Issue #5: Sandy's Reflections on Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)

I have to say, this film might be my favorite in the MCU. I think it has everything, with an extra helping of charm and heart. But what I think I have found most meaningful, as a woman and as a comics fan, is a character that I didn’t even know before I watched the film: Peggy Carter.

 

Margaret Elizabeth Carter, fondly named Peggy, first appeared in the Marvel comic universe in Tales of Suspense #75 as an unnamed character, but she was first shown as an important character, a love interest of Captain Rogers during WW II, in flashbacks in Tales of Suspense #77 in 1966. Their love affair was always doomed—in the comics she got amnesia and didn’t remember her partner and lover, Steve Rogers.

 

I never cease to be amazed at MCU Peggy’s ability to balance tough-as-nails with sincerity and emotion. One of my favorite bits is when Steve is trying to drown his sorrows in alcohol at a war-torn bar. He’s destroyed over taking his BFF Bucky with him on a mission, and he blames himself for Bucky's death. However, Peggy knows just what to say to help him pull himself from his grief:

Peggy Carter: Tell me, did you truly like your friend? Did you respect him?

Steve Rogers: Yes.

Peggy Carter: Well then, stop blaming yourself. Give your friend the respect of making his own decisions.

On the surface, she’s presented in the same light as Pepper Potts or Jane Foster as the love interest, sure, but unlike those two characters, she isn’t set up to be in every film; she’s only featured prominently in First Avenger. And yet…she’s not forgotten: She is a crucial part of numerous films thereafter and is responsible for setting up S.H.I.E.L.D.. I spend a lot of time talking about women are portrayed on screen, but Peggy really stands out from the beginning as a woman surrounded by men—but who is “waiting for the right partner,” as she tells Steve. No women look Steve’s way at the beginning of the film, despite the fact that his heart, his courage, his positivity—these traits are clearly spelled out in early scenes. When little Steve, equipped with only a trash can lid, stands up to a bully, he even utters his classic line, “I can do this all day.” Yet he is invisible.

 

But Peggy, right off, sees Steve—really sees him. The tables are turned on Bucky when he spots her in a stunning dress and gives her his most impressive pick-up lines…to no avail. He’s stunned when Peggy—literally—doesn’t take her eyes off of our Captain America. Bucky, amazed, says, “I’m you. I’m turning into you.”

 

But what is really amazing about the character of Peggy is that she continues on with her life after Steve’s disappearance. Agent Carter was one of the first MCU spin-offs, and it ran for two years to rave reviews on ABC, but unfortunately it just didn’t pick up steam with the ratings. “Agent Carter gives us the best of both worlds as a Marvel spinoff; the show stands well as an independent story, while still offering additional emotional heft to the main series of films. These beats make us care about Peggy Carter as a well-rounded character and invest us even further in her journey as it bends toward her eventually becoming the founder of S.H.I.E.L.D.” (https://filmschoolrejects.com/agent-carter/).

 

Peggy gets to shine in Agent Carter, all while showcasing society’s sexism and view of women in the workplace in the post-war world. Despite her work with Captain America and during the war, she’s relegated to almost secretary-status, but that doesn’t stop her from doing the job and, most times, doing it better than the men around her. She doesn’t have superpowers, but she has the confidence of her famous line, “I know my worth.” As Katie Kilkenny states in her review, “Carter’s not a superhero, per se. But as a supersized allegory for a downtrodden woman who suddenly gets new powers—a sense of purpose imparted by a fulfilling, demanding job—Carter is a worthy equivalent of the rest of the heroes in Marvel’s oeuvre” (https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/01/agent-carter-peggy-the-super-riveter/384237/).  

 

She is also the first character that I ever even considered cosplaying. I mean, what woman wouldn’t want to be Peggy for a day? When Gian shared his crazy idea of doing a formal, professional conference with a script using Avengers characters, I laughed. The second time he brought it up, he asked if I would want to be Black Widow. I laughed harder, imagining myself trying to squeeze into Nat’s black suit. (Umm, no.) But when he had a concrete idea and other professionals ready to be a part of the project, I asked if I could be Peggy.

 

I ordered a tailor-made copy of her famous blue suit, along with retro 1940’s shoes and a too-expensive red Stetson that was authentic. I admit that I secretly already owned the Besame Cosmetics line of lipsticks and make-up (https://style.disney.com/beauty/2018/04/30/besame-agent-carter-avengers/). But was I ready to actually walk out of a hotel room, down the hall, and be Peggy 

Carter? I have to say that it was a moment of growth for me. I had to make myself leave the room, post-pep talk, and I was super self-conscious as I walked down to our presentation room. But something happened that day: A bit of Peggy rubbed off on me. It’s empowering to do something you think is difficult and outside of your comfort zone. But I was surrounded by others who I now consider friends (we’ve done this play a few times now), and I have to say that I genuinely enjoyed myself. I stretched myself. And I grew.

 

Now, when I’m in a tough situation, or feeling overwhelmed, I ask myself this question: What would Peggy do? And, I think I know. 

 

Peggy would approve.

