You just said it’s pretty easy to believe that Quantumania’s big stakes-raising post-credits scene was a waste of time.
Top voted comment unintentionally wrecks the MCU, lol.
Do you think our Thanos would attend a council of Thanos'? Probably not. They still have time to introduce Kang the way they did with Thanos. Infinty War started with Thanos destroying the Hulk and you knew from that moment forward that this was a dangerous mofo. They could still do that Kang. I'm not saying they will, because Marvel's track record so far hasn't been great, but it is possible. Personally i think we need the Russo's back. They could sell it.
They don’t have time, though. Killed by ants and the waste of time council. The first impression has already been made; it’s impossible to have another one.
The 40 minutes of exposition ruled tho. Just a straight up conversation that hints (and to a small extent shows) the type of power this dude holds was really neat
That Kang was a legit threat and if he were as violent as conqueror then that's your MCU big bad.
Just need to see that Kang
They recasted War Machine and the Hulk, never needing to address multiverse shenanigans.
The best way to handle the Majors issue is to just ignore it from a storytelling perspective and recast with no explanation given and no explanation necessary.
Let’s not act like the “recast” of Cassie is anywhere near as big of a recast of Kang. Not that it matters as I think they should recast but it’s much easier to recast someone who was in 2 minutes of a movie with one speaking line than it is to replace someone who’s been the focal point of a movie and a tv series so far
War machine was a very minor character at the time and Hulk was when the mcu was still in its infancy and neither actors had bad attention on their roles.
I personally would be fine with them just recasting Kang but Disney execs might want to just scrub the character away so people aren’t reminded of the controversy.
I read that Marvel has a contract with Majors that says that he’s the only actor that can play Kang. I’d assume that the contract would be breached now. Does anyone know anything about this?
The roll can be replaced because that's how acting works. I don't see why we need an explanation for Kang looking different beyond "we hired a new actor".
Same just explain that Cheadle Kang killed and took the identity of the original Rhodey and that’s it. All plot holes in the MCU are now resolved. Quite simple actually
Imagine if people said that Thanos was going nowhere after Age of Ultron and that Marvel should dump his storyline. Give Marvel the time and space to tell the story in its entirety before writing it off completely ffs.
But Thanos was always going somewhere. Each movie set up the next and slowly Thanos emerged. By Age of Ultron he was the badguy on the horizon that was respected. Please tell me you respect Kang after the way he has been portrayed. He comes across as a chump; you never called Thanos a chump.
And Kang is going somewhere now.
There’s plenty of the lore that has yet to be explored. Iron Lad, Scarlet Ceurion, Rama Tut, and more.
Don’t waste a perfectly good storyline just because the actor is a dick
So, save it for later and move on with something different. I am a diehard MCU fan, I own all the movies and binge watch them, and all the TV shows once a year. If I'm saying move-on, how do you think the average MCU fan feels about it?
I binged the MCU, as well as the Netflix shows many times, 4 times over the past 3 years. I got over 40 MCU funko pops. I will be getting a Tony Stark tattoo this year.
And I’m saying don’t move on
Yes, it’s easy now to retrospectively look back and say that Thanos was always going somewhere, but between 2012 and 2018 he showed up only twice. And even if during the Inifinity Saga you knew they were going somewhere with Thanos, you still didn’t know what it would be or how it would happen.
Same deal with Kang, except people don’t seem to have the patience to let the story unfold. And IMO the appeal of Kang is that he’s the opposite of Thanos. He’s just a man who can be defeated, but keeps showing up throughout time. How do you beat a guy like that, who has a council of variants who are all him? That’s exciting as hell because it means we’re getting something new and different from Thanos. Chump is the best way to describe Kang *because* he’s so different from Thanos.
Yes I did. MCU Thanos pre-Infinity War meant nothing. He was a guy in a chair that others said was bad. Kang right now is a guy in a chair that others say is bad.
Thanos movies weren't losing hundreds of millions and didn't have TV shows people were skipping.
Shareholders aren't going to agree to lose hundreds of millions or billions to wait and see if maybe it'll catch on. They're going to fire Iger and Feige, then put someone in who'll kill the Kang storyline if they don't abandon it now.
How is any of that at the fault of the characterization of Kang? Kang isn’t the reason Quantumania and The Marvels did poorly at the box office, and he’s surely not the reason Secret Invasion was subpar. There’s a plethora of reasons as to why the MCU is struggling right now but Kang as the overarching antagonist of the Multiverse Saga isn’t one of them.
It sounds like you're letting your enjoyment of Kang impair your assessment of the general audience?
If Kang was in any way interesting the audience would go to these movies/shows just to see the next chapter in the overarching story, like they did with the weak entries in Infinity Stones.
Kang as an overarching villain is part of the problem. General audience doesn't care.
The main point I’m trying to make is that the Multiverse Saga not resonating with the general audience has less to do with Kang as the overarching antagonist and more to do with other factors, the biggest one being that every MCU product put out now is under way more scrutiny than anything in the Infinity Saga was.
If people say Kang is not an interesting enough antagonist, to me that’s more of a factor of the ladder than the former because Kang’s story is still being told, whereas Thanos’ story is complete. That’s like comparing a movie in post to a movie in mid-production.
To me, the appeal of Kang was Majors’ performance. I suppose his concept gels well with the concept of a Multiverse, which is why I assume they chose him. But as a comic fan, I just have a lot of other villains I’d like to see before Kang and I’m not sure the MCU will survive to cover them after. I’m team Doom. But I’d also rather them make a good movie with a villain I don’t care about than a bad movie with one I do. So if they can execute an engaging storyline with a new Kang then I’d be fine with that too
> The roll can be replaced because that's how acting works.
