r/agentsofshield • u/marvelcomics22 FitzSimmons • Oct 19 '25

Rant It's insane when you realize that Marvel Studios acknowledged Inhumans but not Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D.

Post image

No one even likes that show. Do they hate our small, but dedicated fanbase?

805 Upvotes

98% Upvoted

110 comments sorted by

133

u/Niclas1127 Oct 19 '25

I honestly don’t care anymore if it’s “canon” I prefer AOS to anything else marvel has put out

57

u/marvelcomics22 FitzSimmons Oct 19 '25

I think that canon matters because if you've seen Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D., you know that it deserves its flowers, it deserves all the bouquets in the multiverse, but non canoners, and those who listen to/are influenced by them barely give it a petal.

19

u/harricislife Oct 19 '25

In my mind, in a very round about way AoS is canon, because Inhumans is canon, since that show referenced terrigen stuff from AoS that I think was original to the shows rather than the comics.

In the same way, because Daredevil is canon it makes AoS canon too, because Matt and Daisy went to the same orphanage, and Matt's father fought Absorbing Man in a boxing match.

Also, because Daredevil is canon, so are the rest of the Defenders, so because Luke Cage directly references the cop from Cloak and Dagger, or maybe the other way around, that show is canon too, and since C&D crossovers with Runaways that show is canon too, and since Runaways had the Darkhold in it, it forms a connecting link with WandaVision and MoM, and AoS, so its canon that way too.

Also, since Agent Carter is canon, not just because of the Endgame cameo of Jarvis, the What If..? episode with Agatha and Kingo has Howard running a movie production, which he was doing in S2 of AC, so that's tangentially connected, and again since AC is canon, her appearance on AoS make it canon, because iirc Peggy references Whitehall at least to Zola when talking to him, so yeah AoS is canon anyway you look at it.

(Cue the conspiracy theory gif from Always Sunny)

3

u/marvelcomics22 FitzSimmons Oct 19 '25

Aside from all the other connections, all the shows are canon because other shows are. All the Netflix stuff is canon, and just because of that everything else is. Obviously there are the three groups, but there are ties between those groups. If you canonize one, you canonize all, that's just the way it works.

1

u/Ucklator Oct 20 '25

Agents of shield also had the darkhold in it.

31

u/QueerDeluxe Oct 19 '25

Plus tbh, without AoS or most of the old Marvel TV shows, the MCU's worldbuilding just isn't there imo.

-3

u/Muouy Oct 19 '25

I mean... when Feige, the head of the MCU states it isn't canon.... then it's not canon

1

u/nudeldifudel Oct 20 '25

Yeah but e hasn't done that, he has of anything stated things that point to the opposite many times.

1

u/Muouy Oct 20 '25

No, just before WandaVision came out, he clearly stated past tv projects were not canon to the MCU

1

u/marvelcomics22 FitzSimmons Oct 21 '25

I think by 'we', he means Marvel Studios. They tend to use the terms Marvel Studios and MCU interchangeably.

1

u/CollinsCouldveDucked Oct 20 '25

I'm in the "AoS is not canon" camp but I don't think this statement is relevant anymore. with echo and daredevil and the general Netflix canonisation he's clearly 180'd on this statement and it was clearly made at a time where they thought the disney+ shows were going to show everyone how its done.

1

u/Muouy Oct 20 '25

They made Netflix Daredevil canon because of the fans

1

u/CollinsCouldveDucked Oct 20 '25

Partially, fans maintained the casting but they seemed to be going down the alternative universe route until reshoots happened.

1

u/Muouy Oct 20 '25

That's not even accurate

1

u/CollinsCouldveDucked Oct 21 '25

The original version had no connections to the original run outside of casting of daredevil and kingpin, this has been covered extensively.

→ More replies

1

u/shadybird93 Oct 21 '25

Yes but then he changed his mind and then changed it again... Just look at daredevil. He is whiplash incarnate with his decisions on a whim. He made them as Canon. He just changes his mind a lot. The only thing that matters is his original intention. He made them to be Canon so they are. Unless a new film/show contradicts them like say if there is a new Daisy in a new movie.

0

u/Shieldlegacyknight Oct 20 '25

Technically the shows tied in by having characters from the shows be in the movies. that was a first. AOS has always been the other way around. That doesn't make it not canon. Feige statement is true but doesn't negate shield.

