PDA

View Full Version : TL;DR: Captain America Needs To Die



YorkNecromancer
05-01-2016, 12:13 PM
Captain America needs to die:
Or: The Problem Of Merchandise

So Captain America is my favourite character in the MCU. Has been ever since I saw ‘The First Avenger’, and honestly? He may achieved the unthinkable and overtaken Punisher as my favourite Marvel character. It’s weird; normally I’m all about the GRIMDARK, but Cap… In a cultural landscape where every other character is cynical, consumed by manpain, or frankly insane, there’s something really refreshing about a protagonist who isn’t. I love the idea that he’s not driven by a past tragedy, or some wonky Freudian excuse. He’s just this good man. He doesn’t get his powers from wealth or being born to it, or just getting lucky. He earned everything he’s got. He’s a working-class boy done good, and what’s he done with his power? Used it to help people. And he’s also refreshingly free from the moral incompetence of a character like Batman; Cap doesn’t jump through hoops to justify the violence he commits. He’s more than prepared to kill when necessary. But unlike Crazy Steve, he doesn’t glory in violence. You always get the feeling Cap would rather be sat at home drawing, or maybe just listening to some music. He only breaks out the can of whoop-donkey when people need to stay safe. I love that his symbol is an unbreakable shield: what a perfect metaphor that is.

So, yeah, it’s weird: I should despise him, but I pretty much love everything about him. He’s the absolute heart of the MCU, the unshakable core of the Avengers, a man whose power is making things simpler for others: there’s right, and there’s wrong, and you always choose the right thing no matter how hard it is, because it’s the right thing.

Captain America needs to die.

An Unprecedented Cinematic Experiment.

As huge a Cap fan as I am, that statement might sound strange. But it’s true. He may be my very favourite character in the whole MCU, but he needs to go. And with the nascent ‘Captain America: Civil War’ film around the corner (I’m literally going to see it after I’ve posted this), they’re in the perfect position to make this happen, because in the ‘Civil War’ comic, SPOILER Cap dies. The film is the perfect opportunity to make this happen.

I don’t want Captain America to die, but he needs to.

As some people may have inferred from one of my previous blog posts (https://yorknecromancer.wordpress.com/2016/03/06/march-2016-the-definitive-warhammer-40000-recommended-film-list/), I did my degree in film, and it’s because of my roots in cinema that I’m kind of in love with the Marvel Cinematic Universe as an artistic concept, quite separately from the characters.

I find the films fun, and frequently excellent, but it’s not for the their pure entertainment value that I love them. No, I love them because they’re the most incredible experiment in long-form cinema that’s ever been conducted. Seriously, ‘Civil War’ is the thirteenth film in an ongoing story arc that been running since 2008. Marvel is – unbelievably – managing to tell a single, rolling story spread over multiple, diverse films. This is a completely unprecedented achievement, and it doesn’t get enough recognition as the so-impossible-it-borders-on-miraculous achievement it is.

And it only gets more incredible when you look at the insane characters it’s sticking together. They’re all so completely tonally unconnected! Thor is a completely ridiculous high-fantasy character who just shouldn’t be able to mix with the hard-edge techno-thriller stylings of Iron Man, whose too-cool-for-school snark shouldn’t mix with the abject tragedy of Hulk, or the goofy comedy caperings of Ant-Man. It should be like mixing oil and water and glue and sticky toffee pudding, leaving behind nothing but a putrid, benighted mess.

But somehow, it all works. Even when you get a lacklustre offering like ‘Iron Man 2’, or ‘Thor: The Dark World’ or even ‘Age of Ultron’, a film where things don’t quite come together, it’s still kind of enjoyable because you’ve seen the characters before and they’re always going to have something awesome to do. Not to mention, there’s still this feeling that there’ll probably be a later film that makes up for it.

https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/dwvf6b2619ar4fp68i3r.png
Pictured: The Vision’s cape’s too goofy for you? Don’t sweat it; in the next film, this sweater solves all those problems.

It’s reached the point that the inevitable backlash has begin – that train’s never late. So we get the fashionable hate for Marvel, lamenting their success, decrying them for running so long, complaining how Marvel’s ruining cinema by filling our multiplexes with superheroes, as though there’s nothing else to f**king watch… On and on and on… And, you know, it’s true, I honestly couldn’t care less about any of the other bunch ‘Fantastic Four’, ‘X-Men’ or (Glob save us) the DC Cinematic Murderverse. I didn’t even think ‘Deadpool’ was that good.

http://images4.fanpop.com/image/photos/15200000/The-Crimson-Bolt-rainn-wilson-15236787-550-366.jpg
Pictured: obligatory plug for a much-better R-rated superhero film that not enough people have seen.

For me, the thing is that Marvel’s efforts are unprecedented in Western cinema, and I’m fascinated to see where they end up. It’s like if HBO had the budget of the US military. Yeah, there might be episodes you don’t like, but Tom Hiddleston’s there, it all feels like it has weight, and the metanarrative is going somewhere.

However, as time has gone on, more than a few problems have begun to rear their heads, and aside from things like continuity issues which all long-running narratives suffer from, it’s this:

There’s no tension.

Now, while we know the heroes are going to win in most Hollywood films, the comics the MCU are based on take this a stage further, to the point where not only do we know the characters are in no jeopardy, but we can be categorically sure they won’t ever die. Why? Well, that’s entirely down to their nature.

The Reason Why John Cena Won’t Turn Heel.

John Cena has been WWE’s top wrestler for nigh-on a decade. He’s a face, a good guy. He should be getting cheers.

http://www.gifbin.com/bin/022012/1336065970_john_cena_fake_wrestling.gif
Pictured: IT’S CALLED ‘WILLING SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF’ JOHN! READ A F**KING BOOK, LEARN WHY IT’S IMPORTANT, THEN LEARN TO DO THE F**KING JOB THEY PAY YOU TO DO!