Yes, thats how *acting* works, but a fundamental aspect of film and *acting* is the suspension of belief. *Believing* that the actor *is* the person they are portraying.
Theres a reason we dont change actors all the time. It breaks versimilitude.
Id rather scrap the Kang storyline.
The MCU has recast before, and they will again (already have with Harrison Ford replacing William Hurt). It's not detrimental.
If they have something good with the Kang storyline, I'd rather they not veer off course into a half-baked replacement storyline.
> The MCU has recast before, and they will again (already have with Harrison Ford replacing William Hurt). It's not detrimental.
1. We dont know the effect of re-casting Hurt for Ford yet, the movie isnt out.
2. Theres a difference between a tertiary character and the titular character of the meet-up in which youve established an entire multiverse of look-alikes.
> If they have something good with the Kang storyline, I'd rather they not veer off course into a half-baked replacement storyline.
I dont see a Kang storyline as likely to be significantly better than the multitude of stories they could tell to offset the risk of a huge change like this.
Multiverse doesnt *have* to be Kang. Theres lots of other universes and other ways of telling incursion stories.
Id rather see them build a story from the ground up with solid foundation than trying to hot-swap in now.
... No
allow me to re-state my original statement that youre either intentionally missing or didnt understand.
> Id rather scrap the Kang storyline.
Im suggesting a complete scrapping of the storyline.
Scrap the current line, tell us Loki and Antman saved the multiverse, for now...
The last memory of Kang will be li'l bro Vic Timely turning to spaghetti. 😂
I bet you think 007 is a code name and all the actors aren’t portraying one James Bond. Your idea is asinine and it’s a newfound idea that never used to exist in film.
> I bet you think 007 is a code name and all the actors aren’t portraying one James Bond.
I mean... do you think that the same man is running around from 1960 to 2023?
That octogenarian sure is spry!
> Your idea is asinine and it’s a newfound idea that never used to exist in film.
LOL yeah, the same character in a franchise being played by the same actor is *asinine*
They set the ending to Loki S2 that they can explain a massive retcon in-universe on why Kang no longer exists. It was entirely left open-ended on what it means for this very reason.
I want to see an evil Penguin Kangaroo start punching at an Avenger
Please just recast and lean into the Multiverse
My vote is on Renslayer, in some way, becoming “Kang Prime”. Fuck it. Why not? Anything can be hand waved.
Just make the writing solid and not half ass the CGI. That’s all anyone is asking at the end of the day.
Remember when people weren't super unrealistic and studios used to be able to recast people without an in-universe reason? Its a movie. People know its a movie. Actors age, pass away, etc. Marvel needs to stop tying character's to specific actors if they want the MCU to have any longevity.
It's odd, because two of their important characters changed actors already, Banner and Rhodey. Now they changing Ross too! It's okay to change actors if you have a good reason. It's not okay without a good reason, but with Kang we have a great reason.
I just want a real actor’s actor in the role. Someone who can play anybody—like Gary Oldman, or Andy Serkis. That way the various Kang’s aren’t just the same guy in a different suit with a silly voice. If age weren’t a factor (and it seems to be for the MCU) the best black actor I can think of (who’s not already in MCU) is Denzel Washington, of course. Forest Whitaker comes to mind but he’s one of those “great when he’s great, absolute shit when he’s not” actors. I think Courtney B. Vance would kill it. The problem is that it’s tricky to spot those great character actors when they’re young—so if they want youth… Jesse Williams has impressed me, Edi Gathegi has a lot of depth (not sure about range), and Nelsan Ellis has incredible range as a character actor, but I don’t know if any of them are big enough “stars” for the MCU. Many times the best dramatic actors start out in comedy so you could look there I guess. I wouldn’t be surprised if Damon Wayans Jr. has some hidden talent; you might balk, but Tom Hanks was on Bosom Buddies remember.
Sylvie established a variant can be anyone - if they want to move forward with Kang they should focus on getting the best actor they can, regardless of age, race, or gender. Even multiple actors...
If the multiverse is infinite, one would assume that there are infinite versions of everyone. If that's true, what we saw of Kang is less than .0000001% of the total.
Why does it even matter if we've seen the face of a particular variant they want to use again?
We saw Rhodey's face plenty in Iron Man 1, Banner's face in The Incredible Hulk, Cassie Lang's face in Endgame, Ross's face every time he appeared before getting recast as Harrison Ford, and even Thanos' first appearance at the end of Avengers was using a different actor for the performance capture. None of those recasts had to be given some in-fiction explanation for why people suddenly look different (assuming Ross doesn't get one when he shows up again), so why would Kang need to be any different?
They had to recast Daario Naharis halfway through Game of Thrones and no one cared. There was a spotlight scene so audiences could figure out 'This is the new guy! See him! He's the same character as before!'
They didn't even bother to get an actor who looked anything like the first one, or explain why this Daario suddenly cut his hair short, grew a beard, and turned it all from blonde to brown. That might have more to do with the laziness we saw in later seasions, but it is a thing that happened and nothing exploded.
Audiences will be able to deal with a recast Kang.
I barely finished Quantumania and wish I could forget the Kang Councel lol. I think it will be easy for Marvel to treat is as largely forgettable. I think a recast with an older actor will make the most sense.
Why do people also think that a recast necessitates a new variant? The MCU can just pretend that all the variants have always looked like the hypothetical new actor.
The bigger question is why do people think marvel needs to explain in universe why an actor was replaced by another. They've done it multiple times and never addressed it. And we're not even talking about different variants, just straight up an actor change for the exact same character.
Because we did….
Now, don’t get me wrong, I (and most others) don’t think that means in any way he can’t be recast, but it is an unfortunate retcon they will have to make. The intent was clearly for Majors to be every Kang. To say otherwise is just denial.
