# So, Wandavision?



## Morrus

Seen it yet? What did you think?


----------



## MarkB

It's great to see the characters again, but aside from that it's just all sorts of WTF?


----------



## The Myopic Sniper

More fun to think about than watch.


----------



## DammitVictor

Very experimental. I'm very much into it.


----------



## Morrus

Well, that was odd. I think I like it. Not sure!


----------



## pukunui

Based on what I’ve seen, it looks interesting. I have only watched some of the peripheral Marvel movies, though - both Guardians of the Galaxy films, Captain Marvel and Black Panther.

Will I be able to enjoy this without having seen all the Avengers movies and such?


----------



## Morrus

pukunui said:


> Based on what I’ve seen, it looks interesting. I have only watched some of the peripheral Marvel movies, though - both Guardians of the Galaxy films, Captain Marvel and Black Panther.
> 
> Will I be able to enjoy this without having seen all the Avengers movies and such?



The plot doesn’t appear related to any movies yet so far, as far as I can tell. You probably need to know she’s a powerful witch and he’s a sentient robot, but that’s about it.


----------



## pukunui

Morrus said:


> The plot doesn’t appear related to any movies yet so far, as far as I can tell. You probably need to know she’s a powerful witch and he’s a sentient robot, but that’s about it.



Good to know. I might watch the two available episodes later today then.


----------



## trappedslider

I was going to start a thread, but wasn't sure if it was already airing in the UK. I just started episode two, but had to deal with some real life issues, so i haven't been able to finish it yet. But...the sword on the toy helicopter is the symbol of S.W.O.R.D. which for the show and MCU stands for Sentient Weapon Observation Response Division. Episode one was inspired by The Dick Van Dyke Show, while two from what I've seen looks like and reminds me of Bewitched.

I also liked the fake commercial for Stark Industries' toaster.... 



pukunui said:


> Based on what I’ve seen, it looks interesting. I have only watched some of the peripheral Marvel movies, though - both Guardians of the Galaxy films, Captain Marvel and Black Panther.
> 
> Will I be able to enjoy this without having seen all the Avengers movies and such?



you might want to watch the Marvel Studios: Legends mini-episodes, as that's meant to be a newbie guide to help bring you up to speed on whose who.


----------



## trappedslider

Morrus said:


> It’s on Disney+.
> 
> Yikes. Well that explains my disconnect. I’ve never seen the latter and never even heard of the former. I might struggle with this series.



It's hard to keep track of which streamers or shows do world wide release and which you have to wait for depending on where you live...

Episode three zips over to the ’70s with Brady Bunch/Partridge Family–style antics. Episode four is the ’80s episode, which takes its inspiration from Family Ties. Episode five heads to the ’90s and Roseanne and so on into the 2000s with Modern Family and Office homages.









						WandaVision: An Expert’s Guide to the New Marvel Show
					

Everything MCU and comic fans need to know to prepare for the Disney+ series.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

It is supposed to be nine episodes, with the first 6 each a different sitcom theme, from the 50's to the 00's. Maybe episode 7 will be themed for the 2010's or the final three episodes will be actual action and the reveal of what S.W.O.R.D. is doing. The "commercial" in the 2nd episode was Hydra-related, so there is that too. So while Hydra was, maybe, purged from S.H.I.E.L.D., perhaps they are still secretly within SWORD, which is the space-based version of SHIELD and protects against extraterrestrial threats, and they have somehow captured Wanda and are trying to get secrets out of her or figure out a way to control/brainwash her to their side.









						S.W.O.R.D. - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Campbell

I'm pretty intrigued by it so far. I have also been enjoying the critiques/send off of American pop culture, but I'm a general pop culture nerd.


----------



## pukunui

I enjoyed those fist two episodes! Looking forward to seeing how it all unfolds!


----------



## Mallus

It’s fantastic, but who is this for?

I’m mean, it‘s for me, but I’m old enough to remember Bewitched, I Love Lucy, My Favorite Martian, et al and the timeless limbo of 1970s syndicated TV. And Grant Morrison’s “The Gospel According to Crafty” is one of my favorite comic book issues.

I’m really curious to see who this works for.


----------



## hawkeyefan

I was both intrigued and annoyed by the show. There’s some interesting stuff going on. The zany sitcom antics are funny, but I feel like they take up too much of the show. It’s hard to say, but the little glimpses of whatever’s actually going on have been almost too scant. 

But, I think I’m more intrigued than annoyed because I’ll check out the next episode for sure.


----------



## Zardnaar

Hmmn that's different. Hopefully the 50"s "matrix" will come to an end sooner rather than later.


----------



## John R Davis

The wife enjoyed it, and she has only seen a few of the movies. I enjoyed it but the 2nd one less than the first. If it's just 97% sit com parody and only 3% avengers stuff it may wear thin. The episodes are short so it may just hold up.


----------



## Lidgar

Delightfully odd. Which suits me.


----------



## cbwjm

It was fun, I had no idea what was happening most of the time in regard to why they are in the show, I read a while back it was happening in between civil war and end game (or was it infinity war) but haven't figured out how it relates. At least one supervillain name was dropped but I'm not sure if it's related or if they are just a name drop.


----------



## Dire Bare

Really enjoyed the first two episodes quite a bit! The parody/homage to classic sitcoms is spot on, and the "zany antics" actually work pretty well within the sitcom aesthetic . . . then add in the weirdness and creepiness of the "glitches" Wanda experiences.

I loved seeing Debra Jo Rupp as Mrs. Hart (the wife of Vision's boss), who is probably best known as the sitcom wife from _That 70's Show_. Also, Kathryn Hahn is always fun (Agnes, Wanda's neighbor and "best friend"), and I squealed a little bit when I finally recognized who was playing Dottie (the mean neighborhood wife), Emma Caulfield (Anya, from _Buffy the Vampire Slayer_)! Also, as I was double-checking names I realized . . . don't visit the IMDB page unless you want some spoilers! There are some character names recognizable from the Marvel Universe!



pukunui said:


> Will I be able to enjoy this without having seen all the Avengers movies and such?





Morrus said:


> Yikes. Well that explains my disconnect. I’ve never seen the latter and never even heard of the former. I might struggle with this series.




Don't worry about it! The references to the deeper Marvel Universe are about as necessary to understand as they have been in all of the movies. Knowing that the symbol is for the organization S.W.O.R.D. isn't important in understanding and enjoying the show, at this point it's just "_obvious creepy organization symbol that means something_" . . . if S.W.O.R.D. later becomes important to the plot, they'll explain it. At this point it's basically an easter egg for comics fans. And there were more easter eggs, caught some of them, but I'm sure I missed more . . .

An important plot point regarding Vision from _Avengers: Infinity War_, which is spoiled in the trailers for _WandaVision_, is that Vision is dead!


----------



## Dire Bare

The NPR review of the first three episodes has some good discussion of the shifting sitcom reality of the show.









						'WandaVision': The Next Era Of The MCU Will Be Televised
					

The latest entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe has been downsized to fit the television screen — and pay loving, sharply observed homage to TV sitcoms of different eras in the process.




					www.npr.org


----------



## MarkB

So, how about that spontaneous pregnancy at the end? Are we going to see a kid added to the show, maybe growing up at a similarly accelerated rate as they progress through time periods, just to hit every sitcom cliché?


----------



## pukunui

MarkB said:


> So, how about that spontaneous pregnancy at the end? Are we going to see a kid added to the show, maybe growing up at a similarly accelerated rate as they progress through time periods, just to hit every sitcom cliché?



For the children!


----------



## MarkB

For those who aren't caught up on the movies, the two Marvel Legends shorts provide good summaries of both Wanda and Vision, and they're only 15 minutes long between them.



			https://www.disneyplus.com/en-gb/series/marvel-studios-legends/7YmtoS60RMH6


----------



## trappedslider

pukunui said:


> For the children!



won't somebody please think of the children! lol


----------



## Kezghan

The commercials they showed are definitely tied to traumas Wanda has experienced.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

MarkB said:


> So, how about that spontaneous pregnancy at the end? Are we going to see a kid added to the show, maybe growing up at a similarly accelerated rate as they progress through time periods, just to hit every sitcom cliché?




Similar storyline from the comics has her having twins who grow up to be supers named Wiccan and Speed. The pregnancy in the story was helped along by Mephisto.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Also, if you watch the Making Of featurette, during the interview with the head writer, there are a bunch of blurred out storyboards behind her. Even so, one is too obvious for the blurring to hide: Wonderman.


----------



## Tonguez

Gonna wait a couple of weeks and do a binge watch, I hear the first two episodes are only half hour long?

Its got everything I like though - Marvel adventure, kitschy nostalgia, magic fantasy and a dark undercurrent


----------



## Rune

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Similar storyline from the comics has her having twins who grow up to be supers named Wiccan and Speed. The pregnancy in the story was helped along by Mephisto.



The devil is in the details! (That’s not the only place he is...)


----------



## ccs

trappedslider said:


> won't somebody please think of the children! lol




Yes, Wanda will.  
At least in the comics....


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Tonguez said:


> Gonna wait a couple of weeks and do a binge watch, I hear the first two episodes are only half hour long?




All nine episodes are a half hour each.


----------



## DeviousQuail

I really enjoyed the first two episodes. My guess is that the world-breaking elements will come up more often as the show progresses. I'm intrigued to see how it all plays out.


----------



## MarkB

I'm glad they didn't lean too heavily into the whole "colour objects in a black-and-white setting" schtick before moving on. It was starting to feel a little derivative of Pleasantville by the end, especially when Vision's face coloured in.

I wonder how they'll mess with the setting next. Maybe we'll see foreign visual elements starting to intrude through the black bars surrounding the 4:3 ratio picture - that'd be creepy.


----------



## Nebulous

I liked the first episode.  They went all in for the vibe of the 50s era, bad jokes and all. By the 2nd episode it was starting to wear on me a little   I haven't seen the rest yet so I'm hoping the show takes a darker turn.


----------



## Weiley31

As soon as I saw August 23rd on the calendar, I had to immediately look up a certain date on my phone and lo and behold, I was absolutely right about it.

Also, that _indestructible head_ line in Episode 1 hits a lot harder when you know the subtext.


----------



## Weiley31

Also, I feel very bad for Vision: he's absolutely confused on what's going on (especially in the trailers) and him trying to figure out the purpose of the company he works for is like him trying to think of what his purpose is in this new reality.

Also, anybody notice how things are already starting to _glitch out_ when the red light segment on that toaster commercial lasted a bit too long?

Even if that wasn't the intentional point of that detail, I think it actually added a lot to how things are not going to Wanda's plan.


----------



## MarkB

Weiley31 said:


> Also, I feel very bad for Vision: he's absolutely confused on what's going on (especially in the trailers) and him trying to figure out the purpose of the company he works for is like him trying to think of what his purpose is in this new reality.
> 
> Also, anybody notice how things are already starting to _glitch out_ when the red light segment on that toaster commercial lasted a bit too long?
> 
> Even if that wasn't the intentional point of that detail, I think it actually added a lot to how things are not going to Wanda's plan.



I haven't watched the trailers, but certainly just from the first two episodes I don't get the impression that Wanda has any plan, or any better handle on the situation than Vision does.


----------



## pukunui

We know that Wanda is being watched, and that someone is trying to reach her via the radio, but it also seems like she might have a modicum of control, given that events rewound after she said “no” when the beekeeper looked at her.

At the moment, I’m thinking she’s in some kind of fantasy world of her own making, perhaps an attempt at having a “normal life” with Vision (who is dead in reality but not in this fantasy world). I also suspect that it’s all inside Wanda’s head.

But I am happy to be proven wrong and look forward to the reveals as they come in the ensuing episodes!


----------



## MarkB

pukunui said:


> We know that Wanda is being watched, and that someone is trying to reach her via the radio, but it also seems like she might have a modicum of control, given that events rewound after she said “no” when the beekeeper looked at her.
> 
> At the moment, I’m thinking she’s in some kind of fantasy world of her own making, perhaps an attempt at having a “normal life” with Vision (who is dead in reality but not in this fantasy world). I also suspect that it’s all inside Wanda’s head.
> 
> But I am happy to be proven wrong and look forward to the reveals as they come in the ensuing episodes!



At the moment, I'd put the probabilities at around 50% it all being in Wanda's head, 30% it being Wanda and Vision's shared consciousness, and 20% them being in someone else's simulated reality.

There are ways that at least some part of Vision may have survived, so I'm not yet ready to write him off as a figment.

EDIT: One major reason I don't see this being entirely Wanda's fantasy is the setting. It feels rather outside her experience, while Vision / Jarvis had access and exposure to a large percentage of the world's media.


----------



## trappedslider

Weiley31 said:


> Also, I feel very bad for Vision: he's absolutely confused on what's going on (especially in the trailers) and him trying to figure out the purpose of the company he works for is like him trying to think of what his purpose is in this new reality.



Thhat made me think of Kelso's dad from That 70s show attempting to explain what he does


----------



## Wolfram stout

This is completely in my wheelhouse. I grew up in the 70s watching all (and I mean all) the sitcoms from the 50-70s. Not only was the first episode so very Dick Van Dyke, but Vision was very good at using Van Dyke's express and mannerisms. Same with Wanda emulating Samantha from bewitched in the second episode. 

Trivia point, Agnas was the noisy neighbor in Bewitched that was always trying to catch Samantha doing something weird.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Wolfram stout said:


> Trivia point, Agnas was the noisy neighbor in Bewitched that was always trying to catch Samantha doing something weird.




No, it was Gladys, not Agnes.


----------



## Umbran

MarkB said:


> At the moment, I'd put the probabilities at around 50% it all being in Wanda's head, 30% it being Wanda and Vision's shared consciousness, and 20% them being in someone else's simulated reality.
> 
> There are ways that at least some part of Vision may have survived, so I'm not yet ready to write him off as a figment.
> 
> EDIT: One major reason I don't see this being entirely Wanda's fantasy is the setting. It feels rather outside her experience, while Vision / Jarvis had access and exposure to a large percentage of the world's media.




So... do folks here know the comics on these subjects?



Spoiler: The inspirations



So, at one point Wanda studies real magic under Agatha Harkness.  And, after some nonsense concerning her own parentage, Wanda and Vision take a leave of absence from the Avengers, and have kids.

Note, Vision is an android.  He can't sire kids.  There's magic involved.  Bad magic.  They are shards of a demon called Master Pandemonium.   So they get the demon bits back, but this kills the kids.  Agatha Harkness erases Wanda's memory that she had ever had children.

Erasing her memory was one of the worst mistakes any Marvel Universe character has ever made. 

It eventually leads to Wanda, with her reality warping powers, to crack.  Filled with a desire for vengeance for what's been done to her, she kills a few Avengers... and then depowers 90% of mutant-kind in the House of M event...



Upshots - under extreme duress, Wanda is capable of... some very extreme stuff.  Recreating Vision from nothing, and making herself pregnant, are within her wheelhouse, not just as mental figments, but as _reality_.


----------



## Blue Orange

It'd be funny to have someone do this with D&D characters living through each edition. "Where'd our assassin go?"


----------



## Wolfram stout

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> No, it was Gladys, not Agnes.



Yep, thanks for the correction. I think I confounded the name with the actress' name who played Samantha's mother


----------



## DammitVictor

Umbran said:


> Upshots - under extreme duress, Wanda is capable of... some very extreme stuff.  Recreating Vision from nothing, and making herself pregnant, are within her wheelhouse, not just as mental figments, but as _reality_.




Is she _really_, though? Thanos didn't even know who she was in _Endgame_.


----------



## trappedslider

Shroompunk Warlord said:


> Is she _really_, though? Thanos didn't even know who she was in _Endgame_.



Thanos of the past....


----------



## DammitVictor

trappedslider said:


> Thanos of the past....



I am actually agreeing with him.



Spoiler


----------



## cbwjm

Umbran said:


> So... do folks here know the comics on these subjects?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The inspirations
> 
> 
> 
> So, at one point Wanda studies real magic under Agatha Harkness. And, after some nonsense concerning her own parentage, Wanda and Vision take a leave of absence from the Avengers, and have kids.
> 
> Note, Vision is an android. He can't sire kids. There's magic involved. Bad magic. They are shards of a demon called Master Pandemonium. So they get the demon bits back, but this kills the kids. Agatha Harkness erases Wanda's memory that she had ever had children.
> 
> Erasing her memory was one of the worst mistakes any Marvel Universe character has ever made.
> 
> It eventually leads to Wanda, with her reality warping powers, to crack. Filled with a desire for vengeance for what's been done to her, she kills a few Avengers... and then depowers 90% of mutant-kind in the House of M event...
> 
> 
> 
> Upshots - under extreme duress, Wanda is capable of... some very extreme stuff. Recreating Vision from nothing, and making herself pregnant, are within her wheelhouse, not just as mental figments, but as _reality_.




Unless this show proves otherwise, I'm not sure if she is as reality-bendingly powerful as she can be in the comics. I've always considered the movie universe characters to be a little less powerful than the comic versions, could just be my perception of them though, even Thanos seemed a pale comparison to his comic version.


----------



## Umbran

cbwjm said:


> Unless this show proves otherwise, I'm not sure if she is as reality-bendingly powerful as she can be in the comics.




Well, at the moment we are not seeing the same reach as depowering 90% of all mutants.  We have... Vision alive, a weird TV environment, and pregnancy.   And not all of it needs to be her.

It is also possible that this is all mindscape, given her mind-influencing power.  I'm just saying don't rule out other alternatives just yet.


----------



## cbwjm

Umbran said:


> Well, at the moment we are not seeing the same reach as depowering 90% of all mutants. We have... Vision alive, a weird TV environment, and pregnancy. And not all of it needs to be her.
> 
> It is also possible that this is all mindscape, given her mind-influencing power. I'm just saying don't rule out other alternatives just yet.



Pretty sure I read that this was before infinity war and the death of Vision, so I'm not sure that he's been brought back by her powers. 

There was someone who was watching "the show" and the name Strucker was brought up in the watch commercial, I'm wondering if Baron Strucker is behind it. Then you have the voices asking her who did this to her and I'm wondering if her allies are in a complex somewhere that she's been captured and they're trying to wake her up so it could be some sort of dream state. Only more episodes will tell though.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

MarkB said:


> So, how about that spontaneous pregnancy at the end? Are we going to see a kid added to the show, maybe growing up at a similarly accelerated rate as they progress through time periods, just to hit every sitcom cliché?



Two kids. If you watch the trailers for the show, there are two cribs in their house. 



Spoiler: Spoilers for the Comic Books



There is also a fairly popular comic book series that this show is loosely based off of, the House of M. In this storyline, Wanda ends up having two children.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

I have liked the show so far. I'm only 19, so I don't get most of the references to previous shows, but that hasn't negatively affected my opinion on the show so far. I'm here for the Marvel action, not sitcom stuff. That's currently my main issue with this show. It's entertaining, but not exactly what I'm interested in from a Marvel show. Hopefully it will improve as the series moves on, and hopefully the other shows will be more of "my thing" (Loki especially). 

I'm going to keep watching and hoping that it quickly transitions to "Marvel sitcom riffs" to "Wanda discovering that the reality she's living in is fake and someone is using her to their advantage".


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

pukunui said:


> We know that Wanda is being watched, and that someone is trying to reach her via the radio, but it also seems like she might have a modicum of control, given that events rewound after she said “no” when the beekeeper looked at her.



Yeah, she's definitely pretty powerful. 


Spoiler: Possible Spoilers for Later On (Speculation)



I'm guessing that the beekeeper is going to be Swarm.


----------



## Tonguez

MarkB said:


> At the moment, I'd put the probabilities at around 50% it all being in Wanda's head, 30% it being Wanda and Vision's shared consciousness, and 20% them being in someone else's simulated reality.
> 
> There are ways that at least some part of Vision may have survived, so I'm not yet ready to write him off as a figment.
> 
> EDIT: One major reason I don't see this being entirely Wanda's fantasy is the setting. It feels rather outside her experience, while Vision / Jarvis had access and exposure to a large percentage of the world's media.



Yeah I’m going with a shared conciousness thing, Vision is an AI and we saw in AoUltron how it manifest via the Mindstone. Wandas abilities are linked to the Mindstone too so I’m assuming that her mindcontrol abilities includes being able to access the AI residue of Vision and recreate him in her TV/MIndscape - I’m also assuming that Wanda’s manipulation of the Enhanced AI will be how Vision is eventually returned to his body


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Tonguez said:


> Wandas abilities are linked to the Mindstone



This isn't really connected to the show, but it always bugged me on how her powers are connected to the Mind Stone. I understand they needed some excuse for her that wasn't "mutants", but the Reality Stone would have worked so much better than the Mind Stone. (The Space Stone or even Time Stone would also have been better for Quicksilver, too.)


----------



## DammitVictor

AcererakTriple6 said:


> Yeah, she's definitely pretty powerful.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Possible Spoilers for Later On (Speculation)
> 
> 
> 
> I'm guessing that the beekeeper is going to be Swarm.






Spoiler



My immediate first thought was AIM.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Shroompunk Warlord said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> My immediate first thought was AIM.





Spoiler



That would certainly fit the mention of Strucker in the second episode.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

AcererakTriple6 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> That would certainly fit the mention of Strucker in the second episode.





Shroompunk Warlord said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> My immediate first thought was AIM.






Spoiler



Sure, AIM's yellow hat _looks_ like a beekeeper's hood, but they don't usually have the _bees_ to go with it. I made that joke with my kids when we were watching it. It's probably Swarm, but it could be AIM.


----------



## Mind of tempest

FitzTheRuke said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Sure, AIM's yellow hat _looks_ like a beekeeper's hood, but they don't usually have the _bees_ to go with it. I made that joke with my kids when we were watching it. It's probably Swarm, but it could be AIM.



your looking for hive as the likely organisation.


----------



## BRayne

I'm pretty sure the "beekeeper" had a SWORD logo on their suit so I would think they're more likely a rationalization of a generic Hazmat suit on a SWORD agent over a AIM operative or someone representing Swarm or Hive


----------



## Umbran

cbwjm said:


> Pretty sure I read that this was before infinity war and the death of Vision, so I'm not sure that he's been brought back by her powers.




I think that is incorrect. A search shows several references to Disney confirming this is after Endgame.

Note: Wanda is going to be in Multiverse of Madness as well.  So make of that what you will.



cbwjm said:


> There was someone who was watching "the show" and the name Strucker was brought up in the watch commercial, I'm wondering if Baron Strucker is behind it.




Stark was brought up in the other commercial, so I don't think the comercials are goign to be a good indicator of who is behind it.


----------



## Umbran

BRayne said:


> I'm pretty sure the "beekeeper" had a SWORD logo on their suit so I would think they're more likely a rationalization of a generic Hazmat suit on a SWORD agent over a AIM operative or someone representing Swarm or Hive



Yes, it is a SWORD logo.  A quick search makes that pretty certain.

And that is strange.  Because SWORD is focused on extraterrestrial threats.  Wanda and Vision are not extraterrestrial.  So, why is SWORD invovlved?


----------



## Mind of tempest

Umbran said:


> Yes, it is a SWORD logo.  A quick search makes that pretty certain.
> 
> And that is strange.  Because SWORD is focused on extraterrestrial threats.  Wanda and Vision are not extraterrestrial.  So, why is SWORD invovlved?



some other group involved to a degree?


----------



## cbwjm

Umbran said:


> I think that is incorrect. A search shows several references to Disney confirming this is after Endgame.
> 
> Note: Wanda is going to be in Multiverse of Madness as well. So make of that what you will.
> 
> 
> 
> Stark was brought up in the other commercial, so I don't think the comercials are goign to be a good indicator of who is behind it.




It was a while ago that I read, may have been just a theory at the time. I don't even know what multiverse of madness is, is it the next big marvel movie event?


----------



## trappedslider

cbwjm said:


> I don't even know what multiverse of madness is, is it the next big marvel movie event?



It's part of the next Doctor Strange movie title.


----------



## trappedslider

Umbran said:


> Yes, it is a SWORD logo.  A quick search makes that pretty certain.
> 
> And that is strange.  Because SWORD is focused on extraterrestrial threats.  Wanda and Vision are not extraterrestrial.  So, why is SWORD invovlved?



I posted upthread what SWORD stands for regarding the MCU: Sentient Weapon Observation Response Division


----------



## Weiley31

cbwjm said:


> It was a while ago that I read, may have been just a theory at the time. I don't even know what multiverse of madness is, is it the next big marvel movie event?



It's supposed to introduce multiple realities to the MCU like the Spider Verse and stuff.

And as mentioned, it's the next Doctor Strange movie.


----------



## cbwjm

trappedslider said:


> It's part of the next Doctor Strange movie title.



Oh right! I knew one was coming out but that was all I knew. I hope they use 3d as well as they did in the first one because that was pretty awesome.


----------



## Parmandur

I appreciate that both episodes actually just work as period sit-coms


----------



## Parmandur

pukunui said:


> Based on what I’ve seen, it looks interesting. I have only watched some of the peripheral Marvel movies, though - both Guardians of the Galaxy films, Captain Marvel and Black Panther.
> 
> Will I be able to enjoy this without having seen all the Avengers movies and such?




Part of the success of the MCU has been that they have been walking that balance, where you can watch most of the film's and shows without context and get what's happening.


----------



## Umbran

trappedslider said:


> I posted upthread what SWORD stands for regarding the MCU: Sentient Weapon Observation Response Division




Weapons, plural, I think.  In the comics, it is "World".  In any case, those acronyms are among the silliest things in the Marvel Universe.

But, regardless, it is still space-based, and concerned with extraterrestrial threats.  So, I expect aliens.  With Thanos, they've lifted their eyes to the sky...

Unless you think they've significantly deviated from the comics, and it is supposed to be observing and responding to sentient weapons?  When we see it being set up, the only known "sentient weapons" were Ultron and Vision, and both of them were dead.  Bit much of a reaction.  And being on a space station doesn't make a whole lot of sense if the things you have to respond to are on the ground...


----------



## hawkeyefan

Umbran said:


> Weapons, plural, I think.  In the comics, it is "World".  In any case, those acronyms are among the silliest things in the Marvel Universe.
> 
> But, regardless, it is still space-based, and concerned with extraterrestrial threats.  So, I expect aliens.  With Thanos, they've lifted their eyes to the sky...
> 
> Unless you think they've significantly deviated from the comics, and it is supposed to be observing and responding to sentient weapons?  When we see it being set up, the only known "sentient weapons" were Ultron and Vision, and both of them were dead.  Bit much of a reaction.  And being on a space station doesn't make a whole lot of sense if the things you have to respond to are on the ground...




I don’t think “sentient weapon” is a designation that needs to be limited to AI beings like Vision and Ultron. 

I don’t see how it couldn’t also apply to Wanda. Or pretty much every other Avenger.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

hawkeyefan said:


> I don’t think “sentient weapon” is a designation that needs to be limited to AI beings like Vision and Ultron.
> 
> I don’t see how it couldn’t also apply to Wanda. Or pretty much every other Avenger.



That's how I see their use of "weapon"... but then they become pretty much the SHIELD-like version of the Commission on Superhuman Activities - A little more boring than the comic version of SWORD.


----------



## Eric V

FitzTheRuke said:


> That's how I see their use of "weapon"... but then they become pretty much the SHIELD-like version of the Commission on Superhuman Activities - A little more boring than the comic version of SWORD.



Agreed.

However, with the mutant property coming to Disney, perhaps necessary for classic stories in that genre?


----------



## Umbran

hawkeyefan said:


> I don’t think “sentient weapon” is a designation that needs to be limited to AI beings like Vision and Ultron.
> 
> I don’t see how it couldn’t also apply to Wanda. Or pretty much every other Avenger.




Obviously, I can't say this is impossible.  However, I think it is pretty darned speculative.


----------



## Mind of tempest

hawkeyefan said:


> I don’t think “sentient weapon” is a designation that needs to be limited to AI beings like Vision and Ultron.
> 
> I don’t see how it couldn’t also apply to Wanda. Or pretty much every other Avenger.



wanda is a reality warper weapon is the understatement of a year.


----------



## trappedslider

Umbran said:


> Weapons, plural, I think.  In the comics, it is "World".  In any case, those acronyms are among the silliest things in the Marvel Universe.
> 
> But, regardless, it is still space-based, and concerned with extraterrestrial threats.  So, I expect aliens.  With Thanos, they've lifted their eyes to the sky...
> 
> Unless you think they've significantly deviated from the comics, and it is supposed to be observing and responding to sentient weapons?  When we see it being set up, the only known "sentient weapons" were Ultron and Vision, and both of them were dead.  Bit much of a reaction.  And being on a space station doesn't make a whole lot of sense if the things you have to respond to are on the ground...



Well considering the post credit scene that had fury in space,it's possible that he was setting up some organization


----------



## Tonguez

Umbran said:


> Weapons, plural, I think.  In the comics, it is "World".  In any case, those acronyms are among the silliest things in the Marvel Universe.
> 
> But, regardless, it is still space-based, and concerned with extraterrestrial threats.  So, I expect aliens.  With Thanos, they've lifted their eyes to the sky...
> 
> Unless you think they've significantly deviated from the comics, and it is supposed to be observing and responding to sentient weapons?  When we see it being set up, the only known "sentient weapons" were Ultron and Vision, and both of them were dead.  Bit much of a reaction.  And being on a space station doesn't make a whole lot of sense if the things you have to respond to are on the ground



I’m guessing that with the Multiverse being so promiment in the next stage if the MCU that SWORD will expand its remit from extraterrestial to extradimensional too  - Thor and the Bifrost has already blurred the distinction, so no reason not carry it on. If thats the case then the WandaVision situation would be within SWORDS ambit of dimensional disturbance

I’m also hearing rumour (unconfirmed) that Wanda will be a villain of the Multiverse of Madness (which is consistent with the comics)


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Mallus said:


> It’s fantastic, but who is this for?
> 
> I’m mean, it‘s for me, but I’m old enough to remember Bewitched, I Love Lucy, My Favorite Martian, et al and the timeless limbo of 1970s syndicated TV. And Grant Morrison’s “The Gospel According to Crafty” is one of my favorite comic book issues.
> 
> I’m really curious to see who this works for.



I don't think there is anything in the premise that requires having watched those shows to appreciate the show. Most people are well aware of the basic ideas and memes.


----------



## Parmandur

doctorbadwolf said:


> I don't think there is anything in the premise that requires having watched those shows to appreciate the show. Most people are well aware of the basic ideas and memes.




It's also neither difficult, nor uncommon, to have watched at least some of these old shows.


----------



## trappedslider

Parmandur said:


> It's also neither difficult, nor uncommon, to have watched at least some of these old shows.



I'm sure morrus will say something in response to this lol


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Parmandur said:


> It's also neither difficult, nor uncommon, to have watched at least some of these old shows.



That too. 

I don't think the show will have any trouble being broadly understood.,


----------



## DammitVictor

Tonguez said:


> I’m guessing that with the Multiverse being so promiment in the next stage if the MCU that SWORD will expand its remit from extraterrestial to extradimensional too  - Thor and the Bifrost has already blurred the distinction, so no reason not carry it on. If thats the case then the WandaVision situation would be within SWORDS ambit of dimensional disturbance
> 
> I’m also hearing rumour (unconfirmed) that Wanda will be a villain of the Multiverse of Madness (which is consistent with the comics)




Well, you cannot have a Multiverse of Madness without 



Spoiler



as Moviebob so helpfully pointed out, MOM


.


----------



## Imaculata

I'm intrigued by these first two episodes, but I don't yet know if I like it. I suppose with the introduction of color at the end of episode 2, we're heading towards 80's and 90's era tv shows? That makes it all the more fun Emma Caulfield (Buffy) is in this, and that Christophe Beck (also Buffy) does the score.

Assuming this all takes place after End Game, I'm thinking Wanda is actually being kept in some sort of reality warping prison by some insidious organisation, or it is a prison of her own making. All we know is that she is being watched, that she has some manner of control over the reality and that both her and Vision have memory loss. There are also various references to other characters and organisations in the commercials, which are probably red herrings. I'm quietly hoping it's not quite as simple, and that the answer is a lot more clever and surprising.

Presuming season 1 ends with an explanation to all this, does this exclude the possibility of a season 2? Because the mystery and the riffs on old tv shows are pretty much the premise of the whole show, right?


----------



## pukunui

Imaculata said:


> Presuming season 1 ends with an explanation to all this, does this exclude the possibility of a season 2?



Potentially. I did read something the other day that seemed to suggest the MCU's foray into TV would mostly consist of "event series".


----------



## Imaculata

It would make sense. It would allow them to fill in the gaps towards the next phase of big budget movies with smaller stories. Of course, due to Corona, tv shows are a much better idea right now anyway, since nobody is going to the movie theaters.

I noticed there were a few details in Wandavision they got wrong in regards to imitating tv from that era, although arguably it might even be deliberate. Episode 2 had several scenes outside the house, which on a show of that era would most often just be a very obvious set, or stock footage. Also, people of color! Shock! But I think the show might be playing a bit here with the idea that some of the tvshow's characters are more than what they seem. Do some of the other characters know they are inside some sort of warped reality? Are they real people? Or is only Wanda real?


