TexasAggie_02 said:

---

GiveEmHellBill said:

---

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

Was thinking about the tesseract this weekend. In the trailer, we see Loki holding it, usually it is handled with tools or gloves of some sort.

---

I'm calling it now: that scene is a Loki trick. He is handing it over to Thanos aboard their ship from Ragnarok. But, Loki (and the Tesseract) are actually with Thor trying to get the Asgardians to safety. Then, Loki and Thor take on Thanos to buy time for them to escape. Thor is beaten to a pulp and Loki....well, I don't think he survives and Thanos ends up with the first stone.

---

I bet they use the tessseract to send banner back to warn earth. Thor and Loki stay behind to fight and lose. Guardians are hot in thanos' trail after Nova Corps falls, and pick up Thor in short order.

---

That's how I see it: they use the Tesseract to get ALL the ship's inhabitants (the Asgardian survivors, Korg & Meek, Valkryie and Banner to get to Earth. Pretty sure Marvel came out and told us that the Asgardians will be setting up a new city somewhere in Norway. When Odin passed, he said that this cliff would be a good spot because it reminded him of home or something like that. That was kind of a big hint about the future...there will be a New Asgard on Earth.

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

I bet they use the tessseract to send banner back to warn earth. Thor and Loki stay behind to fight and lose. Guardians are hot in thanos' trail after Nova Corps falls, and pick up Thor in short order.

---

I like this theory as it makes sense with Banner's appearance in Strange's place and what I figured caused him to get there was him falling out of outer space. - So not specifically what I was thinking but pretty similar... I'll say I was partially right. We'll see how high up he gets dropped from.

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

Sex Panther said:

---

Dr. Strange's stone is the "Eye of Agamotto". Doesn't that kind of ruin this?

---

Yes, though this theory came out before Dr strange. Some say it still technically works if you substitute "necklace", but that breaks the continuity of using the actual names of the other stones.

---

But "orb" isn't the name of the stone, either, but the name of the container. So "necklace" would work.

MooreTrucker said:

---

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

Sex Panther said:

---

Dr. Strange's stone is the "Eye of Agamotto". Doesn't that kind of ruin this?

---

Yes, though this theory came out before Dr strange. Some say it still technically works if you substitute "necklace", but that breaks the continuity of using the actual names of the other stones.

---

But "orb" isn't the name of the stone, either, but the name of the container. So "necklace" would work.

---

Orb and scepter were names used in the movies, necklace never was.

dcaggie04 said:

---

MooreTrucker said:

---

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

Sex Panther said:

---

Dr. Strange's stone is the "Eye of Agamotto". Doesn't that kind of ruin this?

---

Yes, though this theory came out before Dr strange. Some say it still technically works if you substitute "necklace", but that breaks the continuity of using the actual names of the other stones.

---

But "orb" isn't the name of the stone, either, but the name of the container. So "necklace" would work.

---

Well the soul mind stone is in Vision, so we must be looking for a worse villian named THANOV.

Plus this whole thing in stupid since it has no continuity in how the letter is gathered. The T for tesseract and A for Aether are the actual materials. The N for necklace, O for orb and S for Scepter are vessel that carry the stone.

---

FIFY

Good catch

OnlyForNow said:

---

dcaggie04 said:

---

MooreTrucker said:

---

TexasAggie_02 said:

---

Sex Panther said:

---

Dr. Strange's stone is the "Eye of Agamotto". Doesn't that kind of ruin this?

---

Yes, though this theory came out before Dr strange. Some say it still technically works if you substitute "necklace", but that breaks the continuity of using the actual names of the other stones.

---

But "orb" isn't the name of the stone, either, but the name of the container. So "necklace" would work.

---

Well the soul mind stone is in Vision, so we must be looking for a worse villian named THANOV.

Plus this whole thing in stupid since it has no continuity in how the letter is gathered. The T for tesseract and A for Aether are the actual materials. The N for necklace, O for orb and S for Scepter are vessel that carry the stone.

---

FIFY

---

So, if we're trying to spell "Thanos" then we're missing the "H"?

