#i don’t trust anyone who says mcu tony stark is meant to be an unlikeable character

[bayzadas]

I just saw someone say that Tony is a perfectly written unlikeable character and. what. i mean yeah Tony’s sooo well written but you’re saying he’s UNLIKABLE??? blocked.

[enmy-writes]

Baby Avenger

Summary: (Y/N) is one of the youngest avenger members and some government officials repeatedly let her know of “her position.” So, she lets them know exactly what her position is.

Word Count: 2100

Fandom: MCU Avengers

Pairing: Avengers x Reader

Genre: Fluff, soft, slight angst and sadness, & family love.

Rated: 18+

Content Warnings: profanity, death, abandonment, bullying, this is my first ever post of any fanfiction ever so it’s probably bad

**** This is my first ever imagine that I have ever finished and published. Please give me feedback and let me know what else I should write! I’m very excited and nervous so please let me know if you enjoyed this :) I’m thinking of making this Y/N character into a little “Baby Avenger” one-shot series, so let me know your thoughts ****

 _____________________________________________________________

Baby Avenger.

Baby Avenger.

Baby. Avenger.

 In her head, her stomping can be heard throughout the whole Compound and all of its residents and guests can hear her anger. They know she’s going right to the meeting room; not the team meeting room, but the meeting room they use when they have special guests in for a meeting.

The new government officials who are now “in charge” of the Avengers since The Snap Part 2 were in for the day to go over the general plans that the Avengers have been coming up with. They’re nicer than those in charge of the group from the Accords, but in no way were they nice to majority of the group as a whole.

(Y/N) (L/N) happens to be the second to youngest member on the team coming in at an age of 18, second only to her best friend Peter Parker

(Y/N) is an orphan, the typical origin story of any superhero. Her parents spent their last minutes pushing her out of their burning house in rural Pennsylvania. Actually, it was her father who got her out of the flames and by their fishpond 100 meters from the house. Her mother was inside, trapped under a steal beam in the basement.

(Y/N)’s mother was a scientist who worked in secret in a little band of scientists who tried to accomplish their own small victories in testing the alterations and limits of humans. The goal of these scientists is to stay out of sight of the CIA, FBI, S.H.I.E.L.D., and other government agencies. Most of them are left alone and those who get found are either immediately sent to a high security prison or recruited to continue their experiments for a certain country/agency.

(Y/N)’s mother decided to give herself her treatment she was working on instead of potentially kidnapping someone in the everyone-knows-everything kind of town that they had been living in. Her experiment and life studies were all in trying to find a way to unlock the rest of the human brain so that more than that small percentage is being used at a time. It has been hypothesized that humans could do a lot if their brains just used itself more.

The only problem is when she gave the treatment to herself, she was unknowingly pregnant, and the treatment attached onto that small lifeform instead of her own. She created a super baby.

No one knew the exact answer to what is on the other side of that tunnel of science. No one knew what opening the mind could do, there were only theories to support ideas. Plenty of scientific evidence, but it meant nothing with no legit proof.

Well, turns out that those on the team of “you will gain the ability to read minds and shit unlike any human” were the correct guessers.

(Y/N) can read others’ minds, move things with her mind, slow down time in her mind to be able to successfully breakdown a situation and perform the best possible reaction to anything that comes her way. Oh, and the color spectrum is broader for her, allowing her to see a significantly more amount of colors than a normal human (including seeing the aura’s and heat that people give off. Very useful in the few missions she goes on.).

But her parents are dead.

After setting small (Y/N) down, her father ran back in to save the love of his life. Or, well, that’s what the towns’ people say to romanticize the situation. A brave man trying to save his family.

In the end, her father had shaken his head, laughing at the moment like a mad man with tears running down his face. He pulled (Y/N) in for the tightest hug that he had ever given the girl—which is tight considering how close the two really were. They were just like two peas in a pod, the light of each other’s lives, basically soulmates.

But love makes you do crazy things.

“You listen to me, (Y/N).” He gripped her face in a painful grip, cheeks sure to be bruised later. “I will always love you. Don’t doubt that, baby girl, okay? I love you so so so so much” By this time, tears are pouring off his face, the neon flames coming from the house reflecting off his wet face. “Mommy… mommy just needs me now, baby. I need mommy, too. We love you so much.”

It had confused her, his words. Nothing could prepare her to watch her father run back into the house, leaving her by the pond with nothing but a small bag of little family things like pictures, little stupid gifts, and a notebook she had stolen from her mom’s bookshelf one day.

Her mother’s grandfather had been friends with Howard Stark, both science men having been in the same circle of famous inventors since before WWII. While neither her mother nor father personally knew his son, Tony, he was still listed as the godfather to the child. With no close friends allowed in their secret circle, old bonds and pacts that her grandfather had with the older Stark led to a blind trust in the man.

Tony Stark had agreed to be the godfather during a one-week bender in his 30s, and when he was yelled at about it, he chose to just keep it there because “the chances of this happening is very slim.”

But here we are, Baby Avenger.

The officials who are here now actually were the same people that used to do check-ins and such with them pre-Accords, so they knew the team better than any government official save for the rare union that the team members may have with government officials. (Y/N) randomly has one with the Queen of England (she did a favor for Her Majesty once, and now they have tea every third Thursday of every month).

They knew that Tony suffered from panic attacks, and they knew Steve was going through a never ending loop of an existential crisis, and that Bucky will most likely always be having an identity crisis, and that Sam cries to sleep a lot around a certain time of year that renders him almost useless in his sleep deprived state he puts himself into. They know EVERYTHING vulnerable about the team.

So, that means they know how when she first got to the team and to Tony that she wouldn’t speak to anyone unless absolutely necessary. It took her almost a year to be able to speak more than a sentence to every person she was around. No one was too upset, though, Tony was trying to figure out how to save himself and rebrand his whole legacy and the Avengers weren’t really a family family yet like they are now. (Y/N)’s shyness made it much easier on the adults to figure out their stressful situations.

The officials, though, never got why she wouldn’t speak to them. They actually pushed her progress back more and more with taunts and comments such as “Oh, the baby can’t speak?” or a “Get your phone out! She’s about to say her first words!” every time she did go to say something.

Tony soon got fed up with it and filed a lawsuit against them which threatened their agency enough to pull them out and let a S.H.I.E.L.D. agent be a liaison for them. After their presence was rid of, (Y/N) grew exponentially with her new family. She was still home schooled, but now she had Peter Parker as a friend and world geniuses as her teachers. She was an only child, but now she’s a big sister to Morgan and has plenty of people on the team that are dubbed her siblings (since they don’t act their age majority of the time to be considered aunts and uncles).

While she’s trained to fight, (Y/N) doesn’t go out on the field much unless they need her brain or her extended vision. She likes to remain behind the computer screen and help that way. She’s invented a way to make prosthetics like Bucky’s become more available to the general public and has started a school/home that’s three miles from the Compound for orphaned kids, mutants, super kids, and those who aren’t accepted where they come from.

In conclusion, (Y/N) is 18 and not useless in any way, shape, or form.

So why, why, do these absolute short dick idiots decide that they can come into here, her home, and push her around like she hasn’t contributed more to the Earth and society in the short 18 years than their middle-aged asses?

Eyes narrowed and seeing red, she stomps her way down the last hall, shoving herself into the door of the meeting room and throwing it open.

The team stays unfazed, knowing she’d show up pissed at some point. The officials, though, jump in their seat and turn to look at her.

It wasn’t the biggest meeting, the original Avengers plus Bucky, Sam, and Wanda sit around the table. Though, Rocket and Groot are here sitting along the back wall, looking bored as hell. Thor must have drug them along.

Fists clenched, (Y/N) narrows her eyes more. She’s been here since the first attack. Sure, she didn’t fight since she was like, 8 or so, but she was in charge of her man-behind-the-computer work. She’s been a part of the team since the beginning, and these assholes are too big of pricks to acknowledge that.

That’s what’s pissing the girl off. This could have been a meeting for every one of the fighters of the team, which she wouldn’t go to because that’s not her role. This meeting, though, was scheduled as “Originals plus the newly appointed leaders only.” She’s an original.

SHE IS AN ORIGINAL.

