We still don't know who the enemy is (my money on Skrulls), I don't believe it's Loki I already ship Natasha/Loki Steve has a gun, all is right with the world Don't like how they just attached Hulk at the end - is he in the film for just 3 seconds?
Okay, i am going over this one more time, because i am doing my best to explain this and you are just not getting, either through your fault or mine.
It is not a gender issue if it applies to both men and women equally. If Tony, Cap, Thor, Clint, and banner were women, but Nat and Jan were both men it would still apply in the exact same way. It's done for a reason. A man and a woman having the same traits are still easier to distinguish from each other than two people of the same sex being identical are. I couldn't tell you why. I am not a psychanalyst. But that's the way things are, and you see it everywhere if you actuallylook for it.
In the comics, Sharon does very little compared to nat. She is beasically an administrator who does some field work, while Nat is actually in the field doing things. At least thats how it was when I last checked at the end of the Mars thing and beginning of the Secret Empire. Same with Jewel and Ms. Marvel. Ever notice how rarely those two are seen on panel fighting together? Each gets the spotlight when the other isn't there. That can work in comic books. in a movie, not so much, not unless you want one of them to neglected and half-characterized.
And two unpowered men who throw things in the secret avengers? Who would that be, Moon Knight and Cap? Because the genetically perfect super soldier and schizophrenic avatar of a lost god don't really have that much in common.
When you put another woman on the team just to have another woman there, what does that make her? That's just trying to fill a quota. When you have a legitimate reason to add her, that's fine. We have nat as a shield agent already who knows how to do her thing. it means nothing and does no good if you just put her there because "Oh no, not enough women." I know that sounds really sexist. I know that makes it sound as if I dont want any more women on the team because one is enough. Thats not what i mean. What I mean is that is has to be done with purpose, or it serves no purpose.
And in the same vein, guess who would be perfectly happy if Hawkeye wasn't in this movie. Me. The reason why I argue he's a better fit right now is because his concept is easier to grasp. The Wasp and her powers, be they science or mutant, requires explanation in the Movieverse. And more than i feel like they could fit into the movie smoothly, especially since they don't even own the X Men licensing. "Guy who's good with a bow" is a much, much easier concept for people to wrap their heads around.
![[personal profile]](http://f.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
kirke_novak) wrote in ![[community profile]](http://f.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
scans_daily2011-10-11 03:15 pm
no subject
It is not a gender issue if it applies to both men and women equally. If Tony, Cap, Thor, Clint, and banner were women, but Nat and Jan were both men it would still apply in the exact same way. It's done for a reason. A man and a woman having the same traits are still easier to distinguish from each other than two people of the same sex being identical are. I couldn't tell you why. I am not a psychanalyst. But that's the way things are, and you see it everywhere if you actuallylook for it.
In the comics, Sharon does very little compared to nat. She is beasically an administrator who does some field work, while Nat is actually in the field doing things. At least thats how it was when I last checked at the end of the Mars thing and beginning of the Secret Empire. Same with Jewel and Ms. Marvel. Ever notice how rarely those two are seen on panel fighting together? Each gets the spotlight when the other isn't there. That can work in comic books. in a movie, not so much, not unless you want one of them to neglected and half-characterized.
And two unpowered men who throw things in the secret avengers? Who would that be, Moon Knight and Cap? Because the genetically perfect super soldier and schizophrenic avatar of a lost god don't really have that much in common.
When you put another woman on the team just to have another woman there, what does that make her? That's just trying to fill a quota. When you have a legitimate reason to add her, that's fine. We have nat as a shield agent already who knows how to do her thing. it means nothing and does no good if you just put her there because "Oh no, not enough women." I know that sounds really sexist. I know that makes it sound as if I dont want any more women on the team because one is enough. Thats not what i mean. What I mean is that is has to be done with purpose, or it serves no purpose.
And in the same vein, guess who would be perfectly happy if Hawkeye wasn't in this movie. Me. The reason why I argue he's a better fit right now is because his concept is easier to grasp. The Wasp and her powers, be they science or mutant, requires explanation in the Movieverse. And more than i feel like they could fit into the movie smoothly, especially since they don't even own the X Men licensing. "Guy who's good with a bow" is a much, much easier concept for people to wrap their heads around.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
Mod Note
Mod Warning
Re: Mod Warning
Re: Mod Warning
Re: Mod Warning
Re: Mod Warning