Captain Marvel or How Marvel does everything better than everyone else

[Saelune]

So, yeah, the plot is something that's likely to appeal more to women than guys. Not saying that guys can't enjoy it, I certainly did.

Okay. Let's start asking the hard questions with uncomfortable answers.

What makes Captain Marvel different from Jessica Jones, other than one being a street-level Netflix series and the other being a cosmic-level feature film? What made their receptions so radically different?

Other than scale, on every conceivable level they're basically the same character. That's why in the comics, Carol and Jessica are inseparable friends. The primary difference is, all that stuff that metaphorically happened to Carol, literally happened to Jessica. And just as you'd expect, for it JJ is a hell of a lot darker and a hell of a lot less subtle.

Captain Marvel is a movie and actually part of the MCU. Jessica Jones is not a movie, is on a subscription service, and is kept at multiple arms length away from the MCU, which is stupid. The Netflix shows should directly be acknowledged by the cinematic universe and vice-versa, but they never want to completely commit. They keep teasing it, but that's all.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

Captain Marvel is a movie and actually part of the MCU. Jessica Jones is not a movie, is on a subscription service, and is kept at multiple arms length away from the MCU, which is stupid. The Netflix shows should directly be acknowledged by the cinematic universe and vice-versa, but they never want to completely commit. They keep teasing it, but that's all.

...other than one being a street-level Netflix series and the other being a cosmic-level feature film... I said. Right there, clear as day, anyone literate and conversant in basic English can do it. What's different between the two, how were their receptions different, and how might those differences be interconnected?

And actually, that's not even a great answer considering the exception I already made, as JJ season 1 was produced and released on Netflix before the difference in opinion between Feige and Perlmutter over how human beings should be treated which led to their "divorce", since JJ season 1 still has references to the Chitauri invasion as "the incident". JJ season 2 even sneaks references to the Raft specifically in its MCU iteration, particularly telling as the prison debuted in Alias in its Marvel Comics form -- an expansion wing to Rikers Island.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Just came back from the screening. It's definitely a have-cake-and-eat-it movie. A lot of build up and character development is thrown away on a lark and nobody seems to get the ending they deserve, at least as far as the original Avengers goes. I got major "All hail the new generation" vibes from the movie.

 

[gorfias]

A major spoiler review almost as long as the movie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Keooxe5x6Ts

 

[Saelune]

Captain Marvel is a movie and actually part of the MCU. Jessica Jones is not a movie, is on a subscription service, and is kept at multiple arms length away from the MCU, which is stupid. The Netflix shows should directly be acknowledged by the cinematic universe and vice-versa, but they never want to completely commit. They keep teasing it, but that's all.

...other than one being a street-level Netflix series and the other being a cosmic-level feature film... I said. Right there, clear as day, anyone literate and conversant in basic English can do it. What's different between the two, how were their receptions different, and how might those differences be interconnected?

And actually, that's not even a great answer considering the exception I already made, as JJ season 1 was produced and released on Netflix before the difference in opinion between Feige and Perlmutter over how human beings should be treated which led to their "divorce", since JJ season 1 still has references to the Chitauri invasion as "the incident". JJ season 2 even sneaks references to the Raft specifically in its MCU iteration, particularly telling as the prison debuted in Alias in its Marvel Comics form -- an expansion wing to Rikers Island.

No need to be rude about it.

I believe that is the second time in this very topic someone asked a question, then gave the answer, then said you aren't allowed to use the answer.

I dont think Jessica Jones and Carol Danvers are so drastically different, and I dont see why that matters. I like both characters alot too, and think both Captain Marvel was a really good movie and I really liked the Jessica Jones Netflix series. I suppose JJ is different in her more outward reluctance to be a hero, where as Carol is pretty fine with it, was just an issue of figuring out which side was the good one.

Oh and JJ was more violated by her abusers than Carol was, which is probably a big reason why she has more trouble with being a hero than Carol.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

I believe that is the second time in this very topic someone asked a question, then gave the answer, then said you aren't allowed to use the answer.

