Marvel Cinematic Universe

Marvel Cinematic Universe

An Informative Essay by

Mitchell A. Quondam

The Marvel Cinematic Universe is a film franchise and shared fictional universe that is the setting of superhero films independently produced by Marvel Studios, based on characters that appear in publications by Marvel Comics. The shared universe of the films, much like the Marvel Universe in comic books, was established by crossing over common plot elements, settings, cast, and characters.
The entire continuity is produced by Kevin Fiege. Fiege said in April 2010 that constructing a shared film universe:

“...is daunting but it's fun. It's never been done before and that's kind of the spirit everybody's taking it in. The other filmmakers aren't used to getting actors from other movies that other filmmakers have cast, certain plot lines that are connected or certain locations that are connected, but I think ... everyone was on board for it and thinks that it's fun. Primarily because we've always remained consistent saying that the movie that we are making comes first. All of the connective tissue, all of that stuff is fun and is going to be very important if you want it to be. If the fans want to look further and find connections, then they're there. There are a few big ones obviously, that hopefully the mainstream audience will able to follow as well. But ... the reason that all the filmmakers are on board is that their movies need to stand on their own. They need to have a fresh vision, a unique tone, and the fact that they can interconnect if you want to follow those breadcrumbs is a bonus”

The first step of the Universe, titled Phase 1, was to set up an Avengers movie by introducing the members in individual films with a single cast. The first of these was Iron Man, starring Robert Downey Jr. in the titular role, which began the Avengers Initiative with a cameo from Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson). Next was the Incredible Hulk played by Edward Norton, which was tied to Iron Man with a cameo by Robert Downey Jr. Iron Man 2 heavily featured members of S.H.I.E.L.D, a popular group in the Marvel Universe, and, along with Nick Fury, added Scarlett Johansson as the Black Widow. Thor featured Nick Fury, Agent Coulson (played by Clark Gregg, who appeared in Iron Man and its sequel) and Hawkeye, played by Jeremy Renner. Lastly, Captain America (played by Chris Evans) featured Fury, and a plot device from Thor called the Tesseract (known in the comics as the Cosmic Cube) and ended with the first teaser for the Avengers. The next Step is Phase 2, a series that will introduce the Avengers 2. Phase 3 has been announced, and will feature new heroes Ant-Man, Doctor Strange, and possibly a new Hulk film.



People Involved
Directors/Producers
Kevin Fiege - Producer
Jon Favreau –Director (Iron Man 1&2)
Shane Black – Director (Iron Man 3)
Joe Johnston – Director (Captain America: The First Avenger)
Louis Leterrier – Director (Incredible Hulk)
Joss Whedon – Director (The Avengers/Avengers 2)
Edgar Wright – Director (Ant-Man)
Kenneth Branagh – Director (Thor)
Alan Taylor – Director (Thor: The Dark World)
James Gunn – Director (Guardians of the Galaxy)
Anthony & Joe Russo – Directors (Captain America: the Winter Soldier)

Cast
Iron Man – Robert Downey jr.
Thor – Chris Hemsworth
Captain America – Chris Evans
Bruce Banner/Hulk – Mark Ruffalo (previously Edward Norton)
Black Widow – Scarlett Johansson
Hawkeye – Jeremy Renner
Nick Fury – Samuel L. Jackson
Loki – Tom Hiddleston
War Machine –  Don Cheadle (previously Terrance Howard)
Red Skull – Hugo Weaving
Iron Monger – Jeff Bridges
Whiplash/Crimson Dynamo – Mickey Rourke
The Mandarin – Ben Kingsley
Bucky/Winter Soldier – Sebastian Stan



Released Films (In order of their release)  
Iron Man  
The Incredible Hulk  
Iron Man 2  
Thor  
Captain America  
The Avengers  

Upcoming Films (In order of their release)  
Iron Man 3  
Thor: The Dark World  
Captian America: The Winter Soldier  
Guardians of the Galaxy  
The Avengers 2  
Ant Man  
Doctor Strange  
A “Planet Hulk” film has been proposed before the release of…  
The Avengers 3


Continuity Issues 

There were only two casting issues in this continuity. The first was an Iron Man character named Rhodey AKA War Machine. Originally played by Terrance Howard, was replaced by Don Cheadle for Iron Man 2, and Cheadle will reprise his role in the future. The second recast was the Hulk. Edward Norton left the project and was replaced with Mark Ruffalo for the Avengers. For now, Ruffalo is also set to reprise his role in Avengers 2.