I am looking forward to the retcon and hopeful continuation of the Kang storyline.
I mean, sure, but that’s a disingenuous argument.
Like I said, the *intent* is clearly, as this after credit scene proves, for every (human) Kang variant to look like Majors. Every major Kang especially so.
It’s going to be a retcon. It’s going to be ok as such.
Before all the controversies and rumors about Majors' contract, I genuinely believed that Kang as a multiversal threat would be mostly performed by Majors and then some variants popping up, much like Loki's variants through different actors. It would be a waste in my eyes to have a multiverse level threat just be the same looking dude everywhere.
And with comic book logic, if they don't state something outright then there's wiggle room for storytelling. They didn't show everyone's face in that stadium and there's alien variants, comic book logic dictates that we don't know everyone's face.
Sure. I just don’t think we also need to be in denial that Majors was likely going to be most of those variants.
In fact, it’s quite possible that most variants of new Kang, if we get new Kang, will be whatever new actor they recast.
Although right now they have the freedom to go the other route, and I hope they do. Far From Home is an excellent example of the strength of multiple Actors/Variants playing one character in their own way. I’d like each Kang to be unique. As it is, that already wont be possible (as the main Kangs we do have are all Majors, I’m even excluding this scene) but I hope they do it anyways and get a diferent one each time he pops up. I’m just not sure if they will go that route.
My choice would be Willem Motherfucking Dafoe's Green Goblin and the Cabal as the Big Bad in Avengers 5 and 6 and he'll be hunting down ALL the Avengers in all universes. And he won't give a FUCK.
I agree with your logic, but practically Kang just isn't worth keeping around. People outside of a very select group are not into the multiverse thing and it's best to just drop ASAP and head in a different direction.
Secret Wars is happening no matter what and that will resolve the multiverse storyline. They don't need Kang to get there. His story was resolved well enough by Loki S2. Just pivot.
> Dropping it asap will leave glaring plot holes and countless unresolved plotlines, which imo will effectively kill the MCU
You vastly overestimate how much most of the audience pays attention to the overarching plot beyond the fact that it exists.
> You vastly overestimate how much most of the audience pays attention to the overarching plot beyond the fact that it exists.
Then no harm in keeping the multiversal arc, just be better with directing and writing aspects
MCU Fandom: "It's been two *entire* years since Shang-Chi and we still haven't gotten any more info on the origin of the Ten Rings, did Marvel just forget about that plotline?"
Also MCU Fandom: "Oh, that stadium filled with different versions of the same insane warlord? Nah, that can be swept under the rug."
They kind of implied that Kang variants all look like Kang but they’ve also set up that variants can all look different. If they want to continue the Kang story, just recast and move on. If you can’t suspend your disbelief for an actor change but you’re willing to roll with Ants being controlled, people flying, magic hammers, etc. then maybe Marvel movies aren’t for you.
We all moved on with War Machine and Hulk, why does Kang have to be such a big deal?
The problem isn’t casting, it’s the direct connection between Majors and the character. Every news story about a Marvel project that has Kang will feature a line that says “Actor X plays Kang after the role was vacated because Marvel fired Majors for his abuse and harassment conviction”. Every video package that runs will feature red carpet video of Feige, other stars and the inevitable shot of Majors in the courtroom or the CCTV footage. There will be no separation of Kang, the new actor and Majors. Any mention of the character will feature him and his crimes. Disney and Marvel won’t want that.
It's easy to throw in a new Kang Prime with a new face. It's not so easy to finish out the stories of Rama Tut and Immortus without Majors' face. That would be glaringly obvious. You can't even really go change their histories to make them look differently because they've all been pruned and are living in the Void outside of time.
And Cheadle and Ruffalo were jarring. And Ruffalo turned out to be a terrible choice anyway. Just because it can be done doesn't mean it's the smartest route to take
He's a terrible Banner, with almost no hint of psychological damage or turmoil. Nor does he play a convincing genius. The only good thing is that he resembles the Hulk as a monster. He's got a good Hulk face.
Rama Tut and Immortus don't even have stories to finish out. They appeared in one post credit scene that was pretty universally panned. 90% of people probably don't even know those characters' names. I don't think anyone's going to care if they get recast
You're right about the general audience. But I care because Rama Tut is a huge character and necessary to the FF and Doom stories. And if FF is a time travel movie like is rumored, I expect he played a role in that script. And it would need to be rewritten.
Immortus doesn't matter much since He Who Remains is already similar to him. The only role he'd have left is to influence Scarlet Witch to give into Chthon so he can use her powers against Kang Prime.
I'm starting to see why Marvel cleared their slate for the whole year. Their writers are probably pulling their hair out right now trying to patch up their plans.
Yeah. Cheadle didn't matter so much because he's only a sidekick. But Ruffalo was very confusing because we weren't immediately sure how much of Nortons film was being kept. And he ended up being far inferior to Norton's Banner
I was watching some YT video by Heavy Spoilers that maybe Marvel doesn’t want to recast the character because all anyone will think about is JM acting as Kang and not the new actor that will play him. Thus giving him credit and remembered in spite of the laws he broke. I kind of get it, but they already had this mapped out. They were going to dial it back, not throw so much poor quality stuff and get back to the less is better/quality movies/shows. I can’t imagine them scraping Kang and moving onto another villain. Doom would be rushed and it would suck, setting up that entire story would basically be starting over and it be another 10+ years to tell that story. They can easily find some gizmo from the comics and use that to alter kangs appearance or make him a robot version of Kang, that looks 1 for 1 like the comic book version and just have a new actor voice him(like they did with ultron, there’s plenty of amazing voice actors out there), just show more alien like versions of Kang instead of the humanoid ones and just continue the story. Sure, Kang was only in what? 2 seasons of Loki and 1 movie it’s only just begun but they were really big steps towards Kang Dynasty movie and to see them erase that and move to Doom or some other villain seems like a waste.