In my case, it's because I'm trying to make a point about how drastically different the two works -- and characters -- were received. I know damn well what I was doing when I made that sole exception, because it's the only viable answer. The only difference between Jones and Danvers is a matter of scale, in-universe and out. JJ is a netflix series, Captain Marvel is a feature film; JJ is a street-level hero whose powers realistically put her in the "B-team" category, Danvers is a cosmic-level superhero.

Other than that, they're pretty much the same, and both works focus on the themes of abuse, trauma, loss of identity, and overcoming that to take back one's own sense of agency. If the backlash against Captain Marvel is at its core about sexism, toxic fandom, and a relatability gap as proposed by the post(s) to which I was responding, there should have been an even greater backlash against Jessica Jones -- or really any sort of backlash at all -- considering JJ was not only more overt about them, but more assertive in its core theses. But there wasn't.

Why?

 

[Trunkage]

I believe that is the second time in this very topic someone asked a question, then gave the answer, then said you aren't allowed to use the answer.

In my case, it's because I'm trying to make a point about how drastically different the two works -- and characters -- were received. I know damn well what I was doing when I made that sole exception, because it's the only viable answer. The only difference between Jones and Danvers is a matter of scale, in-universe and out. JJ is a netflix series, Captain Marvel is a feature film; JJ is a street-level hero whose powers realistically put her in the "B-team" category, Danvers is a cosmic-level superhero.

Other than that, they're pretty much the same, and both works focus on the themes of abuse, trauma, loss of identity, and overcoming that to take back one's own sense of agency. If the backlash against Captain Marvel is at its core about sexism, toxic fandom, and a relatability gap as proposed by the post(s) to which I was responding, there should have been an even greater backlash against Jessica Jones -- or really any sort of backlash at all -- considering JJ was not only more overt about them, but more assertive in its core theses. But there wasn't.

Why?

I, for one, would suggest it has something to do with rape being the truama.
Sure Danvers lost her memory but that's no where near as bad as rape. Thus JJ is automatically less susceptible to criticism.

Also, Jessica Jones came out about the same time as Ghostbusters. Many of these anti-SJW guys thought that they made Ghostbusters tank. But it tanked because it was a bad movie not what some internet troll says.

Since that 'win', Anti-SJW types have have been targeting films and shows, most importantly, before it's been released. But JJ came in at the perfect window before anyone gave these guys power. It was released on its merits, not what any troll made up.

I also do have friends who didn't like JJ. It more centered around two facets. 1. She took her anger out on other people. They don't care what her reasoning is, it's unjustified. 2. She never gets over the truama or even really tries.

 

[PsychedelicDiamond]

Just came back from the screening. It's definitely a have-cake-and-eat-it movie. A lot of build up and character development is thrown away on a lark and nobody seems to get the ending they deserve, at least as far as the original Avengers goes. I got major "All hail the new generation" vibes from the movie.

So we're finally moving away from attractive blonde men named Chris?

 

[BrawlMan]

I believe that is the second time in this very topic someone asked a question, then gave the answer, then said you aren't allowed to use the answer.

In my case, it's because I'm trying to make a point about how drastically different the two works -- and characters -- were received. I know damn well what I was doing when I made that sole exception, because it's the only viable answer. The only difference between Jones and Danvers is a matter of scale, in-universe and out. JJ is a netflix series, Captain Marvel is a feature film; JJ is a street-level hero whose powers realistically put her in the "B-team" category, Danvers is a cosmic-level superhero.

Other than that, they're pretty much the same, and both works focus on the themes of abuse, trauma, loss of identity, and overcoming that to take back one's own sense of agency. If the backlash against Captain Marvel is at its core about sexism, toxic fandom, and a relatability gap as proposed by the post(s) to which I was responding, there should have been an even greater backlash against Jessica Jones -- or really any sort of backlash at all -- considering JJ was not only more overt about them, but more assertive in its core theses. But there wasn't.