SHE. IS. AN. OG.

AND YET, they remained in telling her she wasn’t invited because “The Baby Avenger doesn’t need to join big kid conversation.”

She locked eyes with her adopted father and her best friend, aka Peter Parker, aka the only reason she knew this meeting was still being held.

Poor, lovely Peter. He grew confused when his best friend wasn’t sitting in between Mr. Stark and him for the meeting, especially when the officials referred to the meeting as they did. He was just there to take notes for Mr. Stark, not that the man wouldn’t remember it all. Pepper thought it’d be a good idea if Tony had written evidence to anything said in these meetings so that he wouldn’t be pouring statements out of his ass without proof, and poor, lovely Peter got elected to take such notes.

When he noticed you weren’t there, he had sent you a text asking where you were and that your drink that he brought you was right next to him.

“(Y/N)! It is so great to see you, my wonderful flower.” Thick arms wrapped around her as a golden man squeezed her tight to him. Thor and (Y/N) had a special relationship. They’re always close and do the most innocent of tasks together like flower crowns, step-by-step painting classes, and making those Tik Tok crocheted blankets made with that big yarn. He even had taken her to Asgard (back when it was a planet) for a royal ball where she was the guest of honor. They’re just soft together.

Though, rage blocked that softness that normally occurs between the two. Pushing off of him, she points her finger at the men in the front. The officials look like they’ve seen the devil and all of Hell and (Y/N) can see the fear pouring off of them.

“Let’s get this clear,” she says as she slowly stalks her way up to them. “I am an Avenger. I am an original Avenger. I know about 3,000 ways to kill you in this room at this very moment with anything. I drink tea with the fucking Queen on Thursdays, and I’ve created a better orphanage/school system in 2 years than this country has in the 250 years it’s been around. Don’t you EVER call me a fucking baby again, you fucking hear me?”

By this point, she’s right up in their faces, her glare unwavering and them sweating. The silence in the room was great and seemed to go on forever. The team held their breaths, some trying not to laugh and some scared of backlash that might be trust upon the girl.

With one last eye narrow (you could blindfold her with toothpicks at this point), she whips around and walks back to Thor, placing herself sideways on his lap and relaxing into his hold. Peter passes her (Drink Order) down the table, and (Y/N) takes it.

Clint, Bucky, and Sam try and hide their laughter when the meeting starts again as they look at their long-time teammate cradled and curled up in Thor’s arms, head on his shoulder and under his chin as she sips her drink with an angry look in her eyes and a pout on her face.

All wrapped up like a baby.

[wonderfulworldofmichaelford]

Psycho Analysis: Mysterio

(WARNING! This analysis contains SPOILERS!)

In one of the greatest twists in all of cinematic history, it turns out that Mysterio, the man who in the comics is one of Spider-Man’s most iconic foes and who was heavily hyped by marketing as TOTALLY a good guy, is in actuality… a villain. Bet you didn’t see that one coming!

I think the real twist is that, despite how obvious the twist is and despite how much they change going into this character, they really managed to make him one of the most enjoyable antagonists in all of the MCU. And trust me, the fact that he is yet another villain that Tony Stark inadvertently helped create is a big hurdle to overcome, not to mention Beck is coming right on the heels of one of the MCU’s greatest villain so far, Thanos. But somehow Quentin Beck manages to not only be great, but a villain who takes the cake as one of the most terrifically amoral douchebags in all of cinematic history.

Actor: Jake Gyllenhaal plays Mysterio, and while it is literally impossible to make this man ugly like his comic counterpart, they not only managed to give a good reason why Quentin Beck should be sexy but they gave it to the perfect actor for the role. Gyllenhaal manages to sell Beck as a charming and likable fellow, a “cool uncle” figure to Peter as he has been described, to the point where the inevitable reveal that he’s just a scumbag who is lying out his ass about everything sting all the more even though it is so obviously coming. And when Beck’s true nature is revealed, Gyllenhaal manages to use that natural charm Beck seems to exude to make him at once completely hilarious with how he treats everything his team does as a primadonna actor would as well as utterly terrifying with his extremely blasé attitude towards killing children, treating it less like a contemptible crime and more like an annoying speedbump in his career he’d really rather not do. Gyllenhaal absolutely nails it, and while this Beck may not be in the film business like in the comics, he still manages to be one Hell of an actor.

Motivation/Goals: As it turns out, Beck was the guy who made B.A.R.F. If you don’t remember what that is, don’t worry; the movie gives a flashback to the scene where Tony debuts it in Civil War. Beck was fired by Stark for being too dangerous and unstable, and giving his hard work a stupid acronym was the last straw for Beck, who proceeded to round up disgruntled Stark employees to utilize illusion technology, drones, costumes, and special effects to essentially do what Syndrome wanted to do in The Incredibles: create fake world-threatening problems that he could solve with ease to make himself out to be a hero, all the while causing untold amounts of death and destruction in an attempt to make things realistic. You know, just like how a totally normal, mentally stable person would do it. This might actually be the one time where Tony made a good call in firing someone and it still somehow comes back to bite the people he cares about in the ass.

Personality: Quentin Beck, when acting as a hero, exudes the sort of charm and charisma one would expect of a hero, though occasional hints at his ego and lack of modesty do pop up; however, all of that is subdued by the general air of cool, friendly affability he exudes. He’s a kind mentor to Peter, giving him good advice, and in general seems to be a genuinely good guy…

...But obviously it’s all an act. Beck is very much an egomaniacal sociopath who has no care for anyone, not even his own henchmen; he threatens them after a screwup, though it is a bit justified seeing as how they were brushing off something that would blow their ruse wide open. Just as Beck revels in being a hero, he too revels in his villainy, as one can see during the scene where he gleefully breaks Peter’s mind with a series of traumatizing hallucinations. While he does give some indication he wished he could just have let Peter go, his behavior indicates that unlike someone like Vulture, all of this is just him never turning off that surface-level charm he puts up. He’s absolutely not sorry he has to kill Peter, he’s gonna have fun doing it, but he has to at least put forth that token “I really wish he didn’t have to do this” as if for the sake of some unknown viewer he wants to convince of his nobility even as he tries to brutally murder high school students.

Final Fate: Beck is apparently shot by one of the drones under his command, and dies shortly after Peter manages to break through his illusions… or is he? Considering this is Mysterio we’re talking about, and considering the mid-credits scene, there is a high chance that Beck faked his own death and used one last illusion to escape from under Spidey’s nose. But for now, we can only assume he’s dead. I’m definitely updating this if he comes back, trust me on that.

Best Scene: The scene in Berlin where Beck subjects Peter to a series of illusions that look like something ripped straight out of a comic book, or even a Scarecrow sequence from Arkham Asylum. It’s filled with utterly nightmarish imagery, tons of fakeouts, lots of references to the Spider-Man mythos, and even a few allusions to Mysterio’s video game appearances. In a film where Mysterio has no end of fine moments, this is easily his finest.

Best Quote: Beck has so many great lines that really ring with truth nowadays about people and their desire to believe even the most blatant of lies just so they can have something to believe in. But his greatest quote is perhaps when he weaponises that, with a little bit of edited footage he sends to a seedy, sensationalist news site called The Daily Bugle…

“I managed to send the Elemental back into the dimensional rift but I don't think I'm gonna make it off this bridge alive. Spider-Man attacked me for some reason. He has an army of weaponized drones, Stark technology. He's saying he's the only one who's gonna be the new Iron Man, no one else. Spider-Man's real... Spider-Man's real name is - Spider-Man's name is Peter Parker!”

And with this doctored footage, broadcast live on the news for all to see, Mysterio cements himself as one of the most absolutely scummy pricks in the entirety of the MCU, second only to Ego in sociopathic kick-the-dog cruelty.

Final Thoughts & Score: I just want you all to know that Mysterio is my absolute favorite comic book villain; I love his costume, his concept, that time he fought Daredevil, his gimmick… Mysterio is a villain who is a lot of fun but who rarely is handled well by comic writers, never getting to truly show off the full extent of his greatness. As you can imagine, this meant my expectations going into Far From Home were pretty high… and they were blown out of the water. Mysterio is just that good.

