I too enjoy Captain Marvel's characterisation and Brie Larson's portrayal of the character. She's a bit vanilla in Endgame but that's because they filmed it before the Captain Marvel script was written, so she literally had nothing to go on. In Captain Marvel itself I wouldn't call her character "wooden" at all. It's true that Larson shines most in her character scenes (such as those she shares with Monica Rambeau and the kid) rather than in action/SFX sequences, but that's no bad thing.

 

I, for one, felt she only had around 3 to 4 expressions in CM which she rotated around in the name of “acting”. It wasn’t really something you’d expect from an actor of her caliber. Her portrayal just seemed to lack depth. This was massively reinforced in Endgame, though I agree it wasn’t Brie Larson’s acting which caused it here.

 

For me it’s less of a matter of her acting and more that the character just doesn’t work right now.

I’d have introduced her after endgame, but her whole story arc in Captain Marvel would’ve played out over several movies. Rather than instantly on thanos’s level she would’ve had to grow her power over time. Much like Tony/Thor

So she’d reach her endgame power level in a movie fighting galactus or whoever the next villain is.

 

Brie Larsenon makes Daniel Radcliffe look like Ian McKellen

 

Something people keep missing about Captain Marvel is that she's not actually a really likeable person. I'm not talking about Larson - I'm talking about the character. Look up her wiki page - she's been through some convoluted shit, and a remarkable amount of that shit has taken her away from earth and humans.

People keep comparing her to Superman or Thor, but a closer analogy is actually Dr. Manhattan; seriously overpowered, but largely divorced from humanity. Not to mention that this version of her came up as an Air Force pilot - a lot not exactly known for being humble in the first place - as a woman at a time when it was a boys' club, after being a super-ambitious female with more than a few males in her life telling her to stop being that way.

If it seems like she's got a chip on her shoulder, well, anyone would. Spending your whole life having to outperform everyone else just to get a modicum of the same recognition or respect that you deserve isn't exactly going to encourage a jocular, jovial side. And yet, she's not cold. I'd say, at worst, she's reserved. And in a world inhabited by Thor and Tony Stark, there's going to be some contrast.

Larson is not a bad actress, not by a long shot - which means she is giving the directors and producers the performance they want.

Just my two cents.

As for Shuri, I remember this discussion from the Infinity War thread, but that scene could have been saved with two lines: keep her condescending question as it was, hell, even keep the tone, but have Bruce's response be, "We wanted to, but the technology doesn't exist." Then she can just answer, "Well, it does here." Bruce (and by extension, Tony) don't have to appear dumber - just, as Howard Stark once was, 'limited by the technology of their time.'

Likewise, the A-Force shot could have been more organic if they had a dozen 2-3 second shots of the women approaching that spot, rather than just magically appearing - and yeah, I know, they have magic now, but even that requires portals outside of the Sanctum.

Just teeny, tiny, minor things that make moments like that so much more digestible - and, let's face it, unassailable. Because when moments like that are earned - moments like the Rotating Money Shot from Avengers 1, the Shield/Repulsor Shot from Civil War, or Lightning Landing Shot from Ragnarok - they not only resonate with the audience, they become serious fucking highlights rather points of contention.

 

While very likely true in Larson's case, it should be noted that that's not necessarily the case. Even the best actors can have a bad run while shooting, or the director might not really know what to do with the character and so give sub-par direction, or the writing might be off, etc.

A very good case study of that is the Star Wars prequels; pretty much every actor in there was fantastic, especially Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman, but the acting quality almost across the board was subpar. A bad script, bad director, or even just a shitty day for the actor can pull some real stinkers out of even the best performers.

In Captain Marvel's case, honestly, my feeling is that it's a combination of the comic elements you mention and her being an entirely new character (and archetype, to a certain extent) to slot into the framework, and the folks involved simply weren't all that certain how to go about doing it properly.

 

Just got back and I liked it even more the second time.

Even Thor was less annoying and worked much better for me. Cut two funny scenes and add two subdued scenes, like he was at the beginning of the film, and he would be perfect if not for the ending. Leaving Asgard doesn't work with the rest of his films. My opinion may change depending on what they do later with him.

Only thing that hasn't improved for me is Sam getting the shield. It felt even more unearned and if that was the plan from the beginning, they really should have build up his character more in the previous films.

I do have a one question.

How did they decide the order of the O6's actors giving their signatures? Mark Ruffalo placement before Chris Hemsworth with his three solo films and Scarlett Johansson who was before him in the MCU and is a bigger star is quite odd.

 

At a guess, I would say that it has to do with star power and overall importance & recognition of the characters. I had no problem with the placement, though I couldn’t tell you why. There might also be contractual obligations to consider (e.g. actor/actress “x” gets placed here over actor/actress “y.”)

 

I agree it's that, but I can't tell how Mark can beat Scarlett in a pure star power (as in a popularity with fans) or Chris in overall importance to the MCU. The only thing that I suspect is giving him an edge on them is the amount of awards and nominations he has compared to them.

 

Okay, definitive answer time! Turns out, Cap lived out his life in an alternate timeline (and stole his shield from there) and made a deliberate jump back rather return to his anchor point: https://bgr.com/2019/04/30/avengers-endgame-ending-russo-brothers-on-captain-america-iron-man/

 

Endgame has made 1.7 billion in a single week. Holy tits.

 

Every major chapter has grown significantly since they were introduced. It’s kinda the point of the movies...

 

Brie Larson was fucking amazing in Room. It really, really makes it look like she's just phoning in her performance with her three facial expressions of smugly stoic, determined stoic and default stoic in endgame.

It also doesn't help that she's so dismissive and condescending as an individual outside of movies. Like her crusade against critics being all 40 year old white "dudes" and how a wrinkle in time was not written for them so clearly their opinions shouldnt matter. Just annoying.

I dislike shuri, but then again I pretty much dislike the entire cast of black panther for various reasons except Michael B Jordan's character. Dude was charismatic as fuck. The movie would have been nothing without him.

 

I agree that Peter is smarter in raw intellect as are probably Banner and Tony if nothing else then by experience alone.

It's a question of resources. Shuri has had access to Vibranium which opens up whole avenues of research and development. Of course, then you can make the argument that Tony has has had the same advantage by being born to someone like Howard but the point of Banner and Parker still stand. Parker was able to build his own web fluid using high school resources. Based on her (Admittedly limited) appearances, Shuri hasn't shown the same level of creativity.

I will say though that Banner saying "We didn't think of that." is valid for two reasons.

1. They didn't have much time to do anything. It was a very "In the moment" and time sensitive situation.
2. Ultron had already pretty much built most of Vision.
3. Vibranium, the thing Vision is made out of, is Shuri's area of expertise. Banner's is bio-chem.

 

I'm not big on the film's explanation of time travel effects. The Harry Potter version is better: You can't change the past because you already did it.

Cap going back and finding Agent Carter and then living out his life knowing he one day had to go for a picnic and finally say hi to his friends again is much nicer than "he went to an alternate reality and then came back to deliver a shield."