Why?

I, for one, would suggest it has something to do with rape being the truama.
Sure Danvers lost her memory but that's no where near as bad as rape. Thus JJ is automatically less susceptible to criticism.

Also, Jessica Jones came out about the same time as Ghostbusters. Many of these anti-SJW guys thought that they made Ghostbusters tank. But it tanked because it was a bad movie not what some internet troll says.

Since that 'win', Anti-SJW types have have been targeting films and shows, most importantly, before it's been released. But JJ came in at the perfect window before anyone gave these guys power. It was released on its merits, not what any troll made up.

I also do have friends who didn't like JJ. It more centered around two facets. 1. She took her anger out on other people. They don't care what her reasoning is, it's unjustified. 2. She never gets over the truama or even really tries.

It's good to hear why people actually dislike a character that supposed to be likeable/sympathetic within reason. I kinda liked Jessica Jones, but even I have no trouble admitting that's the biggest problem with the character or the show itself. A lot of the characters are assholes you just want to kick in the face. Granted, you can't "get over" a trauma like rape easily, but since she never attempts, Jessica comes off less sympathetic compared to almost any other Marvel netflix character, minor or otherwise. People call this unintentionally unsympathetic syndrome.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

I, for one, would suggest it has something to do with rape being the truama.

I'm going to go out on a limb and piss a lot of people off here, but in the case of JJ rape was nowhere near the lion's share of it, and to reduce it down to "just" rape trivializes the hell out of it. Not because "rape isn't bad" or whatever, but because everything else Killgrave did was so unspeakably horrible, rape was simply a representative sample. In terms of shared trauma between JJ and Danvers, it's the "everything else" that counts.

And at least in the comics, don't forget Danvers suffered the exact same traumas.

I also do have friends who didn't like JJ. It more centered around two facets. 1. She took her anger out on other people. They don't care what her reasoning is, it's unjustified. 2. She never gets over the truama or even really tries.

This is exactly why I love JJ, compared to other characters and works where themes of trauma, addiction, and recovery are explored. Because it actually takes the subject seriously and treats it with respect. This is an axe I've had to grind against the MCU since Iron Man 2, which was only exacerbated by Avengers, Iron Man 3, and Age of Ultron, and it's exactly why I have zero hope of Danvers being portrayed with an iota of justice on film. Or if she is, like in her post-2012 comic iteration (at select points), it's for all the wrong reasons and without a hint of irony or self-awareness on the part of the creatives'.

Because, like Tony Stark and Jessica Jones, Danvers is post-traumatic with addictive tendencies as a coping mechanism. What makes Danvers unique and compelling compared to the other two, is her addiction transfers between alcohol and power depending upon how she feels about the world, and her place in it, at the time.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Just came back from the screening. It's definitely a have-cake-and-eat-it movie. A lot of build up and character development is thrown away on a lark and nobody seems to get the ending they deserve, at least as far as the original Avengers goes. I got major "All hail the new generation" vibes from the movie.

So we're finally moving away from attractive blonde men named Chris?

Oh yeah, but not necessarily the way you think.

 

[PsychedelicDiamond]

Just came back from the screening. It's definitely a have-cake-and-eat-it movie. A lot of build up and character development is thrown away on a lark and nobody seems to get the ending they deserve, at least as far as the original Avengers goes. I got major "All hail the new generation" vibes from the movie.

So we're finally moving away from attractive blonde men named Chris?

Oh yeah, but not necessarily the way you think.

Considering that no one working on these screenplays can write women for shit, maybe I shouldn't be complaining about the blonde men named Chris.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Just came back from the screening. It's definitely a have-cake-and-eat-it movie. A lot of build up and character development is thrown away on a lark and nobody seems to get the ending they deserve, at least as far as the original Avengers goes. I got major "All hail the new generation" vibes from the movie.