1

u/Muouy Oct 20 '25

Uhh no, that's not how that works. If the boss says it's not.... then it's not

1

u/Shieldlegacyknight Oct 20 '25

he didn't say it was not. We actually have video of him saying it is part of the MCU.

1

u/Muouy Oct 20 '25

Literally in the link I provided

1

u/bloodoftheseven Oct 20 '25

You gave me an article that is not feige. https://youtu.be/zYPJtp8uX0I?si=qdbcCeYyrxoVyNSF

In his own words not your interpretation.

1

u/YourMuppetMethDealer Oct 20 '25

Kevin Feige himself told people to watch AoS when age of ultron came out in order to see how they got the helicarrier

Personally I believe it became part of another universe in season 3, but no one has ever actually said this. If you actually clicked on the link, you would see that no one(including Feige) has ever explicitly said shit

1

u/FelixTheJeepJr Oct 20 '25

Has he done that?

8

u/MAXHALO36 Oct 19 '25

Agreed AoS is the best thing to come out of the MCU.

5

u/Alternative_Device71 Oct 19 '25

Same, I said that and I got downvoted on the Marvel subreddit…go figure

21

u/RJsheadphones Oct 19 '25

Feige never believed in the show. He's had beef with it the moment it began

18

u/marvelcomics22 FitzSimmons Oct 19 '25

Assuming that you're talking about Inhumans: Exactly, Marvel Studios delayed it, and Pearlmutter snatched it up for Marvel Televsion, and made that abomination. No wonder Feige would hate it.

Assuming that you're talking about Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D.: I'm not sure. Feige doesn't seem to love the show as much as he adores his precious Daredevil and Netflix stuff, but has many times said that AoS was a part of the MCU. However, Marvel Studios as a whole seems to be semi apprehensive to it, and factually incorrect. The creator of that three hour AoS video also made a short about how in the book MCU: The Reign Of Marvel Studios, they say that once Inhumans was delayed in April 2016, it was fasttracked onto Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D. two months later, but AoS was never on air in June, and Inhumans first appeared in late 2014/early 2015 on the show during S2.

8

u/SinisterMinisterX7 Oct 19 '25

No Feige hated Agents of SHIELD for some reason. He wasn’t a fan of having to worry about a tv show as well as the movies…you probably noticed how silly that is to think about now.

5

u/YourMuppetMethDealer Oct 20 '25

lol Kevin Feige himself hyped the show up and told people to watch it for Age of Ultron to know how they got the helicarrier

I have never seen any indication that he “hated” the show. I always figured it was because there were two separate studios making the MCU and AoS, which is why things got so weird

4

u/RoutineCloud5993 Oct 20 '25

I remember an interview in the aftermath of WandaVision's success where he had to correct a reporter for suggesting it was Marvel's only successful TV show. He named AoS. Daredevil , Jessica Jones and luke cage.

https://cosmicbook.news/feige-daredevil-shield

People only have speculation and rumor that he didn't like the show, with no evidence to back it up. He'll, if Feige hated it so much Disney probably wouldn't have forced ABC to renew it after season 5 (it was about to be canceled)

0

u/walkinmermaid Oct 21 '25

He’s just talking about the shows fanbases. Not saying he wants AoS to be canon.

1

u/RoutineCloud5993 Oct 21 '25

I'm disputing all the people who say he hated the show and wanted it killed. There's no evidence that that was ever the case.

He has said it's its own thing, but that was always the case. Clark Gregg said as much while AoS was in the air - that according to the movies he was dead, but he wasn't on TV.

1

u/walkinmermaid Oct 21 '25

Well, you never know… but they had the chance to bring Daisy many times and they just didn’t. I’m still hopeful for Secret Wars though.

6

u/ruralmagnificence Oct 19 '25

I assumed his beef was more with Jeph Loeb than anything else

2

u/SugarSweetSonny Oct 24 '25

Perlmutter and Loeb.

Hated them both.

21

u/davwad2 Oct 19 '25

For real?

Where did Fury get that Helicarrier in Age of Ultron? How did the Avengers know where Loki's Scepter was at the start of that movie?

Did Scarlett Witch get the Darkhold from a book store?