It could also be thanof for 'forehead' oooh! Thanos for Skull! As in the stone lodged in Visions skull.

The discussion of a letters:

What if the soul stone is in Thor's Hammer?

It would spell TMANOS with an M for Mjolnir

Soul stone is in Heaven. Someone has to die to retrieve it.

I'm a pretty big fan of these movies, but I've never had much interest in the infinity stones. Too much effort to keep track of where they are and what they do. Maybe the new film will change that.

double aught said:

---

I'm a pretty big fan of these movies, but I've never had much interest in the infinity stones. Too much effort to keep track of where they are and what they do. Maybe the new film will change that.

---

It will, because they'll all be in one place doing one thing.

Just because Disney might own the X-Men doesn't necessarily mean they'll put them in the same universe as their other Marvel stuff.

I kind of agree. The comics usually involved superhero and mutant registration across party lines, however. I just read a 1990 Fantastic Four arc where they testified to Congress about superhero registration and cited the discrimination towards mutants and mutant registration.

That said, it did always bother me that like... the Avengers are usually a group of extraordinary people with extraordinary powers or discoveries or stories. Freak accident, alien traveler, miracle creation. It felt cheap for someone to come along and say "oh I can also turn into a being of pure flame. It just kinda happened. Puberty."

I like the mutants who look and feel like mutants. They don't just have super strength and that's it. Angel has freakish wings on his back and feels like he has to hide them or be looked at like some kind of monster. Beast has blue skin and hair. Cyclops can't see without help.

Gambit, though? He can just choose not to blow things up and no one would know he's a mutant. (Though perhaps being able to hide doesn't mean he should.)

It's a weird thing to put side by side, sometimes. Daredevil had to overcome and earn all that he is. Jubilee..... after puberty, she can get on with her life like nothing happened.

It'd love the FF to join the MCU, but for mutants and X-Men to be reintroduced very slowly or after a decent wait.

Because prejudice is supposed to make sense? The X-men were a pretty blatant commentary on racism when the comic started. They have sensed broadened to represent other forms of prejudice since, most notably homophobia.

Your right that the inherent fear of mutants gets watered down around other superheros, but even in the comic universe people treat them different. The Fantastic Four and the Avengers are rock stars. They are famous and known as good guys for the most part (Spiderman is a notable exception). That's not true for mutants. There are plenty of bad, evil, and violent mutants including those that want to wipe out humanity. So even the ones like the X-men are barely tolerated and get plenty of guilt by association. It's also just a given in the comics that a certain percentage of people will always irrationally hate mutants. It's not always explained but it's an integral part of the X-men narrative from the beginning.

IIRC by the time of Civil War, the mutants were already registered and in detainment camps. So the Registration Act applied to non-mutants. Also, any non-mutant powered person could register, go through training, get a badge, get a job, and get a salary. Mutants were only allowed the same privileges on a case by case basis, whereas the Act gave other powered people blanket amnesty.

So, say you're Marvel and you get the right to X-Men. How do you handle it?

1. Mutants have always been around and known but haven't really been on anyone's radar?

2. Mutants have always been around, but successfully on the down low.

3. Mutants are a brand new phenomenon that is only just emerging, so the only mutants with active X genes are teenagers just going through puberty.

3a. Same as above but there are a very small number of mutant adults, who got their powers on a much more limited scale (presumably Xavier, Magneto, Logan, etc.).


For a second question, do you tie mutant evolution to nuclear weapons (as per the original), to government experimentation (as per Ultimate), or some new phenomenon within the MCU (Infinity Stones, a la Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver)?

TCTTS said:

---

Just because Disney might own the X-Men doesn't necessarily mean they'll put them in the same universe as their other Marvel stuff.

---

They will. The temptation will be there because there are countless stories of them crossing over and teamups between various superhero squads. I'm pretty sure that Wolverine was a member of the X-men and an Avenger at the same time.

AliasMan02 said:

---

So, say you're Marvel and you get the right to X-Men. How do you handle it?

1. Mutants have always been around and known but haven't really been on anyone's radar?

2. Mutants have always been around, but successfully on the down low.

3. Mutants are a brand new phenomenon that is only just emerging, so the only mutants with active X genes are teenagers just going through puberty.