Issue #5: Alex's Reflections on Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)

This film is easy to like. Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) is the perfect man whose morals are unyielding and his enhanced abilities are impossibly precise and effective. Throwing his star-spangled shield, fighting hand-to-hand with Hydra soldiers, leading men on the battlefield, or selling war bonds, Captain America is perfect at everything. He is so perfect that if someone went to the fictional character and told him, “Gee Captain America, you’re perfect,” he would respond, “No, I’m not perfect.” And of course, everyone would still know that he is.

All of the heroes in the Marvel Cinematic Universe have (thus far) been seriously flawed. Tony Stark has issues with narcissism, Bruce Banner has major paranoia, and Thor struggles with taming his hubris. But Steve Rogers doesn’t have anything to balance his heroism. Even Superman, who is depicted as the “perfect” hero struggles with his desire to act more human and balance his immeasurable strength with said desire. Steve Rogers, even before he gets the super soldier serum, is inherently just. Going back and watching this film again, Rogers’ only questionable act throughout the entire film is falsifying his enlistment application so he can be drafted into World War II. That action, while technically illegal, is categorically noble. 

 

Captain America being the embodiment of nobility works in a team setting (as will be seen in the next movie). However, on his own, it is limiting in terms of character development. Growing up, I would watch the World Wrestling Federation (WWF) professional wrestling, and one of the characters was Curt Henning, a.k.a. Mr. Perfect. In wrestling parlance, he was called a “heel” which is essentially a bad guy. Before his matches, Mr. Perfect would mock his opponent by noting flaws in said opponent’s move-set. There would also be promos of Mr. Perfect making half-court basketball shots and nailing consistent bullseyes in darts. And on his way to the ring, he would give a cocky smirk to fans who would boo him mercilessly. Professional wrestling is being referenced here because the “perfect” character in that world was reviled. Captain America’s perfection does not elicit the same response; instead, Steve Rogers is revered and celebrated for said perfection. So, what is the difference, aside from the genre of storytelling, between Mr. Perfect and Captain America? The answer lies in the characters’ perceptions of themselves.

 

The wrestling villain viewed himself as perfect, and as such, disqualified himself from being “perfect.” Captain America’s greatest strength is recognizing his “perfection” and not emphasizing it. After viewing Captain America: The First Avenger, Steve Rogers needs a foil as a character in order to contextualize his inherent nobility. By himself, Captain America is boringly perfect. Yeah, I said it: Captain America, in the first film, is boring. Need to defeat fifty soldiers armed to the teeth with only a shield? Done. Need to skydive out of a plane without a parachute? No problem. Need to say just the right words to a strikingly beautiful Peggy Carter (Hayley Atwell) without coming off as goofy? Easy. Maybe Mr. Perfect was right about flaunting his “perfection"; at least he was fun to watch.

Issue #5: Gian's Reflections on Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)

At the end of Captain America: The First Avenger (2011), Steve Rogers does a slow pivot in Times Square. His mouth hangs open. His chest heaves following a brief battle and a run away from what he believed were would be captors. Times Square is bright and loud, filled with glowing billboards and honking horns. We know it from the ball dropping on New Year’s Eve, but Steve looks around in a daze. He has never seen anything like this before.

 

Then a hard voice rings out: “At ease, soldier.” Steve sees a black clad Nick Fury approach. “You’ve been asleep, Cap, for almost 70 years.” A look of shock crosses Cap’s face, and he stares around him bewildered, trying to take it all in and understand.

 

“You gonna’ be ok?” asks Fury.

 

“Yeah,” says Cap. “Yeah. I just...I had a date.”

 

With one quiet line, Steve captures that he has lost everything. His true love, Peggy Carter. His friends, the Howling Commandos. His whole world. Every single thing he knew and cared about. He has become the man out of time.

 

It’s easy to criticize the film rendition of Cap as being too perfect. Cap (played as no one else can by Chris Evans) always does the right thing. He always makes the right choice. He is always willing to sacrifice himself. Even before he gets his superpowers, when Colonel Chester Phillips (played so well by Tommy Lee Jones) throws a hand grenade into a group of soldiers, Steve jumps onto the grenade to try to save everyone else who has fled away. He does this without thinking, automatically. Cap always does what is right, what is needed. That’s just who he is.

 

But it doesn’t bring him happiness. Over and over, Steve loses the people that matter to him. Dr. Abraham Erskine (played excellently by Stanley Tucci), the man who perfected the Super Soldier Serum that turned Steve into Captain America dies in Steve’s arms. Bucky Barnes (played nicely by Sebastian Stan) falls to his (supposed) death from a mountain train, just out of Steve’s reach. Peggy Carte (played to perfection by Hayley Atwell) only gives Steve one brief kiss before he has to say goodbye to her, imagining that the only way he can save the people of New York City from a bomb carrying plane is to crash the plane, sacrificing his own life in the process.

 

I think in Steve Rogers we not only see someone who chooses to do the right thing again and again, but we also see the price he pays. The war begins, so Steve chooses to join the army. He gets rejected due to his frail stature, but he keeps trying to join until Dr. Erskine lets him in. Steve feels compelled to choose to fight in the war, and so he enlists. Later Steve sees a grenade thrown into a crowd, so he chooses instantly to jump on it. When Steve gets a chance to become a super soldier, he volunteers. When the super soldier experiment seems to be going awry, Steve tells Erskine and Howard Stark (played by John Slattery) to keep going anyway despite the risk and the pain he is in. When Bucky and his troop are captured by Hydra, Steve chooses to risk his own life in order to try to save them.