----------



## Wolfram stout

Imaculata said:


> I'm intrigued by these first two episodes, but I don't yet know if I like it. I suppose with the introduction of color at the end of episode 2, we're heading towards 80's and 90's era tv shows? That makes it all the more fun Emma Caulfield (Buffy) is in this, and that Christophe Beck (also Buffy) does the score.
> 
> Assuming this all takes place after End Game, I'm thinking Wanda is actually being kept in some sort of reality warping prison by some insidious organisation, or it is a prison of her own making. All we know is that she is being watched, that she has some manner of control over the reality and that both her and Vision have memory loss. There are also various references to other characters and organisations in the commercials, which are probably red herrings. I'm quietly hoping it's not quite as simple, and that the answer is a lot more clever and surprising.
> 
> Presuming season 1 ends with an explanation to all this, does this exclude the possibility of a season 2? Because the mystery and the riffs on old tv shows are pretty much the premise of the whole show, right?



First, we will get the 70's with The Brady Bunch (as seen from the clips), and maybe something like Happy Days.  Oh my, your post just gave me a crazy thought.....what if they riff on Mork and Mindy?  I don't think they will, but watching Vison day Na-Nu Na-Nu would be awesome.


----------



## Imaculata

Wolfram stout said:


> First, we will get the 70's with The Brady Bunch (as seen from the clips), and maybe something like Happy Days.  Oh my, your post just gave me a crazy thought.....what if they riff on Mork and Mindy?  I don't think they will, but watching Vison day Na-Nu Na-Nu would be awesome.




Another thing that came to me, is that apparently there is also going to be a Halloween episode. Its in the trailer, and the Vanity Fair article mentions that it may be based on an iconic comic:

"In a Halloween story line (which may or may not have inspired the upcoming Halloween episode of _WandaVision_), Wanda and Vision have to battle both some neighborhood kids who have been transformed into ghouls _and_ the spirit of Samhain himself."

This plot in itself is very similar to a plot in the Halloween episode of season 2 of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, in which everyone transforms into their costume. Lots of Buffy overlap happening in this show so far.


----------



## Tonguez

Imaculata said:


> I'm intrigued by these first two episodes, but I don't yet know if I like it. I suppose with the introduction of color at the end of episode 2, we're heading towards 80's and 90's era tv shows? That makes it all the more fun Emma Caulfield (Buffy) is in this, and that Christophe Beck (also Buffy) does the score.
> 
> Assuming this all takes place after End Game, I'm thinking Wanda is actually being kept in some sort of reality warping prison by some insidious organisation, or it is a prison of her own making. All we know is that she is being watched, that she has some manner of control over the reality and that both her and Vision have memory loss. There are also various references to other characters and organisations in the commercials, which are probably red herrings. I'm quietly hoping it's not quite as simple, and that the answer is a lot more clever and surprising.



The commercials so far have referenced Stark and Strucker, the two major sources of trauma in Wandas life (Starks missile that destroyed her home and pushed her in to Struckers experiment).

My absolute favourite part was the Bewitched inspired animated intro to the second episode, which includes a reference to Bova Milk along with a ton of other cool easter eggs.


----------



## Umbran

Imaculata said:


> Also, people of color! Shock! But I think the show might be playing a bit here with the idea that some of the tvshow's characters are more than what they seem.




With respect, I think the presence of people of color on the show is less about signaling that some of the characters are more than what they seem, and more about just being less racist than we were in the 1960s.  



Imaculata said:


> Do some of the other characters know they are inside some sort of warped reality? Are they real people? Or is only Wanda real?




That is an excellent question.


----------



## Umbran

Imaculata said:


> Lots of Buffy overlap happening in this show so far.




Anya?  What are you doing in 60s TV?


----------



## hawkeyefan

I'd expect that some of the characters are more than just figments of whatever this "simulation" turns out to be. I'd say they're either trapped inside with Wanda and Vision, or they've come to try and help her, or something similar. 

Agnes in particular.....I can't help but think of Agatha Harkness, even though I don't think there's much linking the characters other than a similar sounding name. 

Beside her, both of the named housewives also seem like they may play a bigger role...Dotty, the antagonistic one, and Geraldine, the friendly one. I mean, we know someone is trying to reach Wanda through the radio, and then the other little intrusions like the toy helicopter and the bee guy. Some seem helpful, and some seem threatening.


----------



## Tonguez

hawkeyefan said:


> I'd expect that some of the characters are more than just figments of whatever this "simulation" turns out to be. I'd say they're either trapped inside with Wanda and Vision, or they've come to try and help her, or something similar.
> 
> Agnes in particular.....I can't help but think of Agatha Harkness, even though I don't think there's much linking the characters other than a similar sounding name.
> 
> Beside her, both of the named housewives also seem like they may play a bigger role...Dotty, the antagonistic one, and Geraldine, the friendly one. I mean, we know someone is trying to reach Wanda through the radio, and then the other little intrusions like the toy helicopter and the bee guy. Some seem helpful, and some seem threatening.



the show trailers already identify who Geraldine is Monica Rambeaux so we know she is a real person from outside

I do recall too that Agatha Harkness had grandchildren who fought Wanda and Vision- so maybe Dotty and the others are really them. Dotty seems to know Wanda isnt what she appears to be


----------



## hawkeyefan

@Tonguez I tend not to watch trailers or read synopses and castings and the like to avoid spoilers (so thank you for blurring that out). 

It's not hard to see there's more to her just based on the way she's presented in the show. The other likely characters who may be more than they appear are Agnes, Dotty, and I'd say Vision's boss and boss's wife. Some level of importance was given to each of them, and the rest were largely just kind of there.


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> I do recall too that Agatha Harkness had grandchildren who fought Wanda and Vision- so maybe Dotty and the others are really them. Dotty seems to know Wanda isnt what she appears to be




Agatha Harkness has one son (Nicholas Scratch) and seven grandkids (who form a group - Salem's Seven).  

In the comics, Agatha is a powerful witch, and runs New Salem.  She eventually goes off to be the governess of Franklin Richards (because, well, it is Franklin, and he's a reality bender).  Agatha fights with the Fantastic Four on and off.  Her son, a power-hungry jerk, tries to turn New Salem and his kids against Agatha.  They fight.  Agatha and the FF win. Nick is banished.

Then, Agatha comes to teach the Scarlet Witch.  Hilarity ensues...

I don't know that they'd dip into the Salem's Seven before even introducing Agatha herself.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Yeah, I feel like if they want to broaden Wanda's ability beyond just the telekinesis type powers she's displayed so far....which it seems like this series intends to do.....then I think Agatha Harkness would be a likely candidate to show up.


----------



## Umbran

hawkeyefan said:


> Yeah, I feel like if they want to broaden Wanda's ability beyond just the telekinesis type powers she's displayed so far....which it seems like this series intends to do.....then I think Agatha Harkness would be a likely candidate to show up.




I agree.  Also useful if they are bringing in the Fantastic Four any time soon...

Oh, by the way, for Doctor Who fans - Captain Jack Harkness is named for Agatha Harkness...


----------



## Rune

Umbran said:


> Agatha Harkness has one son (Nicholas Scratch) and seven grandkids (who form a group - Salem's Seven).



Isn’t Agnes’s rabbit in episode 2 named Mr. Scratch?


----------



## hawkeyefan

Rune said:


> Isn’t Agnes’s rabbit in episode 2 named Mr. Scratch?




Is that the case? Nice catch!


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Rune said:


> Isn’t Agnes’s rabbit in episode 2 named Mr. Scratch?




Sir Scratch. And a lot of the theories out there say that Agnes is Agatha Harkness.


----------



## Rune

hawkeyefan said:


> Is that the case? Nice catch!



I’d have to rewatch to be sure.


----------



## Imaculata

Umbran said:


> I agree.  Also useful if they are bringing in the Fantastic Four any time soon...




I wonder if Marvel wants to have another go at The Fantastic Four, after all the disastrous movie attempts that came before. F4 may be considered box office poison at this point.


----------



## Dire Bare

hawkeyefan said:


> Agnes in particular.....I can't help but think of Agatha Harkness, even though I don't think there's much linking the characters other than a similar sounding name.
> 
> Beside her, both of the named housewives also seem like they may play a bigger role...Dotty, the antagonistic one, and Geraldine, the friendly one. I mean, we know someone is trying to reach Wanda through the radio, and then the other little intrusions like the toy helicopter and the bee guy. Some seem helpful, and some seem threatening.



Agnes, in the show, wears a brooch that is similar to one that Agatha wears in the comics.

So far, I don't think any of the neighborhood inhabitants are aware of what's going on, and are as trapped as Wanda and Vision. When the false reality "glitches", they all suddenly get confused and ask "Who are you?" and "Who am I?" Dottie's already done this in episode 2, and both Agnes and Geraldine do this in the trailers.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Imaculata said:


> I wonder if Marvel wants to have another go at The Fantastic Four, after all the disastrous movie attempts that came before. F4 may be considered box office poison at this point.




You need to do some catching up.  

At the big investor meeting, when all these MCU and Star Wars shows were announced, they also officially announced a new Fantastic Four movie. So that has been known for several weeks now.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Also, two new posters for the show released today. The one with Wanda seems to want us to believe one theory. But the one with Vision has me wondering just what the quote is hinting at:


----------



## Rune

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Also, two new posters for the show released today. The one with Wanda seems to want us to believe one theory. But the one with Vision has me wondering just what the quote is hinting at:



I was thinking Mephisto, but that Vision poster now makes me think of Shadow King. Which I guess would imply it’s all in the Astral Plane?


----------



## embee

Rune said:


> I was thinking Mephisto, but that Vision poster now makes me think of Shadow King. Which I guess would imply it’s all in the Astral Plane?



I hope not. Only because of how much I enjoyed how Shadow King was brought to the screen in Legion.


----------



## cbwjm

Imaculata said:


> I wonder if Marvel wants to have another go at The Fantastic Four, after all the disastrous movie attempts that came before. F4 may be considered box office poison at this point.



None of those F4 movies were done by marvel, they were owned by fox studios. Now that Disney owns both fox studios and marvel, and it seems like they have a winning formula with their other marvel movies, we might actually get a really good F4 movie.


----------



## Dire Bare

embee said:


> I hope not. Only because of how much I enjoyed how Shadow King was brought to the screen in Legion.



*Legion* is a part of the X-Men universe before Marvel/Disney reacquired the rights . . . so is not part of the MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe). So, Shadow King has not yet appeared in the MCU and is a possibility. But I agree, *Legion* was an awesome and trippy show, and did a fantastic job with Shadow King . . . I also hope he's not involved in *WandaVision*. Does Shadow King play a role in the comics as an antagonist to the Scarlet Witch and/or Vision?

_For those who aren't aware of this gem, *Legion* is a three-season TV series in the X-Men universe about the powerful mutant David Haller, otherwise known as Legion in the comics. Haller has mental abilities on par with Professor X and other psychic mutants. It was an FX network show, and can be streamed on Hulu. It has gotten mixed reviews, and can be a bit hard to follow . . . but is a lot of fun. Actors involved you might recognize include Aubrey Plaza and Jermaine Clement._


----------



## hawkeyefan

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Also, two new posters for the show released today. The one with Wanda seems to want us to believe one theory. But the one with Vision has me wondering just what the quote is hinting at:




Vision has sometimes used the alias "Victor Shade" when he's needed a human identity. Seems to be referring to that. I was kind of surprised that they didn't use it in the show and instead everyone calls him Vision, which seems odd.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Dire Bare said:


> *Legion* is a part of the X-Men universe before Marvel/Disney reacquired the rights . . . so is not part of the MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe). So, Shadow King has not yet appeared in the MCU and is a possibility. But I agree, *Legion* was an awesome and trippy show, and did a fantastic job with Shadow King . . . I also hope he's not involved in *WandaVision*. Does Shadow King play a role in the comics as an antagonist to the Scarlet Witch and/or Vision?
> 
> _For those who aren't aware of this gem, *Legion* is a three-season TV series in the X-Men universe about the powerful mutant David Haller, otherwise known as Legion in the comics. Haller has mental abilities on par with Professor X and other psychic mutants. It was an FX network show, and can be streamed on Hulu. It has gotten mixed reviews, and can be a bit hard to follow . . . but is a lot of fun. Actors involved you might recognize include Aubrey Plaza and Jermaine Clement._




I don't think Shadow King has ever had much to do with them. 

And I agree....Legion is great. Arguably Marvel's best TV show to date.


----------



## Umbran

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Sir Scratch. And a lot of the theories out there say that Agnes is Agatha Harkness.




Yeah.  Similar sounding name, and she does show up to teach Wanda how to get by...

And, well, as someone's mentioned the brooch, let's see images...



Spoiler: side by side









And, I think I have seen an image from the Halloween episode with Agnes dressed as a classic pointy-hat witch.  So, I can't say they're crazy for thinking it.  But then, Marvel stuff has enough internal references that aren't directly plot relevant.  So... I shrug.


----------



## Imaculata

Wolfram stout said:


> First, we will get the 70's with The Brady Bunch (as seen from the clips), and maybe something like Happy Days.  Oh my, your post just gave me a crazy thought.....what if they riff on Mork and Mindy?  I don't think they will, but watching Vison day Na-Nu Na-Nu would be awesome.




I think the strength of the show so far, is that they aren't literally imitating one particular show. They copy the style of a bunch of shows from an era, without it literally being that show. Apparently they will do an episode in the style of Family Ties next, which could very well also have elements of Happy Days in it. Once they tackle the 90's, I'd love to see their take on a supernatural action show like Buffy or Charmed.

The show certainly is intriguing. I like how the first episode doesn't knock you over the head with the fact that something strange is going on. There are a bunch of subtle clues, like the fact that Vision doesn't know what it is that the company he works for actually does, which could just as easily be read as just a joke by an unattentive audience.

I also like how the second episode, while still in black and white, casually adopts a different format and a different intro.


----------



## embee

Umbran said:


> With respect, I think the presence of people of color on the show is less about signaling that some of the characters are more than what they seem, and more about just being less racist than we were in the 1960s.
> 
> 
> 
> That is an excellent question.



Sadly, in that respect, Leave It To Beaver, Bewitched, I Dream of Jeannie, and My Three Sons were fairly accurate. 

Why weren't there people of color in those neighborhoods? Because the suburbs were filled with land covenants that forbade selling to people of color (and often Jewish people as well). Beev didn't show any black kids in the neighborhood because black people would not be legally permitted to buy a house in the neighborhood.


----------



## Umbran

Imaculata said:


> Apparently they will do an episode in the style of Family Ties next, which could very well also have elements of Happy Days in it.




They've done 50s and 60s.  They'd need to get the 70s next - Happy Days, Lavern and Shirley, and The Brady Bunch being typical for that decade.  Figuring they stick to the family-oriented scheme, given the kids - Family Ties and Married with Children are in there, but I almost hope for an Alf reference, just because...



Imaculata said:


> Once they tackle the 90's, I'd love to see their take on a supernatural action show like Buffy or Charmed.




The theme seems to be sitcoms, so I don't know if you'll see that.


----------



## Umbran

Umbran said:


> And, I think I have seen an image from the Halloween episode with Agnes dressed as a classic pointy-hat witch.  So, I can't say they're crazy for thinking it.  But then, Marvel stuff has enough internal references that aren't directly plot relevant.  So... I shrug.




Oh, and while we are playing this game, if every background character has to be somebody - folks have suggested Agatha Harkness and noted Monica Rambeau.  It has been suggested that Dottie (played by Emma Caulfield Ford) is visually similar to Clea, a princess and occasional ruler of of the Dark Dimension, occasionally romantically linked with... Doctor Strange.

It is not clear to me why we'd have this combination of magically powered characters and SWORD - they don't usually mix in the comics so much.


----------



## Rune

Umbran said:


> They've done 50s and 60s.  They'd need to get the 70s next - Happy Days, Lavern and Shirley, and The Brady Bunch being typical for that decade.  Figuring they stick to the family-oriented scheme, given the kids - Family Ties and Married with Children are in there, but I almost hope for an Alf reference, just because...
> 
> 
> 
> The theme seems to be sitcoms, so I don't know if you'll see that.



But _Happy Days_ and its spin-offs (except for _Mork and Mindy_?) were set in the 50s-60s, so...maybe not? Obviously, if none of it is real, anything’s possible, but going backward in time seems like it might not be the direction they’re going.

Personally, I’m hoping for some _All in the Family_/_Jeffersons. _


----------



## pukunui

Happy Days was on TV in the 70s but it was set in the 50s, so would they really use that as a reference in this tour through the decades?

EDIT: Ninja'd by @Rune !


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Agnes is not a name too far removed from Agatha. And Clea has "dots" on her leggings!

(I am aware that the connections are flimsy at best).


----------



## Umbran

pukunui said:


> Happy Days was on TV in the 70s but it was set in the 50s, so would they really use that as a reference in this tour through the decades?




Perhaps, if you separate _setting_ from _overall style_.


----------



## Umbran

FitzTheRuke said:


> And Clea has "dots" on her leggings!
> 
> (I am aware that the connections are flimsy at best).




Honestly, given how much those circles are iconic to the character design of Clea, but also kinda dorky... I would not put it past them to be lampshading it.


----------



## Imaculata

One thing I noticed upon rewatching episode 1, is that Vision's boss and his wife seem to get stuck in a loop as soon as the boss chokes on his food. Then as soon as Vision saves his boss with his powers, they continue with the script of the episode as if nothing has happened. Throughout episode 1, their special powers are shown with the kind of special effects of a tvshow from that era (such as the jump cut when they get their rings). But when vision saves his boss, he reaches inside of him in a way we've seen him do in the MCU movies. The boss and his wife make no mention of it. This could be explained away by Vision being behind the dinner table when he does it. But I get a strong impression that both the boss and his wife are just part of the tvshow universe, and not real people. This would explain why they get caught in a loop when the episode goes off script, and ignore how Vision intervenes. Thoughts?


----------



## pukunui

Yeah, I wondered about that too.

I'm also wondering if there's any significance to the symbols on Vision's tie.


----------



## Arilyn

I really like the show so far. There's a slow creeping horror behind the sitcom zaniness that's very effective. It's different, and that's cool. 

Also love how much the episodes feel like those old shows, until those weird moments. Really well done.


----------



## cbwjm

Umbran said:


> Oh, and while we are playing this game, if every background character has to be somebody - folks have suggested Agatha Harkness and noted Monica Rambeau.  It has been suggested that Dottie (played by Emma Caulfield Ford) is visually similar to Clea, a princess and occasional ruler of of the Dark Dimension, occasionally romantically linked with... Doctor Strange.
> 
> It is not clear to me why we'd have this combination of magically powered characters and SWORD - they don't usually mix in the comics so much.



I'm not clear on the SWORD combo either, but if Wanda is meant to be in the multiverse madness dr strange movie then that might explain the various magical characters. Is SWORD involved in interdimensional stuff or only space stuff in the comics? If interdimensional becomes part of their purview in the cinematic universe then that could explain it.


----------



## pukunui

cbwjm said:


> I'm not clear on the SWORD combo either, but if Wanda is meant to be in the multiverse madness dr strange movie then that might explain the various magical characters. Is SWORD involved in interdimensional stuff or only space stuff in the comics? If interdimensional becomes part of their purview in the cinematic universe then that could explain it.



Maybe Wanda is already in the multiverse of madness!


----------



## cbwjm

pukunui said:


> Maybe Wanda is already in the multiverse of madness!



If her powers are connected to the mind gem, maybe she created it. It's not a true multiverse, it's all in her head, and others have to go in and get her before her powers cause her madness to spill into reality.


----------



## Umbran

pukunui said:


> Maybe Wanda is already in the multiverse of madness!




I'm going to guess more like... causes it.  Rather than have her kids disappear, wipe her memory, and she snaps and kills avengers and eradicated mutants, she snaps and busts a hole in the universe.  Which may be possible because the Infinity Stones are now gone, and folks have been time travelling all over the frelling place....


----------



## pukunui

Umbran said:


> I'm going to guess more like... causes it.  Rather than have her kids disappear, wipe her memory, and she snaps and kills avengers and eradicated mutants, she snaps and busts a hole in the universe.  Which may be possible because the Infinity Stones are now gone, and folks have been time travelling all over the frelling place....



That's an intriguing idea!


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

One thing we all need to remember about the continuity between this show and the MCU and Phase Four is that the pandemic threw everything out of order. WandaVision was the closest to being completed, but it was not originally supposed to start Phase Four. I think at least one of the other series, and at least one movie, were due to come out before this show. I don't know now much they had to shuffle things around, or reshoot other shows, once they decided to lead with WandaVision instead.


----------



## pukunui

I wasn't aware of that! That's interesting. Apparently _WandaVision _is meant to directly set up the next _Doctor Strange _movie: 
Honey, I'm Chrome: Marvel prepares to take over TV with 'WandaVision'


----------



## WayneLigon

Umbran said:


> Yes, it is a SWORD logo.  A quick search makes that pretty certain.
> 
> And that is strange.  Because SWORD is focused on extraterrestrial threats.  Wanda and Vision are not extraterrestrial.  So, why is SWORD invovlved?





Spoiler



Monica Rambeau was last seen in the comics as a SWORD agent, I think.





embee said:


> Sadly, in that respect, Leave It To Beaver, Bewitched, I Dream of Jeannie, and My Three Sons were fairly accurate.
> 
> Why weren't there people of color in those neighborhoods? Because the suburbs were filled with land covenants that forbade selling to people of color (and often Jewish people as well). Beev didn't show any black kids in the neighborhood because black people would not be legally permitted to buy a house in the neighborhood.



Hmm, despite all the 'for the children', we haven't see _any _children.


----------



## Rune

WayneLigon said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Monica Rambeau was last seen in the comics as a SWORD agent, I think.
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm, despite all the 'for the children', we haven't see _any _children.



But we _have_ seen one pregnancy.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

pukunui said:


> I wasn't aware of that! That's interesting. Apparently _WandaVision _is meant to directly set up the next _Doctor Strange _movie:
> Honey, I'm Chrome: Marvel prepares to take over TV with 'WandaVision'




Yes, the next Doctor Strange movie was always scheduled to come after this show, but others were not.


----------



## WayneLigon

Rune said:


> But we _have_ seen one pregnancy.



Maaaaybe? See, in the comics, Wanda could manipulate reality. One thing she did was give herself twins. This is probably just a call-out to that time, but atm who knows?


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

WayneLigon said:


> Maaaaybe? See, in the comics, Wanda could manipulate reality. One thing she did was give herself twins. This is probably just a call-out to that time, but atm who knows?





Spoiler



If you've watch the trailers, Wanda ends up having twin boys.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

cbwjm said:


> . Is SWORD involved in interdimensional stuff or only space stuff in the comics?



Interdimentional stuff was handled by ARMOR "Alternate Reality Monitoring Operational Response"!

... but you know, that's far FAR FAR too many silly knight acronyms.


----------



## Rune

WayneLigon said:


> Maaaaybe? See, in the comics, Wanda could manipulate reality. One thing she did was give herself twins. This is probably just a call-out to that time, but atm who knows?



Pretty sure Wanda _did_ do it herself in the show. What else would Dotty be talking about when she said the way a housewife gets blood out of white linen is to do it herself?

Also, I doubt Vision is capable of reproducing, even if he’s real. Which I also doubt.


----------



## pukunui

Rune said:


> Also, I doubt Vision is capable of reproducing, even if he’s real. Which I also doubt.



There's a bit in the first trailer where Vision and Agnes are talking and she states that he's dead.


----------



## Tonguez

Imaculata said:


> One thing I noticed upon rewatching episode 1, is that Vision's boss and his wife seem to get stuck in a loop as soon as the boss chokes on his food. Then as soon as Vision saves his boss with his powers, they continue with the script of the episode as if nothing has happened. Throughout episode 1, their special powers are shown with the kind of special effects of a tvshow from that era (such as the jump cut when they get their rings). But when vision saves his boss, he reaches inside of him in a way we've seen him do in the MCU movies. The boss and his wife make no mention of it. This could be explained away by Vision being behind the dinner table when he does it. But I get a strong impression that both the boss and his wife are just part of the tvshow universe, and not real people. This would explain why they get caught in a loop when the episode goes off script, and ignore how Vision intervenes. Thoughts?



I interpreted that as a pointer that it was Wanda who was controlling her 'fantasy'  - when the boss and wife get stuck in the loop, Wanda and Vision sit in shock, until Wanda gives Vision the command "Vision save him" - ie it is Wanda who makes the choice to actively break the fantasy, she directs Visions action to use his powers and then resets things so the Boss and Wife skip to the next scene and she can go on with her fantasy.
Hmm, I wonder if thats the first crack, episode 2 then shows an increase in cracks as Wanda's fantasy begins to break and she is forced to reassert her denial (thus the plot charts her ascension to tragic villain)


----------



## ccs

pukunui said:


> I wasn't aware of that! That's interesting. Apparently _WandaVision _is meant to directly set up the next _Doctor Strange _movie:
> Honey, I'm Chrome: Marvel prepares to take over TV with 'WandaVision'



Yes, was wondering how long it'd take this discussion to realize this.


----------



## Dire Bare

Tonguez said:


> I interpreted that as a pointer that it was Wanda who was controlling her 'fantasy'  - when the boss and wife get stuck in the loop, Wanda and Vision sit in shock, until Wanda gives Vision the command "Vision save him" - ie it is Wanda who makes the choice to actively break the fantasy, she directs Visions action to use his powers and then resets things so the Boss and Wife skip to the next scene and she can go on with her fantasy.
> Hmm, I wonder if thats the first crack, episode 2 then shows an increase in cracks as Wanda's fantasy begins to break and she is forced to reassert her denial (thus the plot charts her ascension to tragic villain)



If Wanda is controlling the fantasy reality . . . she's doing it subconsciously and without a conscious realization of what's going on. And even if that is the case, it doesn't rule out someone else's involvement . . . S.W.O.R.D. or perhaps something or someone more sinister . . .


----------



## Dire Bare

pukunui said:


> Yeah, I wondered about that too.
> 
> I'm also wondering if there's any significance to the symbols on Vision's tie.



They reference his costume, both his Vision costume but also his "Victor Shade" outfit from the comics. Vision has similar symbols on his chest in superhero mode, and in the comics he wore a similar tie as Victor Shade.


----------



## cbwjm

Dire Bare said:


> If Wanda is controlling the fantasy reality . . . she's doing it subconsciously and without a conscious realization of what's going on. And even if that is the case, it doesn't rule out someone else's involvement . . . S.W.O.R.D. or perhaps something or someone more sinister . . .



Wasn't the SWORD symbol on the notebook of whoever was watching wandavision at the end of the first episode? I feel like it is a foregone conclusion that they are involved somehow. How they are involved is another matter.


----------



## wicked cool

Theres something  supernatural going on and some type of government involvement (feels like Stranger things eleven) where eleven can go places with her mind  ( it think Wanda has partially gone into another realm like Dr Strange/eleven can do ) but somehow she has created a doorway for these scientists to see her and get to her if they  cant get caught .

some of theses people seem to be almost acting out her fantasy and maybe some are agents (their confusion on why they are there etc). Feels like the Truman show at times

I do believe vision is there as well and isn't a figment of her imagination


----------



## Tonguez

Dire Bare said:


> If Wanda is controlling the fantasy reality . . . she's doing it subconsciously and without a conscious realization of what's going on. And even if that is the case, it doesn't rule out someone else's involvement . . . S.W.O.R.D. or perhaps something or someone more sinister . . .



yeah, I'd presume that its part of her decent into her Multiverse of Madness, she doesnt have conscious realization because she's in denial of reality - she wants the fantasy of a happy life with Vision.

The voice on the radio sounded concerned for her safety so I assume that was someone from SWORD, they are the ones trying to break in to the reality bubble that Wanda has created to sustain her fantasy


----------



## billd91

Imaculata said:


> I'm intrigued by these first two episodes, but I don't yet know if I like it. I suppose with the introduction of color at the end of episode 2, we're heading towards 80's and 90's era tv shows?



Bewitched started in black and white and made the transition to color. So, in a sense we are modernizing, and also still calling back to the motif of the original TV show.
Good thing we didn't change husbands.


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> The voice on the radio sounded concerned for her safety so I assume that was someone from SWORD, they are the ones trying to break in to the reality bubble that Wanda has created to sustain her fantasy




So, let us lay out how it looks...

There's the fight in Wakanda at the end of Infinity War.  Vision is killed, Wanda dies in the Snap.
Wanda comes back along with everyone else in Endgame, and she is Very Ticked Off, fights in that battle.

Afterwards... Vision is still dead.  You could imagine, for example, that SWORD has picked up Vision's body - the thing that made him live was extraterrestrial.  She goes to them to see him, maybe to try to revive him.  They aren't horrible, so they allow it...

...And seeing him lying there is too much, and she goes down the rabbit hole.  You could imagine Monica Rambeau (and possible other SWORD agents) being in the room at the time, and getting dragged down with her.  Either SWORD recognizes they are out of their area of expertise and cooperates with Harkness, or Harkness, realizing the issue, enters independently with her own powers.  Her rabbit hole is still in a SWORD facility, and they are trying to initiate contact...

Okay, that hangs together well enough.

There are variations one could easily imagine.  Like, this is all the result of her trying to forge a replacement for the Mind Stone that animated Vision.  And maybe Harkness is a red herring, just another SWORD agent. 

Or... Sentient Weapon...  SWORD has decided to use what's left of Vision as the core for their systems, and Wanda is having None Of That, and the rabbit hole happens as she's trying to break him out of SWORD....


----------



## Zaukrie

Big fan, and I have not read any of your conjecture, because I just want to experience it......


----------



## trappedslider

billd91 said:


> Bewitched started in black and white and made the transition to color. So, in a sense we are modernizing, and also still calling back to the motif of the original TV show.
> Good thing we didn't change husbands.



I could make an immature joke about switching dicks.....


----------



## ART!

Dire Bare said:


> If Wanda is controlling the fantasy reality . . . she's doing it subconsciously and without a conscious realization of what's going on. And even if that is the case, it doesn't rule out someone else's involvement . . . S.W.O.R.D. or perhaps something or someone more sinister . . .



Her rewinding of the scene with the "beekeeper" shows that she is conscious of the unreality going on, at least at some level. She sees that person, realizes they don't belong in this reality, says "No" in a very out-of-character (the sitcom character) way, and rewinds.


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> So, let us lay out how it looks...
> 
> There's the fight in Wakanda at the end of Infinity War.  Vision is killed, Wanda dies in the Snap.
> Wanda comes back along with everyone else in Endgame, and she is Very Ticked Off, fights in that battle.
> 
> Afterwards... Vision is still dead.  You could imagine, for example, that SWORD has picked up Vision's body - the thing that made him live was extraterrestrial.  She goes to them to see him, maybe to try to revive him.  They aren't horrible, so they allow it...
> 
> ...And seeing him lying there is too much, and she goes down the rabbit hole.  You could imagine Monica Rambeau (and possible other SWORD agents) being in the room at the time, and getting dragged down with her.  Either SWORD recognizes they are out of their area of expertise and cooperates with Harkness, or Harkness, realizing the issue, enters independently with her own powers.  Her rabbit hole is still in a SWORD facility, and they are trying to initiate contact...
> 
> Okay, that hangs together well enough.
> 
> There are variations one could easily imagine.  Like, this is all the result of her trying to forge a replacement for the Mind Stone that animated Vision.  And maybe Harkness is a red herring, just another SWORD agent.
> 
> Or... Sentient Weapon...  SWORD has decided to use what's left of Vision as the core for their systems, and Wanda is having None Of That, and the rabbit hole happens as she's trying to break him out of SWORD....



A couple more things to mention.

Wanda had to see Vision die twice. First she killed him herself, then Thanos reversed time and killed him again. So that has to really suck.

But before all that, Shuri was well on the way to fully mapping out Vision's consciousness before he was forced onto the field. It's ambiguous as to how complete that process was, but I find it hard to believe that they threw that whole sequence in there for no reason. At least some portion - maybe even the majority - of Vision may exist in some form on Wakandan computers. I feel like that has to play into this in some fashion.


----------



## ART!

MarkB said:


> A couple more things to mention.
> 
> Wanda had to see Vision die twice. First she killed him herself, then Thanos reversed time and killed him again. So that has to really suck.
> 
> But before all that, Shuri was well on the way to fully mapping out Vision's consciousness before he was forced onto the field. It's ambiguous as to how complete that process was, but I find it hard to believe that they threw that whole sequence in there for no reason. At least some portion - maybe even the majority - of Vision may exist in some form on Wakandan computers. I feel like that has to play into this in some fashion.



And given the tragic passing of Chadwick Boseman, spending a little time on that Wakandan angle as a way to boost the prominence of one or more characters from _Black Panther_ seems like a very good idea.


----------



## Umbran

ART! said:


> Her rewinding of the scene with the "beekeeper" shows that she is conscious of the unreality going on, at least at some level.




"Conscious, on some level," is not what I'd call it.  She seems to be following a fairly common (though inaccurate) media depiction of mental illness, in which a subsoncsious desire momentarily asserts itself as conscious action.  



ART! said:


> She sees that person, realizes they don't belong in this reality, says "No" in a very out-of-character (the sitcom character) way, and rewinds.




I read that less a "he does not belong" and more like, "I do not want you here."