So we're finally moving away from attractive blonde men named Chris?

Oh yeah, but not necessarily the way you think.

Considering that no one working on these screenplays can write women for shit, maybe I shouldn't be complaining about the blonde men named Chris.

You're right about that. I think the writers generally feel more confident toying around with the character of the Chris dudes than they do trying their hand at writing female characters. Thor in particular has gone through four distinct (albeit contradicting) phases throughout these movies. Credit to Hemsworth for throwing himself at every incarnation with zero self-preservation instinct. And contrast with every single female lead that's played with the same dull, no-nonsense determination. I don't think anybody could distinguish Widow, Witch, Wasp or CM with a single adjective that doesn't apply to the other three.

 

[Here Comes Tomorrow]

Just came back from the screening. It's definitely a have-cake-and-eat-it movie. A lot of build up and character development is thrown away on a lark and nobody seems to get the ending they deserve, at least as far as the original Avengers goes. I got major "All hail the new generation" vibes from the movie.

So we're finally moving away from attractive blonde men named Chris?

Oh yeah, but not necessarily the way you think.

Considering that no one working on these screenplays can write women for shit, maybe I shouldn't be complaining about the blonde men named Chris.

You're right about that. I think the writers generally feel more confident toying around with the character of the Chris dudes than they do trying their hand at writing female characters. Thor in particular has gone through four distinct (albeit contradicting) phases throughout these movies. Credit to Hemsworth for throwing himself at every incarnation with zero self-preservation instinct. And contrast with every single female lead that's played with the same dull, no-nonsense determination. I don't think anybody could distinguish Widow, Witch, Wasp or CM with a single adjective that doesn't apply to the other three.

I'd disagree with Scarlet Witch. Civil War did wonders for her character.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Just came back from the screening. It's definitely a have-cake-and-eat-it movie. A lot of build up and character development is thrown away on a lark and nobody seems to get the ending they deserve, at least as far as the original Avengers goes. I got major "All hail the new generation" vibes from the movie.

So we're finally moving away from attractive blonde men named Chris?

Oh yeah, but not necessarily the way you think.

Considering that no one working on these screenplays can write women for shit, maybe I shouldn't be complaining about the blonde men named Chris.

You're right about that. I think the writers generally feel more confident toying around with the character of the Chris dudes than they do trying their hand at writing female characters. Thor in particular has gone through four distinct (albeit contradicting) phases throughout these movies. Credit to Hemsworth for throwing himself at every incarnation with zero self-preservation instinct. And contrast with every single female lead that's played with the same dull, no-nonsense determination. I don't think anybody could distinguish Widow, Witch, Wasp or CM with a single adjective that doesn't apply to the other three.

I'd disagree with Scarlet Witch. Civil War did wonders for her character.

I'll give you "mopey".

 

[Trunkage]

I believe that is the second time in this very topic someone asked a question, then gave the answer, then said you aren't allowed to use the answer.

In my case, it's because I'm trying to make a point about how drastically different the two works -- and characters -- were received. I know damn well what I was doing when I made that sole exception, because it's the only viable answer. The only difference between Jones and Danvers is a matter of scale, in-universe and out. JJ is a netflix series, Captain Marvel is a feature film; JJ is a street-level hero whose powers realistically put her in the "B-team" category, Danvers is a cosmic-level superhero.

Other than that, they're pretty much the same, and both works focus on the themes of abuse, trauma, loss of identity, and overcoming that to take back one's own sense of agency. If the backlash against Captain Marvel is at its core about sexism, toxic fandom, and a relatability gap as proposed by the post(s) to which I was responding, there should have been an even greater backlash against Jessica Jones -- or really any sort of backlash at all -- considering JJ was not only more overt about them, but more assertive in its core theses. But there wasn't.

Why?

I, for one, would suggest it has something to do with rape being the truama.
Sure Danvers lost her memory but that's no where near as bad as rape. Thus JJ is automatically less susceptible to criticism.