3a. Same as above but there are a very small number of mutant adults, who got their powers on a much more limited scale (presumably Xavier, Magneto, Logan, etc.).


For a second question, do you tie mutant evolution to nuclear weapons (as per the original), to government experimentation (as per Ultimate), or some new phenomenon within the MCU (Infinity Stones, a la Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver)?

---

I feel like you have to introduce it as a new thing, let Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver stand alone as a govt experiment and introduce mutants as a new phenomenon.

That sort of separates them from the existing heroes, who are largely technology-based in varying ways, and lets you naturally develop the societal divide that plays well into X-cannon.

So if that's the case, does Marvel have the balls to forego Xavier, Magneto, or even Wolverine for the time being and focus on something totally new, focused on kids?

It actually does make sense. Mutants were considered abominations by normal people since they had their powers from birth due to a natural mutation of the genes. People were afraid because they different. Think of it like the kid with a disformed face due to a birth abnormality. He would be shun and frowned upon by normal people because he was born different.

For the most part, the powers of the members of the avengers or fantastic four were not because they were humans born with a mutation. Let's take a look at some of them:

Iron Man - Highly intelligent human who built a sophisticated suit of armor
Captain America - Normal human who gained powers from army experiment
Hulk - Normal human who gain powers from lab experiment gone bad
Black Widow - Normal human no real powers, just good at kicking ass and spy stuff
Hawkeye - Normal human, really really good with a bow
Spiderman - Normal human who gained powers from lab experiment mishap (bit by lab experiment spider)
Fantastic Four - Normal humans who gained powers from space disaster with cosmic radiation

fig96 said:

---

AliasMan02 said:

---

So, say you're Marvel and you get the right to X-Men. How do you handle it?

1. Mutants have always been around and known but haven't really been on anyone's radar?

2. Mutants have always been around, but successfully on the down low.

3. Mutants are a brand new phenomenon that is only just emerging, so the only mutants with active X genes are teenagers just going through puberty.

3a. Same as above but there are a very small number of mutant adults, who got their powers on a much more limited scale (presumably Xavier, Magneto, Logan, etc.).


For a second question, do you tie mutant evolution to nuclear weapons (as per the original), to government experimentation (as per Ultimate), or some new phenomenon within the MCU (Infinity Stones, a la Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver)?

---

I feel like you have to introduce it as a new thing, let Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver stand alone as a govt experiment and introduce mutants as a new phenomenon.

That sort of separates them from the existing heroes, who are largely technology-based in varying ways, and lets you naturally develop the societal divide that plays well into X-cannon.

---

This

Quote:

---

It doesn't make sense? Huh, guess Marvel has been making the wrong comic book stories now for decades.

---

Do you not see the inconsistency in how the civilians in the marvel universe are distrustful of Cyclops because his powers showed up in puberty but Captain Marvel is accepted because she received hers from an Alien? The line about why people hate and fear mutants is because of their powers, so logically Spider-man, Vision, Dr. Strange, etc should be on a watch list as well. If you're an average Joe, what practical difference is there between Storm who controls the weather, and Dr. Strange, a magician who could control the weather?

Quote:

---

I wish they'd had X-Men before making the Civil War movie because they were the main reason for Civil War happening. And it wasn't just mutants that had to register with the government, but any powered individual. So the battle lines in Civil War were all those who were OK with government registration and all those who were not.

---

Thanks for bringing up Civil War, because I feel it kind of proves my point. The Civil War arc was at last an attempt to rectify this, but even afterwards (I think the registration side won, unless it was retconned - I haven't really read any comics following that arc) the non-mutant powered superheroes are still treated completely different than the mutants. Otherwise the Thing would be treated like Beast

At least all sides realized the hulk was too dangerous and shot him off into space.

AliasMan02 said:

---

So if that's the case, does Marvel have the balls to forego Xavier, Magneto, or even Wolverine for the time being and focus on something totally new, focused on kids?

---

That's an interesting question.