----------



## ART!

Umbran said:


> "Conscious, on some level," is not what I'd call it.  She seems to be following a fairly common (though inaccurate) media depiction of mental illness, in which a subsoncsious desire momentarily asserts itself as conscious action.
> 
> 
> 
> I read that less a "he does not belong" and more like, "I do not want you here."



That is some grade-A nitpicking, but sure. I say this as a pedant myself.


----------



## Umbran

ART! said:


> That is some grade-A nitpicking, but sure. I say this as a pedant myself.




Well, when you are talking about a mystery where you have very little information, the details are all you have to work with.  As we get more information, they'll become less meaningful.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Read an interview earlier today with Paul Bettany where he says an end-credits scene for Endgame had to be cut that showed Wanda visiting Vision in the morgue, which was somehow supposed to connect the movie to this series.


----------



## pukunui

Well, that was interesting! A few more clues laid out.


----------



## cbwjm

Looks like she's turned a small area into her own Pleasantville. Vision is starting to get suspicious and the rest of the people, are they trapped here or were they made by Wanda?


----------



## MarkB

The part where she rewrote Vision's suspicions was particularly unsettling in its implications. Either he really is just another fictional character for her to do with as she likes, or else she's casually mind-controlling him.


----------



## pukunui

I 


cbwjm said:


> Looks like she's turned a small area into her own Pleasantville. Vision is starting to get suspicious and the rest of the people, are they trapped here or were they made by Wanda?



I think they’re trapped based on that one clip from the trailer where Agnes asked if someone is there to rescue them.

Not sure about Vision.


----------



## Rune

MarkB said:


> The part where she rewrote Vision's suspicions was particularly unsettling in its implications. Either he really is just another fictional character for her to do with as she likes, or else she's casually mind-controlling him.



That’s what I thought when I watched it, too, but it’s so much smoother than the rewind that I have to wonder if it might have been done by another entity. 

If it _was_ Wanda, she’s gotten _much_ better at it since the rewind.


----------



## Morrus

MarkB said:


> The part where she rewrote Vision's suspicions was particularly unsettling in its implications. Either he really is just another fictional character for her to do with as she likes, or else she's casually mind-controlling him.



I think she rewound time?


----------



## Imaculata

I'm pretty sure it was Wanda herself doing it. But instead of a rewind we just got a jumpcut to rewind the scene. It looks as if SWORD is trying to send in operatives, but Wanda got wise of it that she didn't belong. Which raises the question, do the rest of the characters belong there? Did Wanda bring them in against their will and rewrite their memories? Or were they created by Wanda, but became self aware? Vision is becoming aware of it as well, but did Wanda actually recreate him?

The shot outside showed some sort of energy bubble. This seems to confirm our suspicions that she has created some kind of pocket reality for herself that SWORD is having great trouble penetrating.

This show now has be pretty invested. They've hooked me. I hope they keep it up.


----------



## MarkB

Morrus said:


> I think she rewound time?



Yes, but if she only rewound time, events would simply play out exactly the same again the second time. For them to play out differently she'd also have needed to alter Vision's mind - assuming he's real and actually has a mind.


----------



## pukunui

MarkB said:


> The part where she rewrote Vision's suspicions was particularly unsettling in its implications. Either he really is just another fictional character for her to do with as she likes, or else she's casually mind-controlling him.



I don't think he's just a "fictional character" because otherwise Wanda would have been able to write him in such a way as to never become suspicious of the unreality of his situation. I think he's a real being, and that's why she's having to rewind / redo things in an effort to keep him from getting suspicious.

If I understand correctly, he wanted a normal life / relationship with her. He didn't get that thanks to Thanos. So now Wanda is trying to give him that opportunity but is keeping him in the dark about the fact it's all fake.

Now that we know it's not all in Wanda's head but is happening in the physical world, we now need to figure out whether Westview is more like the Truman Show, with actors pretending to be Vision's friends and neighbors, or more like a Delos park, with Wanda trying to stop Vision (and everyone else) from figuring out that they're robots. Or something.

In short, I'm hooked too and can't wait for the big reveal!


I'm also wondering if maybe the other people in Westview are all real people that Wanda has "kidnapped" and that, at some stage, her magic is going to affect them and turn most / all of them into a new crop of superheroes / villains ... perhaps creating the multiverse of madness in the process!


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

MarkB said:


> The part where she rewrote Vision's suspicions was particularly unsettling in its implications. Either he really is just another fictional character for her to do with as she likes, or else she's casually mind-controlling him.




This is post-Endgame, so Vision is dead. He is not real, or at least not yet, if some of the theories are to be believed.


----------



## Rune

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> This is post-Endgame, so Vision is dead. He is not real, or at least not yet, if some of the theories are to be believed.



He must at least be independent from Wanda’s control, because we see him think and react to things outside of her presence/perception. I haven’t ruled out the possibility that he is a construct of Wanda’s reality-bending that she has given an AI. Possibly un/subconsciously.


----------



## pukunui

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> This is post-Endgame, so Vision is dead. He is not real, or at least not yet, if some of the theories are to be believed.



He is supposed to be dead, yes. But whatever he is, I think he is still real. Real enough that the others can see him. Real enough that, as @Rune says, he can do things independently of Wanda. Real enough that she has to rewind/rewrite his memory to keep him from discovering the truth of their situation.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Rune said:


> He must at least be independent from Wanda’s control, because we see him think and react to things outside of her presence/perception. I haven’t ruled out the possibility that he is a construct of Wanda’s reality-bending that she has given an AI. Possibly un/subconsciously.





pukunui said:


> He is supposed to be dead, yes. But whatever he is, I think he is still real. Real enough that the others can see him. Real enough that, as @Rune says, he can do things independently of Wanda. Real enough that she has to rewind/rewrite his memory to keep him from discovering the truth of their situation.




But if someone, or some organization, is controlling this, and Wanda only has limited ability to adjust things, "Vision" could have been programmed to act just this way, to push her limits or something.

And since they seem to be using a lot of the comics storyline this is taken from, they may also be using other storylines involving Vision and his brain patterns/consciousness being merged with other characters, one of which is Wonderman, the same character still visible in the blurred out image of the storyboards from the Behind the Scenes interviews.

Just because we did not see it happen in a movie, does not mean it has not happened behind the scenes.


----------



## pming

Hiya!

I'm kinda digging it, tbh. I didn't think I would, but I am. A nice surprise! 

As for what it "is" or what is "going on"... right from the trailers for it I got nothing but "Mojo World" vibes. I'm sure someone has mentioned this. For those that don't know what I'm talking about: "Mojo" is a powerful alien who rules an entire planet that is, effectively, hyper-focused on "TV Entertainment". Look up "X-Men Mojo World series". Had one of my all-time favourite characters in this one... "Spiral"! LOVE that character!

Another possibility I've considered... "The Shaper of Worlds". This would make sense in that it is "WANDAVision" and not "VISIONWanda" (well, that and the name... ; ) ). The Shaper is a "Cosmic Entity" classed 'bad guy' who can, quite literally, re-write reality on a global scale. He looks dumb af, imnsho, but his schtick is that he has no actual imagination himself...so he draws out from the peoples minds; think Matrix, but on steroids.

No matter the reason 'behind' the show...I am enjoying the "Super-Heroes in Pleasantville" vibe. 

^_^

Paul L. Ming


----------



## Rune

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> But if someone, or some organization, is controlling this, and Wanda only has limited ability to adjust things, "Vision" could have been programmed to act just this way, to push her limits or something.



Maybe, but Vision’s confusion/suspicion while talking with Agnes and Herb about Monica seems incongruous with that. Agnes shouldn’t have to hide anything from him if he’s just a program. Unless she is representing a separate interest, of course.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Rune said:


> Maybe, but Vision’s confusion/suspicion while talking with Agnes and Herb about Monica seems incongruous with that. Agnes shouldn’t have to hide anything from him if he’s just a program. Unless she is representing a separate interest, of course.




But if this is all in Wanda's head or something, why would there be any interaction at all between the other "residents" when out of her awareness/hearing/sight range? Like the stuff between the doctor and Vision at the doctor's house. And the doctor saying small towns are impossible to get away from? If everything is under her control, I would expect side bits like that would not happen.

Plus, that whole bit at the very end, showing the big military encampment and that force field bubble thing, made me think of it as a containment system keeping her in and not them trying to get in to her and get her out. But that part is hard to tell with a frame by frame look at that scene.


----------



## Eric V

The Vision here is a reconstruction by Wanda, to the best of her ability, which would include his inquisitive nature.  I suppose then, that's why he starts to get suspicious...
...until she re-adjusts him.

That's my theory.


----------



## Rune

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> But if this is all in Wanda's head or something, why would there be any interaction at all between the other "residents" when out of her awareness/hearing/sight range? Like the stuff between the doctor and Vision at the doctor's house. And the doctor saying small towns are impossible to get away from? If everything is under her control, I would expect side bits like that would not happen.
> 
> Plus, that whole bit at the very end, showing the big military encampment and that force field bubble thing, made me think of it as a containment system keeping her in and not them trying to get in to her and get her out. But that part is hard to tell with a frame by frame look at that scene.



Agreed. If it’s all Wanda’s construct, at least some of the residents would seem to be capable of independent thought (and may not be native).

Since you mention the outside world, did anyone else notice that there’s a billboard for West View on the outside? Monica goes flying past it. I wonder how that features in.


----------



## pukunui

Rune said:


> Since you mention the outside world, did anyone else notice that there’s a billboard for West View on the outside? Monica goes flying past it. I wonder how that features in.



That's what makes me wonder if perhaps it's a real town that she has "taken over" by encasing it in a bubble or something. The neighbors are real people that she's brainwashed / mind-controlled / otherwise convinced to play along (or are actors who are being paid to play along) or something.


----------



## Imaculata

Given the fact that we saw a SWORD operative talking to Wanda through the radio, asking who was doing this to her, it seems a fair bet that SWORD is investigating Wanda's world and trying to help her. The billboard was a good catch. This does imply that not all of Westview is of her making. In fact, her two neighbors hint at Vision that they are all trapped here.

Was the beekeeper a first attempt by SWORD to inject an operative? It seems they are trying to make Wanda remember her trauma in order to put an end to her reality bending pocket dimension and free the people trapped within. 

It also seems Vision is a completely reconstructed self aware and independently thinking being. He is real, but a copy I think, created by Wanda, and kept in the dark about reality. She literally seems to brainwash him when he starts to catch on.


----------



## Rune

Imaculata said:


> Was the beekeeper a first attempt by SWORD to inject an operative? It seems they are trying to make Wanda remember her trauma in order to put an end to her reality bending pocket dimension and free the people trapped within.



Monica has been in since episode 1. Although, she didn’t seem to remember her name or mission.

Edited to reflect my error: Monica sppears in episode 2, not 1.


----------



## pukunui

Rune said:


> Monica has been in since episode 1. Although, she didn’t seem to remember her name or mission.



I thought she only showed up in episode 2, when she introduces herself as "Geraldine" to Wanda at Dottie's gathering.


----------



## Umbran

Rune said:


> Since you mention the outside world, did anyone else notice that there’s a billboard for West View on the outside? Monica goes flying past it. I wonder how that features in.




At this point, I expect all the people are real.  We see a sign for the Westview community in the outside world - Wanda came to Westview, and likely created that bubble, and trapped the residents, real people, inside with her.  They are at least somewhat capable of independent thought, but try not to express it anywhere near Wanda, or she sends them to the cornfield*.




*Twilight Zone - Season 3, Episode 8, 1961 - "It's a Good Life"


----------



## Rune

pukunui said:


> I thought she only showed up in episode 2, when she introduces herself as "Geraldine" to Wanda at Dottie's gathering.



Yeah, I think you’re right. Haven’t rewatched yet. But the beekeeper was still after, wasn’t he?


----------



## pukunui

Rune said:


> Yeah, I think you’re right. Haven’t rewatched yet. But the beekeeper was still after, wasn’t he?



Yes. Geraldine showed up near the beginning of the episode, and then the beekeeper showed up at the end.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Okay, that was the episode I needed. Definitely on board now. The first two had just enough to get me back for this one, and it delivered. 

At this point, I think anything’s possible as to who’s behind this. Could be Wanda. Could be someone else. If we go by the comics....same thing, could be Wanda, could be someone else. 

My guess is it’s a combo of outside influences and her own trauma. She’d already been through a lot, but I expect another inciting incident or two will be revealed, and  that’s what triggered all this.

We’ll see, though. Good stuff.


----------



## Imaculata

pukunui said:


> Yes. Geraldine showed up near the beginning of the episode, and then the beekeeper showed up at the end.




Interesting... so, hypothesis:

Geraldine is one of the first operatives to be send in, but the longer she stays in Westview, the more she gets brainwashed too? Or maybe she just pretends to be part of the sitcom for an episode, in order to get closer to Wanda?

Maybe the beekeeper was sent in to extract her?

Then there's the toy helicopter that shows up, which was in color, and had the SWORD logo too. Was that an attempt to send in a real helicopter?

Possibly SWORD found out the hard way that objects and people that do not conform with Wanda's reality, will be made to confirm to it. Perhaps they can only send people in that fit in with 50's/70's West View and play along? Because Geraldine didn't confront Wanda with the death of her brother right away. She waited an episode.


----------



## ART!

At some point, when this bubble reality she's manifested bursts, she's going to realize she doesn't have children, and that's going to be _rough_ - although it's also possible that she's altered actual reality enough that now she _does_ have kids.


----------



## Imaculata

ART! said:


> At some point, when this bubble reality she's manifested bursts, she's going to realize she doesn't have children, and that's going to be _rough_ - although it's also possible that she's altered actual reality enough that now she _does_ have kids.




This is something I'm wondering. Maybe with her fantasies she has managed to bring Vision back from the dead, and give herself children for good. And maybe they will stay, even if this bubble bursts, because Wanda has permanently willed them into existence. 

I don't know what Dr Strange and The Multiverse of Madness will be all about. But I wonder if Wanda's antics throw the reality of the entire universe into disarray.


----------



## MarkB

Imaculata said:


> Interesting... so, hypothesis:
> 
> Geraldine is one of the first operatives to be send in, but the longer she stays in Westview, the more she gets brainwashed too? Or maybe she just pretends to be part of the sitcom for an episode, in order to get closer to Wanda?
> 
> Maybe the beekeeper was sent in to extract her?
> 
> Then there's the toy helicopter that shows up, which was in color, and had the SWORD logo too. Was that an attempt to send in a real helicopter?
> 
> Possibly SWORD found out the hard way that objects and people that do not conform with Wanda's reality, will be made to confirm to it. Perhaps they can only send people in that fit in with 50's/70's West View and play along? Because Geraldine didn't confront Wanda with the death of her brother right away. She waited an episode.



Perhaps Geraldine is the one who flew the helicopter into the 'bubble'. And I don't think she was waiting to confront Wanda with the mention of her brother - it seemed more like something she only remembered in that moment, as Wanda reminisced about it.


----------



## Rune

ART! said:


> At some point, when this bubble reality she's manifested bursts, she's going to realize she doesn't have children, and that's going to be _rough_ - although it's also possible that she's altered actual reality enough that now she _does_ have kids.



When Monica gets expelled, she’s still wearing the 70s clothes and hairstyle on the outside. Since those are both changes that happened after her first appearance, we can infer that the reality-altering changes made inside don’t revert to previous states on the outside. That may well include the kids. And vision.


----------



## Mind of tempest

Rune said:


> When Monica gets expelled, she’s still wearing the 70s clothes and hairstyle on the outside. Since those are both changes that happened after her first appearance, we can infer that the reality-altering changes made inside don’t revert to previous states on the outside. That may well include the kids. And vision.



that has interesting implications.


----------



## Umbran

Imaculata said:


> This is something I'm wondering. Maybe with her fantasies she has managed to bring Vision back from the dead, and give herself children for good. And maybe they will stay, even if this bubble bursts, because Wanda has permanently willed them into existence.




It would be in line with the similar comics narrative of her magically having kids.


----------



## Imaculata

MarkB said:


> Perhaps Geraldine is the one who flew the helicopter into the 'bubble'. And I don't think she was waiting to confront Wanda with the mention of her brother - it seemed more like something she only remembered in that moment, as Wanda reminisced about it.



You may be right. She did indeed seem to remember in the moment. It is almost as if people assimilated into Wanda's reality start to forget who they are and why they are there.

After Geraldine was expelled from the bubble, it seems she knew who and where she was. So perhaps the mind altering effects are limited to only inside the bubble.



Rune said:


> When Monica gets expelled, she’s still wearing the 70s clothes and hairstyle on the outside. Since those are both changes that happened after her first appearance, we can infer that the reality-altering changes made inside don’t revert to previous states on the outside. That may well include the kids. And vision.




Well spotted. We can only hope the bubble doesn't grow and Wanda's madness starts changing more things.


----------



## Rune

Imaculata said:


> You may be right. She did indeed seem to remember in the moment. It is almost as if people assimilated into Wanda's reality start to forget who they are and why they are there.
> 
> After Geraldine was expelled from the bubble, it seems she knew who and where she was. So perhaps the mind altering effects are limited to only inside the bubble.
> 
> 
> 
> Well spotted. We can only hope the bubble doesn't grow and Wanda's madness starts changing more things.



Not ruling it out, but is there any evidence that it’s been growing?

Edit: Also, I caught the billboard because it was big; the clothing was something that was pointed out in a YouTube analysis channel (New Rockstars, if anyone’s interested. One of the few that actually do their research instead of just regurgitating rumors and widely-known “hidden” details).


----------



## Umbran

Rune said:


> Not ruling it out, but is there any evidence that it’s been growing?




We have only seen one shot of the outside, and haven't been given much of the scope from the inside, so I'd have to say no.  Not yet anyway.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Regarding the twins, in the comic book storylines, Mephisto gave her some of his life essence, or something like that, to help her create them. And they stayed real for three years before he decided he wanted his essence back, reabsorbed it and the kids stopped existing. Then in another storyline, they were somehow reincarnated and existed again for good and became the adult Wiccan and Speed and were part of the Young Avengers. A group which Marvel seems to be setting up for the MCU. Now, Mephisto may not be involved at all and the kids will just poof away when this alternate dimension bubble thing collapsed, pushing Wanda over the edge. One other thing that various articles have discussed, though, about her powers, is that she has primarily been telekinetic and not magic, so I do not know how they will show or explain the shift in what she can do.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

I've figured it out:

Scarlet Witch's original comic power was her mutant ability to "hex" her opponents - she's zap them and they'd have "bad luck" (which included the environment changing to trip them, for example). Later, this was described as "probability control".

Here, they've made it quite simple: She creates a localized field where she can select from multiple realities her own preferred situations. She doesn't mind-control Vision - she selects a reality where he _chose himself to say something different_.

She's ripping through the multiverse and picking and choosing her favorite chunks of reality.


----------



## Mind of tempest

FitzTheRuke said:


> I've figured it out:
> 
> Scarlet Witch's original comic power was her mutant ability to "hex" her opponents - she's zap them and they'd have "bad luck" (which included the environment changing to trip them, for example). Later, this was described as "probability control".
> 
> Here, they've made it quite simple: She creates a localized field where she can select from multiple realities her own preferred situations. She doesn't mind-control Vision - she selects a reality where he _chose himself to say something different_.
> 
> She's ripping through the multiverse and picking and choosing her favorite chunks of reality.




yeah, that sounds super dangerous as a power as in the break the fundamental structure of reality down to nothing thus killing us all kinda stuff.


----------



## Tonguez

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> One other thing that various articles have discussed, though, about her powers, is that she has primarily been telekinetic and not magic, so I do not know how they will show or explain the shift in what she can do.



Her original power in Age of Ultron was Mind control, then Telekinesis which continued through the following movies. Now we see it expand again to reality manipulation but only inside her ‘bubble‘ which might just be an permanent, enlarged, multitarget use of Mind Control.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Mind of tempest said:


> yeah, that sounds super dangerous as a power as in the break the fundamental structure of reality down to nothing thus killing us all kinda stuff.



Right. This is why SWORD is trying to contain her, keep her "happy", and not piss her off. She's an active threat to all of reality.


----------



## Umbran

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Regarding the twins, in the comic book storylines, Mephisto gave her some of his life essence, or something like that, to help her create them.




It was Master Pandemonium (as noted upthread), and, IIRC, when the magic was done Wanda wasn't aware that's where the souls of her kids came from.


----------



## Imaculata

FitzTheRuke said:


> Here, they've made it quite simple: She creates a localized field where she can select from multiple realities her own preferred situations. She doesn't mind-control Vision - she selects a reality where he _chose himself to say something different_.
> 
> She's ripping through the multiverse and picking and choosing her favorite chunks of reality.




If that is what is going on, that is awesome and extremely dangerous.


----------



## Rune

Imaculata said:


> If that is what is going on, that is awesome and extremely dangerous.



Looks like that quote is actually from @FitzTheRuke.

Although, I agree with you.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Umbran said:


> It was Master Pandemonium (as noted upthread), and, IIRC, when the magic was done Wanda wasn't aware that's where the souls of her kids came from.




Sort of. Mephisto tricked him into gathering Mephisto's soul fragments and then Wanda accidentally summoned two of those fragments that became her twins. So while Master Pandemonium was part of it, the soul fragments he thought were his, were actually Mephisto's.









						Master Pandemonium - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## hawkeyefan

Maybe the town is like a SWORD facility. Perhaps they were working on restoring Vision or maybe they were studying his remains or something. Maybe Wanda was involved or somehow found out and came there, but something went wrong. They couldn’t restore Vision or something similar. At that point, she snaps.

Then I think her powers are likely very much along the lines of what @FitzTheRuke said. She’s adjusting her reality by taking bits of others. It’s localized for now, but it seems like there’s concern about whether it can be contained. The military and the barrier we saw at the end had the look of a perimeter.


----------



## pukunui

So do people think the little helicopter was a real one that got turned into a toy when it entered the bubble? I was thinking it was some kind of drone.

Also, I wonder if we’ll get an in-universe explanation as to why Wanda has chosen to model her alternate reality on TV sitcoms and why she is progressing through the decades.

It’s a cute gimmick for the show as a framing device, but I feel like it still needs some kind of justification in-universe as to why sitcoms and why they keep changing.


----------



## Rune

pukunui said:


> So do people think the little helicopter was a real one that got turned into a toy when it entered the bubble? I was thinking it was some kind of drone.
> 
> Also, I wonder if we’ll get an in-universe explanation as to why Wanda has chosen to model her alternate reality on TV sitcoms and why she is progressing through the decades.
> 
> It’s a cute gimmick for the show as a framing device, but I feel like it still needs some kind of justification in-universe as to why sitcoms and why they keep changing.



Might be an indicator that Wanda isn’t creating the situation. Unless she got a chance to watch lots of American sitcom reruns while growing up in Sokovia.


----------



## Dire Bare

pukunui said:


> So do people think the little helicopter was a real one that got turned into a toy when it entered the bubble? I was thinking it was some kind of drone.
> 
> Also, I wonder if we’ll get an in-universe explanation as to why Wanda has chosen to model her alternate reality on TV sitcoms and why she is progressing through the decades.
> 
> It’s a cute gimmick for the show as a framing device, but I feel like it still needs some kind of justification in-universe as to why sitcoms and why they keep changing.



Wanda is fantasizing, subconsciously, about having a "normal" life with a nice house, white-picket fence, loving husband, couple of kids, being part of a neighborhood community . . . . what are sitcoms (especially "classic" sitcoms from the 50s through the 70s) but fantasies of "normal" life?

I think the sitcom framing device is a freaking brilliant exploration of Wanda's fantasies and state of mind.


----------



## Dire Bare

Rune said:


> Might be an indicator that Wanda isn’t creating the situation. Unless she got a chance to watch lots of American sitcom reruns while growing up in Socovia.



Plenty of folks outside the US grew up on US television. Our culture has an insidious reach across the globe!

Also, Wanda's pretty much an assimilated American now after joining the Avengers, and has had plenty of time to catch up on any TV she might have missed. And considering her past, I can imagine that classic American sitcoms might have had a special appeal to her.

In between the Avengers movies, Wanda's been power-streaming all of the classic American sitcoms!


----------



## Imaculata

pukunui said:


> So do people think the little helicopter was a real one that got turned into a toy when it entered the bubble? I was thinking it was some kind of drone.




That's what I think, yes. But it is but a hunch. A SWORD helicopter wouldn't fit in the 60's sitcom setting, to like the people trapped there, it is transformed.



pukunui said:


> Also, I wonder if we’ll get an in-universe explanation as to why Wanda has chosen to model her alternate reality on TV sitcoms and why she is progressing through the decades.
> 
> It’s a cute gimmick for the show as a framing device, but I feel like it still needs some kind of justification in-universe as to why sitcoms and why they keep changing.




She craves a perfect sitcom-style family life that has been denied to her by reality? Perhaps it progresses because her madness is progressing? The longer she tries to deny reality, the more it catches up to her?


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Rune said:


> Might be an indicator that Wanda isn’t creating the situation. Unless she got a chance to watch lots of American sitcom reruns while growing up in Sokovia.



I think that's the easy explaination right there. Sokovian TV just got old sitcoms.


----------



## Rune

Dire Bare said:


> Plenty of folks outside the US grew up on US television. Our culture has an insidious reach across the globe!



Certainly possible. Hence the “unless...” part.



Dire Bare said:


> Also, Wanda's pretty much an assimilated American now after joining the Avengers, and has had plenty of time to catch up on any TV she might have missed. And considering her past, I can imagine that classic American sitcoms might have had a special appeal to her.
> 
> In between the Avengers movies, Wanda's been power-streaming all of the classic American sitcoms!



That would seem more likely if we had seen it at least once.


----------



## Weiley31

So after seeing the third episode last night, I think I get the gist of what's going on:

So one of the "chief" mentions I've heard from MCU fans, when talking about Scarlet Witch/Wanda, is that all she "does" in the MCU is just "shoot red stuff" and that's it. That so far there's been no aspect of her Reality Hacking powers. But so far, it seems like, at least for Wanda's end, this series is now coming to the point where she is actually _gaining/awakening_ her Chaos Magick/Reality Hacking powers. Especially considering how in the third episode she bought the Stork to life, was affecting her house during the birth, and the fact that Vision and the word Illusion were associated together.

Then we have the part where Vision was mentioning about something being off, and then Wanda _literally_ went King Crimson(It Just Works)/copy, cut, pasted that moment to where Vision was saying something completely different, and the whole "_No"_ rewinding moment involving the Bee Keeper. And then we see at the end of the third episode how SWORD has a whole force field defensive perimeter established outside the town/Wanda's Bubble of Chaotic Influence in an effort to keep it from expanding/sending their agents in.


----------



## Weiley31

Also: my one bud pointed out to me the significance of the Rabbit's name. In the story _The Devil and Daniel Webster,_ the Devil went by the name _Mr. Scratch  in that story._

I am gonna lose it/laugh my _donkey_ off if the Rabbit appears later on and it's revealed it's flipping Mephisto all this time. And with the way the MCU has played with the idea of a _minor joke/one off moment_ suddenly becoming important/relevant ala the Hammer Contest in Age of Ultron, it's possible.


----------



## Weiley31

MarkB said:


> The part where she rewrote Vision's suspicions was particularly unsettling in its implications. Either he really is just another fictional character for her to do with as she likes, or else she's casually mind-controlling him.



I think the idea is that she's not mind-controlling him, but every time Vision suspects something is off, she just _deletes_ that frame, and reality hacks a new frame of the narrative where her idealized fiction continues to play out. He is probably an _Illusion_ of her happiness. As the first episode established, they never got a chance to reach that point where they had an established Anniversary, favorite music, wedding rings and all that due to the events of Infinity War. My buddy thinks that it's possible that Wanda may end up _reality hacking_ Vision back into existence/life with his powers back as a way of bringing Vision back to life into the MCU again. (since there's no Soul Stone around to provide his powers)


----------



## hawkeyefan

pukunui said:


> Also, I wonder if we’ll get an in-universe explanation as to why Wanda has chosen to model her alternate reality on TV sitcoms and why she is progressing through the decades.




I think, as others have suggested,  a quick flashback scene to a pair of young twins in Sokovia watching reruns of American sitcoms would do the trick.

Pietro: How can you watch these things? 

Wanda: I don’t know....they’re comforting. Everyone in them is so....normal. 

Something like that would do it. I don’t know if it’s necessary, but I think it’d be a cool scene to put in there.


----------



## Weiley31

It would be interesting if the show was showing _how many_ people/individuals were interested in Wanda's Reality Hacking/Chaos Magick. You have SWORD currently, HYDRA in the commercials referencing the trauma of her past, then the possibility of Agatha/Mephisto, the voice on the radio in episode 2 was Jimmy Wu/FBI from Antman/Wasp Woman(according to my bud as I didn't see that one yet), and if the rumors end up being true, which seems likely if since its the set up, Dr. Strange. Especially if the point of Multiverse of Madness is to save an out of control Scarlet Witch from nuking reality.


----------



## Weiley31

Umbran said:


> Yes, it is a SWORD logo.  A quick search makes that pretty certain.
> 
> And that is strange.  Because SWORD is focused on extraterrestrial threats.  Wanda and Vision are not extraterrestrial.  So, why is SWORD invovlved?



Yes but technically one can argue the Infinity Stones are/could be classified as an extraterrestrial threat. Plus it's possible that word of Thanos and his forces, invading Wakanda/or Endgame big battle, could've somehow gotten out and SWORD caught wind of it. The rabbit hole for them then leads them down to two individuals who were directly at ground zero of those events and involved with said classified extraterrestrial stones and threat: Scarlet Witch and Vision.


----------



## Dire Bare

Rune said:


> That would seem more likely if we had seen it at least once.



What, you wanted a scene in one of the Avengers movies with Wanda on the couch, with a bowl of popcorn, "netflix and chillin'" with the Vision?


----------



## Dire Bare

hawkeyefan said:


> Something like that would do it. I don’t know if it’s necessary, but I think it’d be a cool scene to put in there.



It's not necessary. People are overthinking this.

The idea that Wanda, an immigrant from eastern Europe, has fantasies inspired by classic American television . . . . I don't find that odd or in any need of explanation.


----------



## pukunui

So Elizabeth Olsen has said in interviews that episode 4 will be a real game changer for the series. I wonder if it will be the Halloween episode.

She’s also said that Wanda’s Sokovian accent is “still there”. The American accent is part of her sitcom fantasy persona. In episode 3, we saw her sing a “Sokovian” lullaby to her twins. I wonder if in future episodes her accent will slip.


----------



## pukunui

Dire Bare said:


> It's not necessary. People are overthinking this.
> 
> The idea that Wanda, an immigrant from eastern Europe, has fantasies inspired by classic American television . . . . I don't find that odd or in any need of explanation.



I wouldn’t call it “overthinking”. I am enjoying this show and am enjoying talking / speculating about things.

There’s no need to go raining on my parade with all that logic!


----------



## Rune

pukunui said:


> So Elizabeth Olsen has said in interviews that episode 4 will be a real game changer for the series. I wonder if it will be the Halloween episode.
> 
> She’s also said that Wanda’s Sokovian accent is “still there”. The American accent is part of her sitcom fantasy persona. In episode 3, we saw her sing a “Sokovian” lullaby to her twins. I wonder if in future episodes her accent will slip.



It did in episode 3, while she was talking about her brother.


----------



## pukunui

Rune said:


> It did in episode 3, while she was talking about her brother.



Did it? I’ll have to rewatch that bit.


----------



## Rune

Dire Bare said:


> What, you wanted a scene in one of the Avengers movies with Wanda on the couch, with a bowl of popcorn, "netflix and chillin'" with the Vision?



Not particularly. 

I’m just pointing out that there isn’t (yet?) any actual evidence to support the idea that Wanda is a classic American sitcom-junkie. She easily could be, but without evidence, that particular conclusion requires a jump.


----------



## Dire Bare

pukunui said:


> So Elizabeth Olsen has said in interviews that episode 4 will be a real game changer for the series. I wonder if it will be the Halloween episode.
> 
> She’s also said that Wanda’s Sokovian accent is “still there”. The American accent is part of her sitcom fantasy persona. In episode 3, we saw her sing a “Sokovian” lullaby to her twins. I wonder if in future episodes her accent will slip.



Accents are, of course, a function of language. Just as anyone, with effort, can learn a new language . . . anyone can learn a new dialect or accent. Some immigrants, of course, struggle with "losing" their native accent . . . . others speak English so flawlessly that they have less of an "accent" than some native speakers. How long can this learning process take? That also varies by individual, it can be as short as months!

Wanda, adapting a flawless standard American accent is also something that isn't weird or strange. They didn't show (to my memory) any "transition" scenes in the movies . . . but also something not really necessary.

Things that happen all the time in real life, don't need complicated world-building explanations in genre TV and film. IMO, of course.


----------



## Dire Bare

Rune said:


> I’m just pointing out that there isn’t (yet?) any actual evidence to support the idea that Wanda is a classic American sitcom-junkie. She easily could be, but without evidence, that particular conclusion requires a jump.



No, it isn't really a jump. This doesn't need evidence. It's not weird or unusual.

The evidence that Wanda associates classic American sitcoms with an ideal family life is what we're watching right now! This alternate reality created from her subconscious is all the evidence we really need.

We are definitely overthinking some of the aspects of this show's world and character building.