One of the issues often discussed is that Marvel does not own all of its products at the moment. Spider-Man currently resides at Sony, and Fox owns X-Men and Fantastic Four rights at the moment. This deal includes all of their villains. This causes issues as many heroes have common enemies. For example, Iron Man and Spider-Man both have Norman Osborn as a villain. In the comics he retired the Green Goblin moniker and rebranded himself Iron Patriot, and was a popular Iron Man villain for a long time. Likewise, Fantastic Four villain Galactus is an occasional foe of the Avengers.

In October 2012, Lauren Shuler Donner, the producer of 20th Century Fox's X-Men film series, expressed interest in having the X-Men characters appear in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Shuler Donner said, "I would love it. I personally have close ties to Marvel because of Kevin Feige, because Kevin worked for me. But to take our characters and mingle them in the way that they were written, yeah, absolutely." Mark Millar, who was hired in September 2012 to consult on all of Fox's future Marvel films, expressed similar sentiments in an interview, saying "Fox have said that they want to build a cohesive universe and I’d personally like this to work in complement to the Marvel one. It would be cool if these universes didn’t contradict each other so if you went to see Spidey, The Avengers, the X-Men, etc, as a viewer you would have no idea that all three are coming from different studios. I’d love to make it look like they’re all just happening in one place."

A minor crossover almost took place in the Avengers. Marvel Studios got permission from Sony Pictures to use the Oscorp building, a major location form the Amazing Spider-Man franchise. The building would have appeared in the skyline of Marvel’s New York, but unfortunately the rendering of the skyline was completed before the Oscorp building was out of the design stage. Also, as of October 2012, there are currently works of a short-term trade, where Fox will briefly hold the rights to Daredevil, and in return Marvel Studios receives the rights to Galactus and the Silver Surfer.

When Marc Webb, director of the Amazing Spider-Man was asked about expanding his Spider-Man universe over the course of several Spider-Man related movies, he replied “Think bigger” leading many to believe that he is trying to tie his Spider-Man, played by Andrew Garfield, into the Marvel Universe.

Proposals by Marvel

The following films have been proposed by Marvel, but have not begun writing or production yet:


Black Panther        Power Pack  
Cable                 Ka-Zar  
Heroes for Hire   Iron Fist  
Luke Cage solo Nighthawk  
Daredevil reboot Vision  
Cloak and Dagger Doctor Strange  
Dazzler

The Dark Knight Rises Review

A Blog by

Mitchell A. Quondam

 

The best thing about this movie is how satisfying it is. It doesn't leave you frustrated or confused. You can't really complain that it didn't explore certain ideas or follow through. By deciding to have an official ending to this trilogy's story, the themes surrounding Batman are very fresh. We don't know where he'll end up. It's not the same old thing about whether he can continue to be Batman or not. The conclusions are not as important as the feelings they invoke as they come about. Nolan is especially good at capturing the complete tension of actually not knowing what will happen and deeply questioning what you want to happen and why.

This movie is bigger than the previous two, far more ambitious. There are no obvious annoying weaknesses that usually come with films in general, especially blockbuster action movies. All of Nolan's movies have deep psychological themes and this takes those in another new direction. I thought Inception was hugely original and insightful about the way people think. That level of abstraction and depth is present in this film. Bane bursts into it, his reputation is quickly established. Nolan uses people's expectations and anticipation to the fullest. We are left to wonder about what has happened in the 8 years since the events of The Dark Knight. Why have the characters become the way they are now?

In the latter half, it does seem like the movie is trying to pull off so many different plot points and connections, but they all work. The cast is very large and impressive. You don't see "good acting". You see fascinating characters. They're just playing their part in the grand story that's being crafted. There are many unfamiliar faces but they all have a strange, unique look to them. We often see a person's flaws and previous decisions coming back to haunt them. They find out the hard way what mistakes they have made, where their limits are, where they lose control.