It helps that the MCU really managed to utilize the sort of paranoia and distorting of the truth a guy like Mysterio can bring to the table to its fullest extent. It’s to the point where, yeah, it’s easy to believe that he survived his supposed death; he’s shown us so many other moments where it has seem The day is saved prior that turned out to be BS, why should this be any different? Then there’s the fact that Gyllenhaal is able to fully sell this super-cliched bargain bin hero fantasy involving dimensional travel and world-ending elemental monsters, complete with wooden acting, cliché one liners, and an oh-so-obviously manufactured heroic sacrifice and make it cool in universe and out, that it all goes above and beyond to not only wash the bad taste of him being another villain Tony created out of your mouth, but also the sheer clunkiness of his expository bar scene where he literally explains everyone's role in the Mysterio ruse for the benefit of the audience and seemingly no one else in what might be one of the most awkwardly done scenes I have ever scene. He is so legitimately good that he somehow manages to walk away as a 10/10 villain despite being in a scene that bad.

I think what really makes him work is how psychological he is. Obviously, he has no real powers beyond a dedicated special effects team backing him up, and yet he still manages to be a serious obstacle to overcome by just how good he is at utilizing the illsuions he can create to mentally torment Spider-Man. He taunts him over Iron Man’s death, he plays on his fears of not being able to save MJ, he pretends to be trusted authority figures to trick him into endagering his loved ones... he just goes all out and really delivers a different kind of villain, one who poses a far more intriguing threat than simply a physical one and forces Peter to grow as a person and come to terms with himself in order to beat him.

When I compared him to Syndrome earlier, it really was more than just in terms of his plan; he’s equal to Syndrome in terms of quality as well, and portrayed by an actor who is able to inject just as much charm and personality into the role. And much like Syndrome, by the end of the movie you will think Quentin Beck is one of the must insufferably smug, sociopathic, and scummy villains you will ever love to hate. He outed a child’s secret identity to the world out of spite, for Christ’s sake! That really is up there with “I put a tumor in your mom’s brain” in terms of deliciously hateable dickishness in the MCU, in my opinion.

He may not be the most complex villain out there, and his backstory is a bit played out  (which is funny, considering the cliche hero story with destroyed worlds and dead families his team constructs ends up being more original in comparison), but what he lacks in depth he makes up for in charm, charisma, brilliant acting, and just delicious evilness. I seriously hope he comes back, because if any villain deserves more of a thrashing from a hero they fought, it’s this guy.

[aspiestvmusings]

MY REVIEW: CAPTAIN MARVEL

MAJOR SPOILERS FOR “Captain Marvel” (2019) FILM & MCU (A:E4) FILMS

SO ONLY READ IF YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY OK WITH BEING SPOILED BEFORE SEEING THE FILM. IF YOU DON’T WANT SPOILERS, TURN AWAY...RIGHT NOW! BECAUSE I’M LETTING THE CAT OUT OF THE BAG! I TALK ABOUT THE FILM, AND THE END CREDITS SCENES & EVERYTHING! 

Here are some of the bits from the early screening I got to see earlier this week: 

The biggest laughs from the room came during the scenes where the 1990s nostalgia kicked in for the audience (I’d say most of the people around me were old enough to remember those days, I did not see many teens being at the event that evening)  - the dial-up internet (taking forever to load) & during certain Goose scenes/moments. 

For me, personally (as someone old enough to remember the 1990s, which is when the film takes place - I was a kid/teen back then) it was simply a trip down on memory lane. The music! (how it was incorporated in the film made me think of GotG & the mixtapes!!), the little details - Blockbuster, Radio Shack, payphones, pagers, dial-up internet, arcade games, popular 1990s toys...  And I am guessing that “nostalgia” plays a big part in me actually finding the film quite likable. Because I am not a superhero film fan. Nor am I a fan of blockbuster films. 

What made the film for me? The 1990s music! The 1990s feel (nostalgia). The cat... Goose, the cat. Goose & Fury! Carol & Fury. The humour...cause unlike Yon-Rogg says to Veers...humour is good! Right from the start...with the Blockbuster crashing & the security guard in the car... to the 1990s references...to Goose... to... a lot more. And yes... every time a 1990s pop-song was incorporated into a scene I thought of GotG and the 1970s/1980s music  - Quills mixtapes.  

Note: If Captain Marvel/Carol & GotG/Peter should ever meet...in one of the MCU universes, then can I request a dance-off scene, or a karaoke contest or just mix-tape (80s vs 90s) contest between them? In whatever form? haha

The man who started it all: Stan Lee. We open the film with the Marvel sign/logo being made of images/scenes of Stan Lee. The pictures will the letters that make up the logo. And then the dedication... to him. 

The Stan Lee actual cameo scene happens pretty early in the film. It’s during the public transport scene. When Carol is looking for the shape-shifting aliens (the old lady from the trailer) she is looking at everyone  as she moves along. there is someone reading “the paper” (actually a script..that little fun nod was too much to reveal right away) & their face is not seen. When the man “peeks out” from behind the “newspaper”, we see that it’s Stan. But what makes the scene is the way “Carol” softly smiles at the man. #Truth

Carol Danver’s/Captain Marvel’s Kree-name Vers (veers... very Dutch) actually comes from her Earth-name. Her name tag was broken into two pieces during the crash 6 years earlier, one part Carol Den... was in Maria’s possession as “the only thing that survived the crash” & the other was in the possession of Yon-Rogg and it said “vers” (end of her last name), and that’s the origins of that name. 

There are several meant-to-be-for-fun-and-laughs scenes. One of them involves Fury & someone else talking about the characters names. Mar-vell or Marvel? One word/name or two words/two-part name? Other characters, too, had names that are well-known from history/literature, and just with adding a dash in the middle. e.g. Minerva Min-Erva

The film is filled with little nods, and details, and small things. There were too many to list them all. But the looks said it all. The props said it all. The set dressings/props (pinball machines, lunchboxes, baseball balls, payphones, pagers, 1990s pop-culture references everywhere) and little looks and facial expressions...that say more than any dialogue would. I don’t know how the younger audience will feel about those things, but those of us born before 1990, who can remember 1995 (the film is mostly set in that year... 6 years after 1989) & the 1990s in  general will most likely become kinda nostalgic & remember their childhood/youth when watching the film. So if nothing else... the film has that... The film is one big 1990s meme. I’d say that’s the most accurate description. 

And I liked how it showcased that it's important to pay attention to detail, and background. Like the scene where Carol finds/sees the photo of the moment before the fatal flight, and focuses on the background... finding herself on the photo. Behind others... 

Next to other details were small details connecting this film to the larger MCU. Nods & mentions of things & people we’re familiar with - the Tesseract, Ronan, Coulson... etc).  

Goose, the cat. For me, someone who is not familiar with the comics & not aware of MCU (outside the films IronMan has been in), that twist was unexpected. When some characters early in meeting Goose suggested that it’s not a cat, but a Flerken (an alien species that has long octopus-like-tentacles coming out of its mouth & can eat anything...no matter the size... and material), I did not expect that to be the truth. So... when it turned out that the Skrull being “afraid” of the “cat”  was not just scenes made to be funny, I quite liked it. Yeah, that’s not a sweet cat..all the time. When Goose wants, she can eat anything (Tesseract) or anyone (bad guys) - it’s like Gooses inside can fill entire universes in it.. 

So... Goose ended up being the shapeshifting alien... and in a way “foreshadowed” the twist reveal about the skrulls - that not all is as it seems, and you can’t judge a book by it’s cover. Goose being not a cat as we saw her, but a flerken was a nice “hint” at how the truth can change with new info added...

Which makes me now think that there is one more possibility of how Thanos can be beaten in MCU/AE4. Goose can just eat him... and all’s done? ;)

The Skrulls: Now...that’s another twist that will most likely be unexpected to others like me, who are not familiar with the Marvel comics/cinematic universe. Though it’s not as unexpected, and there are kind of hints throughout the film telling us that the narrator (Yon-Rogg) cannot be trusted to tell the truth, it was still quite interesting to find out the real story. The Skrulls motives turned out to be not what Jude Law’s character wanted Carol think they were. That was a nice “twist”. And it tied all into Vers training..where Yon-Rogg had been manipulating her mind...in order to keep her true powers under control (think with your head instead of heart - and though I generally don’t agree - I always say mind/facts before heart/feelings, then in this case its fitting... for this character’s story). But...in general... that twist/reveal kinda meant a sudden & bland end to the Kree/Skrull wars storyline idea. That was..IMO... a missed opportunity, and a letdown. It shouldn’t end with “that was it? and there was/won’t be nothing more to it?” 