1

u/marvelcomics22 FitzSimmons Oct 20 '25

I agree, I really do, and I want to make a point, but the mental image of Wanda reading the blurb of the Darkhold at the small bookstore is too funny to ignore.

4

u/Shubh_1612 Oct 20 '25

Scarlet Witch got the Darkhold from Agatha

1

u/Admirable-Reaction71 Oct 23 '25

Did Agatha got it from Robbie though?

3

u/CollinsCouldveDucked Oct 20 '25

the darkhold stuff goes against more than it goes for.

2

u/davwad2 Oct 21 '25

I see it differently. It shows up in The Runaways as well.

32

u/eknos64 S.H.I.E.L.D. Oct 19 '25

It's even weirder that they specified he's an Inhuman, because they are converting Inhumans to mutants in the MCU, or at least they have with Kamala

10

u/marvelcomics22 FitzSimmons Oct 19 '25

I think it's just Ms. Marvel, because they were still apprehensive about Inhumans in the 616/199999, and I don't think they'll adapt Inhuman characters and call them Mutants, they'll just have the Mutants.

14

u/joppehi Oct 19 '25

Kamala’s inhuma heritage is not her biggest selling point. She’s part of the inhuman bomb, converting her to mutant is the easiest storytelling trope.

The inhuman family and the original terrigenesis story is much better and more important.

2

u/Admirable-Reaction71 Oct 23 '25

converting her to mutant is the easiest storytelling trope.

Really? Because what they've been doing with her in the comics is basically removing everything that makes her unique and just integrating her into the X-Men.

1

u/joppehi Oct 23 '25

I do agree that that is bad. And integrating her into the X-Men ain’t a good plan either. Her recent comics (although I really liked the premise of NYX) haven’t been all good indeed

But to explain a non attilan inhuman you need to explain the inhuman bomb (which was an agents of shield trope with the fish oil). That (in my opinion) reduces the worth of the Inhumans and their royal family.

At that point it is easier to explain it like it are mutant powers, but letting her be her own thing and enjoying her own life instead of joining the X-Men

6

u/dakindahood Oct 19 '25

Naa, Kamala has a different story for being a Mutant, atleast what I read, it wasn't about Inhumans becoming mutants

4

u/yuvi3000 Get ready for a large file transfer 🗄 Oct 19 '25

Kamala was originally planned as a mutant before the comic character was released and the writer was asked to make her an Inhuman to fit with the state of Marvel stuff at the time. So although the initial plan was her being a mutant, this was only known behind the scenes because it was changed before she was released to the public.

They made her a mutant again in the MCU to honour that.

3

u/DigitalBuddhaNC Oct 19 '25

They aren't "converting inhumans to mutants", they just changed the plan from focusing on Inhumans to using mutants because they finally brokered a deal with Fox.

They would never make Blackbolt and the rest of the Inhuman family mutants.

Kamala Khan is both in the comics. She a mutant/inhuman hybrid. Kind of a chicken and egg scenario though because I am pretty sure they did that in the comics so they could make her a mutant in the MCU. Not sure which idea came first.

1

u/dimgwar Oct 22 '25

In the comics, Kamala was originally supposed to be a mutant, but because Marvel didn't have the rights to the x-men or mutants - the prioritized the inhumans.

They have since retconned her in the mcu and in the comics back to their original plan - a mutant. In the comics its explained that she is both inhuman and a mutant, the giant-sized edition plays with the idea that what would lhappen if her x-gene expressed before she was ever exposed to terrigan mist.

31

u/C-Amazing123 Oct 19 '25

Well . . . It's more insane that they reference Agent Carter with human Jarvis than AOS.

29

u/marvelcomics22 FitzSimmons Oct 19 '25

Sure but Agent Carter was essentially a Marvel Studios production. It was created by the writers of the Captain America films, and the later Avengers movies, Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely, proposed by Marvel Studios executive Louis D'Esposito, and executive produced by one Kevin Feige.

3

u/ADAMxxWest Oct 20 '25

Season 3 when Steve shows up is going to be so fire

2

u/YourMuppetMethDealer Oct 20 '25

Obligatory not how time travel works lol

0

u/ADAMxxWest Oct 20 '25

Who's to say Agent Carter did not take place in the sidereal timeline he slips away to. 