The score is almost tribal, very raw and energetic. You don't get much chance to pay attention to it but many parts of the movie are pounding with excitement. There are countless quotable lines and disturbing slices of dialogue. They cut deep. The Joker was a great character and this is a very different movie but the themes are just as dark, only perhaps indirectly. Underneath, it's very sinister. Writing and efficiency appear to be among Nolan's greatest strengths. The story has many layers that interweave and apparently they came in under budget.

The Visual effects were equally impressive.

Perhaps the most important thing about Catwoman is that she's completely believable. When she beats up men, you don't roll your eyes. She's feminine and powerful in her own way. She fits into the world and we completely understand her motivations. She doesn't have a huge role but a very important one.

I thought Christian Bale was overlooked in The Dark Knight especially. The movies hinge on him. Bruce Wayne's just a man but also incredibly inspirational. Bale's famous for completely committing to his roles and it pays off. Tom Hardy is impressive as Bane but I suppose that's no surprise. The rest of the leads are similarly awesome. There are many references to the earlier films. Very few questions are left unanswered. It's always nice when film-makers really think it through and make an actual decision and get all the details right.

My criticisms have to do with the themes of the story. Batman Begins was all about fear, doubt, self-realization and redemption where Bruce Wayne discovers his destiny as Batman. BB had a story arc which set background for main characters – Batman/ Wayne, Ra's al Ghul, Gordon and most importantly Gotham City and hence set stage for a fitting climax.

The Dark Knight explores the theme of chaos, morality and belief effortlessly and establishes characters of Joker, Harvey Dent/Two Face, Rachel etc. so effortlessly that people choose to ignore even some major plot holes. Heath Ledger's interpretation of Joker was so mesmerizing that it single handily carried TDK to path of greatness and critical acclaim.

But Dark Knight Rises is all about story telling; efficient but not exceptional. Bane, Miranda Tate, John Blake, Peter Foley, Selina Kyle are characters are introduced but never explored or expanded; they just start working on their part like cogs in the wheel. They are not so much part of the story itself but just the agents which move the story forward.

There's no dilemma, doubt, love, choices, moral battles, hope, even no chaos/fear- themes which make characters and plot interesting and which made Batman Begins and The Dark Knight really good movies. Even the theme of "Occupy Wall Street" is very weak and at best it's closer to London riots with its loot and arson. There's even perfect order in Bane's revolution. The movie moves effortlessly from one plot to another and to climax that it become at times predictable.

But maybe Dark Knight Rises was supposed to be like that only and Nolan had too much to deal with in 2.5 hours. And maybe that's the only true problem with Dark Knight Rises: too much is going on in the story that it seems crammed at times, and when there are too many characters and so many story arcs it is tough to do justice to characters and story telling at the same time. And this is when you start looking for plot holes, slackness, and predictability.

My Favourite Spider-Man Villains

My Favourite Spider-Man Villains

A Blog by

Mitchell A. Quondam

Spider-Man is my second favourite superhero (Behind Batman), and in my opinion, he has the best rogues gallery of any superhero. They could announce just about any villain to be in the next Spider-man movie and I'd be stoked. His villains have a wide variety of abilities, ranging from electricity, to transforming into an animal, to simply being an incredibly skilled hunter. One of my criticisms of Batman's rogues gallery is that, while they are all fantastic, well-developed characters, there are not many that can challenge Batman physically beyond Bane, Killer Croc and sometimes Ra's al Ghul. Spider-Man doesn't have this problem. Realistically, a B-list villain such as Rhino or Shocker offers just as much physical harm as the mainstays like Venom.

10 - Kraven the Hunter
His fanciful costume and lack of superpowers have turned many off of him, but I've always thought that he was pretty cool. The story arc in which he succeeds in killing Spider-Man also dove into the character's mentality. With the greatest prey now defeated, what does he do next? This was one of the finest arcs in the Spider-Man comics, because it was villain-centric. We are led to believe that Spidey was dead and Kraven was driven to depression, and eventually, suicide. I'm not a big fan of the heirs to Kraven's name, but the original, Sergei Kravenoff, is still awesome.

9 - The Lizard
The Lizard has always been a fan-favourite. He is one of those villains I discussed that provides a very real threat to Spider-Man. It seemed like Spidey always lost more fights against Lizard than he won. Along with being a threat, he looked very cool in all of the incarnations I can remember. A lot of people criticize the Amazing Spider-Man for taking away two Lizard signatures in his lab coat and his snout, but I forgot about those little gripes when watching the movie, and I thought that what they did worked with the story. I also think that both Rhys Ifans and Dylan Baker played the role of Curt Connors very well, although the nod has to go to Ifans, because he also got to play the lizard.