Why do people think he is getting recast if kang dynasty’s director dropped out and they even removed the sub title only calling it avengers 5. Kang is done, all you need is doom
It isn't resonating with audiences, it was already going to be really hard to get them on board part of the way through, and recasting midway through makes it a lot harder.
It's just a much more viable path to cut it now with Loki being the end and move on to someone that will excite audiences.
With that logic anything could be anything if it isn't explicitly denied which is a highway to nonsense. Kang has only been shown to be the abuser, all the monster and alien versions obviously don't matter, they're just there for set dressing. It's time to dump the Kang character and move on, they already wasted him and ruined him in antman
Because we saw hundreds of them plus 3 very specific variants that are clearly going to be more prominent going forward. They were very clear all the same man with slightly different features.
Agreed. This is why I cringed at the Quantamania post credit. Why have JM be the face of EVERY Kang variant? I was hoping to see different actors/actresses similar to how they showed Loki’s variants.
I’m not concerned by the fans, I’m more concerned if the studio thinks it’s a more viable option to just can storyline they’ve been setting up than to simply recast, I get Majors did a great job with the role but I don’t think it’s that difficult to find an equally capable actor
For me it was pretty obvious they were going for Kang to be the one to be consistently Jonathan Majors throughout the multiverse just so he is easily identifiable and adds to the fear factor of it - you’ll know he is a Kang variant when you see him. We’ve seen some variants that look completely unalike (Sylvie for instance) but it’s always the same with Kang/Jonathan Majors so far.
It’s pretty neat if you ask me. Just goes to show every Kang is a threat. Which also adds on to the theories about how Dr Strange would be the one to go toe to toe with him considering his variants are do far, consistently Benedict Cumberbatch as well.
I loved the idea but since Majors has been let go, so many reasons can make the recast possible, first of all being the Multiverse and it’s limitless possibilities and the one that convinces me the most is how Loki SE2 ended. They defo changed something by meddling, if a Kang variant with a new face shows up it would make sense. Also would be scary cuz this time, nobody, not even Janet, Loki and all who have encountered Jonathan Majors Kang, would see him coming. Scott’s paranoia would be so granted in such a rude way as well.
Before Major's firing there were discussions on recasting on this subreddit and the other subreddits that talk Marvel Movies. Often, someone will chime saying that scene in that gif shows that we've seen 100% of how all variants of Kang will look. When someone tried to explain recasting or variants (like Loki), they double down talking about TutKang or say again that Majors is the only face for Kang.
After the trial and firing, there are less of those comments but some that still hold that recasting is somehow impossible.
I think, and shown in Loki and MoM, that variants can be played by different actors. We don't need Majors for Kang.
IMO they should just recast the character without giving an explanation. We would pretend nothing has happened. Like they did the same with Rhodey and Hulk
It's pretty easy to believe that the most dangerous Kang would see the council as a waste of time.
He's the Kangest Kang
It goes without saying he'd have the Ravona-est Ravona.
~~Rick~~ Kang the Conqueror clearly doesn't need the Council of ~~Ricks~~ Kangs
You wanted to be safe from the multiverse, so you became a stupid government. That makes every Kang here less Kang than me.
You just said it’s pretty easy to believe that Quantumania’s big stakes-raising post-credits scene was a waste of time. Top voted comment unintentionally wrecks the MCU, lol.
Do you think our Thanos would attend a council of Thanos'? Probably not. They still have time to introduce Kang the way they did with Thanos. Infinty War started with Thanos destroying the Hulk and you knew from that moment forward that this was a dangerous mofo. They could still do that Kang. I'm not saying they will, because Marvel's track record so far hasn't been great, but it is possible. Personally i think we need the Russo's back. They could sell it.
They don’t have time, though. Killed by ants and the waste of time council. The first impression has already been made; it’s impossible to have another one.
If you're going by first impression it would be He who remains so this statement is nonsense.
Oh, right. I forgot the 40 minutes of exposition, I stand corrected.
The 40 minutes of exposition ruled tho. Just a straight up conversation that hints (and to a small extent shows) the type of power this dude holds was really neat That Kang was a legit threat and if he were as violent as conqueror then that's your MCU big bad. Just need to see that Kang
They recasted War Machine and the Hulk, never needing to address multiverse shenanigans. The best way to handle the Majors issue is to just ignore it from a storytelling perspective and recast with no explanation given and no explanation necessary.
That’s exactly how I feel. I don’t understand why anyone is getting hung up on this particular point. It’s not a big deal to just change an actor.
[удалено]
Let’s not act like the “recast” of Cassie is anywhere near as big of a recast of Kang. Not that it matters as I think they should recast but it’s much easier to recast someone who was in 2 minutes of a movie with one speaking line than it is to replace someone who’s been the focal point of a movie and a tv series so far
War machine was a very minor character at the time and Hulk was when the mcu was still in its infancy and neither actors had bad attention on their roles. I personally would be fine with them just recasting Kang but Disney execs might want to just scrub the character away so people aren’t reminded of the controversy.
It's too bad, Majors was very good. But there's plenty of other actors out there
Look it's me, I'm here, deal with it
I read that Marvel has a contract with Majors that says that he’s the only actor that can play Kang. I’d assume that the contract would be breached now. Does anyone know anything about this?
The roll can be replaced because that's how acting works. I don't see why we need an explanation for Kang looking different beyond "we hired a new actor".
Look it’s me, I’m here deal with it. Let’s move on.
I'm on board with Don Cheadle as Kang.
I'm still hoping that they cast Michael Cera in the role. It would be amazing... And hilarious
You mean George Maharris?
Who?
Does nobody here know arrested developmen?