More 1990s thoughts: the aliens & the secret underground labs & the vaults filled with shelves of files... all made me think of The X-Files...so much. Those visuals... so much like moments from Mulder & Scully’s investigations into “secret government projects”. I found those visual parallels quite... similar. 

Captain Marvel/Carol Danvers vs IronMan/Tony Stark parallels. This was one of the things I personally saw in the film. In Ironman/Avengers we’ve seen & heard it being implied by some characters that Tony is nothing without the suits & the toys/technology. In this film similar thing was suggested about CM/Carol and her “suit” (the powers she literally holds in her hands/palms). But both assumptions are incorrect. Just like Carol proved that she is even more powerful when she isn’t limited by the “in the box” thinking, same applies to Tony - he is more than his suits. I found those parallels to be... interesting & telling. Both characters have humanity, and strength. They both get up every time they fall/fail (as demonstrated, visually, in the montage scene of Carol getting up...every time she “failed”...through the years). So... just like Jude Law’s character is wrong in this film about Carol. certain characters in MCU are also wrong about Tony, when they make similar claims. IMO

I even kinda liked the way the film was set up. How it started with her/Vers unable to sleep (”nightmares” - memories from the time she wads Carol) & knocking on her “friends” door early in the morning.... and later we learn that she used to do the same back on Earth, when Carol used to wake up Maria early in the mornings...to go flying...when they were pilots. To the way the flashbacks/memories from another life were incorporated into the present day events (via “memory extraction”, via dreams, via old photos, via “daydreaming”...) It was kinda fitting for this film and story and character. 

And I liked Carol & Maria’s (and Carol/Monica) friendship/scenes. And all that. The part of the story that revealed who she used to be, and what really happened six years ago... what was that plane crash all about, who was her “mentor” - Mar-Vell and what she really did and what was she working on (that secret technology), who she herself was/is, what’s the deal with skrulls and the technology they were after, who were the team she’d been part of for the past 6 years... etc. There was a lot of content fit into those two hours. 

Other than that...there were also many many unexplained things. And many unanswered questions..and even new questions were raised that fans are trying to find answers to now. Goose’s fate - what happened to Goose - how will Goose’s non-appearance & non-mentioning in the past be explained in future films? The Tesseract and it’s fate - what we know from past MCU films & what we saw in this film... how do these stories fit? ... to name a few bigger ones. The film messes with the MCU timeline & it’s possible that  it’s full of continuity mistakes, because unless some things are explained in future films, then the name Avengers Initiative, the tesseract’s location, SHIELD’S beginning & naming time, and other things... are confusing. 

THE “RANTY” PARTS (IN SEPARATE POST), LINKED  HERE & HERE & HERE

THE END: 

The film ends with Carol using all of her powers ( she was fighting with one hand behind her back until now), not being restricted (to think she has to control or hold back her powers...so she’s able to use them all...and be extremely powerful). And we see her blast off to space... taking the skrulls spaceship...  far away... somewhere in the universe...

And then we...maybe...find out what happened to Fury’s eye. Not really.... cause the official report is made up. As Fury is typing on the computer... and we see him type something... important.. regarding the MCU... Coulson enters with a box of glass eyes...for him to choose (to replace the eye he “lost”, and reveals the official story... but Fury doesn’t really confirm or deny..so I am not completely sure if it’s not just a cover story, and the backstory to the eyepatch is the other one... the one with the cat that the scene implies to. 

Pros: 

The 1990s music & props - nostalgia! (for those of us who are over 25 years old)

The cat!/Goose! (because I like cats) 

Nick/Carol “friendship”

The CGI (as with most current films, the VFX is good quality)

Cons: 

Possibly...Messing up the MCU timeline (Tesseract, Ronan...etc) Though it can be explained in A4/future films via time travel and/or alternate universes. It’s not great, but they can make it believable & not a continuity error.... that it looks like at this point. 

The marketing (I have issues with marketing in general. The hollywood sjw-marketing strategy that does no good - focusing on the cover of the book, not the storytelling & character (development) 

People, who might like this film: 

people, who grew up in the 1990s (kids, teen, youth). The 1990s nostalgia hits you 

people, who like cats 

people, who like (1990s) music being strongly incorporated into scenes

people, who want just a typical mindless blockbuster entertainment from their cinema experience 

People, who most likely won’t like this film that much:* 

comic book fans/people who are familiar with MCU & Marvel comics 

people, who are not fans of continuity issues in film/TV 

people, who prefer the film versions to honor the book/comic canon (not change names, characters, events, locations...etc) 

* have issues with some things 

AND I’LL FINISH WITH THE TWO END CREDIT MCU SPOILERY SCENES 

1. MID-END-CREDIT SCENE

Avengers Headquarters. Captain, Black Widow, Bruce Banner & Rhodey in a room, looking at the device (Furys pager that Carol upgraded in the CM film to have a wider signal range...of at least a few galaxies), trying to figure out what it is & how it works #wedontevenknowwhatthisis

2. POST-CREDIT SCENE: 

Nick Fury’s office. His name  plate on the table. Goose, the cat jumps on the table. The cat looks like its about to “throw up a hairball”... and sure enough...the cat “spits out” something... the blue cube...aka Tesseract. The end. 

ETA: REVIEWS BY OTHERS: 

Brent Hankins @ SpoilerTV   (this review describes the film the best, IMO)

[silverducks]

Thor:Ragnarok

Had a bit more time to think about the film now and whilst I did still enjoy it, I’m also trying to reconcile myself to the things I didn’t like as much.

I’m still not entirely sure what I think overall. I guess if I was to try and summarise my thoughts, it’s that I overall liked what they did, just not really how they did it.

There is some really good stuff in the film and I’m glad that the critics and fans so far are favourable about it. The more fans the better, as I really want another solo Thor film now.

The thing is though, it’s just not really what I wanted from the (potentially) last Thor film. And I’m still trying to reconcile myself to that.

But more than anything, it feels like I’m still stuck in limbo. That even after waiting 6 years for this film, I’ll still have to wait and see what happens in the rest of the MCU. I don’t think I can really give an overall opinion until I know how it all fits together. And I’ve had chance to rewatch this film.

I think now more than ever (and I thought this after Thor 2 as well) being part of the wider MCU is both it’s greatest strength, and greatest weakness.

And whilst I think this review is a little harsh, it does hit upon a good few of the issues I had with the film. Contains spoilers - http://www.theactionpixel.com/comics/tapreviews-thor-ragnarok/

I don’t want to analyse the film bit by bit. Not only will I need to see the film again to do that properly, but I think it’ll do more harm than good. It’s not a film you can really pick apart and analyse like the first 2. It’s a film to be taken as a whole, looking at how it’s meant to fit together and fit into the wider MCU. So I’m trying to do that.

But... (My own thoughts and lots of spoilers below):

My biggest issue is the overall style of the film. As I feared from the trailer, it was very much a sci-fi road trip space adventure film. Not as GotG like as I expected, but definitely a very different vibe to the previous two. This wasn’t all bad - the scenes on the alien world of Sakaar fitted this vibe and did work with the story. And the fight scenes to Led Zeppelin were pretty darn cool. But it was all just too much - too different. There wasn’t much of a norse, medieval fantasy feel to the film like we had in the first two. The colours were bright and vivid, the music like an 80s disco, more 80s sci fi than LotR like the first two.

Yes, it was a Thor film, you could tell that. And thankfully, unlike Cap 3, it was Thor’s film. He was the main character from start to finish. The Asgard sets were the same, the nods to the previous two were all there. But the vibe was just too much a change to what had gone before and that grated with me. I’m a stickler for continuity and this film didn’t give a damn about it. If they’d started the trilogy with this vibe, fair enough, and it was entertaining and fun, but it just didn’t fit with the Thor world we’d come to know.