But he doesn’t. He gets cheers and boos. A lot of boos. Why? Because he’s a terrible wrestler. Everything he does looks faker than Iain Duncan Smith’s concern for the poor, and if you’re an adult fan like me, that makes it nearly impossible to suspend your disbelief. It spoils the matches and betrays the artistry of the craft.

Now, normally when a wrestler gets boos, it’s a simple enough matter to sort things; just have them turn heel. Once they’re a bad guy, well, all those boos are great, because the heel is supposed to get boos.

The trouble is, John Cena gets cheers too. But from who? Well, the answer is kids. Kids love John Cena because his in-ring persona is basically them. He’s a big, simple, easy to understand good guy who looks great, wears bright colours and always beats the bad guy. The kids don’t understand the artistry of bumping, the skill of selling, the need for careful ring psychology to craft a match. They’re not watching for the same reasons adult fans are. Their love for wrestling is so much purer.

And their love sells a lot of T-shirts. And pyjamas. And hats, wristbands, action figures, computer games…

John Cena has sold more merchandise than any other wrestler, ever. His merchandise outsells every other wrestler’s combined. (http://www.cagesideseats.com/wwe/2014/8/29/6082507/merchandise-sales-no-alternatives-keeps-John-Cena-top-WWE-babyface ) If he turns heel, those sales crash: kids don’t like the bad guy. So, even though he’s been booed for a decade, Cena remains the company’s top face.

Now, Cena’s merchandise sales have fallen somewhat over the last year, but the fact he still hasn’t turned shows how wary WWE is about killing that particular golden goose.

A lot of fans of geek culture accept the things they’re interested in at face value, but there’s a whole lot of real-world stuff going on behind the scenes driving the stories and characters we consume. And do you notice that word?

‘Consume’.

We don’t watch Marvel films, or read DC comics: we consume them. We exchange our money for them, and when you’re looking at something like John Cena, or Undertaker, or Captain America, something that’s tied into more than just the stories written about them, something tied into multimedia merchandising opportunities, well… We’re not looking at anything so simple as a character any more. Once they’ve got merchandise, they’re Intellectual Properties.

And becoming an intellectual property is the death of drama.

The Problem of Joker Immunity (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/JokerImmunity )

In comics, there are certainties: Batman will never make a difference. Gotham will always be a craphole. The Joker will never, ever be defeated. Never. Nothing meaningful can ever change, because outside the fiction of Gotham, here, in the real world, T-shirts need to get sold. Every year brings a new crop of five-year old boys who want Spiderman pyjamas. Every year brings a new crop of girls who want a Black Widow figure.

http://images.comiccollectorlive.com/covers/c43/c438ba3d-7da0-4380-af9f-42bb77145807.jpg
Pictured: so rare, even the Hulk’s daughter doesn’t get to have one (https://twitter.com/MarkRuffalo/status/593222325325209601).

Companies like money. Merchandise makes money. Kids buy more merchandise than adults. So Marvel – as with every other geek intellectual property - follows the money, meaning their comics are – ultimately - for kids. Sure, they can tell some stories of astonishing complexity (the latest run on The Vision is absolutely worth your time, BTW), but let’s be fair here: they’re aimed at children and young adults as much as they are at older audiences. You can disagree all you want, but there’s a reason Marvel created their Epic, Knights and MAX imprints.

https://thedrunkenodyssey.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/born-2-2.png?w=550&h=850
Pictured: coming in ‘Avengers 5’ – a scene where Punisher drowns an American soldier for raping a Viet Cong sniper.

And those of you going ‘Well, the problem is the kids then; sell to the adults. The real collectors, with real jobs and big money’, well. It’s been tried. Turns out adults might love their Transformers, but they’d rather spend their money on things like house insurance, electricity bills, and food. Not to mention, every adult collector was a childhood fan once. The geek industry thrives on nostalgia; I doubt I’d be a 40K fan if I hadn’t gotten into it as a nervous eleven-year old. Today’s childhood fan is tomorrow’s big-spending collector; except in very rare cases, you don’t get one without the other.

Not to mention selling your comics to a younger audience isn’t remotely a bad thing, and nor does it denigrate adult fans. But it does put a limiter on what writers can do narratively.

See, children have no conception of the character’s backstories, because they haven’t read the literal decades of issues that existed before they were born. And it’s not like comics are massively durable; they’re printed on cheap, disposable paper, not meant to last. As a result, even with back issues now being printed in huge collected editions, it’s really hard for a child to get into superhero comics if those comics have a slavish dedication to continuity.

This is the reason for the ‘broad strokes’ timeline of comics. Peter Parker’s age is indeterminate, falling somewhere between 15 and 29. However old he is, though, he’s always the youngest though, because Spiderman’s whole gimmick is that he’s the ‘young superhero’, like Cap’s is ‘Big Good’, Stark’s is ‘the clever one’ and Punisher’s is ‘the sociopath’.

This keeps things easy for any child to understand; assuming they start at issue 1 of any story arc, they can pick up a comic and enjoy without needing too much backstory. However, those T-shirts have to get sold, which locks characters into certain, fixed personalities. Whenever a writer comes along and tries to make a permanent change, in a handful of years, it’ll be undone, because they’ve got merchandise to sell to kids.