 

Of course, Steve has superpowers, so it’s easy for him to charge off to save Bucky. But the rest of his choices are made when he has no powers. It’s easy for a superhero to make the right choice. But an ordinary person has to make that choice even if they’re scared they don’t have the strength to carry the choice out. We all get these choices as life goes by. And most of the time we know which choice is right. Yet too many times we make the wrong choice anyway. We’re afraid or we’re selfish or the price is too high. That’s what makes Steve a hero. He always makes the right choice no matter what it costs. And, over and over, what it costs him is the things he loves.

 

So, by the time we get to that final scene in Times Square, we know how much Steve is hurting. By then, he has lost everything. He’s still Captain America, so we know he will carry on. He will bury the pain. He will keep fighting the good fight. But we can see it there on his face for a moment as he looks at this strange new world into which he has awoken. He’s just an ordinary man who’s lost everything that matters to him. You can see his sadness, even feel it. Who would want that loss? Who could bear it?

 

As Steve stands there in the square, you can see him thinking. Did I make a mistake? Should I have chosen something else? Maybe something for myself? You know he’s thinking about Peggy in that moment. It’s the missed date. That’s all he really cares about.

 

What I think we need to realize is that the message of Captain America: The First Avenger is not about perfection. Cap isn’t meant to get us to always make the right choice. In fact, I think Steve Rogers knows we can’t always make the right choice. He would want us to try. And he would also know sometimes we are going to fail. Sometimes we will have to choose what is best for us rather than what is best for everyone. That’s life; we aren’t perfect. Steve would tell us, that’s ok. (There are some other figures I’m sure you can think of that extoll the same virtues, but we don’t need to get into religion here.)

 

Ultimately, what we need to do is find a balance, the right mix of choosing to serve others and choosing the things we need in life. The moments of choice will keep coming at us. We won’t know the outcomes. And we don’t have superpowers. So we will just have to do the best we can. And if we feel lost at times, like Steve does in that square, we have to trust that we should just keep going on and things will turn out. We just won’t know when that will be. In fact, Steve Rogers doesn’t find that balance at the end of this film. And his counterpart, Tony Stark a.k.a. Iron Man, hasn’t found the right balance either, despite getting 2 movies. It will take them both more time, the same as us.

 

But Marvel has time. And, with Captain America: The First Avenger, it’s clear the company made a decision to take their time and do things right. Marvel chooses here to tell their own story in the mighty Marvel way: No apologies, no excuses, no second guessing. This is a Cap story right out of the comics. We get a real superhero who acts like a superhero. We get a real supervillain, the Red Skull (played by Hugo Weaving). The Skull issues Cap a challenge during one fight scene: “You pretend that you are just a simple soldier, but you are afraid to embrace that we have left humanity behind.”

 

But Steve never leaves his humanity behind. He stays human. He tries to help the people around him. He loves and he loses and he goes on. So, we need to go on too, even when things get bad. And we need to keep going, even though we will make mistakes and make the wrong choices. We can do that much. We don’t have to be perfect like Cap, but we do have to keep going like he does. And that much is in our power, super or otherwise. The message of Captain America: The First Avenger isn’t to be perfect, it’s to keep trying to make the right choices whether you’re prefect or not.

Issue #4: Alex's Reflections on Thor (2011)

This is a film of two worlds: Earth and Asgard. Completely different from the previous Iron Man movies and The Incredible Hulk, Thor tries to balance those two worlds by presenting an extended “fish-out-of-water” scenario with Thor (Chris Hemsworth) as he struggles with his banishment at the hands of Odin (Anthony Hopkins). Thor is banished due to his hubris and carelessly embroiling Asgard in a senseless war with the Frost Giants. When writing all of this, it feels a bit silly, but after watching this film for the first time in many years, it became apparent that the strength of the film is in Asgard, not Earth.

 

Kenneth Branagh, acclaimed stage actor and extensive Shakespearean veteran, directed Thor, and the extensive amount of dialogue makes that apparent. Nothing is wrong with dialogue, but Thor is characterized early on in the film (in Asgard) as a presumptuous and dangerous antagonist who fool-heartedly rushes into fights and dangerous situations. In short, he is quick to action, not words. When Thor is banished to Earth, the entire film changes. Gone is the majesty of Asgard and its glimmering city. Gone are the overly theatrical garbs that accentuate personalities. Gone is any magic that the film has. Instead, the majority of this film takes place in a desert in New Mexico. 

 

After seeing this again, I was unfortunately reminded of a movie that, upon further reflection, is eerily similar. Masters of the Universe was released in 1987 starring Dolph Lundgren as He-Man and Frank Langella as Skeletor. In that film, a group of freedom fighters from a distant and magical land (Eternia) are teleported to Earth and must find their way back. Along the way, they run into a Pre-Friends Courtney Cox who helps them find their way back to Eternia. The villain, Skeletor, also briefly visits Earth and causes havoc looking for He-Man. Eventually, all of the heroes return to Eternia and defeat Skeletor. The parallels to Thor are astounding. While there are inherent problems with Thor, it is undoubtedly a better film than Masters of the Universe. Regardless, the parallels echo one characteristic that I recognized as a child when originally seeing Masters of the Universe and when seeing Thor today as an adult. When these mythical characters leave their natural setting, they lose a bit of their effect. 