----------



## MarkB

Dire Bare said:


> No, it isn't really a jump. This doesn't need evidence. It's not weird or unusual.
> 
> The evidence that Wanda associates classic American sitcoms with an ideal family life is what we're watching right now! This alternate reality created from her subconscious is all the evidence we really need.
> 
> We are definitely overthinking some of the aspects of this show's world and character building.



I think you're missing the point slightly. The fact that the show is all about American sitcoms can be taken as evidence that maybe this _isn't_ all just coming out of Wanda's subconscious - _unless_ we have pre-established evidence that, despite not growing up in that culture, she does in fact have extensive experience of several decades' worth of American sitcoms.


----------



## Dire Bare

MarkB said:


> I think you're missing the point slightly. The fact that the show is all about American sitcoms can be taken as evidence that maybe this _isn't_ all just coming out of Wanda's subconscious - _unless_ we have pre-established evidence that, despite not growing up in that culture, she does in fact have extensive experience of several decades' worth of American sitcoms.



I don't think I'm missing the point . . . I just don't agree with the logic.


----------



## Rune

Dire Bare said:


> No, it isn't really a jump. This doesn't need evidence. It's not weird or unusual.
> 
> The evidence that Wanda associates classic American sitcoms with an ideal family life is what we're watching right now! This alternate reality created from her subconscious is all the evidence we really need.



I hear you. I disagree, but I hear you. None of that is actually evidence of anything until we know that what we are witnessing is, in fact, Wanda’s construct. That may well turn out to be the case, but it is, as of yet, unrevealed.

The assumption that it is a given is another conclusion jumped to. Any evidence used to support the assumption that is also based on that assumption isn’t evidence of anything but a circular argument.  Again, it might be true; we just can’t know yet.



Dire Bare said:


> We are definitely overthinking some of the aspects of this show's world and character building.



Who’s overthinking? The show presents mysteries. It wants to be analyzed.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Dire Bare said:


> It's not necessary. People are overthinking this.
> 
> The idea that Wanda, an immigrant from eastern Europe, has fantasies inspired by classic American television . . . . I don't find that odd or in any need of explanation.




Yeah, I don’t think it’s necessary. But I don’t think there’d be any drawback to including something like that. Especially since it would only need a minute or so of time. 

And especially if there wind up being other reasons to have such a flashback or similar scene.


----------



## pukunui

@Dire Bare: What if we _want_ to overthink it? What if we derive pleasure from overthinking it? Is that wrong?

Another thought I had in the shower just now: If we assume that Vision is real (regardless of the specifics) and that Wanda is in control of this fantasy land, then what she is doing to him, while perhaps born out of love, is essentially a kind of abuse. When (not if) Vision finds out the truth, it seems unlikely he is going to want to continue his relationship with her. If what we are seeing is Wanda's descent into madness-induced villainy, then Vision's awakening and subsequent rejection of her could be what ultimately breaks her.


----------



## Tonguez

FitzTheRuke said:


> I think that's the easy explaination right there. Sokovian TV just got old sitcoms.



Yeah, we were watching reruns of Pettycoat Junction, Beverly Hillbillies, Dyk van Dyke and the Munsters in the 1980s


----------



## Weiley31

Dire Bare said:


> What, you wanted a scene in one of the Avengers movies with Wanda on the couch, with a bowl of popcorn, "netflix and chillin'" with the Vision?



You know _damn well_ that was happening in the inbetween time not shown between Age of Ultron and Infinity War.


----------



## Dire Bare

pukunui said:


> @Dire Bare: What if we _want_ to overthink it? What if we derive pleasure from overthinking it? Is that wrong?



If it brings you joy . . . nope, you're good!

It drives me a little nutty though. But don't worry, I'm resilient!


----------



## Weiley31

pukunui said:


> Did it? I’ll have to rewatch that bit.



Yeah: during that segment she  "broke character" when that happened.


----------



## Weiley31

pukunui said:


> If what we are seeing is Wanda's descent into madness-induced villainy, then Vision's awakening and subsequent rejection of her could be what ultimately breaks her.



Either that or ultimately when the _fiction_ breaks and Fiction Vision is consumed alongside with it. I feel like the _Your dead_ trailer line could be what sets Fiction Vision to seek out the truth even more and start confronting Wanda about what she's doing.


----------



## pukunui

Weiley31 said:


> Yeah: during that segment she  "broke character" when that happened.



I'm not hearing it. She sings a lullaby to the babies in "Sokovian" but when she's speaking, it all just sounds American (except for the way she pronounces her brother's name). Is there a specific line I should be listening to?


----------



## Rune

Weiley31 said:


> Either that or ultimately when the _fiction_ breaks and Fiction Vision is consumed alongside with it. I feel like the _Your dead_ trailer line could be what sets Fiction Vision to seek out the truth even more and start confronting Wanda about what she's doing.



Maybe, but, as I mentioned earlier, we already know from Monica’s expulsion that things changed on the inside stay changed on the outside.


----------



## Rune

pukunui said:


> I'm not hearing it. She sings a lullaby to the babies in "Sokovian" but when she's speaking, it all just sounds American (except for the way she pronounces her brother's name). Is there a specific line I should be listening to?



Starting with “I had a brother.” Mostly, it’s the cadence.


----------



## pukunui

Rune said:


> Starting with “I had a brother.” Mostly, it’s the cadence.



Yeah, she definitely drops the sitcom voice and goes somber / sober, but I don’t hear the accent other than in her pronunciation of “Pietro”. But that’s fine! I understand her accent became less pronounced through her movie appearances, so I’m not expecting it to suddenly go all thick again.


----------



## Retreater

We just watched the first episode. I wasn't hooked, but at least the cast is good enough for me to watch another episode - but I'm not particularly excited about it. I'm guessing it's pretty meta, but I think there should have been more clues or at least some indication of why things are weird in the pilot episode. I'm familiar with the general theme of the show, and I think it did a poor job conveying that.


----------



## Rune

Retreater said:


> We just watched the first episode. I wasn't hooked, but at least the cast is good enough for me to watch another episode - but I'm not particularly excited about it. I'm guessing it's pretty meta, but I think there should have been more clues or at least some indication of why things are weird in the pilot episode. I'm familiar with the general theme of the show, and I think it did a poor job conveying that.



I personally like the slow burn. More suspenseful.


----------



## Tonguez

Retreater said:


> We just watched the first episode. I wasn't hooked, but at least the cast is good enough for me to watch another episode - but I'm not particularly excited about it. I'm guessing it's pretty meta, but I think there should have been more clues or at least some indication of why things are weird in the pilot episode. I'm familiar with the general theme of the show, and I think it did a poor job conveying that



yeah, one of the weaknesses of the show (I think) is that relies on a lot of meta knowledge from both the comics and _historic_ sit-coms themes which even casual viewers of the MCU might not understand - if they had run episodes 1-3 together it may have done better to hook the casual viewers rather than relying on fans


----------



## MarkB

Tonguez said:


> yeah, one of the weaknesses of the show (I think) is that relies on a lot of meta knowledge from both the comics and _historic_ sit-coms themes which even casual viewers of the MCU might not understand - if they had run episodes 1-3 together it may have done better to hook the casual viewers rather than relying on fans



Sitcoms yes, but I know nothing of the comics and I'm still finding it pretty compelling.

I'm actually considering quitting this thread, because I want to take the show on its own merits, without being influenced by the comics-based speculations.


----------



## Morrus

Dire Bare said:


> Plenty of folks outside the US grew up on US television. Our culture has an insidious reach across the globe!
> 
> Also, Wanda's pretty much an assimilated American now after joining the Avengers, and has had plenty of time to catch up on any TV she might have missed. And considering her past, I can imagine that classic American sitcoms might have had a special appeal to her.
> 
> In between the Avengers movies, Wanda's been power-streaming all of the classic American sitcoms!



I think you vastly overestimate the familiarity of 50s/60s US sitcoms to Eastern European millennials.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

I don't think anyone else has mentioned this about Vision, regarding whether he is real or not, but it looks to me that this version of him still has the Mind stone in his forehead, even though that stone no longer exists. So does that boost the idea of him not being alive again or did Wanda somehow get the Mind stone from an alternate dimension, the way the Avengers collected them in Endgame? I cannot remember now if the alternate Mind stone was returned to it's dimension in Endgame or not.

Also, there are rumors now that Evan Peters, who played Pietro in the Fox X-Men movies, has been signed by Marvel to appear again as Pietro in the MCU. Whether that means he will show up in this series, or maybe not til the Doctor Strange sequel, it will be interesting if true.









						Evan Peters to Return as Quicksilver in WandaVision?
					

Thanks to a now deleted tweet, it sounds like X-Men: Dark Phoenix star Evan Peters' version of Quicksilver will appear in the Disney+ series, WandaVision.




					movieweb.com


----------



## Blue

pukunui said:


> Also, I wonder if we’ll get an in-universe explanation as to why Wanda has chosen to model her alternate reality on TV sitcoms and why she is progressing through the decades.



There's also the possibility that the sitcoms are an allusion - that to Wanda she isn't in a sitcom and it isn't changing, but to those viewing it outside (be it SWORD or us from beyond the 4th wall) it's the way to explain Wanda's mental context.


----------



## Dire Bare

Tonguez said:


> yeah, one of the weaknesses of the show (I think) is that relies on a lot of meta knowledge from both the comics and _historic_ sit-coms themes which even casual viewers of the MCU might not understand - if they had run episodes 1-3 together it may have done better to hook the casual viewers rather than relying on fans



I don't think the show relies on meta-knowledge of the comics, or of American classic sitcoms. Like most of the Marvel movies and shows, there's a LOT of Marvel trivia worked into the show, both as easter eggs and clues to what's going on (and what's coming in later movies/shows) . . . but it's not necessary to recognize to enjoy the show and understand what's going on. The show IS an American production, made primarily for an American audience . . . but again, I don't think having a familiarity with classic American sitcoms is necessary to understand and enjoy the show. I think that having that familiarity ENHANCES enjoyment of the show . . . . the production and acting NAILS the tone and style of classic American TV, and when things shift to a creepy moment, breaking the sitcom vibe . . . it's really effective.


----------



## pukunui

Dire Bare said:


> I don't think the show relies on meta-knowledge of the comics, or of American classic sitcoms. Like most of the Marvel movies and shows, there's a LOT of Marvel trivia worked into the show, both as easter eggs and clues to what's going on (and what's coming in later movies/shows) . . . but it's not necessary to recognize to enjoy the show and understand what's going on. The show IS an American production, made primarily for an American audience . . . but again, I don't think having a familiarity with classic American sitcoms is necessary to understand and enjoy the show. I think that having that familiarity ENHANCES enjoyment of the show . . . . the production and acting NAILS the tone and style of classic American TV, and when things shift to a creepy moment, breaking the sitcom vibe . . . it's really effective.



I'm contemplating having my three daughters watch the show (I've been watching it by myself so far) to see what they think. None of them are all that steeped in the MCU, nor are they particularly familiar with old American sitcoms. I'm curious to see what they think of it without any of that extra meta context.

EDIT: As an aside, I recall similar conversations being had not that long ago about _The Mandalorian_.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Oh, another little sort-of easter egg from episode 3. Near the end of the episode, as the show is transitioning from 70's to 80's, the picture ratio also widens from the TV standard of 4:3 to the film standard of 2.35:1.

Also, all the songs in the series were written by the same duo who wrote all the music for the Frozen movies and for Coco.


----------



## Dire Bare

pukunui said:


> I'm contemplating having my three daughters watch the show (I've been watching it by myself so far) to see what they think. None of them are all that steeped in the MCU, nor are they particularly familiar with old American sitcoms. I'm curious to see what they think of it without any of that extra meta context.
> 
> EDIT: As an aside, I recall similar conversations being had not that long ago about _The Mandalorian_.



Excellent experiment! 

Yeah . . . I think as geeks, we often have encyclopedic knowledge about something, and we enjoy picking out the details, easter eggs, and wondering what it all means! But when we're consuming something outside of our core fandoms, we tend to assume that those details are necessary to understanding and enjoying, which they usually are not.

WandaVision, as with all of the MCU shows before it, is primarily made for an audience that hasn't read a single comic book in their lives!!!


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Tonguez said:


> yeah, one of the weaknesses of the show (I think) is that relies on a lot of meta knowledge from both the comics and _historic_ sit-coms themes which even casual viewers of the MCU might not understand - if they had run episodes 1-3 together it may have done better to hook the casual viewers rather than relying on fans



I don't think that's it at all. 

For example, my kids love it, and they've never watched a sitcom (they're teenagers, they only watch people swearing over video games on YouTube... but I digress. Heck, they haven't even read any of the comics, and I OWN a comic book store!)

However, if there's a barrier to entry (and I think there might be, just not one that bothers _me_) I think that it's that... this is not what your average MCU fan expects to see. At all. I can imagine an awful lot of Avengers fans thinking, "what the **** is THIS!?" 

It's not like casual fans have watched all the trailers, even. My wife loves it, but I kept it to myself what it was about, and she was pretty surprised by it. Fortunately for me, she liked it anyway. (I thought it would be a fun surprise to see the look on her face when it started in black and white, far or less the rest...)


----------



## Rune

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Oh, another little sort-of easter egg from episode 3. Near the end of the episode, as the show is transitioning from 70's to 80's, the picture ratio also widens from the TV standard of 4:3 to the film standard of 2.35:1.
> 
> Also, all the songs in the series were written by the same duo who wrote all the music for the Frozen movies and for Coco.



That doesn’t make a lot of sense; NTSC didn’t change it’s aspect ratio until the aughts.


----------



## Tonguez

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Oh, another little sort-of easter egg from episode 3. Near the end of the episode, as the show is transitioning from 70's to 80's, the picture ratio also widens from the TV standard of 4:3 to the film standard of 2.35:1.
> 
> Also, all the songs in the series were written by the same duo who wrote all the music for the Frozen movies and for Coco.



I thought the change in aspect ratio was just transitioning from Wandas bubble to the real world (where it shows SWORD turning up around Geraldine)


----------



## pukunui

Tonguez said:


> I thought the change in aspect ratio was just transitioning from Wandas bubble to the real world (where it shows SWORD turning up around Geraldine)



That was my thought too. It didn't look like anything was transitioning to the 80s in the process.

On that note, do you suppose the soldiers were all pointing their guns at Geraldine / Monica because they didn't recognize her in her 70s garb? If so, I presume we might see a little scene where she identifies herself and then they stand down. Otherwise, it seems a bit strange that they'd regard one of their own agents as a threat. (Unless of course the soldiers aren't affiliated with SWORD.)

Going back to the helicopter: I'm not sure I buy that it was a real helicopter that got turned into a toy, because I thought the implication was meant to be that it was what was making the knocking noises (not the tree branch). That implies it was more of a drone that SWORD was using to spy on Wanda and Vision.

Given that SWORD is able to "watch" Wanda's sitcom reality, I wonder if they've got agents planting hidden cameras around the place, or if Wanda is somehow broadcasting her fictional world and SWORD is just tuning in. If there are hidden cameras, maybe the beekeeper guy is one of the ones who's planting them.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Tonguez said:


> I thought the change in aspect ratio was just transitioning from Wandas bubble to the real world (where it shows SWORD turning up around Geraldine)




That is possible. I was just applying the same logic as the transition from B&W to color at the end of the 2nd episode, as the show transitioned from the 60's to the 70's.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

pukunui said:


> Going back to the helicopter: I'm not sure I buy that it was a real helicopter that got turned into a toy, because I thought the implication was meant to be that it was what was making the knocking noises (not the tree branch). That implies it was more of a drone that SWORD was using to spy on Wanda and Vision.




As to the "toy" helicopter, while it has the SWORD logo on it, it is also done in the classic Iron Man colors. So make of that what you will.


----------



## pukunui

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> As to the "toy" helicopter, while is has the SWORD logo on it, it is also done in the classic Iron Man colors. So make of that what you will.



Yes, there is that as well.


----------



## Mind of tempest

pukunui said:


> Yes, there is that as well.



there is likely a connection but it is too early for anything but wild speculations, so anyone want to do that?


----------



## pukunui

Mind of tempest said:


> there is likely a connection but it is too early for anything but wild speculations, so anyone want to do that?



Stark Industries supplies SWORD with drones? Perhaps it was a normal drone that got turned into a toy helicopter when it entered the fantasy world (rather than a real helicopter) and just kept its normal colors. Or maybe Wanda's subconscious gave it those colors because of how she feels about Stark Industries (and maybe she associates anything "tech" with Stark). There's my wild speculation!


----------



## Weiley31

Mind of tempest said:


> there is likely a connection but it is too early for anything but wild speculations, so anyone want to do that?



I mean the toaster commercial referenced Stark Industries. The two commercials after had Hydra related stuff in them which is related to Wanda's history.  Maybe the Iron Man colored helicopter is referencing how Vision was technically a Stark related product when he was originally Jarvis. Or maybe when Stark liquidated most of his Military Assets and contracts, SWORD came in and swooped up all the remaining said assets they could get before the rest got dismantled/mothballed/whatever. So the Helicopter is colored in Iron Man colors to represent that it started out its existence when Stark was full on military weapons. Or heck, perhaps SWORD got all of their weapons and crap from Tony Stark when he was full on manufacturing weapons of war BEFORE the events of  Iron Man 1.


----------



## Weiley31

pukunui said:


> Stark Industries supplies SWORD with drones?



I just got done watching _Far From Home_ yesterday for the first time. Considering how EDITH/Drones became a major deal in that movie and where both came from, it's not surprising that could be a possibility. Especially if SWORD swooped up all the weapons and tech they could before Stark stopped being full on Weapons Manufacture. Also a possibility SWORD made use of Stark's history as a weapons dealer basically before he became Iron Man


----------



## Rune

Weiley31 said:


> I just got done watching _Far From Home_ yesterday for the first time. Considering how EDITH/Drones became a major deal in that movie and where both came from, it's not surprising that could be a possibility. Especially if SWORD swooped up all the weapons and tech they could before Stark stopped being full on Weapons Manufacture. Also a possibility SWORD made use of Stark's history as a weapons dealer basically before he became Iron Man



Tony Stark never _stopped_ being a full-on weapons manufacturer (while alive); he just stopped selling them.


----------



## BRayne

pukunui said:


> On that note, do you suppose the soldiers were all pointing their guns at Geraldine / Monica because they didn't recognize her in her 70s garb? If so, I presume we might see a little scene where she identifies herself and then they stand down. Otherwise, it seems a bit strange that they'd regard one of their own agents as a threat. (Unless of course the soldiers aren't affiliated with SWORD.)




I thought they were pointing their weapons as they approached but lowered them as they got close enough to see who it was?


----------



## FitzTheRuke

BRayne said:


> I thought they were pointing their weapons as they approached but lowered them as they got close enough to see who it was?



Yeah, also, maybe they weren't sure if she came out sane. I suspect that she doesn't have powers (yet!) but she still might be dangerous, even if they're on the same side. They looked to me like they 'covered' her until they got up close enough to see who and how she was.


----------



## pukunui

This is the final scene:



Spoiler



It's hard to tell but it looks to me like there are still some guys pointing their guns at her.


----------



## Imaculata

Another odd detail that I can't quite explain, is that in the black and white toaster commercial there is an oddly long pause and then the light turns red. Why would this minor detail in the commercial have color?


----------



## Tonguez

Imaculata said:


> Another odd detail that I can't quite explain, is that in the black and white toaster commercial there is an oddly long pause and then the light turns red. Why would this minor detail in the commercial have color?




Red is a recurring motif in the show, which appears to represent Wanda using her powers, including her unconcious reality bending.

I think the toaster was Wanda’s recollection of the Stark Industry bomb that destroyed her home, in AoUltron Pietro explains that he and Wanda lay under the bed for 2 days watching the bomb waiting for it to pop, the red light is the timer, which she has edited out and replaced with a toaster


----------



## Imaculata

Tonguez said:


> I think the toaster was Wanda’s recollection of the Stark Industry bomb that destroyed her home, in AoUltron Pietro explains that he and Wanda lay under the bed for 2 days watching the bomb waiting for it to pop, the red light is the timer, which she has edited out and replaced with a toaster




Woa, nice catch! That also explains the long pause.


----------



## Rune

Imaculata said:


> Woa, nice catch! That also explains the long pause.



The ticking in the Strücker watch commercial also speeds up ominously. Make of that what you will.


----------



## Umbran

pukunui said:


> Otherwise, it seems a bit strange that they'd regard one of their own agents as a threat. (Unless of course the soldiers aren't affiliated with SWORD.)




SWORD likely has thousands of personnel.  They probably don't all know each other on sight.  At night.  From a distance.  In clothes that they probably didn't start out in.


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> SWORD likely has thousands of personnel.  They probably don't all know each other on sight.  At night.  From a distance.  In clothes that they probably didn't start out in.



Plus they're dealing with Wanda, who has mind-affecting abilities as part of her suite of powers. Anyone who's been around her for an extended time would have to be considered potentially hostile, or at least compromised.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Yes, it seems like a reasonable abundance of caution to me. If Wanda's altering reality, everything that comes out of the zone is potentially dangerous. After her medical checks and debriefing, I'm sure she'll be reinstated.


----------



## Weiley31

Rune said:


> The ticking in the Strücker watch commercial also speeds up ominously. Make of that what you will.



Possibility that time is running out for Wanda before her entire fiction breaks and shatters her mind.


----------



## ART!

If the era sitcom reality bubble was even partially created are reinforced by her, all that's required is that she saw some old sitcoms at some point and those notions of an idyllic, traditional USican life are still in her head somewhere, even if she thought they were ridiculous. If the reality bubble already some or all of that, then that part of her brain that remembered those shows could have latched onto that, given her grieving over the loss of a traditional family-like life.


Dire Bare said:


> Accents are, of course, a function of language. Just as anyone, with effort, can learn a new language . . . anyone can learn a new dialect or accent. Some immigrants, of course, struggle with "losing" their native accent . . . . others speak English so flawlessly that they have less of an "accent" than some native speakers. How long can this learning process take? That also varies by individual, it can be as short as months!
> 
> Wanda, adapting a flawless standard American accent is also something that isn't weird or strange. They didn't show (to my memory) any "transition" scenes in the movies . . . but also something not really necessary.
> 
> Things that happen all the time in real life, don't need complicated world-building explanations in genre TV and film. IMO, of course.



You know, if she has reality-altering powers, she could just _want_ a US accent sometimes and _have it_, and switch back to her native accent whenever she wanted.


----------



## Dire Bare

ART! said:


> You know, if she has reality-altering powers, she could just _want_ a US accent sometimes and _have it_, and switch back to her native accent whenever she wanted.



Well, sure, but . . . it hardly takes magic or superpowers to do so, it's well within the range of human skill.


----------



## Umbran

Weiley31 said:


> Possibility that time is running out for Wanda before her entire fiction breaks and shatters her mind.




I submit that her mind is already broken.  It does not seem to me that she is in a normal mental state and just "pretending".  This is a traumatized woman1 who has retreated into a fantasy world to protect herself - which would entail that most of the time she's not really aware of the full situation.  She is mostly immersed in her role, and the oddness of events is as strange to her as anyone else, because she is not _consciously_ supporting it.


1. Let us recall - she grew up in war-torn Sokovia, where a building collapsed with her in it.  She was taken in by Strucker, who experimented on her -  which was probably torturous.  She became a terrorist, was shown the error of her ways, and saw a large part of her home city lifted into the air, her brother killed and the city destroyed.  She was then made a criminal, escaped, fought a war against aliens, was snapped out of existence... and back, and saw the one person remaining in the world that she loved die.  She has a right to be broken.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Umbran said:


> I submit that her mind is already broken.  It does not seem to me that she is in a normal mental state and just "pretending".  This is a traumatized woman1 who has retreated into a fantasy world to protect herself - which would entail that most of the time she's not really aware of the full situation.  She is mostly immersed in her role, and the oddness of events is as strange to her as anyone else, because she is not _consciously_ supporting it.
> 
> 
> 1. Let us recall - she grew up in war-torn Sokovia, where a building collapsed with her in it.  She was taken in by Strucker, who experimented on her -  which was probably torturous.  She became a terrorist, was shown the error of her ways, and saw a large part of her home city lifted into the air, her brother killed and the city destroyed.  She was then made a criminal, escaped, fought a war against aliens, was snapped out of existence... and back, and saw the one person remaining in the world that she loved die.  She has a right to be broken.




She actually watched him die twice. Once by her own hand.....then rewound so that his sacrifice meant nothing, and then casually destroyed and discarded by Thanos. Oof. 

But based on how she closed out that movie, speaking to Hawkeye after the funeral at the end, she seemed at least to have some sense of peace about it. 

This is why I think something else will be shown to have happened to serve as a last straw. Something like this:


----------



## Umbran

hawkeyefan said:


> But based on how she closed out that movie, speaking to Hawkeye after the funeral at the end, she seemed at least to have some sense of peace about it.




I'm not saying she went screaming out of the movie and did this the next day.  In real trauma, seeming to have some sense of peace at some given moment, in no way, shape, or form, means that the person has healed from their trauma and everything is okay. 



hawkeyefan said:


> This is why I think something else will be shown to have happened to serve as a last straw. Something like this:




Sure, possibly.  But maybe not.  Remember - PTSD does not need another traumatic, or even stressful, event to set it off.  And Marvel has shown some small understanding of the subtleties here.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Agreed, @Umbran. Just speculating. 

She certainly doesn't need any more justification for a breakdown of some kind. I just feel like there will be something.


----------



## Tonguez

hawkeyefan said:


> Agreed, @Umbran. Just speculating.
> 
> She certainly doesn't need any more justification for a breakdown of some kind. I just feel like there will be something.




Just going to note here,that a week ago, Paul Bettany speaking to IMDb revealed that there was a deleted scene after Endgame which was meant to set up WandaVision. There are pictures of that scene on the net, but its a HUGE spoiler, so I wont say what it is 

Whoever wants to can go search it out themselves


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Tonguez said:


> Just going to note here,that a week ago, Paul Bettany speaking to IMDb revealed that there was a deleted scene after Endgame which was meant to set up WandaVision. There are pictures of that scene on the net, but its a HUGE spoiler, so I wont say what it is
> 
> Whoever wants to can go search it out themselves




Yeah, I posted about that several pages ago, but did not spoiler it involving a morgue.

Now for something new. The episode 3 poster has been released today. The tag line, in addition to being a 70's saying, is also a direct reference to Geraldine/Monica Rambeau's history as Captain Marvel:


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Here is another theory, now that they are teasing more that Geraldine/Monica is super-powered. Seeing how she was forcibly ejected from Westview, that kind of thing would have left a normal human either dead or seriously injured, so I am thinking that maybe everyone in Westview who is real, and not a construct of some kind, is also super-powered in some way, allowing them a chance to survive what Wanda might do to them.


----------



## pukunui

According to this WandaVision's Paul Bettany teases Malcolm in the Middle-themed episode, Paul  says the sitcom theme isn’t arbitrary, and we will be getting an explanation for it.


----------



## ART!

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Here is another theory, now that they are teasing more that Geraldine/Monica is super-powered. Seeing how she was forcibly ejected from Westview, that kind of thing would have left a normal human either dead or seriously injured, so I am thinking that maybe everyone in Westview who is real, and not a construct of some kind, is also super-powered in some way, allowing them a chance to survive what Wanda might do to them.



Geraldine/Monica had residual Wanda energy around her until she was on the ground and stopped moving, so maybe she was protected?


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

ART! said:


> Geraldine/Monica had residual Wanda energy around her until she was on the ground and stopped moving, so maybe she was protected?




That is possible too. Or maybe it is her Captain Marvel energy protecting her? This is set after Endgame, so not much time has passed, and I would think Monica may already have her powers and maybe Captain Marvel 2 will show her origin story as an adult?


----------



## pukunui

My theory is that Wanda's madness is going to cause some/all of the Westview residents to gain super-powers and become the next generation of superheroes / supervillains. This could also be the tie-in with the next Dr Strange movie (as Wanda's complete breakdown results in the creation of the so-called multiverse of madness).


----------



## Rune

pukunui said:


> My theory is that Wanda's madness is going to cause some/all of the Westview residents to gain super-powers and become the next generation of superheroes / supervillains. This could also be the tie-in with the next Dr Strange movie (as Wanda's complete breakdown results in the creation of the so-called multiverse of madness).



But the multiverse already exists. Dr. Strange has already explicitly traveled through it in his first movie. And some of it was, indeed, maddening.


----------



## pukunui

Rune said:


> But the multiverse already exists. Dr. Strange has already explicitly traveled through it in his first movie. And some of it was, indeed, maddening.



OK. I didn't know that. Bear in mind that I've only seen _Black Panther_, _Captain Marvel_ and the two _Guardians of the Galaxy _films. I've been considering watching the first _Doctor Strange _movie next.


----------



## Dire Bare

pukunui said:


> OK. I didn't know that. Bear in mind that I've only seen _Black Panther_, _Captain Marvel_ and the two _Guardians of the Galaxy _films. I've been considering watching the first _Doctor Strange _movie next.



You've got some homework to do! By the end of the week, I'm going to need you to watch all 23 films and all 12 television series.


----------



## pukunui

Dire Bare said:


> You've got some homework to do! By the end of the week, I'm going to need you to watch all 23 films and all 12 television series.



I thought we'd established in this thread already that we could watch this show _without_ having watched all that other stuff (or read any of the comics, which I haven't done either).


----------



## Rune

pukunui said:


> I thought we'd established in this thread already that we could watch this show _without_ having watched all that other stuff (or read any of the comics, which I haven't done either).



You can, but your theorizing will reflect it.


----------



## Rune

Rune said:


> But the multiverse already exists. Dr. Strange has already explicitly traveled through it in his first movie. And some of it was, indeed, maddening.



Of course, this doesn’t rule out the possibility that she’s ripping a hole through it.


----------



## pukunui

Rune said:


> You can, but your theorizing will reflect it.



Oh absolutely. I don't deny that. I appreciate having the gaps in my knowledge filled in.


----------



## Rabulias

If Monica does have powers, and she can convert her body into energy, maybe she could broadcast herself like a TV signal? Maybe she was chosen for this mission for that reason? Still does not explain the beekeeper or the helicopter getting in there, but it's something that came to my mind.


----------



## Morrus

Vision doesn’t have superspeed in the movies does he? But Wanda’s brother did...


----------



## Dire Bare

pukunui said:


> I thought we'd established in this thread already that we could watch this show _without_ having watched all that other stuff (or read any of the comics, which I haven't done either).



You don't NEED to have that background to understand the show . . . all you really need is a basic understanding of who Wanda and Vision are, and what happened to them in the Avengers movies.

But, really, if you haven't watched the entirety of the MCU several times over . . . you just need to turn in your nerd-card.


----------



## Rune

Morrus said:


> Vision doesn’t have superspeed in the movies does he? But Wanda’s brother did...



Maybe not, but he displays super-speed in episode 3 when he catches the fruit Wanda knocks off of the table. One of them, anyway; for some reason, he doesn’t catch the orange.


----------



## pukunui

Dire Bare said:


> You don't NEED to have that background to understand the show . . . all you really need is a basic understanding of who Wanda and Vision are, and what happened to them in the Avengers movies.
> 
> But, really, if you haven't watched the entirety of the MCU several times over . . . you just need to turn in your nerd-card.



I've never been a big superhero fan. After actively avoiding it for many years, my daughters convinced me to watch the Guardians movies, and from there I decided to start exploring more of the MCU because once I start getting into something, it's all or nothing. But I only have so much time, so I haven't even begun to catch up yet.

I _have_ watched the two shorts on Wanda and Vision under the Marvel Legends heading on Disney+, so I am caught up on their stories as much as those shorts reveal.


----------



## Morrus

Rune said:


> Maybe not, but he displays super-speed in episode 3 when he catches the fruit Wanda knocks off of the table. One of them, anyway; for some reason, he doesn’t catch the orange.



That’s my point. He has super speed in the show. But not in the films. If he’s some kind of magical or mental creation of Wanda’s maybe she’s given him some of the abilities of her brother.


----------



## Dire Bare

pukunui said:


> I've never been a big superhero fan. After actively avoiding it for many years, my daughters convinced me to watch the Guardians movies, and from there I decided to start exploring more of the MCU because once I start getting into something, it's all or nothing. But I only have so much time, so I haven't even begun to catch up yet.
> 
> I _have_ watched the two shorts on Wanda and Vision under the Marvel Legends heading on Disney+, so I am caught up on their stories as much as those shorts reveal.



Okay, I suppose that will have to do!  As long as you are working on filling the gaps in your geek experience.

_You do know that I've been totally kidding the whole time, right?_


----------



## pukunui

I figured you were, yes.


----------



## Janx

pukunui said:


> OK. I didn't know that. Bear in mind that I've only seen _Black Panther_, _Captain Marvel_ and the two _Guardians of the Galaxy _films. I've been considering watching the first _Doctor Strange _movie next.



you can do whatever order you want, but it might make sense to watch it all in order of release (we're doing that as a re-watch, every couple of days, another movie).

Or if that's too much, I'd focus on:
Avengers 1
Captain America 2
Avengers 2
Captain America 3
Avengers 3 (you've already seen Captain Marvel)
Avengers 4

That'll give Wanda and Vision some context as well as the larger Avengers/Shield topic.