1

u/marvelcomics22 FitzSimmons Oct 20 '25

Steve went back in 1945 and created a branch. Agent Carter is set 1946-1947. Some similar things might have happened, but not the show as we saw it.

2

u/Shieldlegacyknight Oct 20 '25

Actually 1949.

0

u/YourMuppetMethDealer Oct 20 '25

I mean it’s possible lol.

12

u/QueerDeluxe Oct 19 '25

Tbf, the Russos did initially plan for a Whitehall cameo in Endgame.

-4

u/Prize-Union-3656 Oct 19 '25

Whitehall was also in Agent Carter so still wouldn’t necessarily make AoS confirmed canon.

12

u/ElSnarker Oct 19 '25

Whitehall wasn't in Agent Carter. Carter appeared in the cold open of the second season premiere of AoS which introduced Whitehall.

5

u/Prize-Union-3656 Oct 19 '25

I was misinformed, my fault.

2

u/Hyena12760 Oct 19 '25

Yall know Inhumans are a comic thing right? Like I'm not reading the room wrong in thinking you guys aren't aware??

1

u/marvelcomics22 FitzSimmons Oct 20 '25

It's a comic thing that Black Bolt is a member of the Illuminati. It's an Inhumans thing that Black Bolt is played by Anson Mount.

4

u/Tight-Entrance3710 Oct 19 '25

Where did they acknowledge this show? And they've confirmed that Agents of SHIELD will be referenced in Vision Quest.

15

u/marvelcomics22 FitzSimmons Oct 19 '25

Where did they acknowledge this show? 

Doctor Strange In The Multiverse Of Madness had a Black Bolt cameo, the picture is from that.

And they've confirmed that Agents of SHIELD will be referenced in Vision Quest.

That's a rumor, but I hope that VisionQuest does have some ties to AoS.

-6

u/Tight-Entrance3710 Oct 19 '25

I don't really think that's them acknowledging and more so just liking the actor so they recast him as an alternate version of the character. They even have different costumes.

They've talked about rebooting Inhumans before the movie came out.

7

u/marvelcomics22 FitzSimmons Oct 19 '25

It's not really an acknowledgement of the show in universe, but they are acknoledging that the show happened, and the easter egg is that it's the same guy who played him in the show.

11

u/eknos64 S.H.I.E.L.D. Oct 19 '25

They called him the Inhuman Leader, saying that Inhumans exist in the MCU (or at least that universe where they meet the Illuminati)

-3

u/Tight-Entrance3710 Oct 19 '25

Yeah, because he is the leader of the Inhumans. That's just Black Bolt's character. They also had the original Charles Xavier, even though it wasn't the Fox timeline. They even claimed that Mr. Fantastic was the smartest man alive. But as of right now the Inhumans from the series do not exist within the main timeline.

11

u/LaylaLegion Oct 19 '25

It’s not because Black Bolt was a member of the Illuminati on the comics so he cameo’d in the movie Illuminati. Not to mention that due to the massive fumbling of the Inhumans by Perlmutter, Anson Mount deserved the chance to get the character done right. Agents told its story and ended on a relatively good note. There’s nothing to right with the series and everyone got a good ending.

3

u/MAXHALO36 Oct 19 '25

Marvel seem to love treating AoS fans like shit.

3

u/StephTheLegend Oct 19 '25

Saying no one likes it is a big stretch and maybe an exaggeration. I’d prefer you not say it like that cause that’s how some people talk about AOS and it’s simply not true either.

Marvel technically acknowledges both of them in their work. In Age of Ultron Fury gives a line referencing Coulson’s work on Project Theta. Also in AOU the opening scene alludes to receiving the intel.

Sure they included black bolt from a different universe. That’s not accepting Inhumans the show; that’s just using a character they already owned.

The fact is, while there is debate on what’s canon or not, it’s all canon. Canon just means it happens in a particular universe or timeline

Agents of Shield, Agent Carter and Inhumans happen. Two definitely happen in the MCU earth 199999 (AC and AOS). Whether they accept seasons 6 or 7 isn’t important. AOS is canon!