Don’t believe me?

http://www.comicspodcasts.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/The-Uncanny-Podcast-007-Spider-Man-One-More-Day-2014450p.jpg
Click this link to find out how dumb this dedication to the status quo can get. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/ComicBook/OneMoreDay)

So, comics have a problem with ephemerality, and cope with it via cast-iron status quo. But the MCU has a different set of problems. Where the comics can have a sliding timeline, the MCU can’t. Its actors are aging. Robert Downey Jr. was in his forties when he kicked the whole thing off. He’s 51 now. That gives us maybe ten years more where he can play Iron Man, before the whole thing starts to feel a little… Well, weird. Not wrong, but not quite right. And this applies across all the actors. Spiderman’s in ‘Civil War’ and there’s a reason he’s fifteen: it means he can be in their films for decades if they need him to be.

The MCU is therefore, uniquely different to the comics, and therefore in the unique position of being able to do things the comics don’t.

Like inject some real high stakes drama.

I Want Captain America To Live…

As far as I can like anyone I’ve never met, I like Chris Evans.

http://38.media.tumblr.com/ab3c0a10735872f26309340e5b462de2/tumblr_inline_nlkw7kvjwv1rifr4k.gif
Pictured: I mean, Hayley Atwell seems cooler, and much more fun to go drinking with, but Evans seems okay.

Even despite the occasional unpleasant slip-up (http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/just-jeremy-renner-and-chris-evans-slutshaming-the-black-widow--xyLGNGuylW), he comes off as a likable guy (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4NNDnB_AxA ), and that’s great, because Cap needs to be likable. Where Downey Jr. is all snark and charisma, Evans is quiet and introspective. I like that. I don’t want Chris Evans to disappear from the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Not to mention, I love Cap’s backstory. ‘The First Avenger’ is a wonderful piece of dieselpunk, and by rooting him in WW2, Cap’s character somehow has a gravity that the others do not.

I would be very, very sad if Cap were to die.

… But Captain America Must Die

There have been a number of articles about how there are no ‘stakes’ in the MCU, and those claims are not without merit, especially given the source material. In comics, death is so cheap it’s a joke. It used to be that the only people who stayed dead were Uncle Ben, Gwen Stacy, Jason Todd, and Bucky. Now it’s just Uncle Ben, and they’d bring him back if they could. Seriously, at one of Jean Grey’s (many) funerals, Emma Frost actually says to Cyclops ‘Really Scott, these re-runs of your grief must be getting tiresome’.

Death is literally a joke in the comics.

We know the good guys are going to win. We know that the bomb’s timer will stop at one. We know that the Bad Guy will fall to his doom like always.

We come to watch the fireworks and yawn as the heroes pat each other on the back, contented that All Is Right With The World.

http://i1.wp.com/media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m2l907i7zs1rngkh2.gif?resize=399%2C226

‘Game of Thrones’ isn’t a perfect series – I have some serious reservations about the way it treats women. However, the one thing it has done, is shown that with a large enough cast, you can kill whoever you want.

Literally, whoever you want.

Now, I’m not saying that Marvel needs to ‘Red Wedding’ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azr99OfKLxk) everyone. But say Cap dies, and – more importantly – doesn’t come back. Say Marvel holds its nerve and keeps him gone. No final words, no magically TAHITI resurrection. That sends the audience a message: there are stakes, and they are For Real.

The MCU has an opportunity to do something real; to become the ‘Game of Thrones’ of cinema. To make death real. Yeah, they fumbled the ball with Agent Coulson… But they didn’t with Quicksilver. The difference, of course, is that no-one really cared about Quicksilver. Wouldn’t it be amazing if they Ned Starked Cap? Suddenly, everything would be up for grabs.

I love Cap, but if he goes, the status quo goes with him. Just like the end of ‘Empire Strikes Back’, where everything was left unresolved and broken, there’d be real consequences. Not to mention, it allows Falcon to take over as the new Captain America. That instantly gives the MCU a shot in the arm, promotes diversity, and shows that anyone could go. The thing is, legacy characters like this work. Want proof? Look at Doctor Who: the longevity of the series is entirely down to regeneration. Also in the UK, we had two superb series, ‘Being Human’ and ‘Misfits’. Both series killed literally every single one of their main characters but before this, they developed replacements ahead of time. Whenever a main character went, there was a different, but equally awesome character ready to take over.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/93/94/05/9394058eac9d0c6056583feba340b8e9.jpg
Pictured: the single greatest werewolf there has ever been.

Even though beloved characters were gone, the series carried on. They weren’t the same, and we missed the characters that were gone, but that’s the thing about death in real life: it’s final. The fantasy that we can have beloved people back in our life is seductive, but to see that fantasy played out undermines any drama, as well as being dishonest.

If they kill Cap, they move the MCU into seriously dramatic territory. It moves the metaplot forwards in a big way, and makes the stories that follow that much more powerful, because our heroes are no longer safe.

So, how does all this basic narrative theory link to our little hobby?

Wargaming Isn’t A Story.

Well, one of the things you constantly hears is how 40K should ‘move the plot forwards’.

‘I’m tired of things as they are. I wish GW would just move the plot forwards.’

On the surface, this seems like a really solid idea. I mean, 40K’s been going for nigh-on thirty years, and over all that time, nothing’s really changed has it? We’re always reading about how Chaos is going to consume everything, how the Tyranids are going to consume everything, how the Necrons are going to consume everything. Or how they were, before, you know, they became just much more interesting (http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?60022-An-Imaginary-Story&p=515446#post515446). When is this all going to lead to something, asks the 40K fan? When are GW actually going to fulfil those threats? When do the signs and portents actually coalesce into something more than just empty words?

In short, when are they going to stop tightening their power-fist clad grip on our gaming blue balls?

Surely after all these years, it’s about time. The Emperor’s been a corpse for ten thousand years. Let’s finally let him die, have Abaddon finally succeed in his Black Crusade, and plunge the Imperium into madness. Wouldn’t that be awesome?