----------



## Blue

Dire Bare said:


> You've got some homework to do! By the end of the week, I'm going to need you to watch all 23 films and all 12 television series.



Funnily enough, D+ lists "in-universe chronological order" (forget what they call it) as one of their Marvel collections and my wife decided to rewatch them all that way.  I've been occasionally joining her, we just watched Iron Man 3.


----------



## ART!

Blue said:


> Funnily enough, D+ lists "in-universe chronological order" (forget what they call it) as one of their Marvel collections and my wife decided to rewatch them all that way.  I've been occasionally joining her, we just watched Iron Man 3.



That's what we've been doing that past week or so. It doesn't change the order much from the release dates, but there are a few exceptions. We're going to figure out the timeline for the Spider-man movies and insert them in our viewing order, too. Watching WandaVision is what motivated her to do this, so kudos, Marvel Studios!


----------



## trappedslider

'WandaVision' Episode 4 Trailer Just Revealed a Big Marvel Character Comeback
					

Things might start to make sense?




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## pukunui

How exciting! I will look forward to watching ep 4 when I get home from my D&D game tonight!


----------



## ART!

The sitcom aspects of that 3rd episode wore on me, when they did nto do so in the first 2 eps. I think it was because it was pretty much entirely pregnancy jokes. There was a wider variety of humor in the first 2 eps. 

But the pay-off at the end was worth it. 

I love the weirdness of this series, and that 3 eps in we still don't know what's going on - yet it's clear the writers do.


----------



## pukunui

I wonder if tonight's episode will be set entirely _outside_ Wanda's bubble or if we'll alternate.


----------



## Imaculata

I suspect almost every episode will be inside the sitcom, as will this one. But I think more and more will be revealed of the outside as the show progresses.



ART! said:


> I love the weirdness of this series, and that 3 eps in we still don't know what's going on - yet it's clear the writers do.




That is key to writing a good mystery: knowing what the answer is, so all clues point in the same direction. And yet also including some misdirection to throw the audience off. It was one of my biggest gripes with the show Lost, that the writers clearly hadn't planned any ending.

I think a lot of our speculation so far is pretty spot on. I only wonder if there are other malevolent forces involved, apart from Wanda herself and SWORD. Is Agnes a red herring, or genuinly another one of these forces? I honestly don't know, but I suspect episode 4 will shed some light on some of our remaining questions.


----------



## pukunui

Well, that was interesting!


----------



## ART!

I've only seen the teaser/ad with Monica Rambeau and Jimmy Woo in it , and only with the sound off, so I at least know we're getting a look at the outside world again. Cool!

Watching the newest episode of _WandaVision_ has become part of my Friday night routine: get home from work, whip up a quick dinner, and watch _WV_ with my wife wife and my daughter, before I head off for some (socially distanced, mask-wearing) D&D! Makes for a pretty great evening!


----------



## carrot

That certainly answered some questions! And highlighted a few new ones..


----------



## John R Davis

Very good episode 4


----------



## trappedslider

I liked how Woo did a magic trick with his card suddenly appearing in his hand when he introduced himself.


----------



## Umbran

Oh, hey!  Context!

As a note - it looks like many of the names of Westview residents are nod to people in the production.

They name a Sharon Davis - in the real world she's art director for WandaVision, for example.


----------



## Tonguez

Sweet Zombie Vision!!! I loved the episode, finally seeing it from the other side.

the reference to Cosmic Radiation overlaid with a TV signal was interesting and I wonder if thats going to be relevant in future exploration of the Multiverse.


----------



## MarkB

It was fascinating just seeing more of the Unsnap moment at the start of the episode. We didn't get to see much of it at all in Endgame, and Spider-Man Far From Home kind-of just rushed through it.

Still want to know what happened to people who were, say, speeding down a highway or on a transatlantic flight when Thanos Snapped them. Did they come back right where they vanished too?


----------



## trappedslider

MarkB said:


> Still want to know what happened to people who were, say, speeding down a highway or on a transatlantic flight when Thanos Snapped them. Did they come back right where they vanished too?



Fridge horror.....


----------



## pukunui

Looks like I was right about the helicopter.

Interesting that Wanda edited the broadcast, resulting in the people outside thinking that Woo’s attempt to reach her had failed.

I wonder what happened to the agent who turned into a beekeeper on his way through the sewers. Wanda rewound that bit. Did she erase him from existence? If not, I wonder if there is any significance to the fact that his HAZMAT suit changed to a beekeeper outfit, complete with bees. And since Monica couldn’t remember who she was, can Agent Franklin? Assuming he still exists somewhere in Westview.


----------



## Umbran

pukunui said:


> And since Monica couldn’t remember who she was, can Agent Franklin? Assuming he still exists somewhere in Westview.




I think Wanda's control over people's memory is not complete - or Monica couldn't have referred to Ultron.  Or maybe "control over memory" isn't the right model.  Maybe more like they are in a hypnotic state, or the like.  It seems like other residents have some awareness of things - at least as far as to know that cheesing off Wanda gets you sent to the cornfield...


----------



## TwoSix

MarkB said:


> It was fascinating just seeing more of the Unsnap moment at the start of the episode. We didn't get to see much of it at all in Endgame, and Spider-Man Far From Home kind-of just rushed through it.
> 
> Still want to know what happened to people who were, say, speeding down a highway or on a transatlantic flight when Thanos Snapped them. Did they come back right where they vanished too?



Considering the Snap, and then the Return, would have legitimately been the most impactful events in human history, you could have an entire genre of stories just exploring the various ramifications.


----------



## Tonguez

Umbran said:


> I think Wanda's control over people's memory is not complete - or Monica couldn't have referred to Ultron.  Or maybe "control over memory" isn't the right model.  Maybe more like they are in a hypnotic state, or the like.  It seems like other residents have some awareness of things - at least as far as to know that cheesing off Wanda gets you sent to the cornfield...



It seems like the hypnotic state thing is most likely - they are inside a ‘mind control bubble’, but occasionally have moments of disonnance.
In Geraldines case in seems that when Wanda was singing Sokovian lullabies and remembering Pietro she dropped the illusion enough that Monicas mind was able to surface enough to give Geraldine an off script ‘memory’

I wonder if Agnes is in the hypnotic state or if she is fully lucid and playing along (I also wonder if she is Jimmy’s ‘witness protection client’ - that detail has to be relevant somehow)



TwoSix said:


> Considering the Snap, and then the Return, would have legitimately been the most impactful events in human history, you could have an entire genre of stories just exploring the various ramifications.




Indeed it might be interesting in future to see such stories being told.

As to the blip and people flying/driving etc Feige clarified that when Smart Hulk snapped his fingers he wished for everyone to be returned _safely - _the_ safely _part means that those at 35000 ft were all returned_ safely _to the ground and all cars were stopped etc


----------



## Davies

There's a hint -- really just a moment -- in this last one that suggests that "It's all Wanda" might be a rush to judgment.


----------



## MarkB

Davies said:


> There's a hint -- really just a moment -- in this last one that suggests that "It's all Wanda" might be a rush to judgment.



Are you referring to the censorship of the out-of-character moments? That does seem like it's not something Wanda herself is doing.

Even if Wanda really wants to live in retro-sitcom-land, there's no reason for her to be deliberately broadcasting the 'show' to the outside. And if she's not broadcasting it, she's not the one who's censoring it either.


----------



## Davies

MarkB said:


> Are you referring to the censorship of the out-of-character moments? That does seem like it's not something Wanda herself is doing.



That's another one, but I was thinking about the little smirk that Vision gives at the end, while Wanda's back is to him. Something about that expression, so unlike the "decent and honorable" person that he's supposed to be, doesn't sit well with me.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

After watching episode 4, I spent some time reading different articles about easter eggs and new theories for the show and Phase 4 and there is some interesting stuff people are thinking up.

This article is a good one and includes something that did not occur to me. I will spoiler it, for those who do not want to click on the link.









						WandaVision: Every MCU Easter Egg In Episode 4
					

Did you spot them all?




					screenrant.com
				






Spoiler



Darcy detects unnaturally high levels of "Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation," which she defines as "_relic radiation dating back to the Big Bang._" It's unclear how this cosmic radiation ties into the story of _WandaVision_, but comic book readers will immediately recognize it as a reference to the raw energy of creation in Marvel Comics - and the source of the Fantastic Four's powers. Marvel has recently confirmed a _Fantastic Four_ film is in the works, so this can only be direct setup for Marvel's First Family. It's possible that, in the MCU, the Fantastic Four are connected to SWORD; note that Director Hayward has a strong reaction to the mention of cosmic radiation, and claims to still have teams of astronauts missing.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Tonguez said:


> I wonder if Agnes is in the hypnotic state or if she is fully lucid and playing along (I also wonder if she is Jimmy’s ‘witness protection client’ - that detail has to be relevant somehow).




Some are theorizing that it is Agnes' mentioned, but never seen, husband who is the Witness Protection person. Or he could still be the BBEG of the show too.


----------



## pukunui

Do you suppose that Jimmy Woo and Dr Darcy are meant to be stand-ins for us, the audience?

I mean, they’re asking all the same questions we are (e.g. “Why a sitcom?”, “What’s the meaning of the hexagons?”, etc) and having all the same reactions (e.g. Getting the warm and fuzzies when Wanda gives birth).


----------



## pukunui

Davies said:


> That's another one, but I was thinking about the little smirk that Vision gives at the end, while Wanda's back is to him. Something about that expression, so unlike the "decent and honorable" person that he's supposed to be, doesn't sit well with me.



That looks to me more like a confused “I don’t know what to make of this so I’ll just pretend everything’s fine” smile than a sinister smirk.


----------



## Umbran

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Darcy detects unnaturally high levels of "Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation," which she defines as "_relic radiation dating back to the Big Bang._" It's unclear how this cosmic radiation ties into the story of _WandaVision_, but comic book readers will immediately recognize it as a reference to the raw energy of creation in Marvel Comics - and the source of the Fantastic Four's powers. Marvel has recently confirmed a _Fantastic Four_ film is in the works, so this can only be direct setup for Marvel's First Family. It's possible that, in the MCU, the Fantastic Four are connected to SWORD; note that Director Hayward has a strong reaction to the mention of cosmic radiation, and claims to still have teams of astronauts missing.




So, leaving out spoiler content... whenever someone speculating about a weird TV show plot says, "This can _ONLY_ mean/be," is the moment when you should seriously doubt their analysis.  Because, that assertion should be unnecessary - you should not need to _tell_ me how correct you are.  Your point should stand on its own.

There's any number of Easter eggs and references in Marvel material that _fails_ to actually be plot relevant.  Their self-references are often merely nods to lore for those who want to say, "Hey, I understood that reference!"


----------



## Umbran

MarkB said:


> Are you referring to the censorship of the out-of-character moments? That does seem like it's not something Wanda herself is doing.




I think it is.  Think of this as a woman who has gone through too much trauma, who is desperately trying to create a safe and happy world for herself.  

The censored show is what she _desperately wants_ reality to be.  She doesn't have total control of all the minds around her, and the outside keeps impinging on her reality, so occasionally she "wakes up" when her immersion is broken, and corrects the situation, and then goes back into her dream fantasy.



MarkB said:


> Even if Wanda really wants to live in retro-sitcom-land, there's no reason for her to be deliberately broadcasting the 'show' to the outside. And if she's not broadcasting it, she's not the one who's censoring it either.




I think the broadcast is merely the result of the model she has chosen for her safe world - sitcoms are broadcast, therefore this is broadcast.


----------



## Davies

pukunui said:


> That looks to me more like a confused “I don’t know what to make of this so I’ll just pretend everything’s fine” smile than a sinister smirk.



Except that he seems to know more about what's going on than has been shown to this point -- a few moments before that, he was telling Wanda that they could leave if she wanted to go somewhere else.


----------



## Umbran

Davies said:


> Except that he seems to know more about what's going on than has been shown to this point -- a few moments before that, he was telling Wanda that they could leave if she wanted to go somewhere else.




She sees his "zombie" state, and doesn't completely lose her nut.  Ergo, she's the one animating him.  

Her animation leaves him with significant free will and ability to think for himself, or, his mind is an aspect of her subconscious, kind of _Inside Out_ style.

With a troubled mind of sufficient power, you don't really need to invoke outside forces to explain what's going on.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

After doing a bit more reading, I now realize why that deleted scene of Wanda in the morgue with Vision's body was removed and not included with the rest of the deleted scenes for Infinity War. Apparently, an earlier version of the Infinity War script had her surviving the Snap, instead of being erased. So once they changed that part of the script, the scene in the morgue could now not take place.

Her being Snapped away also explains a lot of the trauma she is going through in WandaVision. Episode 4 establishes that this series is taking place only three weeks after the end of Endgame. So while the Snapped people were missing for 5 years, to Wanda, and everyone else, no time had passed at all. To everyone not Snapped, Vision has been dead for 5 years, but for Wanda it had been mere minutes between his death and her being Snapped away. So she comes back, Endgame finishes, she freaks out and either creates this whole Westview thing or is ripe to be manipulated by someone into creating it.


----------



## pukunui

Davies said:


> Except that he seems to know more about what's going on than has been shown to this point -- a few moments before that, he was telling Wanda that they could leave if she wanted to go somewhere else.



Yeah nah I’m not getting that sense at all. He was telling her they could leave because he doesn’t know that they can’t! She’s all weird and then is suddenly like “Let’s watch some TV!” and so he’s like “Yeah, OK, honey, whatever you say ...”

EDIT: The smile in question, for context:


Spoiler


----------



## Rabulias

I took the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation reference to tie in to the Infinity Stones (created at the Big Bang), one of which contributed to Wanda's powers (and was later an integral part of Vision!). It makes sense to me that her powers would have a similar signature to the stones.


----------



## Imaculata

People in this thread have been spot on with their predictions. It's a shame they explained so much so early. I wouldn't have minded trying to solve the mystery one episode longer. However, I am hopeful there are still many more mysteries in this show to unravel. Considering we still have half a season to go, it can't be this simple. Our ideas of Agnes being an antagonist may still turn out to be true.

I loved how this episode showed the aftermath of Endgame. It was truly haunting. But it did leave me with a few new questions:

The cops outside Wanda's bubble were also affected. How does that work?

Is Wanda censoring the broadcast or is someone else?

The drone (great call btw) retained its colors and SWORD symbol. Monica retained her SWORD necklace. The beekeeper retained his color for a few seconds, before turning black and white. It would seem there are limits to the reality bending effect of Wanda's bubble.

Dotty seems antagonistic towards Wanda. Is this simply the role she's been cast in, or is there more going on here?

We saw a dead Vision for a brief moment. Was this simply Wanda's sudden realisation of his death, or is she puppeteering a dead Vision? Could others see a dead Vision as well?

This episode hinted that the effect that Wanda has over the town may get worse. This is something I think I speculated earlier in this thread. Is there a rush against time here before the bubble increases in size, or something worse happens to those trapped within?


----------



## Umbran

Imaculata said:


> The cops outside Wanda's bubble were also affected. How does that work?




I think it is simply that people nearby the bubble were made to forget the place existed, so they'd leave the place alone.  Nothing more complicated than that.



Imaculata said:


> Is Wanda censoring the broadcast or is someone else?




I don't think we have any _evidence_ suggesting there's anyone else involved at this point. 



Imaculata said:


> The drone (great call btw) retained its colors and SWORD symbol. Monica retained her SWORD necklace. The beekeeper retained his color for a few seconds, before turning black and white. It would seem there are limits to the reality bending effect of Wanda's bubble.




I don't know if we should consider those "limits", because Wanda's state of mind is, shall we say, highly questionable at this point.  I don't think we should consider her some detail-oriented mastermind.  She's a woman in great psychological pain.



Imaculata said:


> Dotty seems antagonistic towards Wanda. Is this simply the role she's been cast in, or is there more going on here?




A somewhat antagonistic neighbor or rival in town would be appropriate to the sitcom genre of the time period being depicted.  There could be more going on, but we have no direct indication of that at this time.

We may note that Agnes and Dottie were _not_ on the list of actors identified by Agent Wu and his team - but that may just be so some nerd keep chewing on the mystery of whether they are special or not.



Imaculata said:


> We saw a dead Vision for a brief moment. Was this simply Wanda's sudden realisation of his death, or is she puppeteering a dead Vision? Could others see a dead Vision as well?




I think it was a momentary slip in Wanda's control.  



Imaculata said:


> This episode hinted that the effect that Wanda has over the town may get worse. This is something I think I speculated earlier in this thread. Is there a rush against time here before the bubble increases in size, or something worse happens to those trapped within?




Well, if you are a government agent facing an inscrutable anomaly, you consider the worst.  But, again, we have no distinct and direct reason to worry about that at this time, I think.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Umbran said:


> We may note that Agnes and Dottie were _not_ on the list of actors identified by Agent Wu and his team - but that may just be so some nerd keep chewing on the mystery of whether they are special or not.



If any of the speculation turns out to be true, it may be that Agnes (her friend) is actually Agatha Harkness and Dottie (her foe) is Clea.

... I kind of like the idea that the "good" character is her antagonist, and the "bad" character is her friend!


----------



## Umbran

FitzTheRuke said:


> ... I kind of like the idea that the "good" character is her antagonist, and the "bad" character is her friend!




Neither Agatha Harkness nor Clea is, to my understanding, traditionally villainous.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Just watched the last two episodes. I'm glad I watched them together and didn't have a week at that cliffhanger. 

I'm glad we're finally getting some answers. The show is becoming something that I like now. 

Like others, I'm also wondering if Vision is actually an animated corpse or just a figment of Wanda's mind. 

The possible FF tie in is also interesting, hinting at what the future of the MCU could look like. 

It's also puzzling why none of the events of this were mentioned in Far From Home. Is Nick Fury already off world?

Most of all, I'm wondering how this series is going to end. Is Wanda somehow going to willingly break free of her false reality, or is SWORD somehow going to stop her from causing even more damage? It's almost definitely going to set up a few more shows/movies by the end of it. I wonder which ones (other than the few we already know about) will be set up.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Umbran said:


> Neither Agatha Harkness nor Clea is, to my understanding, traditionally villainous.



That's kind of my point, but I guess I didn't make it well. Generally I assumed that most people assume that Agatha Harkness is more of a villain (though she is not always) and Clea was more of a hero (though she is not always). My idea was that Dottie (should she be Clea) could turn out to be working with Dr. Strange (to protect the multiverse) while Agnes might be there to influence Wanda toward messing things up (for whatever purpose).  But early in the show, it seemed that Agnes was a friendly neighbour, and Dottie was the mean one.


----------



## Imaculata

This episode also specifically called attention to the fact that Wanda's "bubble" is hexagon shaped. So this implies that the shape might be relevant for some reason. It is a bit odd to say the least. Obviously the town itself isn't shaped like a hexagon, and why would Wanda's mind create a shape so orderly?

The episode did give us one possible reason for why the cops outside were affected when the investigators weren't; the cops may have had ties to the town. Maybe they were originally from West View (they said they were from East View). Or maybe West View was originally under their jurisdiction, but Wanda doesn't want any outsiders to enter. Woo described having a feeling of being unwelcome.

This whole situation has a bit of an SCP/Control vibe to it, and I love it. Last night I showed all 4 episodes in a row to a friend of mine who knew nothing about the show yet, but she IS familiar with the MCU and most of the movies. She loved it.

I hope next week's episode takes us back to an 80's sitcom.


----------



## Davies

Trying to work out some timeline stuff here -- has there been any indication how much time there was between the unsnap and Tony's funeral? Because Wanda was in a significantly better emotional situation at that point than she is here.


----------



## Imaculata

Davies said:


> Trying to work out some timeline stuff here -- has there been any indication how much time there was between the unsnap and Tony's funeral? Because Wanda was in a significantly better emotional situation at that point than she is here.




Well, this episode gives us a lot of detail on that. A few weeks prior to Woo encountering the West View anomaly, we see Monica being unsnapped. Monica contacts SWORD after the first 3 weeks after she was brought back, but she wasn't the first to be unsnapped by far. Commemorative plaques of her mother and other operatives are still on the wall, and there are still news reports of people being "unsnapped". The unsnap isn't instantaneous. People seem to be coming back one by one over the course of at least several months.

It seems Monica travels to the city limits of West View the very next day after contacting SWORD, where she contacts Woo and is drawn into Wanda's bubble. 24 hours later, SWORD has established a response base around West View and has called in various scientists. 

Woo gives us some more information on the matter. He had a witness inside West View which vanished and no one had sudden ever heard of him. Woo took the first flight of Oakland (presumably this happened one day prior to him meeting Monica) to investigate the situation in person, which is when he encountered the bubble.

Apparently Wanda's bubble extends roughly by a 5 mile radius. SWORD has already attempted and failed at using the phone lines to contact the anomaly, they've sent in 2 agents, they've attempted drones, and they've attempted digital communications.

So a rough timeline:

5 years ago - The Snap (Avengers Infinity War)
Several weeks ago - The unsnap (Avengers Endgame)
Undetermined date - Tony's funeral, Wanda seems alright
Start of the episode - Monica is unsnapped
3 weeks later - Monica contacts SWORD, Missing person report, Woo encounters the Anomaly
The day after (presumably) - Monica meets Woo, Monica is sucked into the anomaly
24 hours later - SWORD establishes a response base
That same night - Darcy and Woo attempt radio contact, an agent in Hazmat suit is sent in and becomes the beekeeper, Monica is ejected from the anomaly.


----------



## Zardnaar

Davies said:


> Trying to work out some timeline stuff here -- has there been any indication how much time there was between the unsnap and Tony's funeral? Because Wanda was in a significantly better emotional situation at that point than she is here.




 I think one if them said two years had passed in episode 4.


----------



## Rune

Zardnaar said:


> I think one if them said two years had passed in episode 4.



When Monica was in the hospital, she was told her mother’s cancer had returned two years after Monica disappeared, which was three years ago. 

When Monica returned to SWORD, Active Director Hayward told her it’s been three weeks (since the return of people blipped away, presumably). 

It’s been a minute since I last watched Endgame; I can’t remember if we saw a funeral or a memorial service. If the latter, it might not even have happened yet.


----------



## Imaculata

I took some screen grabs of the episode. Of the hexagon and some of the case files. I can barely make out some of the descriptions of the various 'characters' on the show, which seem to say nothing more than what we've seen of the characters during the first 3 episodes; when they appear, and in what scene of the show. Unfortunately, the file for Agnes is impossible to make out. Would have been interesting to see what her real name was.

Also of interest. In episode 2 Vision's magic cabinet also has a hexagon on it, similar in shape to the Mindstone. However, the hexagon shape is elongated, instead of the symmetrical shape of the town. So probably this is unconnected. Note that the screengrab of the hexagon that I took was taken at an angle, skewing the shape a bit.


----------



## Morrus

Imaculata said:


> 2 years ago - The Snap (Avengers Infinity War)



Pretty sure the time jump in AIW is 5 years, not 2.


----------



## Imaculata

Morrus said:


> Pretty sure the time jump in AIW is 5 years, not 2.




Right you are! Consider it corrected.

So, presuming my cobbled together timeline is some what correct, Wanda's anomaly must have been created somewhere in the last few weeks, after Tony's funeral (the date of which we do not know). SWORD watches the 3 episodes of Wandavision in a row that same night. This suggests the events inside the anomaly probably do not happen in real time. Rather, they are a constant broadcast, and what other episodes may follow in the weeks to come, will also be seen by SWORD that same night.


----------



## MarkB

Imaculata said:


> Right you are! Consider it corrected.
> 
> So, presuming my cobbled together timeline is some what correct, Wanda's anomaly must have been created somewhere in the last few weeks, after Tony's funeral (the date of which we do not know). SWORD watches the 3 episodes of Wandavision in a row that same night. This suggests the events inside the anomaly probably do not happen in real time. Rather, they are a constant broadcast, and what other episodes may follow in the weeks to come, will also be seen by SWORD that same night.



Adding to that "not in real time" aspect, note that when the "censoring" happens for the agents watching from outside, there's no break in transmission. What turns out to be a scene lasting a few minutes for Wanda, Monica and Vision is skipped over instantly in the real world.

But we also know that there's a degree of synchronisation between the internal and external timelines. The sewer infiltration, the attempted radio contact and Monica's ejection all sync up pretty well between the 'show' and external events.

Could the "censorship" be a mental effect? Maybe it's not that those scenes don't get broadcast, but that peoples' memories of having seen them are edited out. We already know that people outside the 'bubble' can be mentally influenced by it, from the way the local police officers were made to forget the town.


----------



## Umbran

MarkB said:


> Could the "censorship" be a mental effect? Maybe it's not that those scenes don't get broadcast, but that peoples' memories of having seen them are edited out.




It could be yeah.  But it could also be that the writers just aren't considering that detail.  _hands waving_ "Do not look behind the curtain!!!1!"


----------



## Imaculata

Umbran said:


> It could be yeah.  But it could also be that the writers just aren't considering that detail.  _hands waving_ "Do not look behind the curtain!!!1!"




Well, in this episode they purposefully draw attention to it. They show the characters reacting to Monica suddenly being gone and the episode ending. Right after though, we as an audience are shown what really happened to Monica. The part that wasn't broadcast.

As they state in the episode, they are recording everything. Even if it were a mental effect, they would still record what their collective minds are unable to remember. If they draw so much attention to it, that seems like the opposite of hand waving.


----------



## billd91

Davies said:


> Trying to work out some timeline stuff here -- has there been any indication how much time there was between the unsnap and Tony's funeral? Because Wanda was in a significantly better emotional situation at that point than she is here.



This why I expect that this isn’t simply Wanda doing this in her grief. There’s an antagonist or at least a precipitating event other than Vision’s murder by Thanos and the outcome of the Infinity War/Engame. And it will lead us to the next Dr Strange movie.
Wanda is one of the Marvel characters who has been most emotionally manipulated by others (particularly by Magneto) in the comics, and I suspect this story is a nod in that direction.


----------



## MarkB

billd91 said:


> This why I expect that this isn’t simply Wanda doing this in her grief. There’s an antagonist or at least a precipitating event other than Vision’s murder by Thanos and the outcome of the Infinity War/Engame. And it will lead us to the next Dr Strange movie.
> Wanda is one of the Marvel characters who has been most emotionally manipulated by others (particularly by Magneto) in the comics, and I suspect this story is a nod in that direction.



There's also the question of how the destruction / dispersal of the Infinity Stones affected those who derived their powers from them. 

We know that Captain Marvel was seemingly unaffected - she was operating at full potential the day after it happened, and seemingly continued to do so right through the subsequent five years to the end of Endgame.

However, Wanda technically didn't exist when the Stones were destroyed, plus she got her powers from a different stone. Things might not have been as straightforward for her.


----------



## Rune

billd91 said:


> This why I expect that this isn’t simply Wanda doing this in her grief. There’s an antagonist or at least a precipitating event other than Vision’s murder by Thanos and the outcome of the Infinity War/Engame. And it will lead us to the next Dr Strange movie.
> Wanda is one of the Marvel characters who has been most emotionally manipulated by others (particularly by Magneto) in the comics, and I suspect this story is a nod in that direction.



My money’s on Hayward for precipitating antagonist. We already know he’s in the business of creating sentient weapons, so it isn’t a stretch that he might want to continue Strucker’s work on Wanda. Lacking the mindstone, he’d have to go all in on manipulation, but we already know BARF can handle that role. 

But of course, there’s certainly room for more than one antagonist.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Hexagon theories:









						The big WandaVision villain theory has everything to do with hexagons
					

And we know a thing or two about polygons here




					www.polygon.com
				




Also, another little easter egg I noticed that calls out the original Avengers. The drone turned into a toy that for some reason kept it's color. Those colors happen to be Iron Man's colors. Then the SWORD agent sent in through the sewers. When he crossed the barrier and turned into the beekeeper, the section of safety rope that went through the barrier with him was transformed into repeating sections of red, white, and blue, or Captain America's colors. So should we be looking for things in the remaining episodes that are in Thor's, Hulk's, Black Widow's, and Hawkeye's colors/patterns? Was there another one already shown that I missed?


----------



## tomBitonti

Any thoughts as to the meaning of the calculations that vision is doing? I’m thinkinking this is important, but I have no ideas beyond that gut feeling.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

I seem to recall a line in E4 that implied that there's WHOLE SEASONS for Darcy to watch for each era.


----------



## Morrus

FitzTheRuke said:


> I seem to recall a line in E4 that implied that there's WHOLE SEASONS for Darcy to watch for each era.



Yep.


----------



## Imaculata

Oh really? I must have missed that line.

I wonder if Woo's missing person's case will become important to the plot. The situation may have escalated to a missing town case now, but we still don't know who the original missing person was. And it could be important in solving this mystery.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Yeah, the two main theories for the villains (based off of the hexagons) are Mephisto and Swarm. 

Mephisto because he's tied to the comic-book storyline that this is "based off of", and also for a few other reasons (there are 6 sides on a hexagon, therefore the "triple6" that is in my title could relate to Mephisto, the fact that he appears in the Loki trailer as a stained-glass window, and that Wanda will be in the Multiverse of Madness, and Mephisto is a common Doctor Strange villain.)

Swarm is less likely to be the main villain, but hexagons are connected to bees, and we did see a beekeeper in Episode 2/4. We are still unsure as to what happened to the agent that turned into the beekeeper when he crossed into "Wanda's Vision", so this possibly could be the origin story for Swarm.


----------



## Umbran

Imaculata said:


> Well, in this episode they purposefully draw attention to it. They show the characters reacting to Monica suddenly being gone and the episode ending. Right after though, we as an audience are shown what really happened to Monica. The part that wasn't broadcast.
> 
> As they state in the episode, they are recording everything. Even if it were a mental effect, they would still record what their collective minds are unable to remember. If they draw so much attention to it, that seems like the opposite of hand waving.




I think the fact that it is edited is relevant.  I am not convinced the _time difference itself_ is relevant.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Maybe the 6 sides of a hexagon could be related to the 6 Infinity Stones? They were destroyed by Thanos, "reduced to atoms", but their power still has to exist in the multiverse (otherwise, the multiverse would be destroyed). Maybe they found their way to Wanda? That could explain her reality bending powers (Reality Stone), the time difference (Time Stone), the return of Vision and his power source (Mind Stone), the shape of her domain and Vision's superspeed (Space Stone), the barrier (Power Stone), and the new personas created by the reality and the souls of her children (Soul Stone). The reason for them to reach out to her could be because Wanda got her powers from an Infinity Stone and had her life severely changed by the Infinity Stones multiple times (she was snapped, blipped, she destroyed the Mind Stone before the Time Stone undid it, etc).

I could be grasping at straws here, but the number 6 seems to be important in this show. There are 6 "main" characters (Wanda, Vision, Darcy, Monica, Kim Woo, and Agnes), 6 Infinity Stones (which were fairly recently destroyed), and 6 sides of a hexagon.

Any thoughts on this? Could the Infinity Stones have a part in this?


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

AcererakTriple6 said:


> I could be grasping at straws here, but the number 6 seems to be important in this show. There are 6 "main" characters (Wanda, Vision, Darcy, Monica, Kim Woo, and Agnes), 6 episodes, and 6 sides of a hexagon.




9 episodes, not 6. But six of the episodes are confirmed to be themed after the six decades from the 50's to the 00's.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> 9 episodes, not 6.



It's nine? Where I searched it, it said 6. 

Just looked it up. I was wrong. Will go correct that.


----------



## Imaculata

I noticed btw that Agnes is the only person on the wall who does not have an ID card taped to her poster. Also, the line where her real name should be is blank. Only the name of her character (her alias), her occupation (on the show) and age (which can be an estimate) are listed. This must mean SWORD hasn't identified her yet!

Episode 4 tries hard to get us to focus on other details which may be a bit of clever misdirection. Agnes not being identified yet, and yet no dialogue being dedicated to that fact, is a big red flag in my opinion.

I know we've speculated about Agnes since the show started, but this is the first big hint that she may not be like the other 'cast members'. In episode 3 both Agnes and Herb were clearly aware of being trapped, but Agnes discouraged Herb from speaking further on the matter to Vision.


----------



## pukunui

I reckon Agnes is Woo’s missing witness.


----------



## Imaculata

pukunui said:


> I reckon Agnes is Woo’s missing witness.




I like that theory! However, wouldn't Woo be able to identify her then? Unless he has never seen the witness of course. After all, they were supposed to meet in West View.


----------



## Rune

Imaculata said:


> I like that theory! However, wouldn't Woo be able to identify her then? Unless he has never seen the witness of course. After all, they were supposed to meet in West View.



Also, Woo refers to the missing witness as a he. Of course, that _could_ be why he can’t identify her. 

Personally, I’m hoping for someone like Wilson Fisk or Frank Castle. Longshot, but wouldn’t it be fun? (Admittedly, neither makes much sense. Fisk is the kingpin of his organization and Castle’s way more likely to punish than testify.)


----------



## pukunui

That’s true. Maybe it’s Agnes’ husband. We haven’t seen him yet.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

pukunui said:


> That’s true. Maybe it’s Agnes’ husband. We haven’t seen him yet.




Yes, that has been mentioned a couple of times here. But if she is actually Agatha Harkness, then her "husband" may actually be Mephisto, who may be controlling everything.