8 - Carnage
The first experience I had with Carnage was in the 2000 Spider-Man video game, and it was love at first sight. He was like a more vicious Venom. Since reading the comics and other source material, my love for the character has only grown. He was extremely dangerous even before he got the alien costume, and after, he killed more people than the Punisher and Judge Dredd combined. I have never seen a comic book character with a higher body count than Carnage.

7 - Venom
A lot of people are very high on Venom, and have him listed in the top three, but I feel he suffers from over-exposure. Ever since the original arc, he has been in every media available, even more than the Green Goblin. Besides comics, he's been on TV Shows, a live action movie (sadly), action figures, video games, including several where he is the playable character, and it would appear that he has his own stand-alone movie coming soon. Mac Gargan getting the Venom suit mixed it up a bit, but not much. I may be in the minority here, but I’m not a fan of the Flash Thompson Venom at all. It reminds me too much of Spawn for some reason.

6 - Hobgoblin
I recently went back and read the original Hobgoblin story arcs, and I was very impressed. I always liked his look more than the Green Goblin's, but he also has a great story to fall back on, and the mystery of who was behind the mask was intriguing to me. If I was to do a Spider-Man film, I would leave his identity a mystery until the very end. He would not be built up; he would just appear as a mad bomber and start wreaking havoc, until Spider-Man finally stops him at the end. Joker never needed his origin told, Nolan just threw the Joker into the mix. If Hobgoblin had the right story, he could top Green Goblin in terms of coolness.

5 - Mysterio
I like his look, and his illusions always add something unique to every battle. My criticism is that he is not truly a physical threat to Spider-Man by himself. He always needs traps or trickery on his side. However, we need not worry about that anymore as, unfortunately, he has passed away. Much like Kraven the Hunter, Mysterio has committed suicide, and we may never see Quentin Beck again in Marvel Comics.

4 - Scorpion
One of Spider-Man's earliest villains, Scorpion was always a favourite of mine. I liked his look, his powers and his character. In most continuities, he doesn't even want to be a villain, but is prompted to by either J. Jonah Jameson or Norman Osborn. He was an outcast, and after his first couple issues only wanted to steal enough money to get out of the suit. He has also appeared in many mediums, but I am still looking forward to finally seeing Scorpion on the big screen.

3 - Doctor Octopus
I've always liked Doctor Octopus. My first experience of him was in reruns of the 1967 Spider-Man, and back then he was my second favourite villain, only to Scorpion. Throughout my history with comics and superheroes, he slowly fell down the ladder until 2004. The performance of Alfred Molina in Spider-Man 2 propelled Doc Ock back up the list. Molina brought such depth to the character that it was impossible not to like him. Many mediums have not given Octopus justice, but, like Hobgoblin, if he is given the right story, he could easily top Norman Osborn

2 - Electro
Electro is another favourite from the 60's Spider-Man show. I didn't like that he wasn't in the 1994 show. Apparently James Cameron's Spider-Man had him and Sandman as the villains so they were locked up. Nonetheless, I also very much enjoyed the Playstation game Spider-Man 2: Enter Electro. He had a great showing in Web of Shadows also. In Amazing Spider-Man 2, he is being played by Academy Award winning actor Jamie Foxx. A lot of people are complaining about Electro being played by a black actor, but I do not see the issue with it. Foxx is, credential-wise, the best actor ever cast as a comic book villain (besides maybe Tommy Lee Jones). Comic fans should just be happy that he is not being played by some pro wrestler like Bane and Sabretooth were, or played very campy like the Riddler and Two-Face were.

1 - Norman Osborn
Was there ever any doubt? Norman Osborn is lie Spider-Man's Joker, the antithesis to everything Spider-Man believes in. He also has a cool look, plenty of gadgets, and is a super soldier. He also did the ultimate evil in comic books by killing Spidey's first squeeze Gwen Stacey. Like Dr. Octopus and Venom, he has appeared in a lot of Spider-Man media, although my favourite depiction of him is in the 2002 film with Willem Dafoe. I wasn't a fan of the costume, but Dafoe's manic performace helped to put the character over. Rumor has it that Stormin' Norman will be making an appearance in the Marc Webb saga (and depending on who you want to believe, already has in the form of Michael Masse) and I hope that his version of the Goblin does this amazing character justice.

