Something brought up by poetryondemand's question to kellysue earlier about her plight in demonstrating female leads for super hero films is the struggle I’ve had time and again when discussing Captain Marvel and a possible on-screen origin.
I have found myself saddened, infuriated and speechless time and again when faced with guys** saying “you can’t have MS. Marvel without “the real" Captain Marvel / Mar-Vell" (they’re always very keen to remind us that Carol isn’t the first) when the topic of adapting a potential Carol screen appearance comes up.
She gains her powers when a literal alien wishing machine explodes.
Alien. Wishing. Machine.
If someone can’t see how “US Air Force / SHIELD pilot / Avengers liaison interacts with damaged (or exploding) reality-warping alien technology and thus gains super powers" works as an origin story without having to add “by absorbing them from a man" at the end then I just despair.
re: Emerald City.
IT’S NOT A MOVIE THING.
Guys, I know you want a CM movie and, believe me, I’d be first in line, but I am first and foremost a comic book fan. And the notion that anyone might be disappointed in this cool thing that is happening because it’s not a movie thing, is a profound bummer to me.
So I’m sorry if I got anyone’s skewed in the wrong direction: it is unequivocally NOT a movie thing.
As soon as I am certain everything is in place, I will quit being coy. I only teased because I know people are making travel plans NOW and you’ll need to be there early for this.
Um… I just got an email. SUCH an email. You guys are gonna wanna come to Emerald City Comic Con. Can’t say more yet, but you’re gonna wanna come and you’re gonna wanna come a day EARLY.
I’m getting breakfast for the kids so I don’t have a lot of time to spend on this, but —
> hm hMMMM though my thought was she only complies with the rules when she agrees with them in the first place?
Well, I’m not much of an RPGer (I’ve only played one game), so my knowledge of this stuff is cursory, but the reference I used to double check my thinking was this: http://easydamus.com/lawfulgood.html — and it includes the line, “a lawful good character will not honor a law that runs contrary to his alignment.” While I do believe Carol will defy authority and break rules (and you’ll see that happen soon), I don’t think she’d do so lightly. (We also HAVE to take into account her history. As much as I’d love to forget her behavior during civil war, we don’t get to do that.)
I *do* think Carol would lie as a strategy — I’m not sure how strict these prescriptions are. (For what it’s worth — I also think everyone listed below as ‘well known lawful good characters’ would lie under the right circumstances too.)
Of COURSE we WANT Carol to be “Chaotic Good” — that’s the sexiest. But it doesn’t feel quite as true (to me, anyway). Look at this list of characters they put under LG and the ones they put under CG:
“Well known lawful good characters from film or literature include: Luke Skywalker (Star Wars), Mister Spock (Star Trek), Hermione Granger (Harry Potter), and Superman (DC Comics).”
“Well known chaotic good characters from film or literature include: Han Solo (Star Wars), Batman (DC Comics), Fred and George Weasley (Harry Potter), and Robin Hood.”
To me, without a doubt, Carol is more the former than the latter.
(Even though I agree with the outcome, the “well she’s military” argument doesn’t work for me — Pappy Boyington and Chuck Yeager were also military. Occupation is not character.)
Look, I write character by intuition, not by a set of rules. Under my pen, she’ll behave the way that feels ‘in character’ to me in the situation in which she’s been place. But that said, if you ask me to look back at her history and say where she falls — Lawful Good.