----------



## MarkB

Does anyone else find SWORD's initial involvement in the case a little odd? Yes, there were some strange circumstances to it, but it doesn't seem like they'd be the first place an officer would turn if all they wanted was a drone overflight. I wonder if there was something about the nature of Woo's witness that made them the best choice.


----------



## Umbran

AcererakTriple6 said:


> Yeah, the two main theories for the villains (based off of the hexagons) are Mephisto and Swarm.
> 
> Mephisto because he's tied to the comic-book storyline that this is "based off of"




Um, but in the original storyline, the twins came from Master Pandemonium, _not_ Mephisto.




AcererakTriple6 said:


> Swarm is less likely to be the main villain




What we are seeing in this show has... nothing to do with his power set.  Like, at all.


----------



## Blue

tomBitonti said:


> Any thoughts as to the meaning of the calculations that vision is doing? I’m thinkinking this is important, but I have no ideas beyond that gut feeling.



Well, in Infinity War, Shuri was working to separate out Vision from the Mind Stone.  Perhaps in Wanda's thought pattern, they only "computer" that can continue the work on that is Vision himself.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Umbran said:


> Um, but in the original storyline, the twins came from Master Pandemonium, _not_ Mephisto.




No, he was tricked. 



Spoiler



He thought they were fragments of his, but they were actually Mephisto's fragments, which is why the twins disappeared when Mephisto re-absorbed all his fragments. Mephisto tricked Master Pandemonium into doing the dirty work.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Umbran said:


> What we are seeing in this show has... nothing to do with his power set. Like, at all.



I know. I don't think that the villain is Swarm at all, but saw some people online speculating about it. I do think that Wanda's "no" to the SWORD agent/apiarist could be the origin for Swarm, though.


----------



## Umbran

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> No, he was tricked.




There's problems with using that in this storyline - we haven't ever seen Mephisto before, and the reason he got fragmented was a conflict with Franklin Richards, who also hasn't been seen before in the MCU. More importantly, I think it has been confirmed that the next BBEG for the movie line is Kang the Conqueror, not Mephisto. 

I think the question of the baby's "souls" can and will be left entirely out of this.  It is irrelevant to the plot - for the MCU, the kids were created in a fantasy world, and were never "real" to begin with.  This won't matter a whit to Wanda, who can still snap at their disappearance, especially if the Vision is taken from her... _again_... at the same time.



tomBitonti said:


> Any thoughts as to the meaning of the calculations that vision is doing? I’m thinkinking this is important, but I have no ideas beyond that gut feeling.




Given that they were referenced only in the first episode, and not since, I think they're likely irrelevant, or only a vague reference.


----------



## ART!

Imaculata said:


> I like that theory! However, wouldn't Woo be able to identify her then? Unless he has never seen the witness of course. After all, they were supposed to meet in West View.



Good point - but if Agnes is Agatha, then _magic _and no one remembers her. 


Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Yes, that has been mentioned a couple of times here. But if she is actually Agatha Harkness, then her "husband" may actually be Mephisto, who may be controlling everything.



Ooo, I like this. As was noted elsewhere, Agnes says their anniversary is June 2nd, which is notable as the date of the first Salem witch trial in 1692.


MarkB said:


> Does anyone else find SWORD's initial involvement in the case a little odd? Yes, there were some strange circumstances to it, but it doesn't seem like they'd be the first place an officer would turn if all they wanted was a drone overflight. I wonder if there was something about the nature of Woo's witness that made them the best choice.



I was really struck by something at the end of episode 3, and I haven't seen it mentioned here or elsewhere: "Geraldine"'s pendant that Wanda notices looks an awful lot like an inverted cross - to the point that that's what I thought it was at first. It took me a couple fo seconds to realize it was also a _sword_. One of the main things that an inverted cross is associated with is Satanism*. So, another Mephisto clue?

* (I initially typed that as "Stanism". In the future, I'm sure there will be a religion based on the teachings of Stan Lee...)


----------



## Rune

ART! said:


> Good point - but if Agnes is Agatha, then _magic_and no one remembers her.
> 
> Ooo, I like this. As was noted elsewhere, Agnes says their anniversary is June 2nd, which is notable as the date of the first Salem witch trial in 1692.
> 
> I was really struck by something at the end of episode 3, and I haven't seen it mentioned here or elsewhere: "Geraldine"'s pendant that Wanda notices looks an awful lot like an inverted cross - to the point that that's what I thought it was at first. It took me a couple fo seconds to realize it was also a _sword_. One of the main things that an inverted cross is associated with is Satanism*. So, another Mephisto clue?
> 
> * (I initially typed that as "Stanism". In the future, I'm sure there will be a religion based on the teachings of Stan Lee...)



It’s pretty obviously a SWORD logo, condensed into an oval. But that doesn’t mean it can’t be both.


----------



## ART!

Rune said:


> It’s pretty obviously a SWORD logo, condensed into an oval. But that doesn’t mean it can’t be both.



Doing a quick Google search for SWORD logos, everything I'm seeing is more clearly _not_ an inverted cross compared to the pendant, so I suspect it's intentionally open to interpretation.


----------



## Rune

ART! said:


> Doing a quick Google search for SWORD logos, everything I'm seeing is more clearly _not_ an inverted cross compared to the pendant, so I suspect it's intentionally open to interpretation.



Seems pretty clear to me.


----------



## ART!

Well, all I can say is that's a pretty zoomed-in view of the pendant, and my vision isn't what it used to be.   

That said, the pendant is decidedly not circular like the actual SWORD logo, which means...something or nothing.


----------



## Rabulias

AcererakTriple6 said:


> Maybe the 6 sides of a hexagon could be related to the 6 Infinity Stones?



I was thinking this, too., as well as thinking about some strange circuitry layout.

I also noticed that the closeout shot of Wanda and Vision as the end credits rolled in episode 1 was framed by a hexagon.


----------



## Imaculata

I'm thinking the hexagon is misdirection, and might not be relevant at all. The way Woo wrote it down on the whiteboard, made it seem as if the director really wanted us to focus on a red herring.


----------



## Davies

Imaculata said:


> I'm thinking the hexagon is misdirection, and might not be relevant at all. The way Woo wrote it down on the whiteboard, made it seem as if the director really wanted us to focus on a red herring.



But what if _that's_ what he wants us to think that he wants us to think?


----------



## Umbran

Davies said:


> But what if _that's_ what he wants us to think that he wants us to think?




But what if that's what he wants us to think that he wants us to think that he wants us to think...?

Turtles, all the way down.


----------



## ART!

Umbran said:


> But what if that's what he wants us to think that he wants us to think that he wants us to think...?
> 
> Turtles, all the way down.


----------



## MarkB

We could be overthinking the hexagons. After all, a Hex is a type of witch's spell.


----------



## embee

MarkB said:


> We could be overthinking the hexagons. After all, a Hex is a type of witch's spell.



Then again, the hexagons for the 70s Brady Bunch intro could just be because 70s scifi was all about the hexagons.


----------



## ART!

MarkB said:


> We could be overthinking the hexagons. After all, a Hex is a type of witch's spell.



In fact, in the comics the Scarlet Witch sometimes uses her powers to hurl energy at opponents as "hex bolts".




So, I think it's pretty clear the writers are setting up things for the multiverse, which as we all know is held together by anodized hardware.


----------



## embee

ART! said:


> In fact, in the comics the Scarlet Witch sometimes uses her powers to hurl energy at opponents as "hex bolts".
> 
> View attachment 132092
> So, I think it's pretty clear the writers are setting up things for the multiverse, which as we all know is held together by anodized hardware.



EXCEPT for the Transformers Universe. That's held together by galvanized hardware. 

Hence, Galvatron.


----------



## embee

ART! said:


> Good point - but if Agnes is Agatha, then _magic_and no one remembers her.
> 
> Ooo, I like this. As was noted elsewhere, Agnes says their anniversary is June 2nd, which is notable as the date of the first Salem witch trial in 1692.
> 
> I was really struck by something at the end of episode 3, and I haven't seen it mentioned here or elsewhere: "Geraldine"'s pendant that Wanda notices looks an awful lot like an inverted cross - to the point that that's what I thought it was at first. It took me a couple fo seconds to realize it was also a _sword_. One of the main things that an inverted cross is associated with is Satanism*. So, another Mephisto clue?
> 
> * (I initially typed that as "Stanism". In the future, I'm sure there will be a religion based on the teachings of Stan Lee...)



According to Stanism, the entire multiverse was created by Stan Lee and no one else.


----------



## trappedslider

Was that who i think it is? if so she The Other Darrined 



Spoiler



or jsut did a recast for her own brother


----------



## Vael

Well, that escalated a lot.


----------



## Davies

So can we finally put the "Agnes is really Agatha Harkness" theory to bed?


----------



## John R Davis

Series gets better n better. Roll on next Friday!


----------



## MarkB

Davies said:


> So can we finally put the "Agnes is really Agatha Harkness" theory to bed?



Can we? She's driving events far more than the other characters, who are just under Wanda's control. I don't think any of them would be self-aware enough to pause and say "shall we do that scene over?" to Wanda.


----------



## Rune

Davies said:


> So can we finally put the "Agnes is really Agatha Harkness" theory to bed?



I’m guessing...no?


----------



## Rabulias

This also appears to be the origin story for Monica's powers.


----------



## DeviousQuail

I was ready for 



Spoiler



Aaron Taylor-Johnson


 to make an appearance but 



Spoiler



Evan Peters


 showing up just turns everything else on its head.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

DeviousQuail said:


> I was ready for
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Aaron Taylor-Johnson
> 
> 
> to make an appearance but
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Evan Peters
> 
> 
> showing up just turns everything else on its head.




Taylor-Johnson has not been mentioned in any show rumors at all, while Peters has been several times.

And speaking of rumors, now that Monica mentions contacting a certain aerospace engineer, the rumor mill is tagging that as 



Spoiler



the pre-super-powered version of Reed Richards.


----------



## DeviousQuail

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Taylor-Johnson has not been mentioned in any show rumors at all, while Peters has been several times.
> 
> And speaking of rumors, now that Monica mentions contacting a certain aerospace engineer, the rumor mill is tagging that as
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> the pre-super-powered version of Reed Richards.



I was thinking we'd see AT-J due to what was happening in episode 5 as I was watching it. The story was building too heavily in that direction. It didn't have anything to do with show rumors.


----------



## DeviousQuail

Double post.


----------



## Tonguez

MarkB said:


> Can we? She's driving events far more than the other characters, who are just under Wanda's control. I don't think any of them would be self-aware enough to pause and say "shall we do that scene over?" to Wanda.




Absolutely this, Agnes somehow knows exactly whats going on and is actively monitoring Wanda by playing the role of sit-com friendly neighbour. Agnes also seems scared enough of Wanda’s reaction that she expects Wanda to force a reset when things arent going her way.

Furthermore Agnes has shown an interest in the children and seems to beconcerned about the welfare of the neighbours (she warned Herb not to tell Vision too much) - it may well be that Agnes is the actual ‘Hero’ of Westview, being a powerful Witch in her own right would explain how she is able to resist Wanda’s hex powers

Agnes also sprays lavendar over the twins, Lavendar is a relaxant used to ease anxiety and improve sleep. Traditionally it was used to give good dreams and also to ward off evil spirits. Its use in the show probably references the ‘Dream’ state they’re in AND also protection from the evil spirits (Mephisto?) plaguing them (since nightmares are caused by demons)  - so in spraying them with Lavendar Agnes is protecting the Twins

- ANyway the episodes keep getting better and better, especially with Vision now fully aware that things arent right, and Wanda having made her terms clear to Sword with “I have everything I want, now stay out of my life!!”


Enevhar Aldarion said:


> And speaking of rumors, now that Monica mentions contacting a certain aerospace engineer, the rumor mill is tagging that as
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> the pre-super-powered version of Reed Richards.




Brilliant! I was wondering who Monica might be referring to in that statement, but was looking at Captain Marvel lore to identify someone. That option is much much much cooler


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

So, another thing about Agnes and her maybe being Agatha Harkness that I did not really think about until reading some recaps today. Agatha Harkness was big in Wanda's like in the comics because their powers were both magic-based. But in the film and TV version, her powers are not connected to magic at all. So maybe Agnes is someone else entirely from Wanda's comics past. Someone who would be in on this whole thing with her. She knows way too much and is clearly aware of all the stuff that does not fit the sitcom realities. Also, since this series is supposed to tie directly into the next Doctor Strange movie, maybe it is one of his foes that is behind this, "helping" Wanda? That still leaves it as possible that Agnes is Mephisto.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

So . . . is anyone else getting more and more confused the longer things go on? I'm sure that's the point, but seriously, what is going on? Most of the main questions have not been answered, even as we know a lot more than we did at the beginning. 

Who started this? If Wanda didn't, and is just taking advantage of the circumstance, who/_what _actually caused this in the first place? 

Why can't she control Vision? Is it because of the Mind Stone? If so, that leads to the next question. . . 

HOW IS THE MIND STONE BACK!?!? How!?!? Just how!?!? We know it is back, because Vision used it to get information this episode, his fingers even glowed yellow, but there is no explanation for how it could be back. It was destroyed by Wanda, and then again by Thanos. Maybe Wanda used her knowledge of it from when she destroyed it to rebuild it somehow? The trailer seemed to show something like this. 

How is Wanda so powerful? She hasn't used her telepathic powers (that we've seen) since Age of Ultron, and she was by no means as good at controlling her power as she is now. 

She recast Pietro? How? What does this mean?


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

AcererakTriple6 said:


> So . . . is anyone else getting more and more confused the longer things go on? I'm sure that's the point, but seriously, what is going on? Most of the main questions have not been answered, even as we know a lot more than we did at the beginning.
> 
> Who started this? If Wanda didn't, and is just taking advantage of the circumstance, who/_what _actually caused this in the first place?
> 
> Why can't she control Vision? Is it because of the Mind Stone? If so, that leads to the next question. . .
> 
> HOW IS THE MIND STONE BACK!?!? How!?!? Just how!?!? We know it is back, because Vision used it to get information this episode, his fingers even glowed yellow, but there is no explanation for how it could be back. It was destroyed by Wanda, and then again by Thanos. Maybe Wanda used her knowledge of it from when she destroyed it to rebuild it somehow? The trailer seemed to show something like this.
> 
> How is Wanda so powerful? She hasn't used her telepathic powers (that we've seen) since Age of Ultron, and she was by no means as good at controlling her power as she is now.
> 
> She recast Pietro? How? What does this mean?




Multiple dimensions. Alternate dimensions. Alternate timelines. Etc. Remember how the Avengers went and collected alternate dimension versions of the Infinity Stones to restore everyone? Either the alternate Mindstone never made it back to it's home dimension or maybe Wanda and/or whoever is helping/controlling her figured out how to get one again.


----------



## Vael

AcererakTriple6 said:


> So . . . is anyone else getting more and more confused the longer things go on? I'm sure that's the point, but seriously, what is going on? Most of the main questions have not been answered, even as we know a lot more than we did at the beginning.
> 
> Who started this? If Wanda didn't, and is just taking advantage of the circumstance, who/_what _actually caused this in the first place?
> 
> Why can't she control Vision? Is it because of the Mind Stone? If so, that leads to the next question. . .
> 
> HOW IS THE MIND STONE BACK!?!? How!?!? Just how!?!? We know it is back, because Vision used it to get information this episode, his fingers even glowed yellow, but there is no explanation for how it could be back. It was destroyed by Wanda, and then again by Thanos. Maybe Wanda used her knowledge of it from when she destroyed it to rebuild it somehow? The trailer seemed to show something like this.
> 
> How is Wanda so powerful? She hasn't used her telepathic powers (that we've seen) since Age of Ultron, and she was by no means as good at controlling her power as she is now.
> 
> She recast Pietro? How? What does this mean?



1. Unknown, and there have been many speculations. I don't think this show is about Wanda Maximoff becoming a villain though, so I'm reasonably certain that there is another element in play here.

2. Wanda's family are not just projections of her own mind, so she can't really control them. Added that her control over everything is slipping.

3. I don't think the Mind Stone is back. Remember the whole point of going to Wakanda in Infinity War was to remove the Mind Stone from Vision's head. Even without the stone, his synthezoid body is built out of vibranium, I don't believe all of his abilities are purely from the Mind Stone.

4. Grief as a powerful motivator? Wanda has always been one of the most powerful Avengers, just because she hasn't been showcased as much doesn't make that untrue. She blew up an Infinity Stone. 

5. Alternate realities. Spiderman, and the announced title of the next Dr. Strange movie has already shifted us to a multiverse. The comics actually acknowledges this, believe it or not, our reality is 1218, the comics exist (mainly) in reality 616, the MCU is 199999, and the FOX X-Men movies exist in reality 10005.


----------



## hawkeyefan

This episode was pretty crazy. The show honestly gets better each week. 

Of everything that happened in this episode I think the best was by far....Baby Vision. 

It caught me so off guard I lost it.


----------



## RangerWickett

What I want:



Spoiler



My dream is that Ralph (Agnes's husband) will be played by James Spader. I don't care if it's just a cameo, or literally Ultron somehow brought into flesh by Wanda, or Mephisto using the voice of Ultron to f*** with Wanda. I just want him to make an appearance.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

RangerWickett said:


> What I want:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> My dream is that Ralph (Agnes's husband) will be played by James Spader. I don't care if it's just a cameo, or literally Ultron somehow brought into flesh by Wanda, or Mephisto using the voice of Ultron to f*** with Wanda. I just want him to make an appearance.



I would love that. Can his last name be California?


----------



## Umbran

AcererakTriple6 said:


> She recast Pietro? How? What does this mean?




I case you haven't seen the movie, and nobody has mentioned it - the new Pietro was the Quicksilver from X-Men: Days of Future Past.  Basically, she "recast" by bringing one of the X-Men into the MCU.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Umbran said:


> I case you haven't seen the movie, and nobody has mentioned it - the new Pietro was the Quicksilver from X-Men: Days of Future Past.  Basically, she "recast" by bringing one of the X-Men into the MCU.



Okay. I haven't seen any of the new X-Men movies (anything past X-2), so I didn't recognize him.


----------



## Umbran

Vael said:


> 1. Unknown, and there have been many speculations. I don't think this show is about Wanda Maximoff becoming a villain though, so I'm reasonably certain that there is another element in play here.




Yeah.  I believe her when she says she didn't start it.  So, who, or what, did?



Vael said:


> 2. Wanda's family are not just projections of her own mind, so she can't really control them. Added that her control over everything is slipping.




I think they've established that almost nothing in the town is a _projection_ of her mind.  She has a limited ability to reshape things, but it is all real. 



Vael said:


> 3. I don't think the Mind Stone is back. Remember the whole point of going to Wakanda in Infinity War was to remove the Mind Stone from Vision's head. Even without the stone, his synthezoid body is built out of vibranium, I don't believe all of his abilities are purely from the Mind Stone.




Yes.  It is perhaps best for now to think of it that Wanda's powers (which come from the Mind Stone) are _taking the place_ of the stone for Vision.  Reassemble his body, plug her power into his forehead, and voila, reanimated Vision.  Of course, that suggest that if she stops, he drops.

But, unlike the rest of the people in town, she either cannot, or is not, generally exerting mind control over Vision.  It looks like she can influence him if she specifically tries to, but most of the time he's independent.


----------



## Umbran

So, to muse on what started all this.  I will start with three options.

1) Mephisto.  In the comics, he was the ultimate source of the souls for Wanda's kids.  However, that event didn't play out anything like this.  And I don't know that they'd invoke a villain we haven't seen before, and that has no known role i the MCU going forward.  Also, I don't know if Disney wants to go to "the Devil did it" in the MCU.  I think this unlikely.

2) Kang the Conqueror.   Highly likely.  He's known to be the next BBEG for the MCU.  Breaking walls between realities is a very Kang thing to do.  Gives him more to conquer.  And the "skipping through time" element of the TV show is reminiscent of the fact that Kang is a time traveler, making it thematically appropriate.  Maybe that's a sort of countdown - when the sitcoms get to the present day, the thing comes to fruition?

3) It just happened, an accident.  The Infinity Stones were "singularities" from the beginning of the universe.  They have all been destroyed - that probably has consequences.  Wanda herself is the last known vestige of an Infinity Stones power in the universe.  Imagine she stole Vision's body and tried to being him back with her power - and that much focused application of Infinity Stone power in a place that is no longer stabilized by Stones created a... rupture?  Her powers are now put to generally trying to manage it.  I think they could totally make this a plausible explanation, but I doubt this is what's going on.  They'll have some entity behind it.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Umbran said:


> Yeah. I believe her when she says she didn't start it. So, who, or what, did?



Yeah, that's the main thing. I don't think we're going to figure this out until the last episode or second-to-last episode. This could be Mephisto, Agnes, or someone not introduced in any form yet. Or, it could be the Infinity Stones somehow. 


Umbran said:


> I think they've established that almost nothing in the town is a _projection_ of her mind. She has a limited ability to reshape things, but it is all real.



Yeah. Most of it is real, but I'm not sure what his permanent. Could Vision and the twins cease to exist/die if they leave "the Hex"?


Umbran said:


> Yes. It is perhaps best for now to think of it that Wanda's powers (which come from the Mind Stone) are _taking the place_ of the stone for Vision. Reassemble his body, plug her power into his forehead, and voila, reanimated Vision. Of course, that suggest that if she stops, he drops.
> 
> But, unlike the rest of the people in town, she either cannot, or is not, generally exerting mind control over Vision. It looks like she can influence him if she specifically tries to, but most of the time he's independent.



That could be true. Would explain a lot and make a dramatic dilemma and explain why she went evil at the end.


----------



## Tonguez

AcererakTriple6 said:


> So . . . is anyone else getting more and more confused the longer things go on? I'm sure that's the point, but seriously, what is going on? Most of the main questions have not been answered, even as we know a lot more than we did at the beginning.
> 
> Who started this? If Wanda didn't, and is just taking advantage of the circumstance, who/_what _actually caused this in the first place?
> 
> Why can't she control Vision? Is it because of the Mind Stone? If so, that leads to the next question. . .
> 
> How is Wanda so powerful? She hasn't used her telepathic powers (that we've seen) since Age of Ultron, and she was by no means as good at controlling her power as she is now.




I think that Wanda has always been this powerful, but through the movies she was still learning what her powers could do. In AoUltron her first power use was simple Telepathic Illusion and then gross Telekinesis - then we saw in Endgame that when emotionally aroused by rage she was able to use her telekineisis to hold and tear the weapons and armour off Thanos.

Her overwhelming emotion is now Grief and inside the Hex her powers are amplified but they’re still a form of mass telepathy (she’s inside the heads of all the characters in Westview actively rewriting their identity (until she slips)) and she appears to be using molecular telekinesis (she can reshape the forms of objects - like the Kevlar 70’s pants or the helicopter drone).
We also know from Antman that the the hypermolecular ‘Quantum Realm’ merges with the Multiverse - so Wanda pulling energy (and her not-brother) from another dimension can be justified via her Hex telekinesis too.

I think Wanda is effectively the last remnant of the Mindstones power and that she is channeling her power through Visions AI to create the whole illusion of a happy family for herself. I actually do think that its all Wanda and her not remembering is just because she is crazy. (I also think Tyler Hayward was attempting to harvest Visions AI to be used to make new weapons - and thats what Wanda attacked (Hayward will be the ‘bad government’ antagonist in the show)

Now is a supernatural villain (Mephsito?) using that crazy to open his own franchise in the Astral Realm? Quite possibly. But I still think Wanda will be the Villain of this show (and Agnes vindicated as the hero )


----------



## Davies

There's some interesting ideas there, but I have some problems. If Wanda really is behind it all, and she really has lost control, and Tyler was trying to do something to the Vision ... then why isn't Tyler dead? She had him dead to rights in this episode, and let him live. She had no reason to do that, if all that is true.

What I'm inclined to wonder is whether the Wanda who showed up in her red coat is _not_ the same Wanda whom we saw chasing through the suburbs with Billy and Tommy. What if one of those Wandas -- the one who's reverted to her Sokovian accent -- is an illusion?


----------



## Dire Bare

Davies said:


> There's some interesting ideas there, but I have some problems. If Wanda really is behind it all, and she really has lost control, and Tyler was trying to do something to the Vision ... then why isn't Tyler dead? She had him dead to rights in this episode, and let him live. She had no reason to do that, if all that is true.



Because she's still a good person, a hero. One who's gone crazy with grief and is extremely dangerous, but still a hero.

For now, at least.


----------



## Dire Bare

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Multiple dimensions. Alternate dimensions. Alternate timelines. Etc. Remember how the Avengers went and collected alternate dimension versions of the Infinity Stones to restore everyone? Either the alternate Mindstone never made it back to it's home dimension or maybe Wanda and/or whoever is helping/controlling her figured out how to get one again.



In the episode, she tells her kids that you can't reverse death. Agnes seems surprised that's a possibility. Vision was resurrected, of course, but he's a vibranium magical android, so . . .

So, Wanda couldn't resurrect her dead brother Pietro . . . so instead an alternate universe version was brought to Westview.

Wanda was surprised by Pietro's arrival . . . either she brought him there subconsciously, or something else is at play. What I don't know yet is if she was surprised that it was a different Pietro . . . I thought it was fun that Darcy noticed Pietro had been "recast", what a great line!


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> So, to muse on what started all this.  I will start with three options.
> 
> 1) Mephisto.  In the comics, he was the ultimate source of the souls for Wanda's kids.  However, that event didn't play out anything like this.  And I don't know that they'd invoke a villain we haven't seen before, and that has no known role i the MCU going forward.  Also, I don't know if Disney wants to go to "the Devil did it" in the MCU.  I think this unlikely.
> 
> 2) Kang the Conqueror.   Highly likely.  He's known to be the next BBEG for the MCU.  Breaking walls between realities is a very Kang thing to do.  Gives him more to conquer.  And the "skipping through time" element of the TV show is reminiscent of the fact that Kang is a time traveler, making it thematically appropriate.  Maybe that's a sort of countdown - when the sitcoms get to the present day, the thing comes to fruition?
> 
> 3) It just happened, an accident.  The Infinity Stones were "singularities" from the beginning of the universe.  They have all been destroyed - that probably has consequences.  Wanda herself is the last known vestige of an Infinity Stones power in the universe.  Imagine she stole Vision's body and tried to being him back with her power - and that much focused application of Infinity Stone power in a place that is no longer stabilized by Stones created a... rupture?  Her powers are now put to generally trying to manage it.  I think they could totally make this a plausible explanation, but I doubt this is what's going on.  They'll have some entity behind it.



Just to throw out another possibility, we now know that Wanda recovered Vision's corpse from a SWORD laboratory - and that she was very angry when she did it.

We also have Monica's conversation with Hayward near the start of episode 4, indicating that SWORD are now in the business of creating sentient weapons, not just observing them.

Put that together, and it seems a safe bet that SWORD weren't just examining Vision's remains out of general scientific curiosity - they were trying to use him to build a new sentient weapon. Maybe they succeeded, and maybe whoever or whatever that weapon is, it's in the Hex along with Wanda and the reconstructed Vision.


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> Now is a supernatural villain (Mephsito?) using that crazy to open his own franchise in the Astral Realm? Quite possibly. But I still think Wanda will be the Villain of this show (and Agnes vindicated as the hero )




I think in calling her "villain" you are completely throwing away subtleties.  This is a woman who has seen trauma up, down, and sideways, and has anyone offered her, you know, counselling?  We got Age of Ultron because nobody cared to try to treat Stark for his PTSD, now Wanda...

Instead, consider SWORD.  And how the guy who runs the operation has no concept of the word "de-escalation".  The dude fires off a missile at Wanda while two kids, whose only sin is growing up quickly, are standing right next to her!

I think Wanda's apt to be the _antagonist_, but likely SWORD will be the villain of the piece.


----------



## Morrus

Umbran said:


> I think in calling her "villain" you are completely throwing away subtleties.  This is a woman who has seen trauma up, down, and sideways, and has anyone offered her, you know, counselling?



We don't traditionally excuse comic-book villains because they have a tragic past, and what she's done to all those people is unforgivable.


----------



## Janx

Morrus said:


> We don't traditionally excuse comic-book villains because they have a tragic past, and what she's done to all those people is unforgivable.



the difference is, we like Wanda.  Nobody likes Kraven the Hunter.


----------



## Umbran

MarkB said:


> Put that together, and it seems a safe bet that SWORD weren't just examining Vision's remains out of general scientific curiosity - they were trying to use him to build a new sentient weapon.




That's a pretty reasonable possibility.  I mean, who here thought Ultron would remain dead forever?  And given that Vision was Ultron's design, and supposed to be Ultron++, what better source for resurrection?



MarkB said:


> Maybe they succeeded, and maybe whoever or whatever that weapon is, it's in the Hex along with Wanda and the reconstructed Vision.




This, I dunno.  Seems a bit extraneous.


----------



## Umbran

Morrus said:


> We don't traditionally excuse comic-book villains because they have a tragic past, and what she's done to all those people is unforgivable.




Quite the opposite.  We excuse them _all the time_.  Many of the worst villains do turns as heroes.

Edit: Also, we don't give them credit for their traumas... _AND THAT IS A PROBLEM_.  Our understanding of trauma has increased dramatically since the origination of superhero tropes.  Marvel has clearly upped their game in subtlety of storytelling.  Maybe they're willing to approach this with a story that's not so black-and-white about "villains".


----------



## Umbran

Davies said:


> What I'm inclined to wonder is whether the Wanda who showed up in her red coat is _not_ the same Wanda whom we saw chasing through the suburbs with Billy and Tommy. What if one of those Wandas -- the one who's reverted to her Sokovian accent -- is an illusion?




Outright controlled image projection is not traditionally part of her power set, but maybe.

However, the comics are _loaded_ with characters who have alter-egos.  Perhaps Wanda Maximoff has developed dissociative personality disorder ("multiple personality disorder", in the old parlance).  There are now two personalities - Wanda (the basically nice person in the sitcoms) and Scarlett Witch (who has the Sokovian accent, and throws people she doesn't like around).


----------



## hawkeyefan

Janx said:


> the difference is, we like Wanda.  Nobody likes Kraven the Hunter.




I....I like Kraven

I don’t think Wanda has gone passed some point of no return. And certainly she’s suffered so much, her current state is understandable. And I think it’s clear that there’s something else at play....something else helped push her down this path. Someone.

I was happy to see that they threw in that disassembled Vision scene, even if only through security footage.


----------



## Campbell

Morrus said:


> We don't traditionally excuse comic-book villains because they have a tragic past, and what she's done to all those people is unforgivable.




Magneto says hello.


----------



## Umbran

Davies said:


> There's some interesting ideas there, but I have some problems. If Wanda really is behind it all, and she really has lost control, and Tyler was trying to do something to the Vision ... then why isn't Tyler dead?




She doesn't necessarily know that the guy running the operations in the field is the person responsible for with was going on with Vision.

Some other theories of who is "behind it all":

As I just noted, maybe there's two personalities in play - Wanda, and the Scarlett Witch.  When Wanda says she didn't do it, she's not lying - the Scarlett Witch did it.  The way she's blithely Wanda most of the time, and how this scary, angry version comes out when Wanda's peace is threatened is right up that alley.

Another theory - Westview is New Salem.  Agnes is Agatha Harkness.  Scarlett Witch stole back Vision's body, was trying to resurrect him, and/or she was losing her nut because she couldn't.  Scarlett Witch, at full-force, is a reality altering force - Agatha et al. created the Hex to protect the world from her.

At the moment, I think the Dissociative Personality Disorder version is my leading contender.


----------



## Campbell

More seriously the face/heel revolving door has always been a strong fixture in Marvel comics. Notable luminaries include Magneto, Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver, Emma Frost, Cyclops, Cannonball, Hulk and Namor. Not to mention "heroic" characters like Reed Richards, Hank Pym, Charles Xavier, Tony Stark, Carol Danvers, Matt Murdock, Danny Rand  et. al. that have taken turns being antagonists because of the lengths they were willing to go for the "greater good". Especially Reed, Charles, and Tony.


----------



## MarkB

Campbell said:


> More seriously the face/heel revolving door has always been a strong fixture in Marvel comics. Notable luminaries include Magneto, Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver, Emma Frost, Cyclops, Cannonball, Hulk and Namor. Not to mention "heroic" characters like Reed Richards, Hank Pym, Charles Xavier, Tony Stark, Carol Danvers, Matt Murdock, Danny Rand  et. al. that have taken turns being antagonists because of the lengths they were willing to go for the "greater good". Especially Reed, Charles, and Tony.



Even in the movies we have Loki, Nebula and probably a few others.


----------



## Rune

Umbran said:


> She doesn't necessarily now that The guy running the operations in the field is the person responsible for with was going on with Vision.



Maybe not, but she pretty clearly already knew Hayward somehow. And she hasn’t been back from being snapped away for very long, so that meeting must have happened at some point since then. If at all. 

Someone had to tell her where to find Vision. That could have been someone in Wakanda (although I doubt they’ed know much about his destination). 

Shuri could have told her about Hayward, too, I suppose. Something tells me he wouldn’t have treated her very respectfully when he was taking Vision in the first place.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Rune said:


> Maybe not, but she pretty clearly already knew Hayward somehow. And she hasn’t been back from being snapped away for very long, so that meeting must have happened at some point since then. If at all.
> 
> Someone had to tell her where to find Vision. That could have been someone in Wakanda (although I doubt they’ed know much about his destination).
> 
> Shuri could have told her about Hayward, too, I suppose. Something tells me he wouldn’t have treated her very respectfully when he was taking Vision in the first place.