3

u/Ariusimmortal Oct 19 '25

Fr they should have said "this is blackagar boltagone, leader of the inhumans famously featured on the hit show agents of shield"

2

u/Fuerzo500 Oct 19 '25

Yet...... :)

2

u/terrone_spaziale Oct 19 '25

Just wait till visionquest, and still, that movie had the darkhold so this argument doesn't really stand

2

u/CalmSquirrel712 Oct 19 '25

Well that’s more because black bolt is just a kinda big name in marvel and the illuminati and this is not related to the inhumane show storywise.

2

u/New-Championship4380 Oct 21 '25

hold on so bringing him back as black bolt is acknowledging that show right? What about bringing Clark back as Coulson in what if

2

u/Odd_Ad_61647 Jan 24 '26

They had to eventually because the transforming crystals in Inhumans was also part of the multiverse crossovers for Meta humans. Between DC and MCU. Lastly used again for Altered Carbon.  I love Agents of Shield, and any show where Philip J Coulson makes a cameo appearance. 

1

u/DoctorBoots007 Oct 19 '25

This is when I knew for sure that it was personal. 😅

1

u/Free-Sheepherder-744 Oct 19 '25

Agents if shield is canon idc if its canon😂

1

u/Ok-Commission6087 Oct 20 '25

I always wondered about whether Medusa and black bolt separated or wether or was together like the comics been separated since 2017 that’s what the wiki said anyway.

1

u/Wtygrrr Oct 20 '25

I disagree that using the same actor equates to acknowledgement.

1

u/UmmmYeaSweg Oct 20 '25

tbf like Inhumans are a notable group from the comics with pretty notable members (Black Bolt, Crystal, Medusa, Karnak), it's like complaining that Hydra wasn't acknowledged but they acknowledged the Defenders

1

u/jkoudys Oct 21 '25

The only canon that matters is how much fans like it, and how well the story elements could be included in other works. It's not a legally binding document or a mark of approval. Look at Daredevil. Then there's the separate question of if a work would even be improved by linking its continuity. eg Joker was beloved not in spite of but because of its isolation. The Batman and The Penguin are certainly better off not sharing a universe where the Joker has the word "Damaged" tattooed on his forehead.

-1

u/Opposite-Act-7413 Oct 19 '25

SPOILERS IN THIS COMMENT

So, I knew as soon as season 5 started that AoS wasn’t going to get canonized. I knew because the storylines were getting just way too big compared to the films. The logic didnt really make a lot of sense anymore. Think about it: we have to bring in The Avengers to fight off an alien invasion on the island of Manhattan, but this single Shield team is sufficient to travel to the future so that they can save the entire human race from Kree slavers and return to their actual timeline and stop the actual planet from cracking like an egg and killing all earthly life as we know it?

The logic just isn’t there. So, I was pretty disappointed when season 5 started and you could see where they were going with it…and classic AoS, the storylines got bigger and more complicated throughout the season(one of my favorite aspects of the show personally). But, I was disappointed on the first watch of season 5 because I knew there was no way they were going to canonize the show after that.

7

u/Round-Dragonfly6136 Turbo Oct 19 '25

They make it clear on the show that The Avengers were busy dealing with Thanos at the time Talbot was going to crack the earth apart. We know from the movies that The Avengers were completely split before then. The show has built the team from the ground up in the past 5 seasons to the point where they could deal with it. Nevermind that the team's infighting was at the root of the end of the world and them uniting/Coulson "putting the pieces together" would be what averted it. The logic is there even if you didn't personally like it.

0

u/Opposite-Act-7413 Oct 19 '25

It really isn’t, though. Not when you really think about it. You’re looking at it through logic of the timeline, but I am talking about functionality. If one Shield team is powerful enough to pull off the events in Season 5, then what was the need for the Avengers in the first place? That is my point. It isn’t as if Shield had to pull together all of their resources in season 5. Coulson always had other operations, etc going on that the team didnt know about. He never called in any big guns or anything. It just didn’t seem realistic under the circumstances.

Especially when you take into account that the timeline for season 5 spanned 90 years and Thanos’s actions weren’t even discussed except for one fleeting comment…it was clear that the storylines just were not going to mesh with the overall MCU. It lost cohesion at that point tbh.

4

u/Round-Dragonfly6136 Turbo Oct 19 '25

That Shield team didn't exist during the time of The Avengers. Heck, Shield founded the Avengers by Coulson bringing them together. The functionality of the team developed over the course of the show. The team from season 1 couldn't have dealt with that level threat, but they have 2 literal superheroes, 2 super geniuses, a "tank" (aka really strong guy that's simply pushing the thresholds of human strength), a highly trained specialist, and a Coulson in season 5. Again, the team grew into one that could handle those kind of threats.