A Blockbuster vs. A Great Film

A Blockbuster vs. a Great Film

A Blog by

Mitchell A. Quondam

Blockbuster:
Released during the summer
Is hyped all year
Trailers feature mainly explosions and action scenes
Less emphasis on story & writing
Big this summer, but forgotten about by next summer

Examples of Blockbusters
Transformers 1-3
Independence Day
Godzilla 1998
GI Joe: Rise of the Cobra
The A-Team 2010
Some of the Harry Potter films
The Hurt Locker (won an Oscar, then just vanished)
Terminator Salvation
Phantom Menace
Avengers (beginning to show its holes)
Sam Raimi Spider-Man Trilogy


Great Film
Well written, by someone who can write intense dialogue
Emotionally investing film, with a story people will remember
Uniqueness, not just the typical blockbuster action film
Good actors, not models, “tough guys” or athletes/pro wrestlers pretending to act
Characters with depth
Memorable lines
Will be remembered and re-watched for years

Examples of Great Films
Toy Story 1-3
Dark Knight (Dark Knight Rises is still on the fence for me)
Titanic
Lord of the Rings Trilogy
Empire Strikes Back
Avatar (Although it is on the fence for sure)
Jurassic Park 1
Terminator 2
The Godfather 1&2
Pulp Fiction

What Makes a Good Film?

What Makes a Good Film?

A Blog by

Mitchell A. Quondam

Firstly, when I say “good,” I mean critically well, one that people go back to and enjoy watching over and over again. There is a distinct difference between a movie being financially successful and one that is critically acclaimed.

As an example, let’s look at Transformers 3. The film was panned by critics and is considered a critical flop, and yet it is the 5th highest grossing film of all time. This is because there was hype for the movie, and it seemed cool at the time, but behind all the special effects and explosions, was a weak script with unlikable characters and moments that were supposed to be funny falling flat.

Now, compare Transformers 3 to the Shawshank Redemption, currently #1 on the Internet Movie Database’s top 250 films of all time. Financially, Shawshank didn't make back what it cost when it was in theaters  but people did love it. The dialogue worked, it had an investing story, and, although it didn’t have to, it ended the film on a high note as a bonus. The issue is that, compared to giant robots and explosions, a movie that takes place in a 1940s prison doesn't look all that appealing in trailers.

This is not to say that a critically acclaimed motion picture can not have explosive action. The Terminator 2: Judgment Day is proof of this. Both a critical success as well as a financial one, James Cameron proved that action movies can have a story, which he proved again on Avatar, the highest grossing film of all time. Although many consider Avatar’s plot cliché, it still had one and was well written, complimenting its visual style ably.

What truly makes a good film is 3 things, the writing, the acting, and the directing.

Writing is maybe the most important. The story needs to both carry the plot and incite emotion from the audience. As someone who frequents the theaters  I have seen good and bad examples of this. In Transformers 2, when we are lead to believe that Shia Lebouf died, nobody cared, because his character was uninteresting and weak. However, jump foreword 3 years to the Dark Knight Rises, and people were literally crying when SPOILER ALERT! TURN BACK! Batman flies off towing a nuclear bomb and seemingly dies, which moves right into the next topic: the acting.

Christian Bale brought a lot of humanity to the very unrealistic Batman character. He built a character that people could relate to, (and I give director Christopher Nolan a lot of credit for this too) and got people emotionally invested in Batman’s story, as ridiculous as it is. It takes a certain kind of actor to play a role like that, especially considering that half the time his face is covered, so he has to act a lot with his eyes, and voice.

Lastly, the director is important. I could write an entire essay on what Michael Bay does wrong, but I’ll sum it up to this: he makes financially successful films. He builds up hype for his films by producing trailers showing off his action scenes and then people flock to see his films, but besides those action scenes, the story and acting is weak. Christopher Nolan makes people flock to see him because people know that he is a good director and won’t disappoint them. He could put out a teaser that just says “Inception: A Christopher Nolan film” and people would be excited months in advance.