 

One major problem with Thor is that the main character is powerless for the majority of the film. People want to see Thor because the main character is powerful and can do amazing things with his hammer, Mjolnir. Those abilities are teased in an action sequence at the beginning of the film but are ultimately dismissed for nearly an hour and a half in a two-hour film. Essentially, it is a Thor movie without Thor.

I understand the need to present an origin story of sorts for Thor as not many filmgoers were aware of the character prior to the Marvel Cinematic Universe gaining popularity. However, the film truly suffers from focusing on Thor navigating a week or so on planet Earth in humorous situations and trying to establish a clumsy romance with Dr. Jane Foster (Natalie Portman). Thor is a Norse God who summons thunder to vanquish enemies and smashes evildoers with a magical hammer that only he is worthy of using. Instead, audiences are presented with a Thor who is stuck in a New Mexico desert drinking coffee, making jokes, and not using his magical hammer.

Issue #4: Sandy's Reflections on Thor (2011)

I don’t watch this film as much as others in the MCU, but I have to say that I enjoy how it is much more of a slow-burn than a “big bang” popcorn movie. The camera angles and scenery are lovely, and the quiet scenes that reflect the universal emotions of growing into your own person, wanting to be a good parent, or even experiencing sibling rivalry are, for me, a strength of the film. However, for action lovers or younger viewers, I can see how this movie would be a bit slow moving. It’s a thoughtful piece by Kenneth Branaugh who is definitely not an action movie director (which might be why he does not do any more films for the MCU).

 

Of course, my favorite aspect of the movie is Natalie Portman’s Jane Foster—a character I truly believe is misunderstood by many male viewers. I often hear that she can’t act or that her character is silly, but hey, “she’s good to look at.” If you know me, I’ve clung to this theory tightly that Jane has value in the MCU, even when others were negative. Originally, I was going to write about the different scenes that I would have loved to see as a young girl that show she is a dedicated scientist, a quirky leading lady, or a realistic portrayal of a woman who has flaws and different emotions. I could do that...but as our conversation during the film evolved naturally, I found myself examining more than just Jane—but rather how one film presents three strong, layered female characters in one film but yet they are not fully realized in the future films (yet).

 

In the film, we meet three women, all strong in different ways: Dr. Jane Foster, a scientist; Lady Sif, a warrior; and Queen Frigga, Thor’s mother. Branaugh takes his time with each of these three women, giving each of them—especially Jane—their own moments in the film. Queen Frigga is presented as a strong point/counterpoint to the King, and she has powers of her own, as it is hinted at that she can use magic (realized in the sequel). At one point, she picks up a sword to fight the King of the Frost Giants and protect her husband against the invading army. This scene is an interesting reversal of the “fridging” effect, which is when a female character in comics is brutalized or killed to motivate the male hero. For more information, you can read more about Gail Simone’s trope “Women in Refrigerators” by starting here: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WomenInRefrigerators. In this scene, it’s the King who has been put “in the fridge” in a way, going into a meditative state, because it was necessary to propel our hero, Thor, to fully realize his role as future leader of Asgard. (We’ll talk about what happens to Frigga when we get to Thor: The Dark World.)

 

Second, we have Lady Sif, a childhood companion of Thor’s and one of his group of friends that includes the Warriors Three. She defends and supports Thor, and she is presented as an equal to Thor’s other Asgardian teammates—all of whom are men. She wisely distrusts Loki, and in a key battle scene, she helps to defeat the Destroyer (the large metal robot controlled by Loki). Sif has more of a role in the film than I remember; and it’s obvious that she has feelings for Thor. It’s unclear if they ever were a couple, but there is a definite set-up here for a love triangle in the future between Thor, Sif, and Jane.

 

And, last, we have Jane Foster. Again, I find her misunderstood. Branaugh showcases her as multi-faceted and very human, with quirks. She is obsessive about her research, and it is her primary passion at the beginning of the film, often over-ruling common sense as she tries to put the puzzle pieces together of the anomaly she has found (which we know as the Rainbow Bridge). She is almost comedic at times, saying the wrong things or as in my favorite scene, getting flustered. Portman has comedic chops! When Thor brings back Erik, drunk, he’s alone with her in her camper, and their close proximity as they chat makes her uneasy. She puts her cereal bowl—with remnants of milk and a spoon—along with the cereal box itself in a cabinet because she can’t concentrate. However, that doesn’t stop her OCD, and she returns, a few beats later, to put them in the sink. All of this action is quiet, a bit in the background as they discuss her research and Erik’s drunken night out with Thor. This scene reminds me of the old-school chemistry in romantic comedies like Pillow Talk with Doris Day. It’s quiet, and in the vein of Branaugh’s vision, helps to craft a character in these soft moments, not just in action scenes. 

 

However, Lady Sif has very little to do in the sequel, and then she disappears from the MCU after that, and the love triangle never happens. Queen Frigga does have a few more important moments (no spoilers), but Jane Foster isn’t perceived well, despite Natalie Portman’s acting pedigree. She’s an accomplished actress with awards who is a leading lady in all kinds of films, including other sci fi. 