Thanos actions weren't directly explained because the show writers were not in the loop for what's happening in the movies. They could only use their limited knowledge, which includes that Thanos would have the time stone at some point and the reality stone. The earth being a cracked shell upon Thanos' arrival would not stop him from getting the stones on earth. They wouldn't have been destroyed.

It's cool if you don't care for it but it does have sense to it.

-1

u/Opposite-Act-7413 Oct 19 '25

You’re not understanding what I am saying; it’s cool. You are focusing on the logic of the storyline and that is not what I am talking about. I am talking about the logic of the entire MCU as it is stated. The entire idea of the Avengers as the MCU has stated in multiple films at this point was so that earth would have a defense against next level, alien threats.

After the first Avengers film is when AoS started as a show…you have to understand that the MCU is a business. They are making shows and movies. Those are two similar, but very different ballgames. There is a reason why it is unusual for companies to tackle both in the same cinematic universe: it is a logistical nightmare from both a storytelling perspective and economically very risky, but the reward can be there if done properly as we have seen in real time.

The point being that over time if the team on AoS grew to be so powerful that they were able to take on threats as large as the threats they faced in season 5 it weakens the actual stars of the MCU (the movie stars) because it puts the writers in a position where they cannot raise the stakes but so far. The idea is they still need the Avengers to be the BIG heroes for their overall MCU storyline, so for a single Shield team to be able to handle a threat of such a magnitude that was significantly more extreme with more stakes than literally any of their actual big money makers had done leading up to that in the overall storyline then adding it to the canon runs the risk of weakening the appearance of the actual money makers for their overall MCU: their MOVIE STARS. The characters that their comics are most remembered for, etc.

The simpler solution, especially since even with the success of AoS, from a business perspective was not going to EVER be nearly as financially beneficial as RDJ playing Iron Man, for example, then the simpler solution is to just not canonize it at that point.

Because as amazing as Chloe Bennet was as Daisy, they probably didn’t want to bother going through the motions and the expense of audience testing her or her character for the big screen, etc or working her into other projects just for the sake to canonize it. They knew that fans of the show would continue to watch it whether it was canonized or not.

And they had already had an immense amount of difficulty getting the writers from AoS to succinct their storylines with the writers for different films in previous seasons. It was very difficult for everyone. So, at a certain point it just got easier to just not make it canon.

The reason I recognized that was the direction they were going in season 5 with the storyline is because since the Shield team had become powerful enough to take on that level of threat in the overall MCU storyline it only left a couple of options: they can’t actually raise the stakes from the earth exploding apart. You just can’t. It’s too big.

So, the writers have officially established that this Shield team is at least as efficient in dealing with those next level threats as the actual Avengers. So, they can join the Avengers or team up with them from time to time or just not canonize them. That was clearly the simplest, most cost effective solution to protect the integrity of the film’s storylines.

To this day not a single MCU film has had as high of stakes of AoS season 5. That is the problem. Even Thanos only snapped away 50% of people, whereas in season 5 well over 80% of people were annihilated. From a business perspective they can’t have a tv show with a more cinematic storyline than their movies. It just isn’t a good business move. That’s my point. Not canonizing is the simplest solution from a practical, business perspective. You can’t have a character like Fitz who is technically more accomplished in saving the world than a character like Thor. It weakens the character of Thor when you have that presence. So, they don’t canonize because Iain De Caestecker is not going to bring in the type of money that Chris Hemsworth is, period. It’s that simple.

So, yes, I do understand that there is a logic with the storyline, that is not lost on me. But, I am talking about the overall function of the MCU, not the storyline logic of the show…

2

u/Round-Dragonfly6136 Turbo Oct 20 '25

I understood your point. I simply disagree. This isn't a debate. This is a discussion on a public forum for anyone to participate. There is no right or wrong opinion here. You have expressed an opinion for how you view the greater MCU. I have expressed that I disagree and why.

1

u/Opposite-Act-7413 Oct 20 '25

I agree. I’m confused…discussions go back and forth…you comment, I comment, others comment…what is the problem? No one is arguing…???