See, I don’t think so. Actually, I think moving the 40K plot forwards is the worst possible decision Games Workshop could make. See, I get the desire for the ‘plot’ to advance – I love the idea of Cap dying, of seeing the drama that unfurls – but really, what actually is the ‘plot’ of 40K? Because I don’t think there is one. Who’s the main character of the Warhammer 40,000 universe? The Emperor? Abaddon? Eldrad? Khârn?

http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/warhammer40k/images/8/80/Makari.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20140723181459
Pictured: Makari, obviously.

Better yet, who’s the supporting character? I mean, we know who the bad guy is: literally everyone. (https://yorknecromancer.wordpress.com/2016/01/03/a-barely-commented-upon-evil/) But the other roles…?

See, the people who want to advance the plot have, in my opinion at least, fundamentally misunderstood the nature of Warhammer 40,000. It isn't a story, and whilst it might superficially look like one, to think it is a terrible error.

40K is a sandbox. It’s a space to play in, to create stories within. And you don’t tell a story about the sandbox; you tell a story with a sandbox. It’s a subtle distinction, but one some people don’t seem to like.

Because there is a narrative, but the reason the storyline can never advance is because it’s not GW’s story: it's OURS. Yours and mine, on a very personal level. It’s the reason the game is skewed so heavily towards narrative play, away from competitive. It’s why there’s so many sidebars about ‘Forging The Narrative’. Your army is the one the story is about; yours and your friends. Your local gaming group, you girls and guys are the heroines and heroes of story, not the Emperor.

Consider what advancing the storyline would actually mean. On the surface, it looks like it means everything would change. But would it? I suspect that ultimately that change wouldn’t be so huge as you might think.

The proof of this lies with the Horus Heresy. There’s Forge World’s Heresy-era game we can play, and frankly it looks a lot like 40K. There are differences in armies and the like, some lovely models, but what it really is is just 40K with a different set of army lists. A 50K game would probably look very similar, and for it to be worthwhile, it would have to bring something different and better than the 40K universe.

So what could that be? 30K has Horus, the Primarchs, the Emperor, the full might of the Imperium at the greatest stage in its history. What would 50K have instead? Perhaps Mk IX armour as the norm, and a bolter with rotary drums as standard? Whatever else it has, Marines will be Marines. They’re not going anywhere, because they’ve got the same immunity to plot as the Joker does: gotta shift that merchandise.

And if you’re the kind of person who hates Ultramarines, let me ask you this: who do you think is going to be the hero of the 50K setting? Assuming the death of the Emperor and the collapse of Terra, without the fascist evil of the Imperium to hold them back, there’s nothing to stop the Ultras from becoming the Mary Sue noblebright heroes they’ve always secretly wanted to be.

Consider how much worse this will be if Gulliman really is in suspended animation and does come back. Imagine him as the new Emperor.

Then there’s the problem of the Xenos species. They don’t get as much love as the human factions to begin with, and you know that in 50K, they won’t fundamentally change. Tyranids might get new models to represent their accelerated evolution, but it’s not like those are going to be anything radically different from what’s available now. Orks are orks, and thus utterly impervious to change. The Eldar, it’s reasonable to assume, will disappoint us all by looking the same (assuming they aren’t just Squatted). The Necrons likewise will probably not change overmuch. As we know, in all sci-fi, the older an alien species becomes, the more it always looks the same. Will Smith pilots the equivalent of a Spitfire into the alien ship in ‘Independence Day’ and not one of the aliens bats and eyelid, because, as we all know, when it comes to writing, humans are the only species that’s immune to cultural stasis.

All of which basically leaves Chaos, who, again, aren’t going to be too different. Maybe the Primarchs will be out of the Eye of Terror and playable, but honestly, you can already do that in Apocalypse, and I can’t imagine it’s going to be too many years before GW releases Nagash/Bloodthirster-sized kits of them anyway, because money is delicious. I hate Chaos, and I’d buy a massive kit of full Daemon Prince Angron because of course I would.

Sometimes, Stasis Is A Good Thing

Ultimately, the only people affected by an advancing plotline would be the Imperium, which can ultimately only change two ways: it could get better or worse. If if gets better, 40K loses a huge amount of its uniqueness. The fact that humans are the villains (http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2015/06/40k-editorial-faintly-aggressive-society-claims-its-supremely-moral.html) is one of the major things that makes 40K awesome.

Wargaming is narrative, but it isn’t a narrative, and that’s an important distinction. We can tell stories through it, but it’s not a story itself.

And a final thought. People who want to advance the plot generally use that to imply they want the Imperium to fall. They think there’s a lot of fun to be had in the idea of a ‘post-apocalyptic’ 40K universe. But I think they’ve missed the fact that they’re already playing the game they want to be. You can’t really have a ‘Post-Apocalypse’ version of the 40K universe, because that’s what 40K is: there was an apocalypse, and it did destroy the Imperium.

It was called The Horus Heresy.

If you think about it in those terms, 40K is – technically – already an advancement of the plot.

Kirsten
05-01-2016, 01:30 PM
I liked Quicksilver, and Kharn is clearly the main character.

I agree about plot advancement though, 40k has nowhere really to go, though it interests us from a fluff perspective to know how a story continues, and how it ends, nothing good can really come of it in this instance. Age of Sigmar poses an interesting point in that they do progress the story. it was quite interesting, all my favourite characters started dying in the End Times, there was suddenly real tension and drama. then it all reset for Age of Sigmar, and actually we are back to the same situation, only in a new world. it is like randomly generating a new map to fight over in Civilisation or something. and of course a load of the big characters survived and came back after all. big reset turns out to not be such a big reset really. I hated the fact that Arkham Knight bottled out on making changes. it was a self contained universe away from the comics, more for a grown up audience, it could have done a lot. Main characters die, Batman is terminally ill, one last hurrah. but Characters come back, and Batman gets better through sheer stubbornness... utterly killed the ending because you are back to status quo. one medium where they could have actually broken the cycle of the comics, and instead they embrace it. you might as well stay on the edge of something major, always tantalising, than go over that edge, and find it is actually just a tiny step back on itself.

