[ SECRET POST #4525 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4525 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.










Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 25 secrets from Secret Submission Post #648.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

04. https://i.imgur.com/neSfPxV.png

[(Anonymous)]

To be fair, I think that specific example is a product of how the Civil War movie was set up, in that the sides were pretty explicitly Tony vs Steve-on-behalf-of-Bucky. The movie itself set the ship up in opposition to the character, more so than it being a general shippers vs the world thing. You can kinda see that because it doesn't really work in reverse. If I say I like Tony and don't like Steve, it's not as likely people are going to accuse me of being, what, a rabid Tony/Rhodey fan? Tony doesn't really have a balancing ship on his side. (I have seen Tony/Stephen Strange used as a balancing ship after the fact, as in Steve has Bucky so Tony acquires Strange, but it wasn't a thing when the movie came out I don't think). So I think that one is kinda specific to the set-up of the movies.

Which is not to say that it's not a thing that paranoid shipping and characters being primarily associated with single ships can lead to bashing and paranoia. I have seen that in other fandoms. I just think this isn't necessarily a pure example.

[philstar22]

That's true about Civil War, but how does that explain Endgame? People have just decided that anyone who thought Tony took over the story or was unhappy with the movie is just a bitter Stucky fan even though there are lots of reasons people could be unhappy about it.

[(Anonymous)]

I'd say that just snowballed from bitterness from Civil War. Sides that were assigned from the older movie just stuck into the newer one, and a bunch of people just kept fighting the old fight?

[(Anonymous)]

Probably because the majority of the vocal complainers are, in fact, bitter Stucky fans.

[(Anonymous)]

I've never thought about IronStrange ship as a balancing ship. Many fics are kinda Steve is an ex lover/friend and nowm after CW, Tony is with Stephen, so it makes sense.

[(Anonymous)]

"Tony doesn't really have a balancing ship on his side."

So the person he married and had a child with is, what, chopped liver?

Rabid slash fans, god damn you all, I don't think you even realise what you're like.

[(Anonymous)]

I meant in terms of fandom popularity. Tony/Pepper is the canon ship, but I doubt too many people in fandom are going to hate Steve on Pepper's behalf. Possibly because the ship is canon and therefore doesn't need to be fought for. It's already there.

[(Anonymous)]

troll harder

[ninety6tears]

Tony isn't picketing Steve and Bucky's wedding in Civil War, he's having an ethical disagreement with Steve that is about a lot more than his friend up until he finds out Bucky killed his parents and feels he can no longer trust Steve. He's not against Steve being protective of a friend (whether that friend is Bucky or himself!), it's just more complicated than that.

Then again, people who think the point of Civil War is for the viewer to take hard sides without considering any nuance frustrated me too ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

More understandably, people could just resent Tony as a character because he gets a lot of screen time that Bucky and Steve could have gotten.

[(Anonymous)]

if they wanted people to actually see moral nuance in CW, they shouldn't have made all the political parts so fucking dumb

"both sides have a point" kind of falls apart when both side's "points" are nonsense, so then you just go with who you think is being less of an asshole

OTOH if you want people to take arch nonsense seriously, you can't dress it up in grounded real world practicalities

Either have the UN in it and have some vague approximation of possible logical implementation, or find a different front for the opposing philosophies you want to give them, that has less stuff you can be obviously hideously wrong about

also maybe don't have the supposedly intelligent owner of a megacorporation be the one arguing for signing a contract without reading it and hoping to change the hard parts later

[(Anonymous)]

Well, they're mostly Stucky shippers so it's a reasonable assumption to make. People dislike Tony in CW -> like Steve -> like Stucky. Because there's no objective reason to pick one side in CW so it's all subjective, and usually it's cos one of the characters opposes another. Peoople who are, let's say, ship Coulson/Clint usually would just say that CW is riddled with plotholes and OOC so neither side is better than another.

[(Anonymous)]

Nope, lots of people just dislike Tony with no ulterior motive. Source: me. Any one of the Avengers opposing him in CW would have had my vote, didn't matter who.

[(Anonymous)]

Agreed.

[(Anonymous)]

Any one of the Avengers opposing him in CW would have had my vote, didn't matter who.

I mean, you're proving at least part of AYRT's comment for them, here. --> there's no objective reason to pick one side in CW so it's all subjective, and usually it's cos one of the characters opposes another.

[meredith44]

I disagree. I dislike how Tony has taken over so much of the screentime in movies that aren't his, including Civil War. I also thought he was completely unreasonable at the end of Civil War. (I also though there were glaring plot holes in that movie, like how a secret assassin allows his face to be caught an immortalized on camera while assassinating someone.) And I don't ship Stucky in the slightest. And I have talked to many people who share my views. So I definitely dont feel it is mostly Stucky shippers who feel that way.