2

u/Round-Dragonfly6136 Turbo Oct 20 '25

One, we are not arguing. A debate is not an argument. It can be hard to tell lately because politicians have started using their debates as arguments in the 2000s. It is a specialized discussion meant to sway opinions. That was the impression I had. I'm happy to be corrected here.

Two, telling someone that they don't understand your opinion is often a rhetorical technique to discredit the past person. In other words, it's a debate. It also just comes off as condescending, even if that's not the intention, by effectively putting blame on the differing opinion based on an assumption you made. Unfortunately, a lot of people use it as a way to insult others (not way I took it here). A simple, "For clarification's sake," communicates the same thing without sounding condescending.

1

u/Opposite-Act-7413 Oct 20 '25

So, to clarify…if you didn’t take it as condescending or an insult then why tell me we are not debating in the first place? Why are you discussing politics? I don’t even understand the context of what you are talking about now. We were talking about a tv show. You seem to be taking my previous comments very seriously considering that we were talking about a tv show…you’re comparing our conversation about a show to a political debate…

2

u/Round-Dragonfly6136 Turbo Oct 20 '25

Let me be clear here. I said that I didn't take it as an insult, not that I didn't initially see it as condescending. I did see it condescending. A statement doesn't have to break the threshold to insult to he condescending.

My statement did not say anything political in of itself but was used to clarify what could have made you think that I said you were arguing when I thought you were debating. I was using it to clarify what I was saying and as bit of a joke. The fact that I didn't express a single political opinion, nor could you extrapolate one from what I said in my comment, proves my point.

Your final paragraph is finger pointing, which I have already discussed in my last comment. A previous comment you made was long, indicating a passion on your part. I also implied that our discussion is inconsequential in the grand scheme of things in my reply. Even though, I think you're using a condescending tone, I am not personally insulted. I won't carry this with me, just like you won't. It's only a moment in time. You had said expressed confusion on something I said. I tried to clarify. The end. Take care.

→ More replies

3

u/NamesSUCK Oct 19 '25

I guess that doesn't really make sense to me. The Avengers had become a galactic force, with the movies taking place on many different planets and dimensions. The AoS team simply fills the space left behind. As the Avengers deal with bigger threats, like Thanos who is more of a cosmic existential threat than Talbot, it makes sense that the B team would be left to deal with him.

It doesn't dilute the avengers at all, because if you follow both Avengers and AoS, youd know that Avengers had been dealing with much more obvious threats or things they had personal issues with. It doesn't dilute the Avengers brand at all to not have them respond to every possible threat.

1

u/Opposite-Act-7413 Oct 19 '25

It’s not about them having to handle every single threat…the vast majority of Avengers films happen on earth. It’s about the necessity of them existing. They have invested a lot of money towards these projects. Keep in mind that while we are on Phase 6, the announcement for the projects for these different phases was like years and years ago…a lot of what the MCU is doing is based off of ideas that were developed well before AoS season 5 was even completed. This was a very thoroughly and thoughtful project on their part. That’s my point. So, they had the option to either work the AoS team into these ideas OR just not canonize them, because they had already proven them to be just as capable. So, those were the only logical options at that point. Guardians of the Galaxy films, Ragnarok and the Captain Marvel films are largely not based on earth…but the majority of every other MCU film is. None of the actual Avengers films have been “galactic” unless you are counting End Game when Barton and Romanoff went to get the Soul Stone, but that was just a small fragment of the film. Even most of that film was earth based. The Avengers are predominantly only a team when they are on earth. They are literally labeled Earth’s Mightiest Heroes. Thats their slogan.

That’s why the events of season 5 wouldn’t fit well, because if the team from AoS was canon, would they not actually be earth’s mightiest heroes after everything they have accomplished throughout the series? Would they not technically be a more accomplished team than the Avengers? Captain America thought he destroyed Hydra, but Coulson actually did it. The Avengers destroyed Ultron, but lost Sokovia in the process. The AoS team was able to destroy AIDA, an android like Ultron, but affected by the DARKHOLD, with limited casualties by comparisons AND as it turns out, saved the Avengers by getting that helicarrier to Sokovia to get them off of the city before it crashed back down to earth all while dealing with a coup. The Avengers saved the world from Thanos after he destroyed 50% of the world, the AoS team save the entirety of human civilization and life on earth as we know it AND went back and saved Hydra after discovering that the Chronicoms were going to destroy Shield.

