1. You are the one who suggested a movie about the Avengers being led by Captain America into conflict with the Sakovia Accords because America is better. Natasha Romanov isn't American, or at least not originally (one can only guess that she may have US citizenship in the movies). Wanda Maximoff isn't American. Vision isn't American. Thor isn't American. Also, the US was one of the signatories of the Accords in the films.
2. One of the reasons Black Panther was so popular is that it gave representation to blacks in big budget superhero movies that they hadn't had before. Since whites have had the vast majority of representation is those sorts of movies, the same draw doesn't exist. I'm pretty sure the majority of the cast in every Marvel movie other than Black Panther has been white.
3. Again, the representation issue. While one could conceivably get a majority of the cast to be conservatives, that would not be obvious the way having a majority black cast is. One doesn't need to give lines to every extra for the audience to see they are largely black; the same is not true of seeing that they are conservative. So again, the same sort of 'pandering' wouldn't work.
4. How did the movie target Black Nationalists? If anything, I would think it specifically pushed them away, since the villain of the movie seems like the closest thing to a Black Nationalist.
I still don't know who you think it is that does not go to see Marvel movies now, but would if they were more...blatantly patriotic, or however you want to describe your preferred plan for the movies.
I'm also curious if you believe your ideas for what should be in movies have ever been done before?
1. The Black Widow would have no trouble following Captain America. Neither would Wanda, Vision, nor Thor. That America signed could have been done differently, or simply presented as a mistake by an overly accommodating American President.
2.Blade would like to have a word with you. AND, that was only ONE of the reasons. Plenty of other way to target an audience.
3. "Majority of cast" is the weakest of reasons. YOu would want conservative characters presented sympathetically, and conservative ideas as the premise and/or elements for the plot. A movie glamorizing America and traditional American ideals, would be very well received by American movie goers.
4. There were a number of ideas presented, that fit with Black Nationalism view points and conspiracy theories. From a sympathetic character calling the lead white a "colonizer" to blacks just being presented as extremely competent, to the idea of African as high tech. I heard an actual black nationalists telling a co-worker that Africa really was like that, in the past, before something. Not to mention that the villain was presented as having a reasonable point of view and given quite a bit of time to monologue and to be rude to various white people. Cause, racism.
1. Sure, you can have all of them follow Cap...but if his reasoning is "America great!" having them follow him would be way outside of their characters. None of them has ever been portrayed as American patriots.
2. Blade was a comic book movie with a black lead....written by a white guy, directed by a white guy, with a mostly white cast. I've heard or read quite a few people saying that the black representation in all the major aspects of the film were a big reason they were so high on the film. Also, Blade came out well before the current super hero renaissance. It wasn't nearly as popular as the Marvel movies are now, so had a lesser impact.
3. You asked pandering the same way Black Panther did. Black Panther had a black lead, mostly black cast, black director, black writers. Even people who didn't know about the director or writer could see the level of black representation in the film. That same sort of thing wouldn't work for an ideology.
4. Wow. Blacks being presented as extremely competent is Black Nationalism. The idea of a high tech nation in Africa is Black Nationalism. I wonder, is that who Stan Lee and Jack Kirby were targeting when they created the character, do you think?
Villains are often presented as having at least some degree of reason to their views. Hell, Thanos killed half the universe but was given a somewhat reasonable motivation.
"Rude to various white people"? Killmonger was rude to pretty much everyone.
1. It would be mindless simple to write a conflict between following UN direction and a can do American Altitude with Captain America in the lead. THe rest of the Avengers do not have to be American patriots to support or follow Captain America. I mean, I didn't go into detail there, because it seemed obvious.
2. Sure, it did not become the over hyped cultural mile stone that we all are supposed to pretend the Black Panther was. But it was a major motion picture and it was actually GOOD.
3. Do you think Captain America, before he went back in time at the end of Endgame, was a virgin?
4. When it is against whites who are mostly there to be incompetent or helpless, yes.
1. If this is all so mindlessly simple, why aren't you writing a screenplay that will make billions?
You said that Captain America would reject the Accords because of patriotism and nationalism, and because America is better. If those were his reasons, no, having all the Avengers follow him would not make sense.
2. What is or is not good is subjective. However, Black Panther was clearly a much more popular movie, seen by more people than Blade. And clearly Black Panther had far more black representation in the major aspects of filmmaking than Blade did.
3. I don't know nor care, nor do I understand what that question has to do with the conversation.
4. So all of the blacks being competent in Black Panther were doing so "against whites"? What movie did you watch?
Again I will ask, do you think that Stan Lee and Jack Kirby were targeting Black Nationalists when they created the Black Panther character?
1.
1. You are the one who suggested a movie about the Avengers being led by Captain America into conflict with the Sakovia Accords because America is better. Natasha Romanov isn't American, or at least not originally (one can only guess that she may have US citizenship in the movies). Wanda Maximoff isn't American. Vision isn't American. Thor isn't American. Also, the US was one of the signatories of the Accords in the films.
2. One of the reasons Black Panther was so popular is that it gave representation to blacks in big budget superhero movies that they hadn't had before. Since whites have had the vast majority of representation is those sorts of movies, the same draw doesn't exist. I'm pretty sure the majority of the cast in every Marvel movie other than Black Panther has been white.
3. Again, the representation issue. While one could conceivably get a majority of the cast to be conservatives, that would not be obvious the way having a majority black cast is. One doesn't need to give lines to every extra for the audience to see they are largely black; the same is not true of seeing that they are conservative. So again, the same sort of 'pandering' wouldn't work.
