- 2,304
- 2,734
You can see Tiamut's hand in the header
He's big
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You can see Tiamut's hand in the header
I made I made almost all profiles for Injustice and the DC Animated Movies verse so it's easy to imagine what you must feel :/
And I only spoiled myself two things Ajak and the Tiamut feat for now lolEternals is the worst Marvel movie when it comes to hiding spoilers
Imagine if tom was playing în itEternals is the worst Marvel movie when it comes to hiding spoilers
Imagine if tom was playing în it
Eternals marketing team be like- I guess nobody would notice the Mountain sized fingers in the background in this TV spot
This just makes things more and more confusingAuthor Tara Bennett's final word on the matter of canonicity, which makes it seem like perhaps the book isn't intended to make any official statements on canon, but is more focused on covering the history of projects creatively produced by Marvel Studios, not so much on Marvel Television.
For what it's worth, when searching through Reddit, I found some more direct quotes apparently taken directly from the book.
Supposedly the only real mention of AOS in the book:
"Although the character of Coulson would eventually topline ABC's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. television series, which began airing in September 2013, Whedon is quick to confirm that Coulson's death in The Avengers is definitive, and that the TV show "always was a separate thing- it was really separate from the movies. I was also clear: We can do it in the TV show, but we can't do it in the movies. 'Hey, this beloved character you thought was dead is back' is the worst thing the sequels could do.""
Supposedly the Marvel TV section:
"By this point in Marvel Studios' lifespan, Kevin Feige, Louis D'Esposito, and Victoria Alonso- along with their internal creative executive producers-were finding themselves progressively at major impasses with the powers that be at Marvel Entertainment in New York.
Around this time, on the business side, a progression of choices made by New York would impact the continuing development slate of Marvel Studios- and that impact would be ongoing, years into the future. In 2013, when the 2012 deadline for 20th Century Fox to make a sequel to their 2003 Daredevil film lapsed, Matt Murdock and Elektra reverted back to Marvel's pool of usable characters. New Line likewise gave Blade back to Marvel in 2012. And when Sony's Ghost Rider franchise fizzled with 2011's Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance, he also came back in-house, along with Sony's license for a never-produced Luke Cage movie. Last but not least, Lionsgate's license for The Punisher also reverted back to Marvel Entertainment.
While many observers assumed that this entire stable of characters would go directly into Marvel Studios' movie development process, it was decided by Marvel Entertainment's higher-ups that because the movie side was already deeply committed to their successful Avengers characters, and the impending Guardians of the Galaxy characters, that the returnees would instead help build a planned TV empire under the direct control of Marvel Entertainment (entirely separate from Marvel Studios). The film side had no control over those characters, despite their interest in developing them. Instead, they all went to Marvel Entertainment. Ghost Rider appeared in Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D, and the others were placed in different streaming series."
It's being worked on ATMSo will we have a Carnage profile (if it hasn't been made already)?
AlrightIt's being worked on ATM
i watched it and liked it a lot myself, they gave into the goofsAlright
Going to see the movie either next monday or tuesday so I can see if that's at least somehow better than the first one
I mean, it was the same thing with the first one anywayI'd say it's one of those movies where it's best to just turn off your brain and enjoy the show
TrueI mean, it was the same thing with the first one anyway
This just makes things more and more confusing
This isn't about the canonicity of the projects it's moreso about the development and where the thought process was with the shows clashing with what the already established and being stuck with on the film side of things just allowing the properties that they had access to but didn't want to throw into the universe when they were sticking with the characters and story already established in the films to be used in Television and explorer there.Supposedly the Marvel TV section:
"By this point in Marvel Studios' lifespan, Kevin Feige, Louis D'Esposito, and Victoria Alonso- along with their internal creative executive producers-were finding themselves progressively at major impasses with the powers that be at Marvel Entertainment in New York.
Around this time, on the business side, a progression of choices made by New York would impact the continuing development slate of Marvel Studios- and that impact would be ongoing, years into the future. In 2013, when the 2012 deadline for 20th Century Fox to make a sequel to their 2003 Daredevil film lapsed, Matt Murdock and Elektra reverted back to Marvel's pool of usable characters. New Line likewise gave Blade back to Marvel in 2012. And when Sony's Ghost Rider franchise fizzled with 2011's Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance, he also came back in-house, along with Sony's license for a never-produced Luke Cage movie. Last but not least, Lionsgate's license for The Punisher also reverted back to Marvel Entertainment.
While many observers assumed that this entire stable of characters would go directly into Marvel Studios' movie development process, it was decided by Marvel Entertainment's higher-ups that because the movie side was already deeply committed to their successful Avengers characters, and the impending Guardians of the Galaxy characters, that the returnees would instead help build a planned TV empire under the direct control of Marvel Entertainment (entirely separate from Marvel Studios). The film side had no control over those characters, despite their interest in developing them. Instead, they all went to Marvel Entertainment. Ghost Rider appeared in Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D, and the others were placed in different streaming series.
Considering Bennett also said this along with other things I it directly does speak to what's canon as it's the same book that spoke on and confirmed Agent Carters canonicityAuthor Tara Bennett's final word on the matter of canonicity, which makes it seem like perhaps the book isn't intended to make any official statements on canon, but is more focused on covering the history of projects creatively produced by Marvel Studios, not so much on Marvel Television.
For those who hadn't read Marvel's newest book, this news resulted in both confusion and frustration, with some stating that Agent Carter must fall in the category of non-canon. In regard to these claims, Bennet posted , "Please go read the book:"
"Please go read the book where it clearly states how each show works in the MCU. You are not tweeting what we wrote.""
There's also this too using the same quote straight from the book along with further elaboration from BennettFor anyone whose still not convinced either this is the final word on this:
"Lastly, the Marvel author chose to spell it all out in a final tweet stating that the book is "MS's [Marvel Studios'] history" and it "says what you want to know:"
"We just spent 3.5 years writing 250K words in a book that lays out MS's [Marvel Studios'] history w/ the TV shows. It's all in the book with quotes from the players. I'm not making statements for MS when the book is their history & says what you want to know."
In The Story of Marvel Studios , one of the only direct mentions of Agents of SHIELD comes off a quote from Joss Whedon when he confirms that Coulson's death in The Avengers is described as "definitive." According to Whedon, Agents of SHIELD "always was a separate thing — it was really separate from the movies. I was also clear: We can do it in the TV show, but we can't do it in the movies. 'Hey, this beloved character you thought was dead is back' is the worst thing the sequels can do.""
Pretty bad take if you ask meThe Marvels Director Says Captain America Is The Villain Of Infinity War
The Marvels director, Nia DaCosta, is sharing her hot take on Captain America. Ultimately, he's the villain in Infinity War. Here's what she has to say.www.giantfreakinrobot.com
Worm?I now this isn’t Mcu related but would anyone be interested in a worm general discussion thread for newcomers? I know it’s already done but I think it would be cool to discuss this with other people
The parahumans verse, it’s kinda like mha but if quirks popped up in like the 70’s or 80’s and was set in are worldWorm?
What is thatIf anyone is interested in reading worm here’s the link
https://parahumans.wordpress.com/2011/06/11/1-1/
but it’s a web novel just to throw that out there
A story that’s kinda like mha but if quirks popped up in like the 70’s or 80’s and was set in are world. At least that’s what I got so far from what I’ve readWhat is that
they're a little annoying i guess but i don't find them frustratingI was going to post a rant on these ads that are taking up a third of the page on mobile, but I want to just ask, are they frustrating for you all as they are for me?
Anyway, did have a wacky dream but no Marvel stuff this time.