 

However, if you Google “Natalie Portman” and “Thor,” chances are you will find many articles in these categories: why she doesn’t work in the MCU, why she was dropped after the sequel, how hot she is, or that she wanted out (https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2016/08/natalie-portman-thor-done). And, unless you are new to the MCU, of course there is the huge buzz of Comic Con last year, when it was announced that she would not just return in Thor 4, but that she would become Female Thor for Love and Thunder (https://variety.com/2019/film/news/natalie-portman-thor-4-love-and-thunder-1203274705/). But what does that new label mean? That she has no value if she doesn’t have her own hammer?

 

As we await the new small screen iterations on Disney+, and the Phase 4 offerings on the movie screen, discussion on where the MCU will go with future heroes and returning favorites overflows online. Most articles talk about how forgotten characters will get a second chance, and who is at the top of the list? Jane Foster, such as ScreenRant’s “Marvel Phase 4 is Giving a Lot of Failed MCU Characters a Second Chance.” I think that “failed” is too harsh for poor Jane. But I do think it’s fair to say that the MCU has trouble with giving women arcs of their own and not as a love interest, as I point out last week with my IM2 reflections. Schaefer states, “For the most part, these characters didn't fail because they're badly-conceived; the MCU just couldn't figure out what to do with them. Jane was introduced as a driven scientist in the first Thor movie, but was reduced to serving as little more than a glorified vessel for the Ether in The Dark World. Her absence in Thor: Ragnarok was then explained with a throwaway line about her and Thor breaking up” (https://screenrant.com/marvel-mcu-phase-4-failed-characters-jane-darcy/). 

 

All I know is that I’m hopeful that Jane—the quirky, giggly, dedicated, and smart scientist—shows up in Thor: Love and Thunder—not just superpowered Female Thor Jane. She is important to show that women can be smart and funny and powerful—even without superpowers. We’ll just have to wait and see what we get. Until then, I’m still #teamjane.

Issue #4: Gian's Reflections on Thor (2011)

After finishing the first 3 Marvel films, I found that my re-watching of Thor (2011, Directed by Kenneth Branaugh) gave me fresh perspective on the film. I had remembered Thor as a very fun film. And of course, it is. Thor enters the Asgardian throne room for his coronation strutting, joking, playing, a boy who would be king. He revels in all his power. And his brashness ends up cracking the peace between Asgard and the Frost Giants. This causes Odin to strip Thor of his powers and to banish him.

 

Yet instead of seeing this as a film about Thor’s redemption, I was much more fascinated by Loki’s story this time around. Loki in the comics was always a trickster causing problems. Tom Hiddleston’s outstanding performance of the role made Loki a highly popular character. But I think that popularity really bloomed with Avengers rather than with Thor. In Thor, Loki is just a bad guy. He feels he should be the ruler of Asgard instead of his muscle-bound brother. I know when I first watched the film, I didn’t feel much sympathy for Loki. I read him as a stereotypical villain.

 

Yet rethinking the journey of the MCU, I know see how complex Loki was right from the beginning. Before the ill-fated battle on the Frost Giant’s homeworld of Jotunheim begins, Loki actually counsels Thor to stay calm:

 

“Thor, look around you. We’re outnumbered,” Loki says.

“Know your place, brother,” Thor replies gruffly.

 

Thor, hyped up for battle, of course ignores his brother and launches into a fight that threatens to start a war. Only Odin is able to bring calm back to the situation.

 

Of course, we see Loki manipulate situations as the film progresses. We learn he is a traitor who let the Frost Giants into Asgard to spoil Thor’s coronation day. We see him using the Frost Giants to steal the powerful Teserach. We also see him kill Frost Giants he is supposedly working with. It’s hard to know what Loki’s real motivations are because he is always playing games within games. And in this first film, that constant manipulation and treachery makes Loki hard to root for most of the time.

 

In fact, when Loki discovers the truth of his birth, that he is really the son of the Frost Giant Laufey and not the son of Odin, he reacts so angrily to the discovery that it’s hard to feel sympathy for him. He has been aggrieved, but his anger undercuts our feelings for him:

 

Loki: “The Casket wasn't the only thing you took from Jotunheim that day, was it?”

Odin: “No. In the aftermath of the battle I went into the temple and I found a baby. Small for a Giant's offspring, abandoned, suffering, left to die. Laufey's son.”

Loki: “Laufey's son?”

Odin: “Yes.”

Loki: “Why? You were knee-deep in Jotun blood. Why would you take me?”

Odin: “You were an innocent child.”

Loki: “No. You took me for a purpose. What was it?... TELL ME!”

Odin: “I thought we could unite our kingdoms one day. Bring about an alliance, bring about permanent peace...through you.”

Loki: “What?”

Odin: “But those plans no longer matter.”

Loki: “So I am no more than another stolen relic, locked up here until you might have use of me?”

Odin: “Why do you twist my words?”

Loki: “You could have told me what I was from the beginning! Why didn't you?”

Odin: “You're my son... I wanted only to protect you from the truth...”

Loki: “What, because I...I...I am the monster parents tell their children about at night?”

Odin: “No! No!”

Loki: “You know, it all makes sense now, why you favored Thor all these years, because no matter how much you claim to love me, you could never have a Frost Giant sitting on the throne of Asgard!”