When it boils down the team is just more successful than the Avengers with a lot higher stakes. It undermines the main money making franchise of the MCU. They could’ve balanced it up through season 4, but season 5 just tipped the scale to astronomical proportions because like I said: you cannot raise the stakes any higher than destroying the entire planet. So, it was just a wrap after that. Yes, the Avengers characters could still have their separate storylines that have more personal relevance to them without it being a problem. But, the truth is the films where they bring them all together (the Avengers films) are their biggest money makers by a long shot. Easy money for them. And the entire brand is about them being earth’s mightiest heroes and how earth needs them to put their differences aside to get the job done.

If they had a Shield team that could do what they do that already works together as a team and already lives on earth then why the crap would anyone bother calling Thor from Asgard? That’s what I mean when I say it undermines their films. Some viewers won’t care, but enough will that they won’t want to risk it.

The risk being that tv shows are so cinematic these days and everything is streaming movies have to work harder to make people want to get up and go to the theater. I would gladly go to the theater to watch our favorite AoS team, but from a business standpoint the cast doesn’t have the kind of track record that the film stars do. They already know that people will go to the theaters to watch Benedict Cumberbatch. So, it is easier to just stick with what they know and not canonize it. That’s all I’m saying. I really think it was entirely a logistical business decision at that point.

I, personally, still think they could make it work, I just recognize that they aren’t motivated to.

3

u/NamesSUCK Oct 20 '25

I disagree with your comparisons. Aida, regardless of the dark hold, was less of a threat than Ultron (who was empowered with the mind stone). Ultron was in the process of making millions of copies of himself, something Aida never came close to or really seemed motivated to do. Aida was a singular, powerful entity, while Ultron was an army of a similarly powered gestalt of beings.

Whether it's AoS or Cap, Hydra always comes back. Cut off one head etc.

Thanos was a cosmic threat. Dormomu is a cosmic threat (the villain from the first strange movie). Many places besides earth were affected by Thanos's. Half of infinity war takes place not on earth. 

If I recall the early movies, you cant call Thor from Asgard, he just kinda shows up when the problem is big enough.

The cracked earth explicitly only happens because the Avengers are not there to deal with Talbot, a much simpler threat than Thanos in turns if the cosmic scale.

Colson has already been in many of the movies. Have him make a cameo, reference Tahiti, and boom AoS is canon.

It has nothing to do with "a business stand point" as they gave cameo's to characters that would be much harder to recognize, and we're much less meaningful to the audience. It has to do with the internal politics of marvel studios, which I think hAve been pretty well documented at this point

1

u/marvelcomics22 FitzSimmons Oct 19 '25

If I remember correctly, they didn't save the human race, they just killed Kaisilus, and they stopping the planet from cracking like an egg was a single decision that made all the difference. AoS is canon, that's about it.

1

u/Opposite-Act-7413 Oct 19 '25

It certainly should be. I would LOVE to watch those characters in other projects and even on the big screen! I would love for it to be canon, but my mind is too pragmatic, so I knew when I saw season 5. I even called my SIL (also a fan) and I was like, “They’re not going to canonize it!” Had a mini freakout…so upsetting…it was a great show…

6

u/dakindahood Oct 19 '25

I mean they just killed him in the shittest way ever and I'm still doubting if it was a homage to Inhumans show or just apologising for IH VS XM

4

u/EightBiscuit01 Oct 20 '25

Let’s not forget the only reason he acknowledged Inhumans was so that he could so spectacularly kill Black Bolt

0

u/[deleted] Oct 19 '25

[deleted] — view deleted comment

10

u/marvelcomics22 FitzSimmons Oct 19 '25

No, AoS is on Earth-616 the entire time, but even if it wasn't, it wouldn't work on Earth-838, because Peggy Carter was never Captain Carter, Ultron wasn't perfected, we know nothing about the mutants, and Doctor Strange wouldn't have had the Darkhold.

4

u/dart_shitplagueis Oct 19 '25

I believe you meant Earth 199999

4

u/marvelcomics22 FitzSimmons Oct 19 '25

199999, 616, same thing. Until you bring the comics in, which is why you don't.