For me, they spent too long on this world of Sakaar and tbh I was getting a bit bored. I wanted more Asgard, more the oncoming Ragnarok, more epic fantasy than space adventure. And whilst it was there, it never really took much focus. It felt a secondary plot line to the space adventure. Which brings me to my next gripe with the film - it was played a bit too light heartedly.

One of the things I love most about the Marvel films is how fun and light hearted they are, how they don’t try to be too gritty and dark. But this was a bit too much. Things that needed more emotional weight like Odin’s death, the reveal of Loki as Odin, the loss of Thor’s hammer, the oncoming apocalypse and the destruction of Asgard, were brushed over and just too damn short. There were some interesting themes going on; Hela being their sister, Odin once being a destroyer of worlds not a saviour, then locking away his first born and never mentioning her again. But they were never really explored. Every time the scenes/storyline got a bit more emotional and weighty, it was interrupted by a comic turn - very obviously so. Things just weren’t allowed to settle, to have their proper time, before the next gag came along. Like they were almost afraid of anything being a bit serious. Thor went through so much, but took it all with a witty line and a grin. There wasn’t really any growth in his character. And whilst I loved the whole arc of him realising his power lay within him, not the hammer and finally accepting his place as King, it’s just not focused on enough to really connect with you.

Tbh, nearly all the elements I wanted were there - Loki and Thor’s (semi - it’ll never be perfect and final) reconciliation, Odin accepting both his sons and saying goodbye to them both. Thor realising his destiny and birthright as the God of Thunder and King of Asgard, with a Loki you’re still not entirely sure you can trust at his side. The destruction wrought by Hela and the people fleeing, the little people taking a stand and character redemption, the coming of Ragnarok and the destruction of Asgard. It was all there, ticked the boxes and set everything up nicely for the Infinity Wars. It just took secondary place to the space adventure. Like it was only there because it had to be, not because they wanted it to be.

For me, the whole film felt like it was being played as a fun jokey adventure, a bit of a lark. And whilst I like humour, this was too much. And tbh, I thought Thor 2 was absolutely hilarious in places - I couldn’t stop laughing at some scenes. But I didn’t really do more than crack a smile in this. Maybe it was just me, maybe when I see it again, knowing what to expect and with a (hopefully) less nervous mindset, I will laugh more. But I didn’t really hear anyone else laughing in the cinema much either. It wasn’t that the jokes fell flat or didn’t work, they just didn’t make me laugh out loud - more just amusing. And I think that was because the whole film was played as a one line joke - never once taking itself seriously really. There wasn’t the dramatic moments followed by the fun joke which tends to diffuse tension and works well in these type of films. This just had so many jokes nothing really stood out and it kinda got old. Not that the film wasn’t fun, it just didn’t make me laugh like I’ve done in other Marvel films. Although, to be fair, I’d say this fault was more with the Sakaar scenes than the Asgard ones. The Asgard ones had a different humour, a more witty, dark humour that I much preferred.

And that jokey, light hearted feel definitely didn’t help the characters. Whilst they were essentially the same characters, no major changes happening there, you just didn’t take them as seriously. Thor, as mentioned above, just seemed to take everything in his stride and even the destruction of his home world, the loss of his hammer, the death of his father and the revelation he had a sister, didn’t seem to phase him. Whilst ok, Thor’s been spending the last two years roaming the universe looking for Infinity Stones, has perhaps had time to chill out a bit on Earth, it didn’t quite make sense to me. It wasn’t quite Thor. He was just too self aware and smart, too snarky and laid back, too human over Asgardian warrior and prince/king. Like he was taking too many tips from Tony Stark. And this is just too much at odds with how we last saw him.

It was Thor, of course, and no issues with the acting at all, it’s just that the jokey, fun vibe to the film didn’t give him chance to do anything but brush it off his shoulders and move on after a witty line (he’s definitely been hanging out with Tony Stark too much!). Odin too, lacked the gravity of a dying King, making amends with his sons, whilst lamenting on the mistakes he’d made. And was that really the best vista they could find in a country as beautiful as Norway? And what happened to the streets we saw in the trailer? (And don’t even try to convince me they weren’t taking the mick out of Star Wars 8 with that scene with Odin!)

And as for Loki, well, on the plus side, thankfully they didn’t take him back to his Avenger’s madness phase. They didn’t (thank goodness!!!) have him kill Odin or reverse his epic emotional redemption arc from Thor 2. And his character craving recognition more than actual power was definitely at play here, if a bit heavy handed. But he seemed to be more the comic relief/sidekick a bit too much. He was still Loki, you still didn’t quite know whether to trust him (wonder what Loki took from that weapons vault!), but the film just didn’t have time for him to shine as his snarky, clever, plotting, sneaky self. Like he was there to play the fool to make Thor look like the smart one. (Yes, Thor’s gotten smarter, but the whole Thor/Loki dynamic was just gratingly off kilter at times.)

And there were a few times it felt like Loki’s character did regress too much. Where was the plotting their escape plan on Sakaar, or the scheming how to defeat Hela and save Asgard? I kept on waiting for it to come, and it just didn’t!  Because him just accepting Asgard’s fate, happy to carry on living in Sakaar and watching Thor get beaten to a pulp didn’t quite fit with Thor 2 Loki, who risked his life to save Jane and Thor. Loki’s never struck me as a lazy, apathetic character and he felt like one here. It didn’t sit well with me how willing he was for Thor to just go and fight (and most likely die) in the arena, or for him to sell him back during their escape. I know Loki will always be Loki, God of Mischief, but it just was a bit too simple and character backwards for Loki at this point. They did kinda touch on that, but it’s like they momentarily forgot Loki’s own character growth in the MCU. They definitely did not make the most of him being King and gave him very little to do other than a few jokes, which were pretty much all on him. Again, no issues with the acting, it’s just that the film didn’t really have time for him. Which is such a shame. Loki is one of MCUs best characters imo and he felt kind of wasted here. And yes, him and Thor had their reconciliation, but it was all played too light heartedly for me. Thor was fine with it all, as he seems to be fine with pretty much everything in this film.  And tbh, that kind of spoiled it a bit for me - an emotional reunion played for laughs with not much actual emotion. Although the end reconciliation did make up for it somewhat - that felt much more genuine. And tbh, like a lot with this film, I really need to see how Loki’s character, and Thor and Loki’s dynamic, plays out in the Infinity Wars with different directors/writers.

Heimdall was the only main character who felt like he was given anything much to do emotionally/drama wise and I liked the efforts he went to to help save the people of Asgard. But for me, it was all too brief, all left by the way side so the film could have their space adventure on Sakaar. And I’m not sure what I feel about The Warriors Three. I didn’t want them to die, I liked them, and I can’t decide if their deaths were worth it or not. I’m not sure if the film killed them off quick to make a bold statement of Hela’s power and villianous ambition, or if they just wanted to get rid of their characters quick. At the time of watching, I was eagerly waiting for Sif to come along, but I’m guessing now they’re saving her for another time, so my thoughts on that will have to wait.

As for Jane, that’s probably my third biggest gripe. I get she didn’t really have a story in this film and so didn’t need to be in it, but after being the main love interest for 2 films, a quick comic line that she dumped him is just not enough! Again though, my thoughts will have to really wait on this one - I’m hoping (even if I know it’s unlikely), she’ll at least be mentioned again and they do her character more justice. If that’s it for her character, never to be seen or mentioned ever again, I’ll not be very happy with this - screwing her over for laughs and to bring in a new love interest. Yes, Valkyrie is kick ass, but come on, aren’t we passed the days all superheroes need kick ass girlfriends. There are plently of other ways female characters can be strong and worthy - which the first two Thor films portrayed well.

The Hulk, well, he’s not a Thor character and whilst he wasn’t needed in this film, his appearance was ok. In fact, I enjoyed his appearance more than I expected. It did fit well with the story and I felt like they at least gave him some interesting character arc and emotional weight - be interesting to see how he copes now. My only gripe here was just how much time they spent on the two characters bantering and bickering - I wanted them to hurry up and escape and get back to Asgard!