Haighus
05-01-2016, 01:44 PM
Out of curiosity, why Captain America? Instead of Iron Man or any of the other big characters? (Avoiding the fact that some of them kind of can't die).

YorkNecromancer
05-01-2016, 02:31 PM
Mostly because it's his film that's out at the moment. Honestly, it could be any of them, but I think it would probably work best with Cap, largely because he is so decent. Plus, he goes, and everyone else has a moral benchmark to live up to, and none of the other Marvel characters can really provide that. Stark's a barely functioning ball of insecurities and arrogance, Romanov and Barton are reformed assassins, Hulk is a natural disaster in human form, and so on. Cap is the only member of the Avengers whose never been morally compromised, and so his death and transition into a symbol would have more meaning than any of the others.

It's also the fact that he represents America as it wishes it was, and that's significant. To fail to live up to Cap's legacy would be to fail to live up to America's, and that has a resonance that the others lack. None of the other Avengers represent anything like so potent a symbol as Cap does, not even Thor, because he's only a god, not a cultural dream personified.

So, yeah, mostly he needs to go because it's his film, but also because he's just the most powerful symbol out of all of them.

Asymmetrical Xeno
05-01-2016, 02:57 PM
id like to see most of the heroes killed off by Angela queen of hel.

Or eaten by Shuma Gorath.

YorkNecromancer
05-01-2016, 03:12 PM
Man, I love Shuma Gorath. He's Cthulhu, only Marvel-sized! And also awesome in every Marvel vs. Capcom game.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33We3Lf3An8

Haighus
05-01-2016, 03:20 PM
Mostly because it's his film that's out at the moment. Honestly, it could be any of them, but I think it would probably work best with Cap, largely because he is so decent. Plus, he goes, and everyone else has a moral benchmark to live up to, and none of the other Marvel characters can really provide that. Stark's a barely functioning ball of insecurities and arrogance, Romanov and Barton are reformed assassins, Hulk is a natural disaster in human form, and so on. Cap is the only member of the Avengers whose never been morally compromised, and so his death and transition into a symbol would have more meaning than any of the others.

It's also the fact that he represents America as it wishes it was, and that's significant. To fail to live up to Cap's legacy would be to fail to live up to America's, and that has a resonance that the others lack. None of the other Avengers represent anything like so potent a symbol as Cap does, not even Thor, because he's only a god, not a cultural dream personified.

So, yeah, mostly he needs to go because it's his film, but also because he's just the most powerful symbol out of all of them.
Fair enough, good reasoning. Do you envisage him being completely killed off as a character, or for someone to step in an attempt to continue in his shoes (literally)? I find I prefer the idea of his shield being hung up on the wall in the Avengers HQ as a reminder of what every should try to be like, as opposed to someone trying to be him, but then I can't see them wanting to pass up on using such a powerful artefact.

Mr Mystery
05-01-2016, 03:25 PM
There's the other problem with advancing the background of 40k. And it's a glaring one.

Simply put, everyone wants to win. Everyone.

But the whole point of 40k, and the Horus Heresy. And the Dark Age of Technology. And Old Night.....nobody wins. Ever..

Let's consider the Imperium, prior to Istvaan. Dear lord it was well 'ard. Entire species driven into extinction. The manpower and organisational necessitates to interdict huge areas of the Galaxy (Ghoul Stars), keeping the really nasty at bay until such time are five or six Legionnes can be freed up to properly clear them out. Permanently. Space Marines so astoundingly well equipped in every possible sense, they fought in the style of the modern day Astra Militarum - sheer, overwhelming force.

But of course, The Imperium lost. Then we have the Horus Heresy itself. Yes the Imperium was gutted, and The Emperor left quadraspazzed on Life Support - because of his own hubris. The whole thing was his fault. Be it arrogance or naivety, it's all on Him on Terra. But the Heresy ultimately failed. Miserably. Horrific losses, Horus dead. The traitor/rebel Legionnes driven far beyond sanity, and no longer fighting a single corner. Whilst Chaos itself probably doesn't care that much about the outcome (the Gods are of course irrevocably insane themselves) it doesn't change the fact that Chaos lost the Heresy.

Yet the Warhammer 40,000 Universe is a tale of hubris and massive sacrifice. The Eldar had their fall - they became complacent, and lost everything. They were left as a species on the edge of extinction, and five minutes beforehand had been the force in the galaxy.

Necrons? You thought the a Emperor blobbed it? You think the Eldar threw it all away? They've got nothing on those shiny, shiny Necrons.

So already, we have Eldar, Orks, The Imperium and Chaos as prime losers. They've all had their chance. They've all had their day in the sun. And none of them has anything of worth to show for it.

Tyranids? They're not in it to win it. They simply are. Orks are very similar - but also self defeating.

40k is a setting where every victory, every triumph, be it large or small, is inherently pyrrhic. And I love that. There's no good guy. There's no bad guy. There's no winner. Only losers.

Asymmetrical Xeno
05-01-2016, 03:42 PM
oh he's way better than than that boring overused kaiju reject Cthulhu! Shumas body is properly non-humanoid, and he doesn't sleep on the job!