How about because of her mind-controlling/affecting powers, she pulled the information about Hayward out of Monica's memories when she entered the Hex.


----------



## Rune

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> How about because of her mind-controlling/affecting powers, she pulled the information about Hayward out of Monica's memories when she entered the Hex.



Can’t rule it out, I suppose. Have to wonder why, if she can do that, she hasn’t done it to Agnes, though. 

By now, it’s clear that Wanda’s control over people is conscious and deliberate (unless, @Umbran ’s Dissociative Personality Disorder theory is correct). Unless she’s under some illusion that prevents it, she has to realize she isn’t controlling Agnes like the other townsfolk (and _we_ have reason to believe that because Agnes is able to break the fourth wall in ways the rest can’t).

Also, it still doesn’t address the fact that she had to find Vision’s exact location somehow. Within something like a week of her reappearance.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Davies said:


> So can we finally put the "Agnes is really Agatha Harkness" theory to bed?



You mean in that she's CLEARLY Agatha Harkness, right?


----------



## Rabulias

Umbran said:


> Wanda herself is the last known vestige of an Infinity Stones power in the universe.



<pedant>There is also Captain Marvel...</pedant>


----------



## Rabulias

Umbran said:


> Perhaps Wanda Maximoff has developed dissociative personality disorder ("multiple personality disorder", in the old parlance).  There are now two personalities - Wanda (the basically nice person in the sitcoms) and Scarlett Witch (who has the Sokovian accent, and throws people she doesn't like around).



After we see the two _very _different Wandas in this episode (with seemingly very different levels of awareness of what is real), I began to think similar thoughts re: DPD. I also started to wonder if the Wanda who walked out of the anomaly is someone else entirely, using/masquerading as Wanda, though her Sokovian accent makes DPD more likely.

Edit: Maybe Professor Hulk can help her after his own experience integrating his alter egos?


----------



## Umbran

Rabulias said:


> <pedant>There is also Captain Marvel...</pedant>




That's fair.  Forgot that one.  So, two, two vestiges!  Ha! Ha! Ha!


----------



## Umbran

Rune said:


> Maybe not, but she pretty clearly already knew Hayward somehow.




Does she use his name?  Otherwise, he's just "lead government chump in a suit".  She doesn't need to know him, just his type.  



Rune said:


> Someone had to tell her where to find Vision. That could have been someone in Wakanda (although I doubt they’ed know much about his destination).




I would assume that, after a battle like that, SWORD would debrief anyone they could get their hands on.  All she has to do is walk up to an agent, and she can start climbing the tree to find his body.  

I would imagine (and is sure looks like) she's nearly out of her mind with rage and grief when she breaks into that facility.  She'd not be handling this like a mystery, carefully putting together a complete picture of people involved.  It is more "Walk up to SWORD agent.  Rip information from their mind. Lather, rinse, repeat." until she finds his body.  Personnel details not her focus, then.


----------



## Umbran

Davies said:


> So can we finally put the "Agnes is really Agatha Harkness" theory to bed?




Why would we?  I mean, what information leads you to a conclusion one way or another?


----------



## Rune

Umbran said:


> Does she use his name?  Otherwise, he's just "lead government chump in a suit".  She doesn't need to know him, just his type.



Maybe not, but she does call him “Director”, which seems like a pretty specific leap from “lead government chump in a suit”. 

Of course, she also singled him out from quite a distance in the dark to toss the drone at his feet and ask if it belongs to him (and, yes, she is singling him out; Monica and Woo are right there and she ignores them). 

It certainly _seems_ like she expects to find Hayward there. 



Umbran said:


> I would assume that, after a battle like that, SWORD would debrief anyone they could get their hands on.  All she has to do is walk up to an agent, and she can start climbing the tree to find his body.
> 
> I would imagine (and is sure looks like) she's nearly out of her mind with rage and grief when she breaks into that facility.  She'd not be handling this like a mystery, carefully putting together a complete picture of people involved.  It is more "Walk up to SWORD agent.  Rip information from their mind. Lather, rinse, repeat." until she finds his body.  Personnel details not her focus, then.



5 years later? Maybe. But that’s a very cold trail, especially given that she’d be starting in Wakanda. I can’t imagine they’d let SWORD stay for five years and I also can’t imagine they’d know where to find them. Unless, of course, SWORD isn’t very secretive about its existence. Which, admittedly, is entirely possible.


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> That's fair.  Forgot that one.  So, two, two vestiges!  Ha! Ha! Ha!



Possibly three now, depending upon the exact status and nature of The Other Pietro.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

MarkB said:


> Possibly three now, depending upon the exact status and nature of The Other Pietro.




I think this goes with the whole 80's sitcom thing. Remember that Roseanne switched actresses playing Becky part way through the seasons. And then the original actress came back to the role and everything kept going like nothing had changed. The show even included little in-jokes about the changing of the actresses. Other sitcoms changed actors for main characters as well, such as Bewitched and Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, with nothing seeming out of place. But while this is playing on that, there is something more serious going on, since the MCU version is dead.


----------



## Rune

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> I think this goes with the whole 80's sitcom thing. Remember that Roseanne switched actresses playing Becky part way through the seasons. And then the original actress came back to the role and everything kept going like nothing had changed. The show even included little in-jokes about the changing of the actresses. Other sitcoms changed actors for main characters as well, such as Bewitched and Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, with nothing seeming out of place. But while this is playing on that, there is something more serious going on, since the MCU version is dead.



Well, yes. But also, they could have chosen any actor. The fact that they chose an established X-man is a statement. Just not a clear one, yet.


----------



## Umbran

MarkB said:


> Possibly three now, depending upon the exact status and nature of The Other Pietro.




Unlikely.  Marvel has good reason to introduce mutants into the MCU.  Using _the same actor_ from X-Men is a signal that he's a mutant.


----------



## Umbran

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> But while this is playing on that, there is something more serious going on, since the MCU version is dead.




Given that it is known this series feeds into a movie titled "Multiverse of Madness"?  Yeah.  

I an starting to think the next big Avengers crossover movie might be "Avengers: Secret Wars", in which the worlds get taken apart and put back together again.


----------



## Umbran

Rune said:


> Maybe not, but she does call him “Director”, which seems like a pretty specific leap from “lead government chump in a suit”.




Maybe.  We shall see.


Rune said:


> Of course, she also singled him out from quite a distance in the dark to toss the drone at his feet and ask if it belongs to him (and, yes, she is singling him out; Monica and Woo are right there and she ignores them).




I think in that scene, he's at the center of the formation, giving orders, but not in tactical gear or holding a gun himself.  He kinda stands out.



Rune said:


> It certainly _seems_ like she expects to find Hayward there.




Again, perhaps.  But, let us consider - the question is why she leaves him alive....

The answer is simple - she's not actually a villain and killer.  She thought she was, back when she thought she needed to make Stark pay, but, interestingly, she didn't kill him.

She has what she wants, or as close to it as she's likely to get.  Killing him (or any of the Agents) does not get her anything.  It would serve no purpose.  So, she doesn't.  In fact, she shows remarkable restraint, all things considered - which is a sign that she's not really a villain.  



Rune said:


> 5 years later? Maybe. But that’s a very cold trail, especially given that she’d be starting in Wakanda.




No, she's not starting in Wakanda.  There is no reason at all for her to go back to Wakanda.  Why would she go there?  

She gets snapped back, and takes part in the final Endgame battle.  After that battle, her next question is "WHERE IS VISION?"  The place would be swarming with SWORD agents trying to debrief (as I already noted).  They would be seeking her out.  She can start by asking nicely, and would be given the runaround.  A few days or weeks of that, she'd eventually get fed up, but by that time she's talking to someone who actually knows what's up, and she can make their mind an open book...


----------



## FitzTheRuke

I'm sticking with my "Wanda is pulling bits and pieces from alternate realities" theory. She apparently (maybe) can't actually bring the dead back to life, so she pulled a Quicksilver from the multiverse - she just got the wrong one.

Heck, that might even be the case with your multiple personalities for Wanda - she pulled a version of herself who could "handle things better" than she could. A tough, nasty Wanda, who's taking care of business so she can have a "normal" life.

I think Agnes is just trying to survive - though there may be some part of it that she's responsible for. (Like maybe she was a small-town therapist that was helping Wanda and suggested she needed to find a tougher Wanda within herself, not knowing what Wanda could do.)


----------



## Tonguez

Umbran said:


> No, she's not starting in Wakanda.  There is no reason at all for her to go back to Wakanda.  Why would she go there?
> 
> She gets snapped back, and takes part in the final Endgame battle.  After that battle, her next question is "WHERE IS VISION?"




The last place we see Vision in the movies was during the battle of Wakanda, so its reasonable to assume that Wanda would start searching for Vision in Wakanda.
There is still an unanswered question of how SWORD got the remains out of Wakanda and in to its own facility - presumably somewhere near Westview, New Jersey.


----------



## ART!

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Taylor-Johnson has not been mentioned in any show rumors at all, while Peters has been several times.
> 
> And speaking of rumors, now that Monica mentions contacting a certain aerospace engineer, the rumor mill is tagging that as
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> the pre-super-powered version of Reed Richards.



Wow, I was trying to figure out who that might be, and that possibility had not occurred to me. It could also be 



Spoiler



Susan Storm, considering some more recent versions of the FF's origin





Enevhar Aldarion said:


> So, another thing about Agnes and her maybe being Agatha Harkness that I did not really think about until reading some recaps today. Agatha Harkness was big in Wanda's like in the comics because their powers were both magic-based. But in the film and TV version, her powers are not connected to magic at all. So maybe Agnes is someone else entirely from Wanda's comics past. Someone who would be in on this whole thing with her. She knows way too much and is clearly aware of all the stuff that does not fit the sitcom realities. Also, since this series is supposed to tie directly into the next Doctor Strange movie, maybe it is one of his foes that is behind this, "helping" Wanda? That still leaves it as possible that Agnes is Mephisto.



Maybe she's Clea? Seems unlikely somehow, but who knows.



hawkeyefan said:


> I....I like Kraven
> 
> I don’t think Wanda has gone passed some point of no return. And certainly she’s suffered so much, her current state is understandable. And I think it’s clear that there’s something else at play....something else helped push her down this path. Someone.
> 
> I was happy to see that they threw in that disassembled Vision scene, even if only through security footage.



I wouldn't be surprised if we see Wanda's attack on the SWORD facility from a different perspective on a future episode, especially considering how the show has already revisited other moments but from different perspectives.


----------



## Rune

Tonguez said:


> The last place we see Vision in the movies was during the battle of Wakanda, so its reasonable to assume that Wanda would start searching for Vision in Wakanda.
> There is still an unanswered question of how SWORD got the remains out of Wakanda and in to its own facility - presumably somewhere near Westview, New Jersey.



As much as I’d like to support my position with this, I think @Umbran is right to discount Wakanda as a starting place for her search. She’s at the Avengers HQ within hours (minutes?) of returning from the blip and she’s probably got to know anyone worth asking is there with her. Including the Wakandan elite. 

I do wonder who on that field actually knows about SWORD, though. It seems to have been in operation for years (decades?), but it’s difficult to guage how secretive it’s been, given we, the audience, are only newly introduced.


----------



## MarkB

Rune said:


> I do wonder who on that field actually knows about SWORD, though. It seems to have been in operation for years (decades?), but it’s difficult to guage how secretive it’s been, given we, the audience, are only newly introduced.



Do we know whether, in the MCU, SWORD and SHIELD are related in any way aside from the complimentary names?


----------



## FitzTheRuke

MarkB said:


> Do we know whether, in the MCU, SWORD and SHIELD are related in any way aside from the complimentary names?



No, but I expect that SWORD sprang out of SHIELD, one way or the other.


----------



## Rune

MarkB said:


> Do we know whether, in the MCU, SWORD and SHIELD are related in any way aside from the complimentary names?



I don’t think we know anything about SWORD that isn’t in WandaVision. We DO know that the FBI (at least Woo, who may have been briefed by SWORD) and SWORD know about skrulls, but that maked sense, given who co-founded SWORD. 

We know that SWORD makes trips to space (or at least used to), so it’s reasonably possible they know Fury is alive and active. 

We can wonder whether or not Black Widow’s dump of SHIELD secrets onto the internet included SWORD secrets. And, while we’re at it, whether or not HYDRA knew of or had opportunity to infiltrate SWORD.


----------



## pukunui

FitzTheRuke said:


> I think Agnes is just trying to survive - though there may be some part of it that she's responsible for. (Like maybe she was a small-town therapist that was helping Wanda and suggested she needed to find a tougher Wanda within herself, not knowing what Wanda could do.)



I dunno. I feel like the fact that she always turns up at just the right moment with just the right thing suggests to me that she's watching them. She knows that Wanda "rewinds" and edits Vision's memory. I don't think Wanda knows who Agnes really is, and I don't think she is summoning Agnes, the way Vision seems to think, unless she's doing it subconsciously.


----------



## MarkB

pukunui said:


> I dunno. I feel like the fact that she always turns up at just the right moment with just the right thing suggests to me that she's watching them. She knows that Wanda "rewinds" and edits Vision's memory. I don't think Wanda knows who Agnes really is, and I don't think she is summoning Agnes, the way Vision seems to think, unless she's doing it subconsciously.



There's also the matter of the dog in the hydrangeas. Leaving aside how a dog showed up in the first place, did it really just wander off and get itself killed on day one?

I feel like Agnes was involved in Sparky's death, and maybe also in his existence in the first place. Possibly trying to push the twins toward maturity (she was also right there when they first 'levelled up') or trying to push Wanda into confronting her own grief.


----------



## Imaculata

Davies said:


> What I'm inclined to wonder is whether the Wanda who showed up in her red coat is _not_ the same Wanda whom we saw chasing through the suburbs with Billy and Tommy. What if one of those Wandas -- the one who's reverted to her Sokovian accent -- is an illusion?




It seems unlikely to be an illusion. Remember, we first saw sitcom Wanda encounter the drone. While they were talking to Wanda, they lost control of it, and then outcomes Scarlet Witch to throw the drone at SWORD's feet. So that suggests they are the same physical Wanda.

However, I'm intrigued by the idea that Wanda is not consciously aware of what she does as her Scarlet Witch alias. The idea of a split personality has a lot going for it. Let me point out that this episode even specifically points out Wanda's alias in the dialogue, in a way that confused me. What was that all about? (EDIT: They seem to be indicating that Wanda is not Scarlet Witch in the MCU)

I fully expect the show to revisit Wanda's attack on SWORD's facility from a different angle. But if all things in West View are real and physical, but altered... what does this mean for the kids and the dog? And why did the dog die?


----------



## Rune

MarkB said:


> There's also the matter of the dog in the hydrangeas. Leaving aside how a dog showed up in the first place, did it really just wander off and get itself killed on day one?
> 
> I feel like Agnes was involved in Sparky's death, and maybe also in his existence in the first place. Possibly trying to push the twins toward maturity (she was also right there when they first 'levelled up') or trying to push Wanda into confronting her own grief.



Both times, actually. And that would have been the third.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Oh yeah, Agnes almost certainly killed that dog.


----------



## Rune

Imaculata said:


> It seems unlikely to be an illusion. Remember, we first saw sitcom Wanda encounter the drone. While they were talking to Wanda, they lost control of it, and then outcomes Scarlet Witch to throw the drone at SWORD's feet. So that suggests they are the same physical Wanda.
> 
> However, I'm intrigued by the idea that Wanda is not consciously aware of what she does as her Scarlet Witch alias. The idea of a split personality has a lot going for it. Let me point out that this episode even specifically points out Wanda's alias in the dialogue, in a way that confused me. What was that all about?
> 
> I fully expect the show to revisit Wanda's attack on SWORD's facility from a different angle. But if all things in West View are real and physical, but altered... what does this mean for the kids and the dog? And why did the dog die?



A better question might be: If Wanda can’t make matter from nothing (as suggested in the episode), where did the kids and dog come from? In the case of the kids, at least, we know they did come from nothing (material). 

So, either Wanda _can_ make matter out of nothing, or someone else did. Or at least helped.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Maybe the kids are fome an alternate reality like Pietro appears to be? Maybe Agnes or someone is pushing Wanda toward mucking about with reality?  

Seems very possible.


----------



## Sacrosanct

FitzTheRuke said:


> Oh yeah, Agnes almost certainly killed that dog.



In the comics, Vision had a dog named sparky that also dies eating poisonous flowers. So I think it was just a call out to that.


----------



## Rune

Sacrosanct said:


> In the comics, Vision had a dog named sparky that also dies eating poisonous flowers. So I think it was just a call out to that.



A call out? Sure. _Just_ a call out? I doubt it.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

hawkeyefan said:


> Maybe the kids are fome an alternate reality like Pietro appears to be? Maybe Agnes or someone is pushing Wanda toward mucking about with reality?
> 
> Seems very possible.



I doubt that. The kids seem like they're different from Pietro. They can somehow control how fast they age (which Agnes seems to want to happen). I don't think they're from a different reality, as in a different world in the multiverse. I think they're from Wanda's reality, the Hex.


----------



## trappedslider

Remember the kids appeared to be ready to age themselves up, but Wanda was like No and then went into a speech about dealing with grief, which is pretty rich considering what's going on.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

On a side note, the start date for Falcon and the Winter Soldier was announced today as March 19. Episode 9 of this series airs on March 5. But somewhere in all the press releases about the new shows, Disney stated there would be something new from Marvel every week on Disney+. Some time last month, one of the foreign Disney+ sites "accidentally" listed WandaVision as a 10-episode series. So there will be something extra on March 12, whether that is the actual finale episode or a prologue episode, is not known.


----------



## Imaculata

I'm wondering if somewhere after Tony's funeral, Wanda learned that SWORD was doing shady things with Vision's corpse (but how, and from whom?), and then went into a furious rage much like she did against Thanos. SWORD is definitely hiding their involvement in this whole ordeal. And if Wanda does have a split personality, this event may have been the catalyst for all of this.

Dotty has been notably absent in all of these episodes, which is odd considering the casting. Surely she has a bigger part to play in all this? Especially since she is one of the characters, along with Agnes, whose true identity has not been confirmed.


----------



## pukunui

Imaculata said:


> Dotty has been notably absent in all of these episodes, which is odd considering the casting. Surely she has a bigger part to play in all this? Especially since she is one of the characters, along with Agnes, whose true identity has not been confirmed.



I think she'll be back next episode, as there's a quick snippet of her looking suspicious while smelling a yellow rose in the trailer.


----------



## Imaculata

The episode also never calls Wanda the Scarlet Witch. In fact, they placed extra emphasys on the fact that they don't use her alias. I believe behind the scenes, the name Scarlet Witch may have been long tied up in rights issues with the X-men franchise, just like the name Quicksilver. But considering the reveal at the end of the episode, I think they are now spinning the rights issue into a multiverse plot point. Meaning that Scarlet Witch could very well be a version of Wanda from an alternate reality.


----------



## Janx

Imaculata said:


> And why did the dog die?



Sparky died so Wanda would have to give that speech to the boys and you notice her pause/catch in her voice, have the words sink in to herself about what she's doing.  She's not ready to change, but that was the seed being planted for her character growth moment.


----------



## Janx

FitzTheRuke said:


> You mean in that she's CLEARLY Agatha Harkness, right?



I don't know who that is.


----------



## Umbran

Janx said:


> I don't know who that is.




In the comics, Agatha Harkness is a centuries-old witch, leader of the town of New Salem.  She first comes to our attention by becoming governess for Franklin Richards (who later turns out to have reality-bending powers).  In that role, she helps the FF deal with some mystically weird stuff that isn't in their usually science-wheelhouse.

Later, Agatha Harkness tutors Wanda Maximoff in use of magic, to compliment her magic-adjacent "Hex Power" (which in the comics is her ability to alter reality by playing with probabilities).  This ultimately leads to the birth of her children in the comics, as magic is part of their creation.


----------



## Umbran

Imaculata said:


> I fully expect the show to revisit Wanda's attack on SWORD's facility from a different angle. But if all things in West View are real and physical, but altered... what does this mean for the kids and the dog? And why did the dog die?




I don't expect it.  That footage was originally shot as an end-scene for Endgame that they later cut, which introduces complications (like, sets not beign available, etc) if theylater try to do other viewpoints of the same event.


----------



## Umbran

FitzTheRuke said:


> Heck, that might even be the case with your multiple personalities for Wanda - she pulled a version of herself who could "handle things better" than she could. A tough, nasty Wanda, who's taking care of business so she can have a "normal" life.




They seem to share the same body, though - remember the lullaby scene with Rambeau.  We see her go from nice to angry to throwing Monica across town and out of the bubble. 



Tonguez said:


> The last place we see Vision in the movies was during the battle of Wakanda, so its reasonable to assume that Wanda would start searching for Vision in Wakanda.




Except, of course, for how before she gets to start that, she's on the field of battle with several Avengers who didn't blip, and who we can expect would, you know, talk with her and stuff.  And, again, after that fight, who do you think comes to get control of the situation?  From what we see, SWORD is the obvious choice.



Tonguez said:


> There is still an unanswered question of how SWORD got the remains out of Wakanda and in to its own facility - presumably somewhere near Westview, New Jersey.




Exactly how that happens is probably not important to the plot, and will not be answered. 



MarkB said:


> Do we know whether, in the MCU, SWORD and SHIELD are related in any way aside from the complimentary names?




Fury appears on a space station at the end of Spider Man: Far From Home. 



Rune said:


> We can wonder whether or not Black Widow’s dump of SHIELD secrets onto the internet included SWORD secrets. And, while we’re at it, whether or not HYDRA knew of or had opportunity to infiltrate SWORD.




It looks to me like they are positioning SWORD as, "Nick Fury establishes a new organization after SHIELD is blown." (Edit - okay, turns out I was wrong on that.  Carry on.)


----------



## Imaculata

Umbran said:


> I don't expect it.  That footage was originally shot as an end-scene for Endgame that they later cut, which introduces complications (like, sets not beign available, etc) if theylater try to do other viewpoints of the same event.




I did not know that that particular scene was the deleted footage from Endgame. Still, it was so fuzzy in the episode, that they could easily cook up a copy of the set similar to it, and reshoot the scene from a different angle. I don't think that would be hard at all.

Alternatively, they can also explain what happened just through dialogue. But the show has shown us a scene from different perspectives before, like when Monica is ejected from the Hex.


----------



## ART!

Imaculata said:


> I did not know that that particular scene was the deleted footage from Endgame. Still, it was so fuzzy in the episode, that they could easily cook up a copy of the set similar to it, and reshoot the scene from a different angle. I don't think that would be hard at all.
> 
> Alternatively, they can also explain what happened just through dialogue. But the show has shown us a scene from different perspectives before, like when Monica is ejected from the Hex.



Plus, Wanda's emotional reaction to discovering what's going on, and then storming the SWORD facility, and then encountering and/or creating and/or altering this reality bubble - that all seems like something the writers would want to show full-on.


----------



## Umbran

Imaculata said:


> I did not know that that particular scene was the deleted footage from Endgame. Still, it was so fuzzy in the episode, that they could easily cook up a copy of the set similar to it, and reshoot the scene from a different angle. I don't think that would be hard at all.




I didn't say it was _hard_. I said I don't think they'd do it. The set work on WandaVision has been pretty controlled (so I don't know that they'd spend the $$ for a single sequence), and I don't think they are interested in telling us all the details about everything that happened before the show began.


----------



## Imaculata

ART! said:


> Plus, Wanda's emotional reaction to discovering what's going on, and then storming the SWORD facility, and then encountering and/or creating and/or altering this reality bubble - that all seems like something the writers would want to show full-on.




That's true. We also didn't get to see the moment where Wanda finds Vision's corpse. I'm not sure if we will, but it could be very emotional and interesting to see.



Umbran said:


> I didn't say it was _hard_. I said I don't think they'd do it. The set work on WandaVision has been pretty controlled (so I don't know that they'd spend the $$ for a single sequence), and I don't think they are interested in telling us all the details about everything that happened before the show began.




We might get a brief scene in a lab where she finds Vision's corpse. That could be interesting. But I am of course only speculating. I could be completely wrong. Honestly, this show is so unpredictable, it is very hard to predict anything.


----------



## Umbran

ART! said:


> Plus, Wanda's emotional reaction to discovering what's going on, and then storming the SWORD facility, and then encountering and/or creating and/or altering this reality bubble - that all seems like something the writers would want to show full-on.




I won't be surprised if we are left with several unanswered questions, that we may not get resolved until Multiverse of Madness.


----------



## Imaculata

Umbran said:


> I won't be surprised if we are left with several unanswered questions, that we may not get resolved until Multiverse of Madness.




Which raises the question how much of Multiverse of Madness will be set up in Wandavision. Will Wandavision introduce MoM's main antagonist? Or will the other Disney shows do some of that as well? Will Loki and Falcon & Wintersoldier have anything to do with the upcoming movies?


----------



## hawkeyefan

Umbran said:


> I don't expect it.  That footage was originally shot as an end-scene for Endgame that they later cut, which introduces complications (like, sets not beign available, etc) if theylater try to do other viewpoints of the same event.




Is that the case? I know there was a scene that was cut, but in an interview I saw with Bettany, he mentioned being in the scene, and the decision to not include it in the film was made, he was notified by Fiege, because that meant that he was no longer actually in Endgame, and therefore his royalties would change. 

And I don't know if Bettany is actually in the security footage scene......I know a dismantled Vision is, but I don't think they needed Bettany for what we saw. I haven't rewatched it, so maybe his face/likeness is there, but I don't think it was. 

I don't know if we'll see that scene in particular from another angle, but I don't see how we won't see some kind of build up to that moment.


----------



## Umbran

Imaculata said:


> Which raises the question how much of Multiverse of Madness will be set up in Wandavision. Will Wandavision introduce MoM's main antagonist? Or will the other Disney shows do some of that as well? Will Loki and Falcon & Wintersoldier have anything to do with the upcoming movies?




I don't think they do much that is _completely_ stand-alone.  I won't be surprised if Loki is tied up in the Multiverse stuff.

Falcon and Winter Soldier, however, is less likely to be about multiverses and space-hopping, just by nature of the heroes involved.  I expect this to be more about SWORD and the post-blip world, and how society and governments are trying to gmanage (since we expect to see the US Agent).


----------



## Umbran

hawkeyefan said:


> Is that the case? I know there was a scene that was cut, but in an interview I saw with Bettany, he mentioned being in the scene, and the decision to not include it in the film was made, he was notified by Fiege, because that meant that he was no longer actually in Endgame, and therefore his royalties would change.




I don't think they used the _entire_ footage that was cut from Endgame for WandaVision.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Umbran said:


> It looks to me like they are positioning SWORD as, "Nick Fury establishes a new organization after SHIELD is blown."




Except that the series specifically said that SWORD was created by Monica's mother, Maria. So the MCU version has probably been around since the 90's.


----------



## Umbran

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Except that the series specifically said that SWORD was created by Monica's mother, Maria. So the MCU version has probably been around since the 90's.




Ah.  That detail slipped by me.  So, yeah, SWORD has been around since 1995, but hasn't been mentioned before this (a situation we could nitpick as really awkward storytelling, but anyway).  Plenty of time for Hydra infiltration.


----------



## Dire Bare

Umbran said:


> Ah.  That detail slipped by me.  So, yeah, SWORD has been around since 1995, but hasn't been mentioned before this (a situation we could nitpick as really awkward storytelling, but anyway).  Plenty of time for Hydra infiltration.



Well maybe . . . Rambeau created S.W.O.R.D., but I don't think we've been told WHEN she created it, sometimes between the events of Captain Marvel and before the "blip". The Monica Rambeau we leave in Captain Marvel wasn't highly placed in government circles . . . yet.


----------



## Umbran

Dire Bare said:


> Well maybe . . . Rambeau created S.W.O.R.D., but I don't think we've been told WHEN she created it, sometimes between the events of Captain Marvel and before the "blip". The Monica Rambeau we leave in Captain Marvel wasn't highly placed in government circles . . . yet.




Various information online sources I just looked at place the MCU start of SWORD as 1995 - perhaps they put it there as "right after the events of Captain Marvel".  Consider it an approximation or non-canon.   I think the idea that it was _before_ SHIELD gets wiped is sufficient to note that it probably isn't safe from Hydra.


----------



## billd91

Umbran said:


> Various information online sources I just looked at place the MCU start of SWORD as 1995 - perhaps they put it there as "right after the events of Captain Marvel".  Consider it an approximation or non-canon.   I think the idea that it was _before_ SHIELD gets wiped is sufficient to note that it probably isn't safe from Hydra.



Well, *wasn't* safe from Hydra. One might hope that a pretty significant security sweep would have been implemented after SHIELD's level of infiltration was uncovered. That wouldn't close the door to more Hydra shenanigans, but I would certainly hope that if there is Hydra involvement, there's at least some nod given to previous events - even if it is mostly a reference to having to lay low for a while. You gotta hope these organizations learn at least something every once in a while...


----------



## Rune

billd91 said:


> Well, *wasn't* safe from Hydra. One might hope that a pretty significant security sweep would have been implemented after SHIELD's level of infiltration was uncovered. That wouldn't close the door to more Hydra shenanigans, but I would certainly hope that if there is Hydra involvement, there's at least some nod given to previous events - even if it is mostly a reference to having to lay low for a while. You gotta hope these organizations learn at least something every once in a while...



Hayward doesn’t appear to have learned any such lessons. He’s repeating SHIELD’s mistakes from Winter Soldier and even Tony’s mistakes from Age of Ultron.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Rune said:


> Hayward doesn’t appear to have learned any such lessons. He’s repeating SHIELD’s mistakes from Winter Soldier and even Tony’s mistakes from Age of Ultron.



No kidding! He's like, "I'm in charge of protecting the world from living weapons of mass destruction! I know just what to do: Let's antagonise them as much as possible! That'll work great!"


----------



## Umbran

Rune said:


> Hayward doesn’t appear to have learned any such lessons. He’s repeating SHIELD’s mistakes from Winter Soldier and even Tony’s mistakes from Age of Ultron.




Are we actually sure Hayward isn't Hydra?


----------



## Imaculata

Umbran said:


> Are we actually sure Hayward isn't Hydra?




If he is, that would be kind of lame. I'm kind of done with Hydra, after how prominent a role they've played in so many MCU movies.


----------



## Janx

What is Lagos?  from the commercial.


----------



## billd91

Janx said:


> What is Lagos?  from the commercial.



Lagos, Nigeria. Wanda tried to contain the explosion at the beginning of Captain America: Civil War but was unable to completely do so. And people died.


----------



## trappedslider

Janx said:


> What is Lagos?  from the commercial.



The opening of Captain America: Civil War


----------



## Dire Bare

Umbran said:


> Are we actually sure Hayward isn't Hydra?



Heh, heh . . . I think "clueless guy-in-charge" is a well enough worn trope that we don't need to look much further.

I don't think they'll go with the Hydra angle just because it's been done before. But, it's certainly possible.


----------



## Rune

Dire Bare said:


> Heh, heh . . . I think "clueless guy-in-charge" is a well enough worn trope that we don't need to look much further.
> 
> I don't think they'll go with the Hydra angle just because it's been done before. But, it's certainly possible.



They’ve gone out of their way to depict him as being well-informed. I don’t think any apparent ineptitude can be chalked up to cluelessness.

As for being a HYDRA agent: if so, he’s not very good at hiding it.


----------



## Umbran

Dire Bare said:


> Heh, heh . . . I think "clueless guy-in-charge" is a well enough worn trope that we don't need to look much further.




I don't think they are going with "clueless".  I think they are going with "overbearing and controlling".


----------



## Rune

billd91 said:


> Lagos, Nigeria. Wanda tried to contain the explosion at the beginning of Captain America: Civil War but was unable to completely do so. And people died.



As an aside, I’ve never understood why the world blamed her for that. Dude was already going to explode in a populated public place.


----------



## billd91

Rune said:


> As an aside, I’ve never understood why the world blamed her for that. Dude was already going to explode in a populated public place.



You know how people are - they don't necessarily look at the root causes. They look for easy answers. And from the perspective of an outside observer, she's the one moving the exploding guy and getting it to a place where the Wakandan representatives get killed in the explosion - never mind that had she done nothing, people on the ground were going to get killed.

But most importantly, she blamed (blames?) herself.


----------



## Umbran

Rune said:


> As for being a HYDRA agent: if so, he’s not very good at hiding it.




Exactly!  He's in plain sight!  If you were a Hydra agent, you'd... hide, right?  So, clearly he isn't a Hydra agent. But, since you'd never expect them to be there, it is the best way for a Hydra agent to hide, so he _must_ a a Hydra agent...

{cue getting into a land war in Asia, and going in against a Sicilian when death is on the line...}


----------



## BRayne

billd91 said:


> You know how people are - they don't necessarily look at the root causes. They look for easy answers. And from the perspective of an outside observer, she's the one moving the exploding guy and getting it to a place where the Wakandan representatives get killed in the explosion - never mind that had she done nothing, people on the ground were going to get killed.
> 
> But most importantly, she blamed (blames?) herself.