Michael Bay is a No-Talent Hack and This is Why

Michael Bay is a No-Talent Hack and This is Why

A Blog By

Mitchell A. Quondam

It would be one thing if Michael Bay were merely a bad director. Bay is, in fact, a very bad director, evidenced not just by the more epic and bombastic flourishes of his movies but, rather, how he cannot handle even the basic tasks of a filmmaker:  transitions between scenes, constructing coherent story lines, or conveying motion through space and time in a clear, logical fashion.

There is a sequence in Transformers 2 where characters go into the National Air and Space Museum in Virginia and exit to an abandoned airfield under vast Arizona skies. No explanation or plot device was given to this. It is not as if one has to know where those two things are to know they do not go together.
There is a fine line between signature style and simply repeating oneself continually. This point is shown quite literally in Transformers 3. Consider the collage making its way around the internet clearly showing Bay recycling footage from his previous flop The Island.

Bay's films are also the purest representation of the triumph of shareholder cinema, where a film's quality is irrelevant as long as it offers a suitable return on investment. Bay himself does not show a great interest in principle or any other impediment to maximum profit. In a pre-taped address to the crowd of theater owners at this year's CinemaCon, Bay said, "Do you remember last year how I said I'd never do 3-D? Well, I lied ..."
That kind of willingness to sell out in the name of cashing in becomes even more grim as people look past Bay's own directorial work to look at the films he has produced from his Platinum Dunes production company; a series of low-quality remakes of films that did not need to be remade, such as Friday the 13th, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Nightmare on Elm Street. The idea that the money made by bad films goes to make more bad films is a Hollywood tradition, but with Bay the trick seems even crueler and more disheartening as the production sewer line is opened up to full flow.

But perhaps the greatest offense that Bay has committed is this: He gives big, loud action a bad name by making films out of weak, bloated and cliché-riddled scripts and worse, he does not have to. Sporadic flashes of skill are evident in some of Bay's films. He even won a Saturn Award, and even received a plethora of Oscar nominations for Armageddon, an average film with great action sequences.

The man also knows how to construct an eye-catching image, even if he saves it for weird moments. There is no excuse for Bay to be making films as shoddy and expensive and lazy as Armageddon, Bad Boys II or the Transformers films. It is like watching a student who could be doing A-level work act out instead of focusing.
Another topic that has aroused controversy is his portrayal of women in his films. His cinematography, such as it was, in the first two Transformers movies was dedicated entirely to showing off the leading lady Megan Fox as a sex object, a trait he repeated in Transformers 2. After Megan Fox got tired of it and left the project, he needed to find a new actress, but instead of signing on a professional actress who could actually act, he found a Victoria’s Secret model that was popular at the time and put her in. So far this has been her only acting role. There are other examples of this too. Along with the sex object role, he limits his female characters to being damsels in distress, girls who are only in the movie to be captures or endangered by the villain and rescued by the hero. This is in stark contrast to the way most modern directors try to mix it up.

There is a director very similar to Bay named James Cameron. Cameron is also an action director who has targeted the 14-25 audience. However he has become incredibly popular for using powerful female characters as a recurring theme in his films, something Bay, and many others have never done or even considered. Some of his best include the characters Sarah Connor in the Terminator, Ellen Ripley in Aliens, and Neytiri, the blue alien from Avatar. These are only the most popular from Cameron; there is a myriad of others.

Bay once said, defending his honor, "I make movies for teenage boys. Oh, dear, what a crime." The crime is not the act, it is the execution. James Cameron, Steven Spielberg, Peter Jackson and JJ Abrams make movies for teenage boys, but they also make them exceptional movies with character, with care, with craft, with substance under the spectacle and with a sense of personality, not just Bay's endless series of quick cuts and soft-focus lighting and slapdash storytelling with cheap sentiment as a substitute for real emotion. With Michael Bay, what is frustrating is not merely the films that are, but the films that one can imagine if only he would quit being lazy, put in real work and prove that a good movie can make money, too.

It would be one thing if Michael Bay was a bad director, but he is in fact a very bad director. He puts more effort into making big set-piece action scenes and portraying women as sex objects and damsels in distress, and less effort into actually writing a good movie with solid characters and real emotional weight. He only uses half his potential, and it is sad that audiences will never get to see what might have been with him. Perhaps next year we will get something better from him.