvel has ever worked, since inventing their multiverse concept. They're separate takes on the same base concept and pretty much every detail could change between universes, particularly power levels.

- - - Updated - - -

No, that's simply wrong. Presumably Thanos used the Time Stone to heal the chest wound from Stormbreaker (since the wound and damage to the armor is completely gone), but the damage he sustained from doing the snap wasn't reversed. In the final scene of Infinity War he was limping and stumbling, the only damage visible being what the one snap did to him. He doesn't do the second snap to destroy the stones until later and the damage is even more extensive after that, his arm completely withered and unusable.

Meanwhile Hulk is sprinting into battle (after helping to save those trapped under the rubble of the Avengers compound). He might have been more affected by putting on the gauntlet (because unlike Thanos who added the stones one by one, Hulk was taking them all at once), but after one snap he was in FAR better shape than Thanos.

The series has consistently presented the damage the Stones inflict on the user being the inviolable price you pay for the power they provide. Same way you can't throw Gamora or Natasha off a cliff to get the Soul Stone and then just snap your fingers and bring them back. The Stones set a price, and the Stones don't allow that price to be shrugged off by anything.

And you can't tell me that a set of Stones that could literally unmake Hulk, cure Banner completely, make Banner never have existed, or anything else you can imagine, don't have the capacity to leave Hulk with permanent damage.

[Adamas102]

And you can't tell me that a set of Stones that could literally unmake Hulk, cure Banner completely, make Banner never have existed, or anything else you can imagine, don't have the capacity to leave Hulk with permanent damage.

Guessing you were responding to someone else? But yeah I see no issue with the damage from the stones being permanent, negating any and all healing factors.

That being said, Hulk did seem able to take the damage from a single snap better than Thanos did.

[Endus]

Guessing you were responding to someone else? But yeah I see no issue with the damage from the stones being permanent, negating any and all healing factors.

That being said, Hulk did seem able to take the damage from a single snap better than Thanos did.

Was expanding on what you'd said rather than contradicting it, sorry that wasn't clear.

[Adamas102]

Was expanding on what you'd said rather than contradicting it, sorry that wasn't clear.

Ah, right on!

[Syegfryed]

Thanos is canonically stronger and more resilient than Hulk, in the MCU.

in the movies? maybe, pretty sure i heard an interview saying hulk was stronger, but thanos fought more inteligent, thats why hw won the first fight

This is just wrong, on every stage.

Hulk's healing factor isn't firmly established in the MCU. The closest they really get to talking about it, if I recall, is an offhand comment by Banner that he tried to kill himself and "the other guy" spat the bullet out, and that's not necessarily healing, the change could've happened as he pulled the trigger and the bullet might have just rattled around in his mouth.

in the 2008 movie Bruce jump from a helicopter breaking his bones, in thor ragnarok he also jump from the spacehsip in bifrost breaking his bones, and both times hulk emerged unharmed, so yeah, that is healing factor., hulk dos have the best healing factor in the comics, last i checked, and if they are bringging a weak ass hulk the elast they could do was to bring the healing factor.

Also, the movie with Ed Norton is literally the same character, the same way Rhodie is played by Don Cheadle and is the same as the character in the first Iron Man film. Both roles were re-cast. The Ed Norton film is literally the 2nd film in the MCU.

The ed norton movie had a hulk ten times better than this one who is more like a giant gorila, it was a hulk who got stronger the more he got angrier, it had the sonic clap and the shockwaves by punching the ground, it was beauftiful.

if you are telling me is the "same" they downgraded the shit out of him.

- - - Updated - - -

And he was shown to be stronger than the hulk without stones. Kicked the guy’s ass and gave him ptsd.

he already had the power stone with him

[eschatological]

in the 2008 movie Bruce jump from a helicopter breaking his bones, in thor ragnarok he also jump from the spacehsip in bifrost breaking his bones, and both times hulk emerged unharmed, so yeah, that is healing factor., hulk dos have the best healing factor in the comics, last i checked, and if they are bringging a weak ass hulk the elast they could do was to bring the healing factor.

I was always under the impression that the Hulk's will to survive, his rage at any violent action towards him, makes him Hulk out and basically shrug off any potential damage. IE, when Bruce Banner puts a gun in his mouth and pulls the trigger, the Hulk rages out and the bullet does nothing but bounce around in his mouth - not that he shoots himself in the brain and then somehow heals.