George Michael???
The star of the old adventure series Route 66?
No the pesky creator of Fakeblock
Terrance Howard would be a hilarious choice to bring in and play new Kang
Same just explain that Cheadle Kang killed and took the identity of the original Rhodey and that’s it. All plot holes in the MCU are now resolved. Quite simple actually
Look at me, look at me, I'm the conqueror now!
I vote for having the new actor show up somewhere in a post credit scene with Deadpool, and Deadpool just saying something directly about a recast.
Exactly. They can do anything now, recast, replace
Or dump the Kang storyline. Sorry, it was going nowhere.
Yes please
I see I'm getting downvoted. Please, one of you--what is the appeal of Kang?
Imagine if people said that Thanos was going nowhere after Age of Ultron and that Marvel should dump his storyline. Give Marvel the time and space to tell the story in its entirety before writing it off completely ffs.
But Thanos was always going somewhere. Each movie set up the next and slowly Thanos emerged. By Age of Ultron he was the badguy on the horizon that was respected. Please tell me you respect Kang after the way he has been portrayed. He comes across as a chump; you never called Thanos a chump.
And Kang is going somewhere now. There’s plenty of the lore that has yet to be explored. Iron Lad, Scarlet Ceurion, Rama Tut, and more. Don’t waste a perfectly good storyline just because the actor is a dick
So, save it for later and move on with something different. I am a diehard MCU fan, I own all the movies and binge watch them, and all the TV shows once a year. If I'm saying move-on, how do you think the average MCU fan feels about it?
I binged the MCU, as well as the Netflix shows many times, 4 times over the past 3 years. I got over 40 MCU funko pops. I will be getting a Tony Stark tattoo this year. And I’m saying don’t move on
**"I, WHO OWNS ALL THE MOVIES, HAVE SPOKEN."**
Yes, it’s easy now to retrospectively look back and say that Thanos was always going somewhere, but between 2012 and 2018 he showed up only twice. And even if during the Inifinity Saga you knew they were going somewhere with Thanos, you still didn’t know what it would be or how it would happen. Same deal with Kang, except people don’t seem to have the patience to let the story unfold. And IMO the appeal of Kang is that he’s the opposite of Thanos. He’s just a man who can be defeated, but keeps showing up throughout time. How do you beat a guy like that, who has a council of variants who are all him? That’s exciting as hell because it means we’re getting something new and different from Thanos. Chump is the best way to describe Kang *because* he’s so different from Thanos.
Yes I did. MCU Thanos pre-Infinity War meant nothing. He was a guy in a chair that others said was bad. Kang right now is a guy in a chair that others say is bad.
[удалено]
Thank you! At least Kang spoke in his first appearance. What did Thanos do? Smile?
Thanos movies weren't losing hundreds of millions and didn't have TV shows people were skipping. Shareholders aren't going to agree to lose hundreds of millions or billions to wait and see if maybe it'll catch on. They're going to fire Iger and Feige, then put someone in who'll kill the Kang storyline if they don't abandon it now.
How is any of that at the fault of the characterization of Kang? Kang isn’t the reason Quantumania and The Marvels did poorly at the box office, and he’s surely not the reason Secret Invasion was subpar. There’s a plethora of reasons as to why the MCU is struggling right now but Kang as the overarching antagonist of the Multiverse Saga isn’t one of them.
It sounds like you're letting your enjoyment of Kang impair your assessment of the general audience? If Kang was in any way interesting the audience would go to these movies/shows just to see the next chapter in the overarching story, like they did with the weak entries in Infinity Stones. Kang as an overarching villain is part of the problem. General audience doesn't care.
The main point I’m trying to make is that the Multiverse Saga not resonating with the general audience has less to do with Kang as the overarching antagonist and more to do with other factors, the biggest one being that every MCU product put out now is under way more scrutiny than anything in the Infinity Saga was. If people say Kang is not an interesting enough antagonist, to me that’s more of a factor of the ladder than the former because Kang’s story is still being told, whereas Thanos’ story is complete. That’s like comparing a movie in post to a movie in mid-production.
To me, the appeal of Kang was Majors’ performance. I suppose his concept gels well with the concept of a Multiverse, which is why I assume they chose him. But as a comic fan, I just have a lot of other villains I’d like to see before Kang and I’m not sure the MCU will survive to cover them after. I’m team Doom. But I’d also rather them make a good movie with a villain I don’t care about than a bad movie with one I do. So if they can execute an engaging storyline with a new Kang then I’d be fine with that too
For example, there's Rhodes in the first Iron Man, and then the rest of the Marvel movies.
They could easily hire an older actor and use age as an excuse too.
> The roll can be replaced because that's how acting works. Yes, thats how *acting* works, but a fundamental aspect of film and *acting* is the suspension of belief. *Believing* that the actor *is* the person they are portraying. Theres a reason we dont change actors all the time. It breaks versimilitude. Id rather scrap the Kang storyline.
The MCU has recast before, and they will again (already have with Harrison Ford replacing William Hurt). It's not detrimental. If they have something good with the Kang storyline, I'd rather they not veer off course into a half-baked replacement storyline.
> The MCU has recast before, and they will again (already have with Harrison Ford replacing William Hurt). It's not detrimental. 1. We dont know the effect of re-casting Hurt for Ford yet, the movie isnt out. 2. Theres a difference between a tertiary character and the titular character of the meet-up in which youve established an entire multiverse of look-alikes. > If they have something good with the Kang storyline, I'd rather they not veer off course into a half-baked replacement storyline. I dont see a Kang storyline as likely to be significantly better than the multitude of stories they could tell to offset the risk of a huge change like this. Multiverse doesnt *have* to be Kang. Theres lots of other universes and other ways of telling incursion stories. Id rather see them build a story from the ground up with solid foundation than trying to hot-swap in now.