Hela was brilliant but, like most Marvel villians, very underused, even more so than other films tbh. And her demise felt kinda lacklustre really, a bit of an anticlimax (Basically like the whole Ragnarok side of the story). And whilst her motive made sense, we had seen it all before.

As for Valkyrie, I liked her, she was not what I expected and she did have some emtional storyline/character arc. But tbh, I didn’t want a new love interest for Thor (thankfully it was just hints), and felt that they gave her character too much time and depth which, as there was so little going around, I’d have preferred spent on other characters. I am interested to see what becomes of her character (please no love interest for Thor!), and how she’s going to fit into the overall MCU.

Overall the lack of depth to the characters this time around meant that whilst the film was fun and entertaining, it wasn’t really very satisfying. There was no real emotional interplay or connection/investment in the film. A real popcorn superhero blockbuster if ever there was one, full of lots of fun but no real substance. If I didn’t already know these characters, I wouldn’t feel emotionally connected/invested in them at all. There was no sense of drama, of urgency, of emotion. This is Ragnarok, the end of Asgard, but it just felt like a minor inconvenience to their space adventure. Even the actual destruction was played as a joke and over way too quickly.

So, that’s pretty much my main gripes with the film - too much in general. Too much change, too much comedy and too much trying to be different but without actually breaking the mould. 

It’s not that the emotion and depth wasn’t there, it just was always second and overshadowed by the need to be fun and entertaining. In fact, I’m still not sure if they meant to take the mickey out of that side of the story - and the mickey out of the last two Thor films as well. It’s hard to tell when the film was so light hearted throughout. It certainly didn’t really care about what happened in them at best. (And the near the beginning scene with Loki and the play makes me wonder if they really were taking the mick out of Thor 2 and not in a nice way.)

And I think this is where my opinion pretty much differs from most people. Because most people in reviews I’ve read loved the film. They loved this change in vibe, found it a breathe of fresh air. In fact, other than some reviewers agreeing with it being a bit too light hearted at times, they like how it wasn’t like the previous Thor films. And whilst I can appreciate that, for me that’s just not what I wanted. And THAT, in one sentence, is my biggest problem with this film. It’s not what I wanted.

That’s not to say I don’t get what they’ve done - something different. Not the same old dramatic, emotional storylines we’ve had in previous Thor films. Not yet another emotional family reunion and saga. Not another focus on a romance that can never work, or the same ol’ character growth and redemption. Not another end of the world, impending doom leading up to big battle like we’ve had in pretty much all MCU films. This film is different, it sets out to be different and I get that, and I can’t fault it for that. It’s just not what I wanted.

I love the world and the characters brought to us in Thor 1. I loved seeing this world grow in depth, space and character in Thor 2. And whilst both films had their flaws, I really, really loved them. So I didn’t want a change in direction, I wanted more of the same, but more epic, more dramatic, more worthy of a final installment of a franchise - this is the Norse apocalypse after all.

And I’d have settled for a compromise between the two. If they’d toned it down a bit, had more of a balance between the two themes (the fun space adventure and more serious oncoming destruction of Asgard), I’d have been much happier. And I know Marvel can do that, because they’ve done it before in so many other films. In fact, earlier Marvel phases were brilliant at mixing the comedy with the drama, the ordinary with the extraordinary.

But Marvel didn’t want that, they wanted something different. And other than the film being played like too much of a lark, I can’t really fault the film for that. (Except in the way they handled Jane’s character and if I set aside being a stickler for continuity.)

In one review, the film was basically referred to as being about as comic book like and comic book lad/boy friendly as you can get, and I kinda agree. And I guess Marvel knows its target audience.

It’s just not what I wanted.

And the previous two Thor films brought something new to the comic book superhero genre, that this film just seems to take delight in stomping all over. (Ok, maybe that’s too harsh, I don’t really know if it wanted to poke not nice fun at the past films or not).

It is kind of my own fault - I got sucked into the MCU through Thor and what I love most about Thor is the LotR fantasy vibe, not the comic book vibe. And this is what I wanted in Thor 3. It was kinda there, but just so downplayed and lighthearted it was pretty unsatisfying. And ok, so Thor 2 wasn’t really a comic book film and a lot of people consider it one of the weakest Marvel films (I disagree, but YMMV). And I get that they wanted to bring Thor back more into a comic book vibe, fit it in better with the overall MCU. And I get that, but for me, this is just a complete 180 turn that I find grating, not refreshing.

Ultimately, for me, the problem is that Marvel is focused on the wider MCU and the Infinity Wars end game. And whilst that brings a big budget, instant popularity and lots of great people and investment and interest to the film, it also brings it’s baggage. It has to have it’s place in the wider MCU, it has to keep it’s comic book routes and, as is the thing with Phase 3 and 4, it has to introduce/bring back lots of other characters who don’t really serve much purpose but in trying to bring it all together. And this film does do that well - of all the films, Thor is the obvious choice for bringing in the GotG threads.

And whilst I’ve written wayyyyy more than I intended on my gripes with the film, overall I did enjoy it. It was fun, dazzling and whilst not laugh out loud funny, definitely amusing. It did tick the boxes and had some great new characters and brought back brilliant old ones. It touched upon some interesting ideas, visually was stunning, and stayed relatively true to the characters. The storyline was great, not brilliant and it had it’s plot holes, but it worked and was about on par with most MCU plots. It fitted the MCU and it fitted Thor. (Can’t really think of much else to say on the plot thh)

The film had all the elements, all the right pieces (pretty much), it just didn’t fit them together and present them in the way I wanted. It felt like the film was meant to simply be a fun, popcorn blockbuster to bridge the other films and fill the studio’s wallets until The Infinity Wars comes out. It’s not the epic finale to the Thor franchise I wanted.

TBH, from this post I know I sound pretty annoyed about the film, but in all honesty, I’m not. I’m just getting these thoughts out of my head and trying to reconcile the good with the bad - that what I didn’t like is what everyone else loved. Luckily, I’d seen the trailers, I went through the annoyed/frustrated stage then and I kinda knew what I was in for.

It’s just not what I wanted from the last Thor film. Imho, it’s not the fitting end to a franchise I’ve loved so much and been far too invested in. And I’m kinda resigning myself to that.

But that’s where the limbo comes in, as it’s not really over. This film is basically just another page in the MCU story and until all the pages are written, I don’t really know. Just like after pretty much every Marvel film lately, I’ll have to wait and see what the future holds to form a long lasting opinion on this film.

It definitely felt more like the next installment in the MCU than the end of the Thor franchise. So I guess I’ll have to see where they take things in the Infinity Wars and if (and here’s still hoping) we get a Thor 4. (That would be fun just to say!)

There’s still lots of potential left in the Thor part of the MCU, so I guess I’ll have to wait and see if it’s realised. If that’s it for Thor (other than his compulsory token appearances in Infinity Wars), then I doubt I’ll ever really reconcile myself to this film. If we see more proper story with Thor (preferably in more solo Thor films), then I may let this film off the hook, may even come to love it almost as much as the other Thor films.

For now though, I’ll just try and remember all the good stuff (and there’s lots of good stuff) in this film, and not the things I didn’t really want...

#Can’t wait til this shows in America and there’s more people around to discuss this with #Please PM me if you want to discuss. #I just still don’t know what to make of this film tbh.

[travllingbunny]

What even is a Draco in Leather Pants?

Look, I really like the Television Tropes website. It’s fun and you can spend a lot of time reading it. The tropes it has formulated are, for the most part, the tropes you can actually discern and find quite often in fictional works, and the descriptions are usually quite witty and well supported. The examples and their justifications can be...questionable, since anyone can provide them, and may lead to a debate between contributors (i.e. anyone who has bothered to register and post), but still, usually the majority of examples make sense and more or less fit with the description provided at the top of the page. 

But not always.

There’s supposed to be a trope called Draco in Leather Pants, which I had been vaguely aware for a while (basically, that it had something to do with people in the Harry Potter fandom stanning the character of Draco Malfoy and thinking he’s hot), and have been recently reminded because I’ve recently seen at least a couple of mentions of “leather pantsing”in various comments in fandom discussions, or links to the Television Trope page for said trope (for instance, a link to that page was provided in a page of a podcast about Jaime Lannister... who isn’t even among the examples listed on that page, BTW). So, it seems that this is supposed to be an actual trope and that people know what it’s supposed to be about.