 

Loki has the right to be angry; Odin has kept the truth of his birth from him. But he rejects Odin’s sense of compassion for the abandoned baby Loki, for the son he has raised and loved. Loki feels only the throne matters. But Odin wants him to understand that he does belong in Asgard.

 

Yet even this look into Loki’s inner being is hard to trust. We can never be totally sure what Loki’s true motivations are. He is the greatest of tricksters, and so he is constantly tricking us as film viewers. Just when we think we understand him, Loki deals another ace from up his sleeve. He tells the Frost Giants he will let them into Asgard so they can kill Odin who has fallen into the Odin-sleep. Then, at the last moment, he double crosses the Frost Giant assassins and kills them instead. He then uses the foiled assassination attempt as a justification to destroy the Frost Giant’s homeworld of Jotunheim. Loki plans to unleash the bifrost (an energy force which we see as the Rainbow bridge) to destroy the world. When Thor asks why he is doing all of this, Loki replies, “To prove to father that I am a worthy son. When he awakes, I will have saved his life, and destroyed that race of monsters.” Thor calls Loki’s plan madness and the two struggle. Thor manages to stop Loki by destroying the Rainbow bridge, cutting them off from Earth and the other worlds of the realm.

 

Near the end of their struggle, Loki says, “I never wanted the throne! I only ever wanted to be your equal!” I think re-watching Thor now, I see this as Loki’s true motivation. Marvel’s strength is redemption stories. For all the bad things Loki does, even telling Thor the awful lie that their father has died, Loki’s real problem is that he never believes he is a worthy brother to Thor. Thus, the journey Loki must take is one in which he finds his own self-worth. Rather than only being a trickster, Loki must come to understand that he is every bit the hero his brother is. He learns this over the course of many films, to make the right choices and to accept who he is. When we finally see Loki rise from villain to hero, we know, as he comes to understand, that he has as much claim to the title of Odinson as his mighty brother Thor.

Issue #3: Sandy's Reflections on Iron Man 2 (2010)

I grumbled a bit about watching this movie, for although I love Pepper, Happy, Natasha, and of course, Tony, I don’t watch this film often—probably because the party scene makes me uncomfortable, fighting with Rhodey is just sad, and Tony makes an ass out of himself (even more than usual). Of course, he’s having a bit of a mental breakdown as he contemplates his life…or should I say his impending death? This seems understandable for a man who doesn’t emote well, often using snark and wit as shields to avoid sharing real emotion. He tries several times to tell the person most important to him that he is dying (Pepper, naturally), first by talking about legacy and bequeathing his company to her, making her CEO, and second, by making her an omelette and trying to get her to not fly home and instead “recharge” somewhere with him on an impromptu vacation. However, the words don’t come out, and he is left to keep wallowing in his despair before a video of his dead father nudges him to figure out how to make a substitute for the palladium that powers his arc reactor.

My first talking point, then, was going to be that I don’t like this film. However, I think that watching it from a critical perspective really helped me “see” Tony better. I think he is often knocked for not having emotion or layers. He’s the king of one-liners, and while Ant-Man or Spider-Man are more of the comic relief, I don’t think that Tony gets enough credit for just how much he’s grown since the first film. And I found much more in this story this time around to enjoy (though the party scene still makes me cringe). 

However, that’s not what I want to really write about. It’s interesting that in a film that hinges on this emotional rollercoaster of Tony’s life (or death), I want to talk about the two women in the film: Pepper and Natasha. They are set up interestingly, and watching IM and then IM2 back-to-back really allowed me to compare how Pepper was drawn in this film, especially with the addition of a new female character. Would they be competing for Tony’s affection? Perhaps one of my favorite scenes includes the Desk Set-like banter between Pepper and Tony when he first sees Natasha: 

Tony: [Sitting down next to Pepper] Who is she?

Pepper: She is from legal. And she is potentially a very expensive sexual harassment lawsuit if you keep ogling her like that.

Tony: I need a new assistant, boss.

Pepper: Yes, and I’ve got three excellent potential candidates. They’re lined up and ready to meet you.

Tony: I don’t have time to meet. I need someone now. I feel like it’s her.

Pepper: No it’s not.

Happy: You ever boxed before?

Natalie: I have, yes.

Happy: What, like, the Tae Bo? Booty Boot Camp? Crunch? Something like that? [Natalie’s face shows brief annoyance at his statement before Tony distracts her]

Tony: How do I spell your name, Natalie?

Natalie: R-U-S-H-M-A-N.

Pepper: What, are you going to Google her now?

Tony: I thought I was ogling her. [Brings up Natalie’s file on table which doubles up as a computer. He has computers on everything.] Wow. Very, very impressive individual.

Pepper: You’re so predictable, you know that?

Tony: She’s fluent in French, Italian, Russian, Latin. Who speaks Latin?

Pepper: No one speaks Latin.

Tony: No one speaks Latin.

Pepper: It’s a dead language. You can read Latin or you can write Latin, but you can’t speak Latin.

Tony: Did you model in Tokyo? ‘Cause she modelled in Tokyo.

