The Marvel Cinematic Universe TV Thread

[TKz]

So, is Gregg not going to be in Age of Ultron? Whenever that starts shooting, I could definitely see Whedon shooting a bunch of little post-credit tag scenes that can be woven into this show with the Avengers team, especially Downey and Ruffalo.

Coulson is out of the films. Shield values The Avengers trust way too much to jeopardize it by bringing Coulson in on something again.

[GoGo Yubari]

Eh, unless there's word of god stating Coulson will never be in another movie I wouldn't rule it out.

[Josh]

Stopped episode 2 about 20 minutes in. Just not feeling this show. What I've seen so far just feels like a series of tropes-n'-cheese moments. The recent Marvel films have certainly had those appeals to cheap thrills, but I feel like most of them managed to rise above being that and that alone. The show doesn't seem to, and I don't really need another show to follow.

[GoGo Yubari]

Watch the last minute anyway.

[Josh]

I kind of want to, but - I also kinda hate that stuff important to the films now seems likely to come up in the show. (I know what the spoiler is.) If the show as a whole felt more important to the films it might carry me past the feeling of "this is just too cheesy", but as it is, it feels like the show is saying "put up with these first 59 minutes and we'll throw you a minor bone in the 60th."

[TKz]

I guess it's not for everyone? I really don't know what you were expecting, the writing was pretty much on the wall for what this was going to be when it was announced. I'll admit I think it's leaning a bit heavily on references to the film at the moment, but it's kind of bound to do that to keep interest of the casual viewer, whilst expanding on the characters so that eventually those viewers are there for them, not because of the connection to the MCU.

And it was never going to be important to the films. I'll be shocked if we ever see so much as a cameo from one of the main cast in one of the films.

[HC]

I'm having trouble getting into this, honestly. I really wanted to like it, but none of the characters outside of Coulson really captivate me. It just feels like some CW show with Marvel slapped on the title.

[livid]

I love how people throw out "CW show" like an insult despite the fact that their dramas are consistently better than any dramas on the other networks (meaning not cable) right now.

[HC]

I love how people throw out "CW show" like an insult despite the fact that their dramas are consistently better than any dramas on the other networks (meaning not cable) right now.

That's subjective, buddy. Try not to take it to heart.

[livid]

It's not entirely subjective. Obviously whether or not you enjoy the story they're telling is subjective but the show's ability to tell that story? Not quite. Like, I wouldn't compare them to Breaking Bad or anything but shows on The CW know what they are and that allows them to tell story in an efficient and effective manner. That's not something I can say about network dramas right now.

Though a lot of that can be boiled down to The CW's ability to care less about ratings (they'll never get HUGE ratings to begin with) than the other 4 networks.

[Gabriel]

I'd like to think that quality programming would bring viewers in, but take a look at what is successful on television. Take a quick look back at all of the "quality television" shows and remember how many of them got cancelled before they really got going.

The cable networks all aim for certain demographics because they are the ones that bring in the most viewers. Unfortunately, this doesn't lead to the capability of making a show with the sole intention of making the best possible show. It creates an unfortunate, but necessary, balancing act. So they have the built in movie and comic book audience, but if they cater strictly to us, chances are that it won't last long, no matter how good the show is. So again, it's a balancing act.

I was very happy to see that episode 2 was much lighter on the generic-CSI type of shit, because I personally don't like it.

And you can't really compare this to a Breaking Bad or Walking Dead. Those are smaller budget shows that were given a chance by a network that really had nothing to lose. Could you imagine what would happen to ABC if they had Walt White effectively trying to rape his wife on prime time television?

I think the first season of AoS is going to be a bit rocky as it finds its identity and pushes the boundaries a little to see what they can do. But I fully expect a second season (because Disney owns all of it, and the show is huge publicity for the upcoming films), and I fully expect that it will be more satisfactory come season 2 for fans that aren't trying to decide between AoS and whatever shitty shows people flock to in the same timeslot.

[Hailtothechimp]

Does anybody else have a "6 Episode" rule? Unless the show is offensively bad, I always at least give it six episodes to develop. Characters take time to get attached too, plot lines take time to get going, and most importantly, the creative forces behind the show need time to find what works and what doesn't early on. If the show has interested you at any point, I think you owe it some time to develop before you write it off completely.

[Gabriel]

Does anybody else have a "6 Episode" rule? Unless the show is offensively bad, I always at least give it six episodes to develop. Characters take time to get attached too, plot lines take time to get going, and most importantly, the creative forces behind the show need time to find what works and what doesn't early on. If the show has interested you at any point, I think you owe it some time to develop before you write it off completely.

It's a good way to go into a tv show, because of all the points you raised.

Community and Parks and Rec are both prime examples of that for me. The first couple of episodes were good, but I didn't see why I should keep watching. But I watched a couple more, and now I'm hooked on both of them.

It does take time, and giving up on something with this kind of potential so early on would be insane.

[Lint]

Does anybody else have a "6 Episode" rule? Unless the show is offensively bad, I always at least give it six episodes to develop. Characters take time to get attached too, plot lines take time to get going, and most importantly, the creative forces behind the show need time to find what works and what doesn't early on. If the show has interested you at any point, I think you owe it some time to develop before you write it off completely.

I have the same rule too. Sometimes I'll give it an extension if it seems like there is promise to the show. Sons of Anarchy was that way. First 6 episodes were prettt dull, then the 7th picked up steam

[Your Mom]

6 is a bit much. Maybe 2 or 3 for me unless someone who I know has good taste or at least knows what my taste is tells me to stick with it

[Tits McGee]

I did not like this episode really at all until the last few minutes

[LL!]

I just saw the pilot and thought it was a lot of fun! Looking forward to last night's episode. Sucks that I already know who showed up. But whatevz.

[HailtotheYo]

Eh, the second episode has me wondering if it can stand alone without the helping hand from the movie/bigger productions. I'm not minding it at the moment but I'm questioning it a bit going forward.

[DAv]

So is the second episode worth checking out? Saw the first one and just felt like a really bland 90's action show with bad characters and a dull storyline. Made me nostalgic for Martial Law though so I suppose that's a plus.

[Colly]

It's staying watchable for me. Given that I watched Da Vincis Demons all the way through, and that was dogshit, I'll certainly give this another couple of weeks. It's not horrible, but its just not a format that allows for great drama. Stick this in an 80s schedule with the A-Team and Knight Rider and it'd be amazing.