Well, since I’ve actually looked at the above mentioned page, read the description and looked through the list of examples from various media given on that page, I understand even less what it’s supposed to be about. If anyone has a better understanding of it, please help me.

So, here’s the description from the Television Tropes page called Draco in Leather Pants:

”A form of Misaimed Fandom, when a fandom takes a controversial or downright villainous character and downplays his/her flaws, often turning him/her into an object of desire and/or a victim in the process. This can cause conflicts if the writers are not willing to retool the character to fit this demand.”

Then the text proceeds to talk about how such a character is treated in fanfiction, why this happens, and finally explains the origin of the term:

“ Named for a term in the Harry Potter fandom, for the mostly sympathetic Fan Fic portrayals of Draco Malfoy, who, in Canon, is a petty, smug, elitist Spoiled Brat. (The term originated in Hurt/Comfort Fics, where Draco was the comforter and Ron was the abuser, usually with Hermione being the victim. Not coincidentally, the Inverted Trope Ron the Death Eater also originated from such fics.) “

I have never read any of the Harry Potter books, and have only seen a couple of early movies on TV, so I’m largely unfamiliar with this entire franchise. But from what I gather, the point is Draco Malfoy is supposed to be merely an antagonistic bully and not a particularly sympathetic character or a sex symbol in canon, but fanon and/or fanfiction made him into both these things? Right? 

However, the description is both highly specific, because it includes several different things that don’t necessarily have to go together, but at the same time strangely vague and wide:

The character in question has to be “controversial or downright villainous”. What exactly does this mean? Does it have to be a villainous character, or a controversial one? Many characters are both of these things at the same time, but a villainous character does not need to be controversial (if almost everyone agrees they’re awful and almost nobody likes them, there’s no controversy there), and there are plenty of controversial characters that aren’t villainous. Controversial merely means that there are very strong and very different and polarizing opinions about something or someone, with opposing views being both shared by a significant number of people. Heroic characters or characters meant to be sympathetic can be very controversial.

The “fandom” takes this character and “downplays his.her flaws”. What exactly does this mean? What is meant by “fandom”? It’s really unlikely that it means “literally everyone who’s a fan of that franchise”, since it’s extremely unlikely that 100% of any group of people feel the same about something, so what percentage are we talking about? 90%? 75%? Two thirds? Over 50%? At least 20%? A vocal minority? A reviewer/blogger or two? Anyone who writes a fanfic or posts a Youtube fanvideo? Someone you’ve just argued with online? What is the cutoff?

 ...” often turning him/her into an object of desire and/or a victim in the process”. So, apparently the fandom, whatever that means, does not necessarily have to turn this character into an object of desire and/or victim, but what I gather from this must be a character who is not presented as an object of desire in canon, and is not presented as a victim in canon. At least not intentionally,  by the creators of said media. 

OK, now we’re getting somewhere. This is pretty specific. The character may or may not be a villain, but absolutely must not be presented in canon as either 1) sexy/desirable or as 2) victimized/suffering in any notable way? Got it. 

Now, I’m not sure why exactly this description suggests that it’s necessary to downplay someone’s flaws in order for that someone to be an object of desire or for that someone to be a victim. I mean, these are clearly three different concepts:

(relatively) flawless person

object of desire

victim

Of course, a real person or a fictional character can be two or all three at the same time, but that’s not at all necessary. They may be just one or those things, or two of these things, but not the third. They may be a character or characters who are none of the three in canon but are all three in fanon/fanfics - I’ll trust the Television Tropes page that Draco Malfoy is all of these things. But I’m not sure how many other fictional characters there actually are that fit that entire description. I can’t think of many.

But since the term “leather pants” is in the title, this should suggest that it’s the sex symbol status that’s the emphasis of this trope, right? Not downplaying of flaws or victimization? Because I really don’t see the connection between people wearing leather pants and people being victims or not having notable flaws. 

So, I guess we could say that Ramsay Bolton in his Villain Sue version in the TV show Game of Thrones is a Draco In Leather Pants, if we treat GoT as a fanfic, taking the canon Ramsay Bolton from George R R Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire, who’s described as a very ugly, fleshy dude with no appealing qualities, with a certain low cunning but no great intelligence or skill or courage, who’s not considered as sexy by anyone in universe (and has no consensual sexual relationship with anyone, instead only being interested in raping and torturing people) and turning him into a cute, frequently shirtless Rambo-style fighter with a loving girlfriend who even finds himself as an apex of a love triangle of sorts (even if it’s a one-sided triangle, in that the abused but smitten girlfriend is jealous of the hot new wife Ramsay will get to rape). This fits the trope pretty closely, no? 

However, Ramsay is not in the list of examples on the page. Here are, instead, some of the characters listed by various contributors as examples of this trope. These are about 90% of all character listed that I’m familiar with:

Film:

Jareth the Goblin King (David Bowie) from Labyrinth

Captain Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) from Pirates of the Caribbean

Riddick (Van Diesel)

Frank N Furter from The Rocky Horror Picture Show

Tony Montana from Scarface

Hannibal Lecter from The Silence of the Lambs

Darth Vader from the Star Wars saga

Stanley Kowalski from A Streetcar Named Desire (as played by Marlon Brando)

Arnold Schwarzenegger's Terminator from The Terminator (it's actually mentioned that he literally wears leather pants in the movie)

Sarah Connor (specifically in Terminator II: Judgment Day)

Harry Lime (Orson Welles) from The Third Man (it's actually acknowledged that he's that "both Out and In-Universe)

Loki from MCU

Tony Stark from MCU, called an "Odd heroic variation"

Magneto from X-Men:First Class

Literature:

Hannibal Lecter (again) from Thomas Harris' novels (The Silence of the Lambs and Hanibal Rising are specifically mentioned)

Sandor Clegane from A Song of Ice and Fire

Heathcliff from Wuthering Heights

Mr Darcy from Pride and Prejudice (called "an unusual example of this trope”)

Live-Action TV:

Grant Ward from Agents of SHIELD

Dandy Mott from American Horror Story: Freak Show

Spike from Buffy the Vampire Slayer/Angel

Faith from Buffy the Vampire Slayer/Angel

The Master from Dr Who ("particularly in his Athony Ainley and John Simm incarnations")

The Tenth Doctor

Ianto from Torchwood (called "an odd heroic version")

Gaius Baltar from Battlestar Galactica

Alex Krycek from The X-Files

Sylar from Heroes

Noah Bennet from Heroes

Cole Turner from Charmed

Phoebe from Charmed

Scorpius from Farscape

Eric Northman from True Blood

Lex Luthor from Smallville

Furio from The Sopranos

Ben Linus from Lost

Gene Hunt from Life on Mars and Ashes to Ashes

Alex from Dark Angel ("somewhat. While he's a good guy by the end..." starts the description)

Khal Drogo from Game of Thrones

Dr Gregory House 

Barney from How I Met Your Mother

Tate Langdon from American Horror Story: Murder House

Regina Mills from Once Upon a Time

Rumpelstilskin from OUAT

Jefferson from OUAT

Captain Hook/Killian Jones from OUAT

Tony DiNozzo from NCIS (the description actually says "He's good person deep down (...) and isn't by definition an actual villain" before going into why he's supposedly a Draco In Leather Pants)

Walter White from Breaking Bad

Damon Salvatore from The Vampire Diaries

Klaus from The Vampire Diaries/The Originals

Now, hold on. After going through this list, I’m even more confused. Either the above description of the trope is incorrect or really poorly worded, or most of the people who have posted supposed examples have no idea what that trope is supposed to be about.