YorkNecromancer
05-01-2016, 03:52 PM
Fair enough, good reasoning. Do you envisage him being completely killed off as a character, or for someone to step in an attempt to continue in his shoes (literally)? I find I prefer the idea of his shield being hung up on the wall in the Avengers HQ as a reminder of what every should try to be like, as opposed to someone trying to be him, but then I can't see them wanting to pass up on using such a powerful artefact.

I think it works well either way - legacy character or memorial on wall - but if they don't make Falcon the new Cap, then they've f**ked up massively. See, you always get those wanke - sorry, those persons who complain against diversity using the 'don't just stick diverse characters in for the sake of it; if the diverse character doesn't happen naturally they shouldn't be there'.

Now, while that argument is so pant-sh*ttingly stupid it makes me want to split their heads open for the sake of the species, it is undeniable that there's a real chance to have a black main character in the MCU happen organically.

Because if Cap dies, just like the current comics, you have Falcon take over. Their characters are almost the same: both good men, both became soldiers for the right reasons, both have no concern but helping people - Falcon was explicitly a rescue worker before he re-entered civilian life.

I mean, obviously the shield will inevitably pass to notorious mass murdering serial killer, Bucky, because a white man's need to cleanse hisr manpain and atone for his not-his-fault-but-brainwashed sins must come before anything else.

*sigh*

Still, it'd be sweet. You lose Rogers, gain a symbol of decency for the Avengers to always aspire towards, and the leader of the Avengers is now a black man. That'd be amazing. Plus, from the all-important money perspective, you still have a Captain America, so th kids still get to buy their Cap PJ's from Tesco. It's a win-win all around. I'm hoping to to be surprised, but I can't see it happening. :(

Andrew Thomas
05-02-2016, 10:53 AM
Wealth is neither a superpower nor an origin story, so it's a bit reductive to bemoan the existence of superheroes that happen to be wealthy, even if their power set is connected to their wealth in some fashion. I have yet to hear anyone challenge the legitimacy of Thor as a superhero due to his being a prince/god, or Black Panther...

I do agree that the stakes do need to be raised for the good of the franchise (and while I fear for Rhodey, don't spoil it for me please), but we need more than just a martyr to aspire to, we need the team to grow emotionally.

As it relates to 40k, we could use a few more lost touchstones in the narrative, but the trouble is, at the galactic scale, everything seems small in comparison. Because the narrative is presented more as a history than anything else, it's not easy to just cut out important pieces of the setting without disrupting every other piece of writing that exists. The rebranding of game factions alone has made enough trouble, but wiping out entire chunks of the setting would risk needing an entire reboot.

Erik Setzer
05-02-2016, 10:56 AM
*Sigh.* Poor Makari. Taken out in one of the dumbest examples of fluff-writing ever, which I refuse to acknowledge, except as a reason that some day I'll find who wrote it and beat his head until he gets enough concussions to never again write something so mindlessly stupid.

Hey, the little guy has a place in my heart, I'm allowed to be violently upset about it. (For those who don't know, the TL;DR is: Makari was Ghazghkull's standard bearer and the luckiest bugger alive. Had a 2+ save that couldn't be modified by anything. He could survive when everyone else died. And then because they opted not to make a new model for him, they claimed Ghazghkull sat on him and squashed him. The luckiest git alive gets SAT ON?!? And Ghaz, the most brilliant Ork around, doesn't notice his personal standard bearer when he's sitting down? It's like the lamest attempt at humor ever.)

*Ahem.*

Anyway.

Age of Sigmar shows us the problem with trying to move the plot forward meaningfully even more than Storm of Chaos did (where they retconned it in the main storyline, though WFRP did well with it; ditto for Eye of Terror in 40K). Age of Sigmar comes after they literally destroyed the entire world. Chaos won, game over, everyone died. Even the backup was destroyed.

And yet, here we are, and it's not just Sigmar who survived. Characters who weren't "incarnates" are popping back up in the story. Races that are meant to be gone, at least temporarily, are showing up, with no explanation why. They're trying to appease people who don't want favorite characters gone or whole races gone, and the net result is a somewhat convoluted mess that contradicts itself in places and makes no attempt to explain how we got from Point A to Point B.

If 40K attempted to move forward, even just a hundred years, how much would they then be retconning again? What if the Tyranids munched their way through the Tau Empire and the Ultramarines' systems? What if the Necrons opted to go back to sleep, figuring things were too much of a Charlie Foxtrot to deal with? What if Ghazghkull kept going and embroiled most of the galaxy in wars that produced more and nastier Orks? What if Abaddon's second attempt at a 13th Black Crusade succeeded and he burned Terra?

It's exciting to think "What if...?" but Age of Sigmar answered that for us. You piss off or alienate a LOT of people, and have to do some silly things with your story to bring things back around to the status quo as far as the game goes. It's just not worth it for a company to do.

YorkNecromancer
05-02-2016, 01:37 PM
Wealth is neither a superpower nor an origin story, so it's a bit reductive to bemoan the existence of superheroes that happen to be wealthy, even if their power set is connected to their wealth in some fashion. I have yet to hear anyone challenge the legitimacy of Thor as a superhero due to his being a prince/god, or Black Panther...

'With great power comes great responsibility.'

Wealth = power, because money is the primary means by which people access the goods and service provided by society. No money, no power. You want representation? Wealth and power buys that.

When I bemoan wealth, my key problem with it isn't wealth in and of itself. It's that wealth is used by superheroes almost exclusively as a means to prosecute personally-motivated campaigns without oversight of authorities that would otherwise reign them in, rather than using that wealth for the betterment of society by developing broken social structures to the point that they fulfil their intended roles.