[Egomaniac]

in the 2008 movie Bruce jump from a helicopter breaking his bones, in thor ragnarok he also jump from the spacehsip in bifrost breaking his bones, and both times hulk emerged unharmed, so yeah, that is healing factor., hulk dos have the best healing factor in the comics, last i checked, and if they are bringging a weak ass hulk the elast they could do was to bring the healing factor.


The ed norton movie had a hulk ten times better than this one who is more like a giant gorila, it was a hulk who got stronger the more he got angrier, it had the sonic clap and the shockwaves by punching the ground, it was beauftiful.

if you are telling me is the "same" they downgraded the shit out of him.

I don't know why you think jumping out of a helicopter is comparable to messing with the infinity gauntlet...

[RobertoCarlos]

This sounds like a 100% you issue. These Hulk "fans" you describe are, I assume, the kind that literally just want "Hulk smashes shit up" Hulk?

Seems like you don't know what character development actually is. And again, the Hulk that was taking pics and signing things wasn't just the Hulk. It was basically just his body. This isn't a new thing.

ease up.

Hulks entire character progression is 100% off screen. One minute he cant get it up, next minute hes perma hulk and wants to be a yoga instructor.

Its quite the change to do all off camera.

[DingDongKing]

Had written these thoughts elsewhere, so not going to retype it all. The show as a whole was really engaging, but had issues. Why? Because despite having 6 episodes of 45 minutes each (shave off 5 minutes for credits), it tried to put too much plot in with not enough time. Throw in even another 2 episodes and pace things out evenly, the series works fine. My biggest complaints were - Bucky's trauma wasn't dealt with properly, John's trauma wasn't explored properly, and Karli's arc was highly annoying. Annoying, you say? Yep, because she deserved more as the antagonist of the series. She more or less just devolves into misguided terrorist by the end of it, regardless of whether Sam dislikes labels or not. And a more nuanced portrayal would've elevated the series to another level. And that last line sums up the plot. Lacking nuance. Also, too many Super Soldiers.

But when you're dealing with 'big ideas' like repatriating millions and post traumatic stress disorder, you NEED more nuance. Doing surface level service to such concepts is what lets the show down. It lacked the balls to fully commit. In that respect, Wandavision dealt with grief/loss - its central themes - far better. Thematically I can see what Falcon and Winter Soldier was trying to do. It asks good questions of how the world treats its heroes, and how even the identity of a hero is dependent on what people visualise a hero as, which generally ties into the racial identities of all hero/god symbols across human history. It's all about identity, and the struggle for it. And the secondary theme could be dealing with being wronged by the very world that asks you to 'save' it. Sam, Bucky, John, Sharon, Enfys Nest are all trying to find their identity and place in the world. And by extension, Sam, Bucky, John, Sharon, Enfys and Isiah have all been wronged. All of them (bar Enfys) have been treated as disposable heroes. Even Zemo has been wronged, though it's a stretch to say he tried to save anyone but his own family. So yeah, there's good thematic elements at play.

I guess is that they'll learn from this. I'm glad they're looking at a Captain America film for Sam's character. That said, it'll be waste unless they can have the same level of emotional heft to his character that Steve had. And I don't care if Bucky's name isn't in the title of the film, he needs to be a main player in the story and not just a weapon. I liked him in the show, but his journey did shrift for the more 'fun' elements of the series, to the point that he sometimes became comic relief. All in all? It's a solid 7/10. I think they did very well by the characters, but the plot struggled. The MCU as a whole hasn't really done political content well. And that's okay. But maybe it needs to play to its strengths, and not overcommit to a theme or plot that it can't fully deliver on. I hope there is a Season 2, but I want more character, less big plot, less super soldiers and more nuance. NUANCE.

[Illusions]

Is the new Captain America movie the only follow up that has been confirmed? Is that in place of a season 2, or in addition? I assume we probably don't know.

I'd like to know that as well, though - I heard the director of the series is up for a season 2, but I don't think the series will get a second season (nor will Wandavision) because they're meant to be mini-series anyway, no?

I wonder what Cap4 will revolve around, think it might be just a little painful to see the lack of Chris Evans in a Cap movie, and what would it even mean for other characters like Bucky. His ("villain") arc more or less ended in Civil War, and I'm not sure if a Cap movie would be the place to explore Bucky's new beginnings as well.

edit: I also agree with poster above in that the show felt a little short, even though overall running time was similar to Wandavision's. And it's not the usual 'ah I wish it was longer' of a good movie/series, but more of a 'I wish the show had dissected the themes portrayed even further'. Sometimes it felt slightly shallow.