You could introduce Wolverine as a young adult (Taron Egerton anyone?) and Weapon X as a new program that we're just finding out about, but leaving out Xavier and Magneto is a tough call.

dcaggie04 said:

---

It actually does make sense. Mutants were considered abominations by normal people since they had their powers from birth due to a natural mutation of the genes. People were afraid because they different. Think of it like the kid with a disformed face due to a birth abnormality. He would be shun and frowned upon by normal people because he was born different.

For the most part, the powers of the members of the avengers or fantastic four were not because they were humans born with a mutation. Let's take a look at some of them:

Iron Man - Highly intelligent human who built a sophisticated suit of armor
Captain America - Normal human who gained powers from army experiment
Hulk - Normal human who gain powers from lab experiment gone bad
Black Widow - Normal human no real powers, just good at kicking ass and spy stuff
Hawkeye - Normal human, really really good with a bow
Spiderman - Normal human who gained powers from lab experiment mishap (bit by lab experiment spider)
Fantastic Four - Normal humans who gained powers from space disaster with cosmic radiation

---

I see the distinction.

Except: People weren't afraid of mutants because they are different, people are afraid of mutants because of their powers. Storm? Looks normal (aside from the black chick with a white mohawk). Gambit? Normal looking guy, can't understand the cajun accent. Jubilee? Same. Professor X? cripple, but normal. Jean Gray? Outside of her BSC phoenix episodes, normal. All of them are feared and hated because they're mutants. I remember watching shows where people would be fine with them until they used their powers in public.

However, it does not make sense for a character like the Thing to be accepted (sure, he feels alienated and alone, but he's never hated because of his appearance) to not be lumped into a class with NightCrawler, beast, or that toad guy who hangs around with magneto.

If people feared mutants so much, you would think that all mutants would all try to pass and claim that their powers are due to accidentally swimming in toxic waste when they were 14, or getting zapped by lightning or being exposed to Gamma Radiation from hulk farts, but they don't.

Solo Tetherball Cham said:

---

Quote:

---

It doesn't make sense? Huh, guess Marvel has been making the wrong comic book stories now for decades.

---

Do you not see the inconsistency in how the civilians in the marvel universe are distrustful of Cyclops because his powers showed up in puberty but Captain Marvel is accepted because she received hers from an Alien? The line about why people hate and fear mutants is because of their powers, so logically Spider-man, Vision, Dr. Strange, etc should be on a watch list as well. If you're an average Joe, what practical difference is there between Storm who controls the weather, and Dr. Strange, a magician who could control the weather?

---

If you introduce mutants a phenomenon that's happening in the general population you can write around that. Existing heroes can be pretty easily accepted, they're already saving people, are established "good guys", etc.

It's the kid next door that suddenly turned into a freak that scares you.

Maybe they can redo the New Mutant movie and make that the first MCU/X-Men crossover. Have Arya Stark lead the new cast of mutants into the MCU

Cromagnum said:

---

texasaggie04 said:

---

I really think that my favorite part of the entire trailer is when Thanos just casually pops the infinity stone onto his gauntlet. After seeing its power in GotG1, to see him just pick it up like a pebble really sets the stage.

---

The one we see him pop in is blue (so it's the Tesseract). The purple one (power stone) was already in the gauntlet. What I'm confused about is what all the MCU stones do. I'm not quite sure what the Aether does vs the Power stone.

Oh, and mind blown.



If there is any accuracy to this, then the H could be Helmdall.

---

Well, yes. I was making an assumption that all the stones would cause havoc if handled. Aside from guardians 1, have any of them ever been touched by a human bare skin? I guess the closest might be the aether and Jane, but one could argue she didn't touch the actual stone.

I think that goes back to the Thanos theory and the difference between what is a container and the actual stone. I think it's likely we will see the soul stone in black panther movie. So if the Thanos theory has any merit, the container has to start with an h.

And people will make it fit anyway. Could be h for hidden city.

Out of boredom I'm looking up h words for Wakanda. There is a heart-shaped herb. And it is a hidden city. The religious cults are heliopolitan in nature. They have a high priest. Part of the city is the hall of the dead.

Or maybe they'll just give the meteor a name, who knows.