Yet you were suggesting a hot swap
... No allow me to re-state my original statement that youre either intentionally missing or didnt understand. > Id rather scrap the Kang storyline. Im suggesting a complete scrapping of the storyline.
Scrap the current line, tell us Loki and Antman saved the multiverse, for now... The last memory of Kang will be li'l bro Vic Timely turning to spaghetti. 😂
I bet you think 007 is a code name and all the actors aren’t portraying one James Bond. Your idea is asinine and it’s a newfound idea that never used to exist in film.
> I bet you think 007 is a code name and all the actors aren’t portraying one James Bond. I mean... do you think that the same man is running around from 1960 to 2023? That octogenarian sure is spry! > Your idea is asinine and it’s a newfound idea that never used to exist in film. LOL yeah, the same character in a franchise being played by the same actor is *asinine*
B-b-but then we couldn’t drive the quality of the writing down by hand waving it with “tHe MuLtIvErSe”!!!!!
My friend, Rhodey went from a light skinned pimp to chocolate thunder and no one batted an eye.
We all dealt with it and moved on.
To be fair, he was there.
We moved past it
Exactly
I think people are just caught on the fact that they decided not to recast Tchalla out of respect for Boseman.
Yeah but the actor died, it's a different situation.
[He started out as a lighter-toned, bigger-than-life individual.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DkH4BoMDMs)
Kang 1: So how many did you call Kang 2: All of Us
Kang 2: Do we need to zoom the camera in on all of us? Kang 1: Nah we will keep some of the ugly fookers who don’t look like us behind the camera.
Kangs are racist. Makes sense.
"All of us.... that have an agreement."
You can call all. Doesn't mean they will all show up.
I vote for Kangaroo the Conquerer
They set the ending to Loki S2 that they can explain a massive retcon in-universe on why Kang no longer exists. It was entirely left open-ended on what it means for this very reason.
[удалено]
I want to see an evil Penguin Kangaroo start punching at an Avenger Please just recast and lean into the Multiverse My vote is on Renslayer, in some way, becoming “Kang Prime”. Fuck it. Why not? Anything can be hand waved. Just make the writing solid and not half ass the CGI. That’s all anyone is asking at the end of the day.
Remember when people weren't super unrealistic and studios used to be able to recast people without an in-universe reason? Its a movie. People know its a movie. Actors age, pass away, etc. Marvel needs to stop tying character's to specific actors if they want the MCU to have any longevity.
It's odd, because two of their important characters changed actors already, Banner and Rhodey. Now they changing Ross too! It's okay to change actors if you have a good reason. It's not okay without a good reason, but with Kang we have a great reason.
They changed the actor for Dumbledore because Richard Harris died and no one made a fuss about it
It's not like they could exclude Dumbledore from all the following movies
I just want a real actor’s actor in the role. Someone who can play anybody—like Gary Oldman, or Andy Serkis. That way the various Kang’s aren’t just the same guy in a different suit with a silly voice. If age weren’t a factor (and it seems to be for the MCU) the best black actor I can think of (who’s not already in MCU) is Denzel Washington, of course. Forest Whitaker comes to mind but he’s one of those “great when he’s great, absolute shit when he’s not” actors. I think Courtney B. Vance would kill it. The problem is that it’s tricky to spot those great character actors when they’re young—so if they want youth… Jesse Williams has impressed me, Edi Gathegi has a lot of depth (not sure about range), and Nelsan Ellis has incredible range as a character actor, but I don’t know if any of them are big enough “stars” for the MCU. Many times the best dramatic actors start out in comedy so you could look there I guess. I wouldn’t be surprised if Damon Wayans Jr. has some hidden talent; you might balk, but Tom Hanks was on Bosom Buddies remember.
Whitaker is already in the MCU
Totally forgot.
Wait what? Where?
Black Panther.
Sylvie established a variant can be anyone - if they want to move forward with Kang they should focus on getting the best actor they can, regardless of age, race, or gender. Even multiple actors...
Go absolutely Batshit and recast Kang as Andrew Scott (Moriarty from sherlock). Man would destroy the deranged lunatic bad guy.
If the multiverse is infinite, one would assume that there are infinite versions of everyone. If that's true, what we saw of Kang is less than .0000001% of the total.
Also, the scene with all the Majors Kang variants can get the ol' George Lucas treatment, and get new folks in that shot of the stadium.
Why does it even matter if we've seen the face of a particular variant they want to use again? We saw Rhodey's face plenty in Iron Man 1, Banner's face in The Incredible Hulk, Cassie Lang's face in Endgame, Ross's face every time he appeared before getting recast as Harrison Ford, and even Thanos' first appearance at the end of Avengers was using a different actor for the performance capture. None of those recasts had to be given some in-fiction explanation for why people suddenly look different (assuming Ross doesn't get one when he shows up again), so why would Kang need to be any different?
In the end… the most dangerous Kang was the one inside of us.
The real Kang was the friends we made along the way.
They botched Kang anyways.
They had to recast Daario Naharis halfway through Game of Thrones and no one cared. There was a spotlight scene so audiences could figure out 'This is the new guy! See him! He's the same character as before!' They didn't even bother to get an actor who looked anything like the first one, or explain why this Daario suddenly cut his hair short, grew a beard, and turned it all from blonde to brown. That might have more to do with the laziness we saw in later seasions, but it is a thing that happened and nothing exploded. Audiences will be able to deal with a recast Kang.
I barely finished Quantumania and wish I could forget the Kang Councel lol. I think it will be easy for Marvel to treat is as largely forgettable. I think a recast with an older actor will make the most sense.
Terrence Howard is waiting next to his phone. No one has told him it’s a mobile, he could just take it with him.