Batman is a multi-billionaire who spends his night beating up poor people because it helps him overcome his grief at his parents' death. That was fine when I was a child, but now all I ask is well: why not become a cop? You wanna fight crime, pick up a badge and do it properly. You can't stop the Joker? Fine. Why not fund the police force until they can do it? There's like, hundreds of them. Hundreds. You seriously telling me that one lunatic without powers is completely unapprehendable by regular folks, are you Batman?

'Ah, but the police can't -'

Stop. Right. There.

You are Bruce Wayne, multi-f**king billionaire. You could funnel this money into the public's coffers. You could rebuild and reinvest. If you've got enough money for multiple batmobiles, power armour that works, batwings, experimental ammunition, a g***amned space station, then you have enough money to clean up Gotham. You just do. Seriously, for the price of a single Batmobile, how many extra police could you hire? For the price of a single missile on the Batwing, how much high-level training could you provide? You could get Gotham's police force trained to military levels; you could see them better equipped than most armies.

But you don't. You put on a scary costume to fight crime. That's just ridiculous.

Now, yeah, the meta-reason you don't is because a comic about a superhero who saves the day through effective town planning and redistribution of wealth isn't as exciting as a man who dressed up in a black cape to punch poor people. But the comics never acknowledge that meta reason, because they can't, so what it makes Bruce Wayne look like from the outside is a f**king sociopath who uses the impoverished and desperate as a means to scratch his own egos.

Tony Stark's kind of the same, but he gets away with it, because he's not supposed to be all that likable, and he acknowledges that he's a horrible person, which Bruce Wayne never does. Also, Stark's main superpower is his mind. Wayne's just a rich, violent prick.

(Yeah, I'm ragging on Batman a lot, but I've kind of realised I fairly detest the concept of Batman over the years, and the 'BvS-DoJ' film hasn't endeared him to me. The Nolan films are great, Batman '66 is incredible, and the original 'Batman: The Animated Series' may be just about the best superhero ever realised in any medium. But Batman as an idea is just f**king loathsome to me. I believe in the importance of meritocracy, and while he superficially embodies that, everything about him actually spits in the face of that ideal.)

As for no-one ranting about kings or queens, well, yeah, personally I find the notion of hereditary monarchies detestable in every conceivable way. But at least Thor and T'Challa are bound by duties that simply don't apply to people like Wayne or Stark; they pay lip service to the idea of there being a society which they are supposed to service by operating within existing social structures. It's not ideal, but it's better than Wayne's decision to turn Gotham into his personal playground.

Ultimately, Bruce Wayne without his wealth is Rorshach: a crazed homeless guy snapping the fingers of low-lifes because he's simply unable to function as a meaningful member of society. Wealth is absolutely a superpower, because his wealth enables him to compete on the levels of the demigods that populate the DC universe, and he wouldn't be able to do that otherwise.

Mr Mystery
05-02-2016, 02:09 PM
You know what I'd like to see as an Alternative Batman storyline?

Batman is trying to clean up Gotham of organised crime. Usual reasons apply - Police are corrupt, criminals pay bribes, own Judges etc.

But given his massive psychosis, it's actually Bruce Wayne funding the organised crime - and he does so due to the twisted logic that his actions there act as a poultice to draw out the scum of humanity in Gotham, highlighting them as undesirables to be removed from the equation - be it through a Palpatineesque gang war where he controls both sides, or having them committed to Arkham or locked up in Blackgate.

YorkNecromancer
05-02-2016, 02:53 PM
I'd like one of those alternative universe stories where Batman confronts an evil alternative Bruce Wayne who went through everything Batman did, only he channelled all his money into urban redevelopment, fighting the causes of crime rather than the crime itself.

And this alterna-Gotham is basically as perfect as things get. The Joker's permanently incarcerated in a top-of-the-line mental health facility which has the funding to deal with him. Organised crime doesn't exist because the police and DA's were given more funding for better lawyers than the crime bosses could afford, meaning they were all actually sent down, along with all their henchmen. It's all, essentially great.

Then Ra's Al Ghul shows up looking to tear Gotham down, only he's stopped almost immediately by the well-funded police who quickly identify what's going on, arresting and incarcerating all his minions and leaving Gotham safe.

Every time Batman shows up to solve a problem with his fists, the cops are already there handcuffing the bad guys, and he just can't believe it.

And in the climax, he meets alterna-Bruce Wayne and they compare their lives, and alterna-Wayne's just like

'Well the reason your Gotham's so terrible is you. You're the problem. You could have fought these problems much more effectively, like a grown-up, but you couldn't see beyond the end of your fists. You should have spent your money on society instead of toys for yourself.'

And Batman's like

'My hands are the only ones I can trust.'

And alterna-Wayne's like

'See? That's exactly what I'm talking about you arrogant prick. You're the problem. You're so sure you're the only man for the job, but you didn't realise your job was to co-ordinate and support, not solve on your own. Because no-one can solve the problems of a city on their own. With their fists. Because that's just insane.'

And Batman's like

'My God, he's right. I'm the villain of this story.'

And then he goes back to his Gotham but nothing changes because he's just not that guy. He'd rather be king of the craphole than actually do what needs to be done, because paperwork is much harder than punching.

I'd love to see Batman just get called the f**k out on his arrogance and insanity.

Kirsten
05-02-2016, 03:53 PM
Batman Beyond! then Brave and the Bold.

Psychosplodge
05-02-2016, 04:15 PM
If Batman really wanted to deal with the joker extrajudicially I'm sure he could afford either a team of mercs, a more than competent hitman, or a really big gun. But like you said he likes to keep punching baddies.

I think you're right with the marvel thing, you know you're not going to really lose any of the main characters, though obviously based on other threads if they did kill a main character you know who who it'd be right?