Pepper: Well…

Tony: I need her. She’s got everything that I need. [Camera is now on Natalie and Happy, Natalie looking over, hearing what Tony is saying]

Happy: Rule number one, never take your eyes off your opponent. [He goes to take a swing, she grabs his hand and flips him over, legs over his head.]

Pepper: Oh, my God! Happy!

Tony: That’s what I’m talking about.

Happy: I just slipped.

Tony: You did?

Happy: [Who looks a little like he’s in pain] Yeah.

Tony: Looks like a TKO to me. [Rings bell; Natalie leaves ring]

Natalie: Just… I need your impression.

Tony: You have a quiet reserve. I don’t know, you have an old soul.

Natalie: I meant your fingerprint.

Tony: Right.

Pepper: So, how are we doing?

Tony: Great. Just wrapping up here. Hey--you’re the boss.

Natalie: Will that be all, Mr Stark?

Tony: No.

Pepper: Yes, that will be all, Ms Rushman. Thank you very much. [She leaves. Tony turns to Pepper]

Tony: I want one.

Pepper: No.

What is fascinating about deconstructing this scene is that it sets up many different facets to Nat: She can multi-task, she has an impressive resume of skills, and she is skilled as a boxer—hinting at her super-spy status that we viewers were in-the-know about before the characters in the film. In addition, adding another strong female character helps shade in the portrait of Pepper as well. She could have easily become shrewish or jealous; or she could have launched herself at Tony to try to divert his attention from Natalie. However, her character is drawn differently. While she originally says no to his desire to “have” Natalie, she acquiesces, and we see in the next scene that Natalie has been hired as his assistant. (We aren’t privy to whether or not the other candidates Pepper refers to get interviews or not.) Instead, Pepper becomes a completely different version now: A powerful CEO in charge of Stark Industries. 

So, where the does that leave Natalie aka Natasha aka Black Widow? What’s interesting is that Natalie has many scenes in this film, ripe to set up a storyline of her own, giving just enough backstory in the scene I describe above to show that she has many skills. In the Marvel Avengers: The Ultimate Character Guide, the comic version of her character “was code-named the Black Widow and sent to the USA to spy on Tony’s Stark’s (Iron Man’s) company, but met Hawkeye, who convinced her to leave her Soviet masters.” In addition to all her spy skills, she has powers: “a version of the Super Soldier Serum keeps the Black Widow in peak condition” (22). While this is never addressed in the MCU, it adds even more layers that they could have explored in the nine years between IM2 and Avengers: Endgame.

But back to my question: where does this film leave Natalie? While she and Pepper actually get along and discuss work, passing the Bechdel Test, we just don’t get enough of her after this film. She continues as the third wheel, a back-up player in Avengers and in Age of Ultron a misguided love interest for Bruce Banner. Almost every interview I could find from 2010’s PR mentioned her skin-tight catsuit, such as Matt Price’s expose in The Oklahoman (https://oklahoman.com/article/3457457/scarlett-johansson-is-the-black-widow-in-iron-man-2). There’s so much more to her than just how great she looks in her iconic outfit.

In Vanity Fair’s “How Avengers: Endgame Failed Black Widow,” Bradley argues that (spoiler alert!) while her sacrifice could be seen as noble, “it was a hasty exit for a long-sidelined heroine who has for years deserved better” (https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/04/avengers-endgame-black-widow-death-scarlett-johansson).We will finally get her backstory—but it feels a bit hollow considering that her character has no future story, unless there’s still another surprise up the execs’ sleeves at Marvel. Viewing Iron Man 2 now, I got to really enjoy seeing all these crumbs that Marvel enticingly laid out…only to, at the end, feel a bit of disappointment that we didn’t get to see those stories or feel like her character development got more consideration than her outfits or hairstyles.

Issue #3: Alex's Reflections on Iron Man 2 (2010)

The Unisphere in Flushing, New York is destroyed during this film’s climactic fight scene where Iron Man (Robert Downy Jr.) and War Machine (Don Cheadle) fight Whiplash (Mickey Rourke) at the Stark Expo, a blatant homage to the 1964 New York World’s Fair. In fact, nearly all of the Stark Expo is wrecked as civilians flee in terror from Iron Man-esque drones programmed to kill Tony Stark. It is a fitting end to a story that questioned the place of Iron Man in the modern world and how Tony Stark’s technology could be perverted if it fell into the wrong hands. However, the destruction of the Unisphere stuck with me.

 

At Disney World, there is a ride in Tomorrow Land called The Carousel of Progress. Patrons simply sit in a curved theater that turns every few minutes with depictions of everyday life being presented for each decade. The point of the show is to present how life changes from decade to decade and how technology has helped enhance life. Additionally, each portion of the show ends with the same song: “There’s a great big beautiful tomorrow, shining at the end of every day.” This entire exhibit was taken from the 1964 New York World’s Fair and placed in Disney World for posterity. It is a simple experience that stands no chance against any of the other rides at Disney World, but its importance and message cannot be dismissed. Everyone needs to be constantly reminded that tomorrow is beautiful and waiting for us. If the fictional and non-fictional worlds can be cross-referenced for a moment, then that very same Carousel of Progress may have been a part of Tony Stark’s childhood as well. 