[(Anonymous)]

I ship samsteve and dislike tony but CW is still terrible and riddled with plotholes

[(Anonymous)]

This is why I stopped reading most isekai that are targeted towards male readers. I have ships but it takes time for me to get into them instead of having insta otps. So many of the isekais tend to introduce female characters fairly quickly and their tone will be like ‘here is a pretty GIRL! when will she become our mc’s girlfriend?’ or ‘here are some pretty GIRLS who fell head over heels for our mc! which will our mc choose to be his girlfriend? or will our mc date all of them?’ and even if the female characters didn’t have boobs the size of the mc’s heads or whatnot I get tired of reading very soon. Who cares about romance, can’t we get back to the inventing or civilization building or political intrigue already?

[(Anonymous)]

SA

Damn, I started replying before I got to the end of the secret and saw that it was about the MCU. Nevermind.

[(Anonymous)]

I found I'm much more tolerant towards isekai if there is a slash option, like Overlord.

[dahli]

SOOOOOO have you heard about Twelve Kingdoms? Lots of world building and no romance.

[(Anonymous)]

I have a question that is, I guess, only vaguely related to the secret, but here it goes... I see a lot of people saying they dislike Tony because "He took too much screentime in other characters' movie" whenever the topic of liking or disliking Tony comes up. A LOT of people say that. And I wonder... Why are you faulting the character for this?

It's not 'Tony Stark's choice to 'rob' other characters of screen time. It's the writers/directors/whatnot of the movie. Tony Stark didn't pop up from the script to grab at someone's ear and say "I want more screentime!"

What do people think should've happened? Force Rdj to be a worse actor and be less likeable, so other characters wouldn't be forced to have Tony in their movie? I seriously don't understand what people expect. I have no personal horse in this race (don't care much for marvel movies or it's character other than watch them the one time because they are entertaining movies), but I'm confused by such an illogical reason to dislike Tony.

[(Anonymous)]

No horse in this race either, and only saw your comment because I wanted to see what was the most recent comments, but I wonder if it's hitting some of the same buttons Creator's Favorite/Pet?

Basically, you (general you) wouldn't have been interested in the character much in the first place, but if the story feels like it gives weight to the other characters, it doesn't frustrate you and you actually feel neutral to the character, or possibly mildly like them.

Then it starts feeling like the writers focus more on this character, care more about their coolness or story, or the writers love the actor so they focus the weigh the story and emotional focus on their character to the detriment of the main character or ensemble.
Force Rdj to be a worse actor and be less likeable, so other characters wouldn't be forced to have Tony in their movie? I seriously don't understand what people expect
Because I'm not sure if you meant more likeable to the general audience or the writers themselves?

This is all very subjective of course, and I've only seen Iron Man (back in 2008. I was also into comics but I never cared for the Avengers) out of the Avenger related movies so I have no idea how much he steals scenes or not.

But tl;dr maybe some fans were just neutral to the character at the beginning, just not interested in him. Once he got more focus in a series that wasn't meant to be about Iron Man, they don't pick out specific traits they hate because they didn't particularly hate him before, but they definitely dislike that he gets the lion's share of writer focus.

[(Anonymous)]

Tony's not a real person, anon. We're definitely faulting the creators for their focus on him, it's just easier/faster to say "I'm sick of Tony" than to say "I'm sick of Whedon and the Russos and Marvel Studios and RDJ thinking Tony needs to be in everything and have the most important plot in everything."

And no, obviously Tony isn't doing anything, as he's not REAL, but RDJ is sure as hell getting paid exorbitantly for his appearances and loves having more, but generally, likeability and acting talent doesn't mean you need to be in movies centered on other characters.

[(Anonymous)]

Characters don't have agency. We criticize characters because characters are one of the key elements of storytelling. And when they're used badly, they're one of the elements that make storytelling bad. Often that includes writing other characters badly in order to support the anointed creator's favorite. For example, in Bones, giving Booth the "I told you so" moment required writing Brennan as ignorant of the basics of her own field. Jar Jar Binks is a good sign we're going to get a plot resolution by pratfall. And let's not talk about how Wesley Crusher ended up having more character development beats with anyone but his mother.

What should have happened? IMO pick a better story than Civil War for the third CAPTAIN AMERICA movie. Cast an actor for Uncle Ben for the Spider-Man movie. (And it looks like the next Spider-Man movie will have more Tony-worship.) Cut the unnecessary conversation about Tony Stark's pants to make room for a critically missing Valkyrie moment.