Because, while quite a few of these characters - but not all! - are villains/antagonists or were villains at some point, many (in fact, the majority) of these characters are actually sexualized and presented as objects of desire in canon, by actual creators of the media in question. Now, I’m not sure if the writers, producers and directors of The Silence of the Lambs initially intended to make Anthony Hopkins’ Hannibal Lecter a sex symbol (unlike Mads Mikkelsen’s Hanibal Lecter from the TV show, who clearly was intentionally presented that way and treated as such in-universe) - but I’m pretty sure they always meant for him to be fascinating and strangely appealing while also being super-evil and scary - the way they clearly did not portray Buffalo Bill, or even Chilton, who’s not really a villain but is clearly intentionally portrayed as annoying and hateful. However, I really want to know if someone is seriously going to argue that David Bowie’s extremely tight pants in The Labyrinth happened because the costuming department just couldn’t find anything bigger and looser for him to wear, or that characters such as (among others) Faith, Spike, Damon Salvatore, Klaus, Eric Northman, Grant Ward or Captain Hook from OUAT were not intended to be objects of desire, and that it was somehow the fandom that “turned” them into sex symbols, totally unprovoked, to the total shock and horror of the creators of these shows, who refused to “retool” these characters that were totally not meant to be sexy, no sir! I don’t think that anyone is going to argue that, and if they did, they either did not watch these shows at all, or are being completely dishonest.

What are we even talking about here? It’s really strange if not downright hypocritical to complain about the “fandom” putting certain characters in “leather pants”, when the canon has already put them in (metaphorical and in some cases also literal) leather pants to begin with. That’s not “Misaimed Fandom”. That’s the opposite of it - the showrunners were aiming for it and hit the target, intentionally playing up the actors’/characters’ sex appeal, often in really obvious ways. Unless I’m supposed to believe that things like frequent shirtless or nude scenes, tight/leather clothes, female gazey/male gazey (whichever applies) camera shots, and other fanservicey moments are there for no plot-related reason, just happened by accident, and that the writers wrote these characters as sexy and desirable in-universe with a bunch of other characters commenting on or falling for their charms, not to mention blatant ship teases or actual romantic/sexual relationships with protagonists - but somehow expected the audience to not see them as desirable, at all.

Which, BTW, does not necessarily have anything to do with downplaying a character’s flaws, or to what extent they are portrayed sympathetically. Many of the characters on the list are both given some sympathetic qualities and complexity and intentionally presented as desirable, but you can have one without the other. Case in point: Dandy Mott from AHS:FS - totally evil, no redeeming qualities, not sympathetic at all, but Finn Wittrock sure did not have all the nude scenes because the plot demanded it.

Furthermore, on the second point: most (actually, the majority, although there are some exceptions) of these characters were actually given tragic backstories and/or had terrible things happen to them in canon in scenes that were supposed to be dramatic and tragic and were clearly intended to elicit at least some degree of sympathy or empathy. For instance, you may argue how bad or evil or good Sandor Clegane is, but can anyone deny that he’s canonically a victim of horrible abuse by his brother, which has left him physically scarred and disfigured for life, and left even an harsher psychological and emotional trauma that’s defined his life? No. You can’t deny that. And some of the other above mentioned characters have had entire episodes and storyarcs or, heck, even entire movies devoted to their tragic backstories. It doesn’t make sense to accuse the fandom of “turning (x) into a victim”, when that character is already portrayed as a victim (among other things, and at least at some point in their arc or their backstory) in canon, intentionally, by the actual creators of said media. 

Which, BTW, has absolutely nothing to do with downplaying a characters’ flaws or the villain/hero status in the narrative. You don’t have to be a flawless person or even a good person in order to be or have been a victim (of abuse, rape, torture, murder etc.) and being a bad person or doing bad things does not disqualify you from the victim status. Conversely, being victimized at some point in your life does not automatically make you a good person or a hero, and does not preclude you from doing evil things and/or being a perpetrator of crime/abuse. I shouldn’t really need to explain this, it’s pretty obvious and basic.

In short, there is no reason why villainous, semi-villainous, anti-heroic or super flawed characters can’t canonically be objects of desire, victims, or both. Many, in fact, are.

So then, maybe half of the description of this trope should really be scrapped, and it’s all just about downplaying the flaws of villainous characters?

But that doesn’t fit either, because quite a few of the characters listed on this page either did not remain villains and eventually became heroes (Faith and Spike, for instance - and heck, even Darth Vader got last minute redemption) or simply aren’t and have never been villains. In fact, several of these - such as the Doctor, Sarah Connor or MCU Tony Stark - are definitely heroes and protagonists of their stories. Flawed heroes are still heroes. RDJ’s Tony Stark is clearly meant to be super flawed and occasionally annoying, but still likable, and certainly heroic. Others aren’t heroic, but are clearly not meant to be disliked by the audience, in spite of their shitty behavior (e.g. Barney from HIMYM). 

In fact, people who wrote some of these entries even admit that the character they think is a Draco in Leather Pants is “a heroic example” or “a good person deep down” - which contradicts what the trope is supposed to be about. Some entries are even complaining about the treatment of said characters not by fandom, but in the actual canon - which, again, completely contradicts what the description says the trope is all about (Misaimed Fandom).

OK, maybe listing heroic or other non-villainous characters does not contradict the description - because it says “controversial or downright villainous character”? But a controversial character is simply one that polarizes opinions. It’s usually pretty clear which characters are supposed to be villainous, but any character can be controversial. For instance, someone has listed Sarah Connor and said that people see her as “flawless icon of feminism” and then proceeded to criticize her character flaws - but someone else replied that many people may actually see the character as feminist exactly because she’s a heroine who is flawed and complex, rather than a flawless paragon of anything, and that it’s great to see female characters allowed to be flawed heroes, just like male characters so often are.

How do you actually separate the controversial from the non-controversial characters? If a bunch of people think a character is smart and awesome, and a bunch of others think the same character is stupid and annoying, that’s a controversial character. But do these groups have to be roughly the same in size for a character to be controversial? How many people in fandom need to hold one or the other opinion? Is Dawn from Buffy the Vampire Slayer a controversial character, or just an unpopular one? Many people often go about how hated she was, but I know quite a few BtVS fans who love Dawn.

And even if we agree on that, well - whether people are “downplaying” a character’s flaws is pretty debatable in itself, isn’t it? Yes, sometimes people ignore canon flaws or bad actions of their faves in fanfiction or fandom debates. But what if some fans acknowledge that their faves are flawed and have done shitty things, but insist that they also have good traits and the bad doesn’t outweigh the good, or even simply that they still like them in spite of all? Someone else who hates that character and thinks that they’re the Worst Ever and pretty much the closest thing to Antichrist may say that they are “downplaying their flaws”. But the other party may reply that it’s in fact the hater who’s overplaying their flaws. It’s not really an exact science - and that’s exactly what makes a character controversial. 

And, well, if the point of the trope is to complain that there are different and opposing opinions about controversial characters, in other words, that there’s controversy about controversial characters... well, duh? 

So, at the end of this analysis that’s probably way too long... I’m even more confused than I was at the beginning. I’d really appreciate it if someone would help me understand what this trope is about, if it’s even a trope, and why it’s called what it’s called. Is it supposed to be about:

complaining about characters that aren’t supposed to be sexy /desirable/ appealing in canon, but some rather sizable portion of the fandom treats them as if they were? (Which would be the one explanation that would fit the name of the trope.)

complaining about characters that aren’t victimized/don’t suffer in canon, but some reasonably large portion of the fandom treats them as if they are?

complaining about characters that fit both of the above, at the same time?

complaining about characters that are villainous, but a lot of people like them and sympathize with them anyway (regardless of whether the canon offers them material for that)?

complaining about the fact that authors of some canon works like to make their villains complex and somewhat sympathetic or give them heartbreaking moments and tragic backstories?

not being upset with canon for giving villains heartbreaking moments and  tragic backstories, but complaining anyway about the fact that a lot of fans sympathize with them, because you think that fandom should be stronger than that and bravely resist the authors’ attempts to elicit sympathy for bad people?

complaining about the fact that authors of some canon works portray their villains/antagonists as desirable and try to make them into sex symbols?

complaining about the fact that they’ve actually succeeded in that, which upsets you because you think that fans should all be morally stronger and be able to resists for the authors’ blatant fanservice and sexualization of morally corrupt characters?

just an umbrella term for people’s tendency to downplay or ignore their favorite characters’ flaws (which may apply to not just to villains, but to any character who has any flaws or has done something wrong or morally dubious)?

merely an excuse to bitch about the fact that, shockingly, there are some fans who have a different opinion than you and like a character that you strongly dislike?