 

Being the son of a highly successful tech tycoon in the 1960s, Tony Stark would have, undoubtedly, been to the New York World’s Fair in 1964. World Fairs used to house the newest and most innovative technologies for the world to experience before they became commonplace. And again, to satiate my passion for baseball (and specifically the New York Mets), the 1964 World’s Fair also celebrated the opening of Shea Stadium, one of the early dual-purpose stadiums in American sports. Regardless, the World’s Fair would have stood as one of Tony Stark’s defining moments as a young man.

 

Even the depiction of Howard Stark, Tony’s father, is ripped right out of ABC’s The Wonderful World of Disney with Howard Stark being filmed exactly as Walt Disney was filmed throughout the 1950s and 1960s television show. In the middle of the film, Nick Fury provides Tony Stark with old footage and blueprints from his father in order to help him synthesize a new element. In old 8mm footage of his father, Howard Stark touts the creation of the Stark Expo saying, “Everything is achievable through technology: better living, robust health, and for the first time in human history, the possibility of world peace.” The parallels between Howard Stark and Walt Disney are profound from the design of their offices to the models of cities they reference. But again, the themes of “tomorrow” and “progress” are present.

 

This leads back to the end of the film where the Stark Expo, the same that Walt Dis…I mean Howard Stark had declared would be the foundation for progress and peace, is completely destroyed. All of the work and all of the progress that had been celebrated over decades had been wiped out by Iron Man fighting killer drones. Those drones needed to be stopped, of course, but the destruction of that expo gave Tony a chance to reinvent himself. It served as the end of Howard Stark’s legacy and the beginning of Tony Stark’s. The destruction of The Stark Expo, the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s World’s Fair, is Tony Stark’s “Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow.”

Issue #3: Gian's Reflections on Iron Man 2 (2010)

There’s this awful scene in Iron Man 2 (2010). Tony Stark gets drunk at his birthday party while wearing the armor. He falls over with a bottle in his hand. Then he tells everyone he is peeing in his suit. Pepper Potts tries to get him to end the party, but instead he tells her to leave and, as he waves his hand toward the door, he accidentally blasts a glass wall panel with his repulsor ray. When the crowd cheers, he responds by having women throw champagne bottles into the air so he can blast them.

I have to say I really hate this scene. My fellow MCU blogger Sandy hates it too. The scene is stupid, disgusting, childish. How could anyone wearing the most advanced weapons system in the world, act so stupidly? I originally thought that director Jon Favreau had totally screwed up when he shot this. I felt he was making fun of Stark, going for cheap laughs.

But, watching the film again, I was reminded by MCU blogger Alex of this:

Iron Man #128 published in 1979. The issue was written by David Michelinie and Bob Layton and illustrated by John Romita, Jr., Bob Layton, and Carmine Infantino. In 1979, I was 12 years old. I collected Iron Man comics because I liked his suit, so I bought issue 128 off a rack at Dick’s Grocery Store.

And I hated that issue. Superheroes did not get drunk. They were not alcoholics. They were good and they saved people. I knew Spider-Man had girlfriend problems, but who didn’t? I couldn’t even get a girlfriend. But alcoholism? That just wasn’t right. Tony’s drinking problem eventually leads to him losing control of Stark Industries and later his armor. In the condensed storytelling of the time, Stark becomes an alcoholic, quits drinking, relapses, and then kicks the habit for good, all in one issue. “Thank goodness!” is what my 12-year-old self thought. “Let’s get back to some real superhero stories.” But that iconic cover has stayed with me all these years and, of course, I still own the issue!

Ironically, although Iron Man 2 raises the specter of Stark’s drinking habits, the writers don’t make him an alcoholic. Could the comics writers of the 1970s actually be more daring that today’s superhero film writers? Instead of alcoholism, the screenplay writer of Iron Man 2, Justin Theroux, has Stark dying of blood poisoning caused by the palladium he is using to power the arc reactor that runs his armor.

Knowing he is dying, Stark gives his art collection to the Boy Scouts, his business to Pepper, and one of his suits of armor to Roddy Piper and the U.S. Military. He’s giving things away and giving up until Nick Fury fortunately arrives and sets him on the path to finding a solution to the blood poisoning problem.

As Stark searches for the cure, he finds an old promotional film his father, Howard Stark, had recorded. Stark is startled to find on the reel a recording he has never seen before. Howard actually speaks to Tony who is only a child at the time of the filming. He says the following:

Tony, you are too young to understand this right now, so I thought I would put it on film for you. I built this [model of a futuristic city] for you, and some day you'll realize that it represents a whole lot more than just people's inventions. It represents my life's work. This is the key to the future. I'm limited by the technology of my time, but one day you'll figure this out. And when you do, you will change the world. What is, and always will be, my greatest creation...is you.

At the time, Stark uses his father’s words as inspiration to discover a new element, vibranium (which was retconned in Captain America: The First Avenger). This element helps him power his armor without getting sick. What is more important, though, is that Howard gives Tony the job of saving the world.

As much as I don’t like a superhero being a bumbling drunk, Tony has to hit the bottom of the glass in order to get back up and be the hero his father wanted him to be. As we know, the stakes go far beyond beating Whiplash (played so well by Mickey Rourke) and weaselly arms deal Justin Hammer. Tony’s greatest tasks lie ahead of him. And conquering his despair and self-loathing is the only way for him to reach the level of heroism the world will need from him.