Also, Jessica Jones came out about the same time as Ghostbusters. Many of these anti-SJW guys thought that they made Ghostbusters tank. But it tanked because it was a bad movie not what some internet troll says.

Since that 'win', Anti-SJW types have have been targeting films and shows, most importantly, before it's been released. But JJ came in at the perfect window before anyone gave these guys power. It was released on its merits, not what any troll made up.

I also do have friends who didn't like JJ. It more centered around two facets. 1. She took her anger out on other people. They don't care what her reasoning is, it's unjustified. 2. She never gets over the truama or even really tries.

It's good to hear why people actually dislike a character that supposed to be likeable/sympathetic within reason. I kinda liked Jessica Jones, but even I have no trouble admitting that's the biggest problem with the character or the show itself. A lot of the characters are assholes you just want to kick in the face. Granted, you can't "get over" a trauma like rape easily, but since she never attempts, Jessica comes off less sympathetic compared to almost any other Marvel netflix character, minor or otherwise. People call this unintentionally unsympathetic syndrome.

Yeah, I'd add that she has been mentally forced to do things. And she is the only one to break it, which clearly took a lot. There's likely to be some actual mental damage.

I could have been on board for angry/broken JJ for ome season until Kilgrave was gone. But she doesn't even try to get better for the second, and I was getting over it pretty quick too.

 

[Chimpzy_v1legacy]

So we're finally moving away from attractive blonde men named Chris?

Afaik, Chris Pratt is coming back for Guardian of the Galaxy 3, so still at least one attractive man named Chris (tho not a blonde one).

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

Yeah, I'd add that she has been mentally forced to do things. And she is the only one to break it, which clearly took a lot. There's likely to be some actual mental damage.

I could have been on board for angry/broken JJ for ome season until Kilgrave was gone. But she doesn't even try to get better for the second, and I was getting over it pretty quick too.

I'd like to point out once again this entire tangent has been a litany of reasons why there should have been a bigger backlash against JJ than there was, and why JJ should be a more disliked character than she is, and not a whole lot of exploration why that didn't happen...especially as compared to the backlash against Captain Marvel.

Bonus round: "I don't like her because she didn't just shut up and get over it" is just about the most 'toxic masculinity' thing you could say about this.

 

[Avnger]

Bonus round: "I don't like her because she didn't just shut up and get over it" is just about the most 'toxic masculinity' thing you could say about this.

Something tells me that you don't understand the meaning of that phrase...

 

[Trunkage]

Yeah, I'd add that she has been mentally forced to do things. And she is the only one to break it, which clearly took a lot. There's likely to be some actual mental damage.

I could have been on board for angry/broken JJ for ome season until Kilgrave was gone. But she doesn't even try to get better for the second, and I was getting over it pretty quick too.

I'd like to point out once again this entire tangent has been a litany of reasons why there should have been a bigger backlash against JJ than there was, and why JJ should be a more disliked character than she is, and not a whole lot of exploration why that didn't happen...especially as compared to the backlash against Captain Marvel.

Bonus round: "I don't like her because she didn't just shut up and get over it" is just about the most 'toxic masculinity' thing you could say about this.

Its timing. Anti-SJW got prominence from Ghostbusters a year after JJ was released. JJ could be judged on its on merit, not with the made up nonsense of Anti-SJWs.

I criticized JJ back then, so did my friends. But it wasn't about gender or politcs. It was about how the story and characters were created. Anti-SJWs brought politcs to the forefront.

Sargan and the Quatering complaining about She-Ra's breast size and upbringing isn't the only stuff they made up. Its why talking about Force Awakens and Last Jedi is so toxic, because there are people who are actual grievances with those movies but the Anti-SJW hijacked the conversation and turn it into a political and gendered circus.

Captain Marvel had hundreds of videos about it in the year before its release. That never happened because people never gave Anti-SJWs any power. No we have, and we are reaping what we sow