• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

MCU Phase 4 General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wanda Apologists explaining why Wanda is in the right after she intentionally threatens the lives of millions and the fabric of multiverse a so she can be in love with a robot.
he-is-speaking-guy-explaining-with-a-whiteboard.gif
Isnt Evil Wanda the one doing that or did I miss something?

But yeah even tho I love Wanda her villain side is showing (Which is fair shes a villain in the comics some).
 
there's no "evil wanda" as far as we know. Hell, she clearly acts like she knows our strange personally
There were two clearly different Wandas in the trailer. Potentially 3, but that's doubtful. Regardless my meme applies to both Wandas, cuz you know the stans are gonna defend either Wanda regardless of what either of em do.
 
There were two clearly different Wandas in the trailer. Potentially 3, but that's doubtful. Regardless my meme applies to both Wandas, cuz you know the stans are gonna defend either Wanda regardless of what either of em do.
Good thing both the hypocrisy and the indication that it's 199999 wanda can be found in the exact same sentence then.
 
The events of WandaVision still happened for normal Wanda which the writers seem to desperately want us not to think too hard on how ****** up it is lmao
Fair, she wasn't the hero in that story and it was a very ****** up thing she did. The whole "They'll never understand what you gave up for them" is dumb, loved the show but it was dumb.


I had just thought we where getting two Wanda's and one was specifically the evil/corrupted variant.
 
Also the story isn't asking us to just ignore the moral implications though, it actively defends them for some reason. It seems like the writers of forgot that they had to wrap up that theme up satisfyingly in the finale and just had to shoehorn these odd pieces of dialogue like "don't let them make you the villain", "it could have been a thousand more she imprisoned" and "they'll never understand what you sacrificed" to tell us she's good which was really off-putting. In Iron Man, Tony Stark sold weapons that cost countless lives in the Middle East which is quite evil but the writers treat that as part of his character development where he learns from it and becomes a better person and the movie doesn't try to say "it could have been a thousand more innocents he bombed with his weapons".

I mean maybe it won't be so distracting to me if they just don't try to convince me how misunderstood she is and just set-up the anti-hero/villain-ish arc in Doctor Strange 2 which seems to be what they're doing anyway and would work just as fine. Either that or address it properly and she learns from her mistakes.
 
Well from my understanding Hulk is more so an uncontrollable force of rage that Banner decides to use to help fight evil and I don't think Hulk as in the alter-ego was ever said to be that interested in stopping evil
That makes it okay for me. I don't like it when a hero does something bad but the story tries to present them as misundertood people who shouldn't blamed and it was just a small mistake that shouldn't be acknowledged. That's also why I prefer anti/nominal heroes like Jack Sparrow or Kratos, they do bad things but they don't hide behind morality and the story makes it clear they did something bad and justifying it isn't really an excuse
 
That makes it okay for me. I don't like it when a hero does something bad but the story tries to present them as misundertood people who shouldn't blamed and it was just a small mistake that shouldn't be acknowledged. That's also why I prefer anti/nominal heroes like Jack Sparrow or Kratos, they do bad things but they don't hide behind morality and the story makes it clear they did something bad and justifying it isn't really an excuse
which is even weirder because it's not like they had to do it, it seems like they are going to make Wanda an anti-hero anyway which makes justifying her actions really unnecessary
 
Well from my understanding Hulk is more so an uncontrollable force of rage that Banner decides to use to help fight evil and I don't think Hulk as in the alter-ego was ever said to be that interested in stopping evil
Eh not really, if he was so uncontrollable or wasn’t interested in helping then he wouldn’t help the avengers in the first film or in age of ultron. Heck he even tried to land where there were no people in avengers
 
That makes it okay for me. I don't like it when a hero does something bad but the story tries to present them as misundertood people who shouldn't blamed and it was just a small mistake that shouldn't be acknowledged. That's also why I prefer anti/nominal heroes like Jack Sparrow or Kratos, they do bad things but they don't hide behind morality and the story makes it clear they did something bad and justifying it isn't really an excuse
This is fair, its weird when a hero does a bad thing and its just treated as the people mad at them are in the wrong, makes the story more interesting when it is treated as a bad thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top