Andrew Thomas
05-02-2016, 10:46 PM
Wealth isn't just money. And the societal problems that create a Joker, or a Killer Croc, or any of Iron Man's enemies, couldn't be thwarted by angel investments alone.

To answer your 2 rhetorical questions at once: because the system, and its agents, are not interested in preventing crime and tragedy, but in ensuring that the right, or failing that, acceptable, persons answer for those crimes and tragedies. For all its flaws, one thing the movie Superman Returns gets right is that Vigilantism is not compatible with conventional jurisprudence (the only reason Lex Luthor was still on the streets was because Superman does not make "Parole Hearings, Appeals Hearings, or Congressional Oversight Committees"). This is because the bureaucracy inherent to conventional jurisprudence allows too much opportunity for your typical terrorist mastermind, which would be a fitting description for about 75% of Batman's adversaries, to carry out actions, even while in custody.

Lastly, neither Bruce Wayne nor Tony Stark "buy" their power sets "off of the rack." They build and develop them using their own ingenuity and talent, sometimes at great personal cost.

White Tiger88
05-02-2016, 11:48 PM
Death captian gul...er... I mean primarch of the smurfs!

Morgrim
05-03-2016, 06:52 AM
I once read a wonderful fanfiction where somebody killed the Emperor, and explored the havoc that would result. (Unfortunately it was never finished.) And the best thing about it was that things shook out in a way where you could have a Warhammer 50k in that universe; some characters were killed permanently, but that's okay, and they had a wonderful send off - Eisenhorn was a wonderful and terrible and fitting end, that was a mixture of 'you magnificent *******' and 'you utter idiot fighting Chaos like that' - yet the broad factions were intact. Some new, some melded together, but none completely squatted. Just on different sides, for plausible reasons.

I think that is what you would have to do if you wanted to advance the story of 40k. The first step would be to figure out a new stable equilibrium and where every faction will be afterwards and for heavens sake make them at least vaguely balanced. Then decide which named characters will survive and which will permanently die. Only once you've done all of that and laid the groundwork do you do your dynamic End of Times event and get everyone enthusiastic. Probably want to write the skeleton of the new rule book beforehand and possibly even list the specific models and units that you are not certain whether they will be continued, so there will be no "well I want to play Lizardmen/Bretonia, but I got told they may be getting deleted" happening again.

People are more likely to join in if they're reassured that even though everything is changing, their faction will pull through in some form. Abet possibly switching to a new and unexpected side during the process. (I'm sure some players would promptly whinge about messing up their superfriends army, but you can't please everyone.)

Rory Wildwards
06-06-2016, 01:46 AM
Hail Hydra. ;)

CoffeeGrunt
06-06-2016, 03:11 AM
I once read a wonderful fanfiction where somebody killed the Emperor, and explored the havoc that would result. (Unfortunately it was never finished.) And the best thing about it was that things shook out in a way where you could have a Warhammer 50k in that universe; some characters were killed permanently, but that's okay, and they had a wonderful send off - Eisenhorn was a wonderful and terrible and fitting end, that was a mixture of 'you magnificent *******' and 'you utter idiot fighting Chaos like that' - yet the broad factions were intact. Some new, some melded together, but none completely squatted. Just on different sides, for plausible reasons.

The Shape of the Nightmare to Come? If it's that one, I quite liked it. Was interesting to see the Imperium fracture into a thousand "New Imperiums" of various breeds. Abaddon takes over the Cadia region but doesn't get much further because of the rest of the galaxy brewing up into the mother of all sh*tstorms. The Tau become utterly genocidal over time after seeing world-after-devastated-world ruined due to the Imperium's new civil war, turning them bitter like the Imperium was.

It also had a pretty great sequence of the last stand on Titan after the Emperor dies and the Warp tunnel under his throne opens, pulling Terra into the Warp and shattering the Imperial Fleet. IIRC, Mars falls to a tide of daemons afterwards, and Titan was the last stronghold in the Sol system.

The Emperor as a Chaos God was also interesting, and kinda made sense given that he'd been prayed to with the screaming wails of the dying, the begging of the destitute, and had been fed tortured psykers for millennia. The human within had gone utterly mad and evaporated, leaving only a pained being of human anguish.

Also seeing how various characters reacted to it all was cool. Such as Yarrick becoming a ruthless dictator who was eventually shot by his own men. The best part was that it made everything go to crap, but also laid enough hints of hope down that there was a chance for humanity to survive and prosper again.

Morgrim
06-07-2016, 03:48 AM
No, this one was called 'Death of the Emperor' and featured several splintered factions of the Imperium that were (mostly) still allied, in the sense that other humans were better than the xenos, but more of a cold war situation since everyone else leapt on the chance to attack. Abbadon was delayed by every chaos god having a different idea of how to take advantage of the situation. Slaanesh was the most successful and got a minion into a position of High Lord of Terra, nearly causing another great religious Schism in the process that led to a massive civil war ripping through the Sol System.

Following is major spoilers:

Due to someone's brilliant but stupid move during the battle a major Nurgle incursion occurred on Terra during the fight (the portal was within the Palace, making it rather hard to close), which did very effectively stop the civil war as they took out the leaders of one side and then all the humans decided they'd better reunite if they didn't want to die. Everyone was very hard pressed to survive until they got a sudden unexpected backup... from Magnus and a large force of Thousand Sons. Considering the human armies were being led by the Grey Knights, much awkwardness occurred. Especially when someone pointed out it was their respective similarities that meant the two groups were fighting together really well.

Unfortunately it stopped soon after that point because the author of the fanfic became a published author and was understandably focusing on the stuff they could sell.

CoffeeGrunt
06-07-2016, 04:04 AM
Ah, shame. Might check it out if it's decent.