4. How did the movie target Black Nationalists? If anything, I would think it specifically pushed them away, since the villain of the movie seems like the closest thing to a Black Nationalist.
I still don't know who you think it is that does not go to see Marvel movies now, but would if they were more...blatantly patriotic, or however you want to describe your preferred plan for the movies.
I'm also curious if you believe your ideas for what should be in movies have ever been done before?
1. The Black Widow would have no trouble following Captain America. Neither would Wanda, Vision, nor Thor. That America signed could have been done differently, or simply presented as a mistake by an overly accommodating American President.
2.Blade would like to have a word with you. AND, that was only ONE of the reasons. Plenty of other way to target an audience.
3. "Majority of cast" is the weakest of reasons. YOu would want conservative characters presented sympathetically, and conservative ideas as the premise and/or elements for the plot. A movie glamorizing America and traditional American ideals, would be very well received by American movie goers.
4. There were a number of ideas presented, that fit with Black Nationalism view points and conspiracy theories. From a sympathetic character calling the lead white a "colonizer" to blacks just being presented as extremely competent, to the idea of African as high tech. I heard an actual black nationalists telling a co-worker that Africa really was like that, in the past, before something. Not to mention that the villain was presented as having a reasonable point of view and given quite a bit of time to monologue and to be rude to various white people. Cause, racism.
1. Sure, you can have all of them follow Cap...but if his reasoning is "America great!" having them follow him would be way outside of their characters. None of them has ever been portrayed as American patriots.
2. Blade was a comic book movie with a black lead....written by a white guy, directed by a white guy, with a mostly white cast. I've heard or read quite a few people saying that the black representation in all the major aspects of the film were a big reason they were so high on the film. Also, Blade came out well before the current super hero renaissance. It wasn't nearly as popular as the Marvel movies are now, so had a lesser impact.
3. You asked pandering the same way Black Panther did. Black Panther had a black lead, mostly black cast, black director, black writers. Even people who didn't know about the director or writer could see the level of black representation in the film. That same sort of thing wouldn't work for an ideology.
4. Wow. Blacks being presented as extremely competent is Black Nationalism. The idea of a high tech nation in Africa is Black Nationalism. I wonder, is that who Stan Lee and Jack Kirby were targeting when they created the character, do you think?
Villains are often presented as having at least some degree of reason to their views. Hell, Thanos killed half the universe but was given a somewhat reasonable motivation.
"Rude to various white people"? Killmonger was rude to pretty much everyone.
1. It would be mindless simple to write a conflict between following UN direction and a can do American Altitude with Captain America in the lead. THe rest of the Avengers do not have to be American patriots to support or follow Captain America. I mean, I didn't go into detail there, because it seemed obvious.
2. Sure, it did not become the over hyped cultural mile stone that we all are supposed to pretend the Black Panther was. But it was a major motion picture and it was actually GOOD.
3. Do you think Captain America, before he went back in time at the end of Endgame, was a virgin?
4. When it is against whites who are mostly there to be incompetent or helpless, yes.
1. If this is all so mindlessly simple, why aren't you writing a screenplay that will make billions?
You said that Captain America would reject the Accords because of patriotism and nationalism, and because America is better. If those were his reasons, no, having all the Avengers follow him would not make sense.
2. What is or is not good is subjective. However, Black Panther was clearly a much more popular movie, seen by more people than Blade. And clearly Black Panther had far more black representation in the major aspects of filmmaking than Blade did.
3. I don't know nor care, nor do I understand what that question has to do with the conversation.
4. So all of the blacks being competent in Black Panther were doing so "against whites"? What movie did you watch?
Again I will ask, do you think that Stan Lee and Jack Kirby were targeting Black Nationalists when they created the Black Panther character?
1. I said more than that. Hell, even the actual Civil War touched on the conflict between the UN's desire for control, and the needs for decisive action. Such a conflict could easily be milked for America Yeah, feel good-ness for the American movie going audience. There is a lack of balance.
2. Not completely. You see characters or situations or plot elements that don't make sense, and you can judge that accordingly. Blade's setting was pretty simple and held together nicely. Vampires exist, and the human governments hide the fact. Blade is a vampire hunter. Black Panther? Vibrainum exists and Wakandans use it for shit. Why has no one else noticed? Oh, they hide it. How? Magic cloaking shied. How did they develop that, when did they, what did they do before that? If they are so strong, why did they just sit there and not doing anything while the rest of their content was overrun by "colonizers"? ect. ect. ect.
3. Really? I would think it would be obvious. Captain America is effectively a time traveler from before the Sexual Revolution. Thor and Iron Man both hav plot lines about a romantic interest. If Captain America had such a plot line, they could have had so much fun dealing with him being a super hero who is terrified of modern women. And if they presented his position as sympathetic, or having some validity, it could have been used to pander to conservatives. Can you imagine a Captain America getting married scene? Think that might appeal to female fans? But Hollywood as it is, can't do that. No balance.
4. Look at Killmonger's scene with the female curator. He ridiculed her for buying a cup of coffee, and stupidly not paying attention to what was put in it. That makes no sense. That is the type of shit a bully says to justify their actions. It was up there with "why are you hitting yourself".
Could not say who they were trying to appeal to. Hopefully just black potential customers. Hopefully not Black Nationalists. But it is worth pointing out that, there is no reason that a comic with a black main character cannot appeal to whites. If it is a good comic. Or even ok. Or really, just not shit.