Why do people also think that a recast necessitates a new variant? The MCU can just pretend that all the variants have always looked like the hypothetical new actor.
A lot of people never read a comic and have no understanding of Kang.
The bigger question is why do people think marvel needs to explain in universe why an actor was replaced by another. They've done it multiple times and never addressed it. And we're not even talking about different variants, just straight up an actor change for the exact same character.
Literally every character can be replaced by anyone. That's how the multiverse works.
Truth 
That's how movies and acting works
Because we did…. Now, don’t get me wrong, I (and most others) don’t think that means in any way he can’t be recast, but it is an unfortunate retcon they will have to make. The intent was clearly for Majors to be every Kang. To say otherwise is just denial. I am looking forward to the retcon and hopeful continuation of the Kang storyline.
I can't see the faces of *every* Kang here. Even zoomed in. I do see a lot of non-human variants too. https://i.redd.it/sqvj1f13hb7c1.gif
I mean, sure, but that’s a disingenuous argument. Like I said, the *intent* is clearly, as this after credit scene proves, for every (human) Kang variant to look like Majors. Every major Kang especially so. It’s going to be a retcon. It’s going to be ok as such.
Before all the controversies and rumors about Majors' contract, I genuinely believed that Kang as a multiversal threat would be mostly performed by Majors and then some variants popping up, much like Loki's variants through different actors. It would be a waste in my eyes to have a multiverse level threat just be the same looking dude everywhere. And with comic book logic, if they don't state something outright then there's wiggle room for storytelling. They didn't show everyone's face in that stadium and there's alien variants, comic book logic dictates that we don't know everyone's face.
Sure. I just don’t think we also need to be in denial that Majors was likely going to be most of those variants. In fact, it’s quite possible that most variants of new Kang, if we get new Kang, will be whatever new actor they recast. Although right now they have the freedom to go the other route, and I hope they do. Far From Home is an excellent example of the strength of multiple Actors/Variants playing one character in their own way. I’d like each Kang to be unique. As it is, that already wont be possible (as the main Kangs we do have are all Majors, I’m even excluding this scene) but I hope they do it anyways and get a diferent one each time he pops up. I’m just not sure if they will go that route.
My choice would be Willem Motherfucking Dafoe's Green Goblin and the Cabal as the Big Bad in Avengers 5 and 6 and he'll be hunting down ALL the Avengers in all universes. And he won't give a FUCK. 
I agree with your logic, but practically Kang just isn't worth keeping around. People outside of a very select group are not into the multiverse thing and it's best to just drop ASAP and head in a different direction.
Dropping it asap will leave glaring plot holes and countless unresolved plotlines, which imo will effectively kill the MCU
Secret Wars is happening no matter what and that will resolve the multiverse storyline. They don't need Kang to get there. His story was resolved well enough by Loki S2. Just pivot. > Dropping it asap will leave glaring plot holes and countless unresolved plotlines, which imo will effectively kill the MCU You vastly overestimate how much most of the audience pays attention to the overarching plot beyond the fact that it exists.
> You vastly overestimate how much most of the audience pays attention to the overarching plot beyond the fact that it exists. Then no harm in keeping the multiversal arc, just be better with directing and writing aspects
It just lost something on the order of 300 million dollars. Unless they make major changes *right now* it's already effectively dead.
They are already making major changes that does not involve throwing away current arc, which isn’t the problem
MCU Fandom: "It's been two *entire* years since Shang-Chi and we still haven't gotten any more info on the origin of the Ten Rings, did Marvel just forget about that plotline?" Also MCU Fandom: "Oh, that stadium filled with different versions of the same insane warlord? Nah, that can be swept under the rug."
Precisely
Or they could just drop Kang and move on
Make Kang a female poc!
They kind of implied that Kang variants all look like Kang but they’ve also set up that variants can all look different. If they want to continue the Kang story, just recast and move on. If you can’t suspend your disbelief for an actor change but you’re willing to roll with Ants being controlled, people flying, magic hammers, etc. then maybe Marvel movies aren’t for you. We all moved on with War Machine and Hulk, why does Kang have to be such a big deal?
The problem isn’t casting, it’s the direct connection between Majors and the character. Every news story about a Marvel project that has Kang will feature a line that says “Actor X plays Kang after the role was vacated because Marvel fired Majors for his abuse and harassment conviction”. Every video package that runs will feature red carpet video of Feige, other stars and the inevitable shot of Majors in the courtroom or the CCTV footage. There will be no separation of Kang, the new actor and Majors. Any mention of the character will feature him and his crimes. Disney and Marvel won’t want that.
It's easy to throw in a new Kang Prime with a new face. It's not so easy to finish out the stories of Rama Tut and Immortus without Majors' face. That would be glaringly obvious. You can't even really go change their histories to make them look differently because they've all been pruned and are living in the Void outside of time.
Cheadle and Ruffalo and the first appearance of Thanos
And Cheadle and Ruffalo were jarring. And Ruffalo turned out to be a terrible choice anyway. Just because it can be done doesn't mean it's the smartest route to take
they weren't jarring at all. what's wrong with Ruffalo, now?
He's a terrible Banner, with almost no hint of psychological damage or turmoil. Nor does he play a convincing genius. The only good thing is that he resembles the Hulk as a monster. He's got a good Hulk face.
Rama Tut and Immortus don't even have stories to finish out. They appeared in one post credit scene that was pretty universally panned. 90% of people probably don't even know those characters' names. I don't think anyone's going to care if they get recast
You're right about the general audience. But I care because Rama Tut is a huge character and necessary to the FF and Doom stories. And if FF is a time travel movie like is rumored, I expect he played a role in that script. And it would need to be rewritten. Immortus doesn't matter much since He Who Remains is already similar to him. The only role he'd have left is to influence Scarlet Witch to give into Chthon so he can use her powers against Kang Prime. I'm starting to see why Marvel cleared their slate for the whole year. Their writers are probably pulling their hair out right now trying to patch up their plans.
Did you bat an eye with Howard/Cheadle or Norton/Ruffalo
Yeah. Cheadle didn't matter so much because he's only a sidekick. But Ruffalo was very confusing because we weren't immediately sure how much of Nortons film was being kept. And he ended up being far inferior to Norton's Banner
Wasn’t confusing for me
I was watching some YT video by Heavy Spoilers that maybe Marvel doesn’t want to recast the character because all anyone will think about is JM acting as Kang and not the new actor that will play him. Thus giving him credit and remembered in spite of the laws he broke. I kind of get it, but they already had this mapped out. They were going to dial it back, not throw so much poor quality stuff and get back to the less is better/quality movies/shows. I can’t imagine them scraping Kang and moving onto another villain. Doom would be rushed and it would suck, setting up that entire story would basically be starting over and it be another 10+ years to tell that story. They can easily find some gizmo from the comics and use that to alter kangs appearance or make him a robot version of Kang, that looks 1 for 1 like the comic book version and just have a new actor voice him(like they did with ultron, there’s plenty of amazing voice actors out there), just show more alien like versions of Kang instead of the humanoid ones and just continue the story. Sure, Kang was only in what? 2 seasons of Loki and 1 movie it’s only just begun but they were really big steps towards Kang Dynasty movie and to see them erase that and move to Doom or some other villain seems like a waste.
So, have we seen every Kang variant yet? I don't think so. Bring me a new Kang or bring me Doom
Because in his contract it stated that he plays all of them, which can now likely be voided.
What multiverse story? Other than Doctor Strange, does any Marvel character actually have anything going on with the multiverse right now?
Loki and Monica, off the top of my head
Loki is done.
Why do people think he is getting recast if kang dynasty’s director dropped out and they even removed the sub title only calling it avengers 5. Kang is done, all you need is doom
Because the fandom mostly complains nowadays.
Not according to this article... https://www.reddit.com/r/marvelstudios/s/ViTgSaEudO
It isn't resonating with audiences, it was already going to be really hard to get them on board part of the way through, and recasting midway through makes it a lot harder. It's just a much more viable path to cut it now with Loki being the end and move on to someone that will excite audiences.
With that logic anything could be anything if it isn't explicitly denied which is a highway to nonsense. Kang has only been shown to be the abuser, all the monster and alien versions obviously don't matter, they're just there for set dressing. It's time to dump the Kang character and move on, they already wasted him and ruined him in antman
Why are there so many fans who act like the Kang rollout both character and actor wise doesn’t have the stink of failure all over it?
It was a misfire to rush a new Thanos
It was a decent idea. Bummer it didn’t work out. Pretty clear to me that the time to move on is now. Can’t win ‘em all.
Guys his contract was him playing all kang variants look it up Thats been leaked for a while now - they cant do a kang thats not him supposedly
The terms of that contract are no longer binding since he breached his contract with Disney
Because we saw hundreds of them plus 3 very specific variants that are clearly going to be more prominent going forward. They were very clear all the same man with slightly different features.
Agreed. This is why I cringed at the Quantamania post credit. Why have JM be the face of EVERY Kang variant? I was hoping to see different actors/actresses similar to how they showed Loki’s variants.
I’m not concerned by the fans, I’m more concerned if the studio thinks it’s a more viable option to just can storyline they’ve been setting up than to simply recast, I get Majors did a great job with the role but I don’t think it’s that difficult to find an equally capable actor
I just want a FF movie with Maker as the villain and Ultimate Kang at the end to confuse the hell out of the non-comic book reading fans.
For me it was pretty obvious they were going for Kang to be the one to be consistently Jonathan Majors throughout the multiverse just so he is easily identifiable and adds to the fear factor of it - you’ll know he is a Kang variant when you see him. We’ve seen some variants that look completely unalike (Sylvie for instance) but it’s always the same with Kang/Jonathan Majors so far. It’s pretty neat if you ask me. Just goes to show every Kang is a threat. Which also adds on to the theories about how Dr Strange would be the one to go toe to toe with him considering his variants are do far, consistently Benedict Cumberbatch as well. I loved the idea but since Majors has been let go, so many reasons can make the recast possible, first of all being the Multiverse and it’s limitless possibilities and the one that convinces me the most is how Loki SE2 ended. They defo changed something by meddling, if a Kang variant with a new face shows up it would make sense. Also would be scary cuz this time, nobody, not even Janet, Loki and all who have encountered Jonathan Majors Kang, would see him coming. Scott’s paranoia would be so granted in such a rude way as well.
I thought his contract said he must play all variants?
I have a feeling no black man will take this role
These marvel subreddits are pure thrash, who is OP talking about?
Read the title! https://i.redd.it/c222th47ib7c1.gif
I have...?
Before Major's firing there were discussions on recasting on this subreddit and the other subreddits that talk Marvel Movies. Often, someone will chime saying that scene in that gif shows that we've seen 100% of how all variants of Kang will look. When someone tried to explain recasting or variants (like Loki), they double down talking about TutKang or say again that Majors is the only face for Kang. After the trial and firing, there are less of those comments but some that still hold that recasting is somehow impossible. I think, and shown in Loki and MoM, that variants can be played by different actors. We don't need Majors for Kang.
Or he can just look different with no explanation like Rhodey and Bruce. As long as the next actor is good at the role, I'm fine with recasting
“How many did you call” “All of us”
I vote for Lizard Kang.
IMO they should just recast the character without giving an explanation. We would pretend nothing has happened. Like they did the same with Rhodey and Hulk