She got trolley problem'd


----------



## billd91

BRayne said:


> She got trolley problem'd



She sure did. But without a chance to mentally fortify herself about the choices.


----------



## DEFCON 1

Heyward's not Hydra, he's Kree.  Gotta start planting the seeds for Secret Invasion in 2023.


----------



## Umbran

DEFCON 1 said:


> Heyward's not Hydra, he's Kree.  Gotta start planting the seeds for Secret Invasion in 2023.




The comic book Secret Invasion was Skrulls taking over SHIELD, not Kree.


----------



## Janx

billd91 said:


> Lagos, Nigeria. Wanda tried to contain the explosion at the beginning of Captain America: Civil War but was unable to completely do so. And people died.



that's the reminder I needed to connect Lagos, to the place.  It was just a word and like the other commercials, it hooked to something.


----------



## Dire Bare

Rune said:


> As an aside, I’ve never understood why the world blamed her for that. Dude was already going to explode in a populated public place.



Considering what half the world believes in real life, that plot point didn't seem too unrealistic to me! It was certainly unfair.


----------



## Dire Bare

Umbran said:


> I don't think they are going with "clueless".  I think they are going with "overbearing and controlling".



Wrong choice of words on my part. I didn't mean clueless as in uninformed, but rather clueless in how to effectively resolve situations rather than escalate them.


----------



## Umbran

I have seen a suggestion that the commercials are going to line up with the Infinity Stones...


----------



## pukunui

Umbran said:


> I have seen a suggestion that the commercials are going to line up with the Infinity Stones...



In what way? I suppose that could work if there are only six commercials. We've only had four out of five episodes so far, after all.

To me, they just seem to be referencing Wanda's trauma points: Stark Industries, Strucker/Hydra, and Lagos.


----------



## Imaculata

pukunui said:


> To me, they just seem to be referencing Wanda's trauma points: Stark Industries, Strucker/Hydra, and Lagos.




That was the impression I got as well. As was pointed out to me earlier in this thread, the Stark toaster and its uncomfortable wait and red light, seem to stand in for the Stark bomb that landed on Wanda's house, as she and her brother waited in fear for it to go off.

Strucker and Hydra of course played an important part recruiting Wanda and her brother, before she changed sides.

And Lagos is of course a very recent trauma that Wanda experienced.

It seems every commercial is a distorted fragment of Wanda's traumatic repressed memories.


----------



## Tonguez

Umbran said:


> Except, of course, for how before she gets to start that, she's on the field of battle with several Avengers who didn't blip, and who we can expect would, you know, talk with her and stuff.  And, again, after that fight, who do you think comes to get control of the situation?  From what we see, SWORD is the obvious choice.
> 
> Exactly how that happens is probably not important to the plot




Yes probably not important to the plot and thus will be one of those lingering gaps.

Just noting though that Wakanda was fairly isolationist and in the case of Winter Soldier refused to hand him over stating that they were able to deal with him in Wakanda. Circumstances did change after Thanos, but I’m not sure why TChalla would think that SWORD was able to deal with a _Vibranium_ synthezoid better than Shuri could


----------



## billd91

Tonguez said:


> Yes probably not important to the plot and thus will be one of those lingering gaps.
> 
> Just noting though that Wakanda was fairly isolationist and in the case of Winter Soldier refused to hand him over stating that they were able to deal with him in Wakanda. Circumstances did change after Thanos, but I’m not sure why TChalla would think that SWORD was able to deal with a _Vibranium_ synthezoid better than Shuri could



In the chaos after the snap, they may have "obtained" Vision's body. They had 5 years to do so, ultimately, before T'Challa's and Shuri's (and Wanda's) restoration.
Besides, I expect the other Avengers brought Vis back to the US and it's entirely possible that SWORD would have been able to get it because it was run by Maria Rambeau, someone they wouldn't have had a dispute with (particularly when Captain Marvel arrives on the scene to vouch for her).


----------



## TwoSix

Tonguez said:


> Yes probably not important to the plot and thus will be one of those lingering gaps.
> 
> Just noting though that Wakanda was fairly isolationist and in the case of Winter Soldier refused to hand him over stating that they were able to deal with him in Wakanda. Circumstances did change after Thanos, but I’m not sure why TChalla would think that SWORD was able to deal with a _Vibranium_ synthezoid better than Shuri could



T'Challa wasn't around to tell anyone what to do with anything, since he got snapped.  The politics of how the world got reorganized in the five years between Infinity War and Endgame is a massive source of possible plot implications.


----------



## Umbran

billd91 said:


> Besides, I expect the other Avengers brought Vis back to the US...




I view this as highly likely.  From the Avenger's point of view, he wasn't a lump of vibranium, he was a fallen comrade.  They get to take his body to what they think of as his home.


----------



## Umbran

pukunui said:


> To me, they just seem to be referencing Wanda's trauma points: Stark Industries, Strucker/Hydra, and Lagos.




In symbolism, we can embrace the power of "and"...

That Stark Toaster commercial...




A thing with a _face_, made by Stark Industries, with a major item on its forehead.  In the comics, Vision is occasionally referred to as a toaster.  So, that thing on the forehead is the Mind Stone.

The Hydra Soak luxury bath powder comes in... a completely cubic, light blue box



That's not a natural shape for a box of bath soap.  Looks a lot like the Tesseract, doesn't it?  While I can see an argument that the toaster is stretching it, I don't think there's a strong argument that Hydra and a blue cube isn't Tesseract.  Really.

And the Strucker ad...




What says "TIME" more than a watch?

And, the Lagos paper towels...




Have we forgotten that the Aether from Thor: the Dark World was a red fluid?




Sure, all these things are references to Wanda's past.  But _ALSO_...


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Umbran said:


> In symbolism, we can embrace the power of "and"...
> 
> That Stark Toaster commercial...
> View attachment 132434
> A thing with a _face_, made by Stark Industries, with a major item on its forehead.  In the comics, Vision is occasionally referred to as a toaster.  So, that thing on the forehead is the Mind Stone.
> 
> The Hydra Soak luxury bath powder comes in... a completely cubic, light blue box
> View attachment 132431
> That's not a natural shape for a box of bath soap.  Looks a lot like the Tesseract, doesn't it?  While I can see an argument that the toaster is stretching it, I don't think there's a strong argument that Hydra and a blue cube isn't Tesseract.  Really.
> 
> And the Strucker ad...
> View attachment 132435
> 
> What says "TIME" more than a watch?
> 
> And, the Lagos paper towels...
> View attachment 132437
> 
> Have we forgotten that the Aether from Thor: the Dark World was a red fluid?
> View attachment 132436
> 
> Sure, all these things are references to Wanda's past.  But _ALSO_...



Yeah, that's what I was saying awhile back. If the remnants/vestiges of the Infinity Stones' power sought out Wanda . . . that would explain a lot of stuff in the show. It's the reason Wanda is so much more powerful than she used to be (Power Stone), it's why there's the time difference (Time Stone), it's why there's the barrier and why Wanda can take things from other realities (Space Stone), it's why Vision is back (Mind Stone), it's why her children exist (Soul Stone), it's why Wanda and her children can manipulate reality (Reality Stone), and it's why there is a hexagon shaped barrier (the 6 Infinity Stones). 

It feels like the Infinity Stones are a part of this. Agnes could just be trying to take advantage of Wanda's reality somehow. There could be no real villain, it could just be the Infinity Stones and Wanda.


----------



## trappedslider

maybe..just maybe we're suffering from a bit of Apophenia?


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

trappedslider said:


> maybe..just maybe we're suffering from a bit of Apophenia?



What's your explanation for all of the other stuff? The commercials have to have a deeper meaning, right? This is a mystery show.


----------



## Umbran

AcererakTriple6 said:


> It feels like the Infinity Stones are a part of this.




So, if this is intentional, the fact that they are referenced in the commercial _in no way_ means that they are relevant to the plot.  In the opening animation sequence for one of the sitcom episodes, we see a shape that is clearly the helmet of the Grim Reaper (in the comics, the Grim Reaper is Eric Williams, brother of Simon Williams, aka Wonder Man, from whom Vision's brain engrams are copied).  That doesn't mean the Grim Reaper is showing up, or relevant to the plot.  They love just _referring_ to the work.



trappedslider said:


> maybe..just maybe we're suffering from a bit of Apophenia?




So, I'm having fun here.  The condescending "we" should take a hike.  Thanks.

There are three texts to any artwork - the text the creator intended, the text they actually created, and the text that the audience gets from it.  All are valid.


----------



## pukunui

I’m open to anything at this point. I guess I should get around to watching the 20-odd MCU movies I haven’t watched yet so I get more of the references.


----------



## DEFCON 1

Umbran said:


> The comic book Secret Invasion was Skrulls taking over SHIELD, not Kree.



Yeah, but in the comics the Skrulls were the bad guys and the Kree were the good.  In the MCU that has so far looked to be reversed.  So it really could go either way.  LOL.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Umbran said:


> So, if this is intentional, the fact that they are referenced in the commercial _in no way_ means that they are relevant to the plot. In the opening animation sequence for one of the sitcom episodes, we see a shape that is clearly the helmet of the Grim Reaper (in the comics, the Grim Reaper is Eric Williams, brother of Simon Williams, aka Wonder Man, from whom Vision's brain engrams are copied). That doesn't mean the Grim Reaper is showing up, or relevant to the plot. They love just _referring_ to the work.



I know it doesn't mean that it's relevant, but it _could _be. It's hard to sift through what is relevant to the plot and what is just an easter egg to previous/future content. There's no harm speculating. Especially if it turns out being true.


----------



## Umbran

DEFCON 1 said:


> Yeah, but in the comics the Skrulls were the bad guys and the Kree were the good.




Um, no.  

When the first Kree/Skrull War comes to Earth, it is by way of Mar-Vell (the first Captain Marvel, himself a Kree) came to inform the Avengers that the Kree were planning to _erase_ humanity.  

The Kree, in the past, took to experimenting on other sentient species, to try to find a way around their own evolutionary stagnation, and also to create super-powered soldiers in their wars (creating the Inhumans in the process).  When their leader realizes that this experimenting will lead to the doom of the Kree... the Accusers (like Ronan) are sent out to eradicate the species they experimented on.

No, the Kree were never good guys.


----------



## DEFCON 1

Umbran said:


> Um, no.
> 
> When the first Kree/Skrull War comes to Earth, it is by way of Mar-Vell (the first Captain Marvel, himself a Kree) came to inform the Avengers that the Kree were planning to _erase_ humanity.
> 
> The Kree, in the past, took to experimenting on other sentient species, to try to find a way around their own evolutionary stagnation, and also to create super-powered soldiers in their wars (creating the Inhumans in the process).  When their leader realizes that this experimenting will lead to the doom of the Kree... the Accusers (like Ronan) are sent out to eradicate the species they experimented on.
> 
> No, the Kree were never good guys.



Fair enough.  I admittedly do not have a deep dive knowledge into the Kree-Skrull War, so my memories of it were that the Skrulls were the Big Bads (making the Kree the "good guys" relatively by comparison.)  I defer to your deeper knowledge of the history.  

That being said... my comment about Heyward being a Kree was merely a joke response anyway.  At this point Heyward could just be a regular doofus that will be shunted back down the S.W.O.R.D. ladder once Fury shows back up.  LOL!


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Regarding the commercials and Infinity Stones, remember that six of the episodes will each cover a different decade of sitcoms, from the 50's to the 00's. So if there are only commercials for those episodes, then there will be six of them.


----------



## pukunui

What I’d really like to know is: what’s happening between the sitcom episodes? We know there’s stuff that happens that doesn’t get broadcast (like Wanda ejecting Monica from the bubble). Does each episode take place literally the next day, or does time pass in between them that we don’t see? Does time even function normally inside the hex? I hope we find out at some point!


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

pukunui said:


> What I’d really like to know is: what’s happening between the sitcom episodes? We know there’s stuff that happens that doesn’t get broadcast (like Wanda ejecting Monica from the bubble). Does each episode take place literally the next day, or does time pass in between them that we don’t see? Does time even function normally inside the hex? I hope we find out at some point!




Considering it is daytime inside Westview at the same time it is nighttime in the outside world, I would say no, time is not working the same. Plus, while I would have to track down which episode it was in, but it is implied by something Darcy says that entire seasons are happening for each decade, so there seems to be a lot more happening than what we are seeing. Or at least for the first three episodes, before the pregnancy, as it seems that played out in just a day or two of sitcom time.


----------



## Dire Bare

Umbran said:


> In symbolism, we can embrace the power of "and"...
> 
> That Stark Toaster commercial...
> View attachment 132434
> A thing with a _face_, made by Stark Industries, with a major item on its forehead.  In the comics, Vision is occasionally referred to as a toaster.  So, that thing on the forehead is the Mind Stone.
> 
> The Hydra Soak luxury bath powder comes in... a completely cubic, light blue box
> View attachment 132431
> That's not a natural shape for a box of bath soap.  Looks a lot like the Tesseract, doesn't it?  While I can see an argument that the toaster is stretching it, I don't think there's a strong argument that Hydra and a blue cube isn't Tesseract.  Really.
> 
> And the Strucker ad...
> View attachment 132435
> 
> What says "TIME" more than a watch?
> 
> And, the Lagos paper towels...
> View attachment 132437
> 
> Have we forgotten that the Aether from Thor: the Dark World was a red fluid?
> View attachment 132436
> 
> Sure, all these things are references to Wanda's past.  But _ALSO_...


----------



## Imaculata

Umbran said:


> And, the Lagos paper towels...
> View attachment 132437
> 
> Have we forgotten that the Aether from Thor: the Dark World was a red fluid?
> View attachment 132436




Nice catch. The dialog in the Lagos commercial also talks about how Lagos helps you clean up a complete mess. A painful reference to the mess that occured in Lagos in the first place.


----------



## pukunui

Imaculata said:


> Nice catch. The dialog in the Lagos commercial also talks about how Lagos helps you clean up a complete mess. A painful reference to the mess that occured in Lagos in the first place.



Doesn’t it say it helps you clean up a mess you didn’t mean to make?

I know enough to know that Wanda didn’t mean to kill people in Lagos.


----------



## Imaculata

pukunui said:


> Doesn’t it say it helps you clean up a mess you didn’t mean to make?




Exactly! Not very subtle.


----------



## DEFCON 1

pukunui said:


> What I’d really like to know is: what’s happening between the sitcom episodes? We know there’s stuff that happens that doesn’t get broadcast (like Wanda ejecting Monica from the bubble). Does each episode take place literally the next day, or does time pass in between them that we don’t see? Does time even function normally inside the hex? I hope we find out at some point!



Obviously Wanda is sitting down and binging old sitcoms on Nick At Night.  She was only born in '89... she wouldn't have the wherewithall to create these shows with the specificity they have without a much better institutional knowledge of the sitcom styles in question, so she gotta do all her research!


----------



## ART!

Tonguez said:


> Just noting though that Wakanda was fairly isolationist and in the case of Winter Soldier refused to hand him over stating that they were able to deal with him in Wakanda. Circumstances did change after Thanos, but I’m not sure why TChalla would think that SWORD was able to deal with a _Vibranium_ synthezoid better than Shuri could






billd91 said:


> In the chaos after the snap, they may have "obtained" Vision's body. They had 5 years to do so, ultimately, before T'Challa's and Shuri's (and Wanda's) restoration.
> Besides, I expect the other Avengers brought Vis back to the US and it's entirely possible that SWORD would have been able to get it because it was run by Maria Rambeau, someone they wouldn't have had a dispute with (particularly when Captain Marvel arrives on the scene to vouch for her).






TwoSix said:


> T'Challa wasn't around to tell anyone what to do with anything, since he got snapped.  The politics of how the world got reorganized in the five years between Infinity War and Endgame is a massive source of possible plot implications.



Yeah, there's some interesting timeline things here. T'Challa is gone for 5 years - so the disorder caused by that gap in leadership could have alllowed someone to slip away with the Vision's body, or someone could have taken advantage of the new leadership somehow, getting Vision in exchange for something. Hard to say.

Vaguely related: we don't know how much time will have passed since the end of Endgame and the next Black Panther movie (assuming the go ahead with one), but at some point in there T'Challa dies or disappears again - forever this time.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

ART! said:


> Vaguely related: we don't know how much time will have passed since the end of Endgame and the next Black Panther movie (assuming the go ahead with one), but at some point in there T'Challa dies or disappears again - forever this time.




No clue about MCU time for that, but because of the time jump, the real world has still not caught up to the MCU world, as the year in MCU time is 2023. So even with the delays in filming and release schedule caused by covid, we are still not caught up yet.

And they are doing a 2nd Black Panther movie, plus Ryan Coogler is also developing a Disney+ series set in Wakanda.


----------



## trappedslider

Umbran said:


> So, I'm having fun here.  The condescending "we" should take a hike.  Thanks.
> 
> There are three texts to any artwork - the text the creator intended, the text they actually created, and the text that the audience gets from it.  All are valid.



I didn't mean for it to be condescending,because I included myself in the we. I may not be typing,but I have been reading and looking up all kinds of connections,theories I'm just not as lore deep as everyone else.


----------



## trappedslider

AcererakTriple6 said:


> What's your explanation for all of the other stuff? The commercials have to have a deeper meaning, right? This is a mystery show.



I was being snarky, but honestly not everything needs to have some deeper meaning, beyond "Hey,I understood that reference."


----------



## FitzTheRuke

trappedslider said:


> I didn't mean for it to be condescending,because I included myself in the we. I may not be typing,but I have been reading and looking up all kinds of connections,theories I'm just not as lore deep as everyone else.



I took it as a conspiratorial "we" as well. More like inclusive self deprecation than condescension. It goes to show how difficult it is to parse tone from text.


----------



## trappedslider

So, i just saw a trailer for the next episode,which had Wanda saying she has no idea how this started,along with Vizion asking what's outside and approaching the edge of the hex.


----------



## Imaculata

trappedslider said:


> So, i just saw a trailer for the next episode,which had Wanda saying she has no idea how this started,along with Vizion asking what's outside and approaching the edge of the hex.




I avoid the trailers to avoid spoilers, but Wanda already said that she has no idea how this started in episode 5. And I believe her.


----------



## trappedslider

Imaculata said:


> I avoid the trailers to avoid spoilers, but Wanda already said that she has no idea how this started in episode 5. And I believe her.



it was a commercial on live tv, and it looked like they also got the truck they were talking about.


----------



## pukunui

trappedslider said:


> So, i just saw a trailer for the next episode,which had Wanda saying she has no idea how this started,along with Vizion asking what's outside and approaching the edge of the hex.



There's another promo that shows Vision pushing through the barrier and then collapsing to his knees on the other side.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

pukunui said:


> There's another promo that shows Vision pushing through the barrier and then collapsing to his knees on the other side.



Interesting. I have been curious as to whether or not he can exist outside of the Hex.


----------



## pukunui

AcererakTriple6 said:


> Interesting. I have been curious as to whether or not he can exist outside of the Hex.



It's right at the beginning of this one:

It includes some stuff from previous episodes as well for some reason but it says at the end that it's a promo for episode 6.


----------



## pukunui

Holy crap! Things just got real in Westview! (Or less real maybe?)


----------



## MarkB

Definitely building up the mystery and tension in this one.


----------



## Davies

So this one references _Malcolm in the Middle_ ... which is kind of terrifying, from what I remember about that series ...

That was a disturbing commercial.

_Now_ can we say that Anges isn't freaking Agatha Harkness?


----------



## Echohawk

Davies said:


> _Now_ can we say that Anges isn't freaking Agatha Harkness?



But... but... she was wearing a _witch _hat in this episode!


----------



## ART!

Echohawk said:


> But... but... she was wearing a _witch _hat in this episode!



Yeah, I think us comic book nerds are being trolled a bit by the writers. Which I'm fine with because it keeps us guessing and seems good-natured.


----------



## Gradine

Echohawk said:


> But... but... she was wearing a _witch _hat in this episode!



I mean, I'm sure the random maniacal laughter didn't really mean anything


----------



## MarkB

It's also worth noting that Agnes was promoted to being credited in the in-universe title sequence.


----------



## Rune

Probably meaningless that Pietro told Wanda’s kids to “Unleash Hell, demon-spawn!”

Right?


----------



## DeviousQuail

Rune said:


> Probably meaningless that Pietro told Wanda’s kids to “Unleash Hell, demon-spawn!”
> 
> Right?



Nothing to see here, folks.

A small part of me is jealous of the folks who are going to binge this show in the future because waiting a week for each episode is THE WORST!


----------



## Nilbog

DeviousQuail said:


> Nothing to see here, folks.
> 
> A small part of me is jealous of the folks who are going to binge this show in the future because waiting a week for each episode is THE WORST!




I agree, it really is difficult! So many questions! 

I'm not sure my friends are thanking me or cursing me as I persuaded them to stick with after the first couple of episodes really put them off. They are now hooked


----------



## TwoSix

DeviousQuail said:


> Nothing to see here, folks.
> 
> A small part of me is jealous of the folks who are going to binge this show in the future because waiting a week for each episode is THE WORST!



Not for me, I feel like the anticipation is a big part of what makes it so fun.  I'm glad a lot of streaming shows (Besides the MCU shows, I'm thinking of The Mandalorian and The Boys) have moved to a weekly format.


----------



## tomBitonti

So Agnes ... perhaps the wrong turn was getting stuck in town, and she was actually trying to leave town when discovered by Vision, except Wanda’s mental control made leaving impossible.  I’m thinking more is going on with Agnes.

TomB


----------



## pukunui

Yeah, I’m confused about Agnes. It does appear she’s under Wanda’s control and yet she also seems to know what’s going on.

It also seems maybe Herb does too.

And Pietro, if it really is him, definitely knows what’s going on.

So what about that terrifying ad? It was oh so very 90s claymation but I don’t get the reference. Is it just “yo-magic” as in “your magic” and is implying that Wanda’s magic is killing everyone?


----------



## DeviousQuail

pukunui said:


> Yeah, I’m confused about Agnes. It does appear she’s under Wanda’s control and yet she also seems to know what’s going on.
> 
> It also seems maybe Herb does too.
> 
> And Pietro, if it really is him, definitely knows what’s going on.
> 
> So what about that terrifying ad? It was oh so very 90s claymation but I don’t get the reference. Is it just “yo-magic” as in “your magic” and is implying that Wanda’s magic is killing everyone?



I'm leaning towards Yo-Magic is Wanda's magic keeping them all alive but they are slowly withering away because they need food. Subconsciously she knows this and that's why it's in the commercial.


----------



## MarkB

pukunui said:


> Yeah, I’m confused about Agnes. It does appear she’s under Wanda’s control and yet she also seems to know what’s going on.
> 
> It also seems maybe Herb does too.
> 
> And Pietro, if it really is him, definitely knows what’s going on.



As Vision went further from the centre of town people became progressively less animated, until the ones near the edge were totally unresponsive.

And yet, even though Agnes had gone as far as it was possible to go, and clearly had no remaining volition to go further, she was still conscious enough to respond to Vision's questioning.

Is it because she wasn't meant to be off the map, and therefore wasn't outside of Wanda's awareness the way the others were? Or was it something about Agnes herself?


pukunui said:


> So what about that terrifying ad? It was oh so very 90s claymation but I don’t get the reference. Is it just “yo-magic” as in “your magic” and is implying that Wanda’s magic is killing everyone?



"Hungry? I remember hungry. I used to be like that all the time."
"What did you do?"
"Snacked on yo' magic, bro."

Something's preying on Wanda's magic? And if it continues she'll shrivel to a husk?


----------



## Morrus

TwoSix said:


> Not for me, I feel like the anticipation is a big part of what makes it so fun.  I'm glad a lot of streaming shows (Besides the MCU shows, I'm thinking of The Mandalorian and The Boys) have moved to a weekly format.



Yeah. Looking forward to it is part of the fun, and the shared experience lasts longer than a few days.


----------



## DeviousQuail

TwoSix said:


> Not for me, I feel like the anticipation is a big part of what makes it so fun.  I'm glad a lot of streaming shows (Besides the MCU shows, I'm thinking of The Mandalorian and The Boys) have moved to a weekly format.



It clearly adds to the suspense and I do enjoy trying to figure things out in between episodes. The timeframe just feels too long for me in the age of streaming. But, if that's the worst of it then I reckon I'll survive.


----------



## Morrus

DeviousQuail said:


> It clearly adds to the suspense and I do enjoy trying to figure things out in between episodes. The timeframe just feels too long for me in the age of streaming. But, if that's the worst of it then I reckon I'll survive.



I think the full-season-dump will be a thing of the past soon. And rightly so!


----------



## embee

Morrus said:


> I think the full-season-dump will be a thing of the past soon. And rightly so!



It's almost as if television show executives knew what they were doing with the old weekly format for serialized drama.


----------



## embee

Gradine said:


> I mean, I'm sure the random maniacal laughter didn't really mean anything



I believe it was more of a cackle than a laugh.


----------



## embee

Probably nothing but...

Who is "Ellis"?

The twins aren't allowed past Ellis Avenue and at the 20 minute mark, the camera lingers on the stop sign at the corner, which winds up saying "Stop Ellis."

That shot can't be an accident.


----------



## TwoSix

MarkB said:


> "Hungry? I remember hungry. I used to be like that all the time."
> "What did you do?"
> "Snacked on yo' magic, bro."
> 
> Something's preying on Wanda's magic? And if it continues she'll shrivel to a husk?



The fact that the kid couldn't access "Yo' Magic" and died is almost certainly relevant.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

embee said:


> Probably nothing but...
> 
> Who is "Ellis"?
> 
> The twins aren't allowed past Ellis Avenue and at the 20 minute mark, the camera lingers on the stop sign at the corner, which winds up saying "Stop Ellis."
> 
> That shot can't be an accident.




I think Ellis Ave was just the limit of what Wanda was controlling, until she pushed the Hex further, in order to save Vision. Agnes is sitting at the intersection of Ellis Ave and another street when Vision found her. So with the new, enlarged Hex, Ellis Ave is no longer an important line to not cross.


----------



## DammitVictor

embee said:


> Probably nothing but...
> 
> Who is "Ellis"?
> 
> The twins aren't allowed past Ellis Avenue and at the 20 minute mark, the camera lingers on the stop sign at the corner, which winds up saying "Stop Ellis."
> 
> That shot can't be an accident.




My best guess is _Warren Ellis_, famous comic book writer. Extensive history with Marvel, but I can't connect him to any major Scarlet Witch stories.


----------



## DammitVictor

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> I think Ellis Ave was just the limit of what Wanda was controlling, until she pushed the Hex further, in order to save Vision. Agnes is sitting at the intersection of Ellis Ave and another street when Vision found her. So with the new, enlarged Hex, Ellis Ave is no longer an important line to not cross.



It's still a very important line not to cross because it still represents the intention to leave.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Shroompunk Warlord said:


> It's still a very important line not to cross because it still represents the intention to leave.




Then what is the line in all the other directions from Westview? Unless Wanda redid all the roads, so that Ellis Ave formed the hexagon around the town.


----------



## Rune

I’m really curious what kind of strain the expanded area is going to put on Wanda, given that she could barely control the folk at the periphery of the smaller area.


----------



## MarkB

Rune said:


> I’m really curious what kind of strain the expanded area is going to put on Wanda, given that she could barely control the folk at the periphery of the smaller area.



Also of interest, there are once again people inside the Hex who know what was going on outside. Want to bet we'll see Vision putting the reverse-whammy on Darcy sometime soon and getting the real scoop on what's been going down?


----------



## Campbell

Not sure if it is related, but Matthew Ellis is the President of the United States mentioned in The Winter Soldier and featured in Iron Man 3 and Agents of Shield.


----------



## Rune

Campbell said:


> Not sure if it is related, but Matthew Ellis is the President of the United States mentioned in The Winter Soldier and featured in Iron Man 3 and Agents of Shield.



That seems like it could be very related.


----------



## Sacrosanct

Yeah, this is a complete set up for the sentinels to make an appearance, and for the new captain marvel to make an appearance. They can't do TOO much, since the movies have to be stand alone, but that's what I'm betting at any rate.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Sacrosanct said:


> Yeah, this is a complete set up for the sentinels to make an appearance, and for the new captain marvel to make an appearance. They can't do TOO much, since the movies have to be stand alone, but that's what I'm betting at any rate.




Yeah, that is what some of the fan theories out there are saying. Once the mutants are a part of the MCU, the Sentinels will show up, and the research into Vision's body is either the beginning of the creation of the Sentinels or the resurrection of Ultron. I am leaning more toward Ultron because of Quicksilver and the now several mentions of Ultron killing the MCU version of him. Even though that seems a bit old and tired, same as if they were to bring back Hydra as a major enemy.


----------



## TolkienThePiss

Shroompunk Warlord said:


> My best guess is _Warren Ellis_, famous comic book writer. Extensive history with Marvel, but I can't connect him to any major Scarlet Witch stories.



Warren Ellis did write _Nextwave_, which featured...


Spoiler



...Monica Rambeau who would like you to know that she used to lead the Avengers.


----------



## Sacrosanct

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Yeah, that is what some of the fan theories out there are saying. Once the mutants are a part of the MCU, the Sentinels will show up, and the research into Vision's body is either the beginning of the creation of the Sentinels or the resurrection of Ultron. I am leaning more toward Ultron because of Quicksilver and the now several mentions of Ultron killing the MCU version of him. Even though that seems a bit old and tired, same as if they were to bring back Hydra as a major enemy.



My guess is that Hayward knew vision was recreated, and his main goal is to get him back (or at least his body since it appears vision can't survive outside of the hex)so he can finish the sentinels and then go after all mutants. After all, he's shown some serious animosity towards mutants so far the past couple episodes. Like, exceptional hostility.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Sacrosanct said:


> My guess is that Hayward knew vision was recreated, and his main goal is to get him back (or at least his body since it appears vision can't survive outside of the hex)so he can finish the sentinels and then go after all mutants. After all, he's shown some serious animosity towards mutants so far the past couple episodes. Like, exceptional hostility.




Just remember that mutants do not exist in the MCU, per the rights belonging to Fox for mutants. And though they now own that part of Fox, and can use mutants, they have yet to be introduced into the MCU, so Hayward cannot be targeting mutants specifically. Rather, he seems to have a dislike for, and animosity toward, supers in general. I am wondering if he lost people close to him in Infinity War and this built up in him for 5 years and now he has plans for revenge.


----------



## Campbell

Contains spoilers based on Falcon and Winter Soldier promotional stuff



Spoiler



It looks like Falcon and the Winter Soldier is going to feature the revival of the super soldier project (Weapons Plus Program) with a new state sponsored Captain America type (John Walker / US Agent). I expect there is going to be a generalized sense that the Sokovia Accords are not enough. That this sort of power needs to sit in the hands of "legitimate authority". I view SWORD's attempt to possess Vision along those same lines.


----------



## Lidgar

DeviousQuail said:


> I'm leaning towards Yo-Magic is Wanda's magic keeping them all alive but they are slowly withering away because they need food. Subconsciously she knows this and that's why it's in the commercial.



I also see the soul stone. The island surrounded by water, the shark (red skull) offering the yogurt (stone) that cannot be opened (touched) until he dies?


----------



## doctorbadwolf

FitzTheRuke said:


> Right. This is why SWORD is trying to contain her, keep her "happy", and not piss her off. She's an active threat to all of reality.



Which is tonally consistent. She needs to be essentially a potential deity of cosmic destruction or creation, capable of literally rewriting reality. 

Otherwise, whatever moment they find to be equivalent to “No more mutants” won’t mean much.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

doctorbadwolf said:


> Which is tonally consistent. She needs to be essentially a potential deity of cosmic destruction or creation, capable of literally rewriting reality.




All that makes me wonder what would happen if Wanda were possessed by the Phoenix Force?


----------



## hawkeyefan

So the commercial this time around doesn’t seem so much about past trauma as maybe her current situation? 

Like she’s the kid....trapped on an island, hungry with nothing to eat....along comes a shark who says he’s not hungry anymore because “I ate Yo’Magic”. 

Seems like maybe someone or something is thriving from her predicament and her constant use of her powers. 

Something dark and supernatural is my guess, based on some of the comics and also all the imagery and cues in this episode. Agnes as a witch...I agree with those who said she almost feels like a red herring at this point. But a witch always serves some greater power. 

And Pietro called the kids “demonspawn” which feels deliberate, and may not bode well.

Great episode, overall.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Rune said:


> Might be an indicator that Wanda isn’t creating the situation. Unless she got a chance to watch lots of American sitcom reruns while growing up in Sokovia.



I mean, realistically yeah, she probably did.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> All that makes me wonder what would happen if Wanda were possessed by the Phoenix Force?





Be a great way to explain a full-on Day One, no half-measures, no BS, genuine reboot to the entire Marvel Universe.


----------



## pukunui

I'm starting to question whether Wanda is still a protagonist or if she's really one of possibly several antagonists. Yes, she is a traumatized person; however, in her grief, she is causing great pain and suffering to a town full of people while at the same time holding her lover hostage. Vision may not be able to exist outside of Wanda's bubble, but he is clearly not fully under her control and is a self-aware being.

Even if there is some other power behind the throne, Wanda is still doing terrible things, both to random strangers and to at least one of hte people she professes to love.

I'm finding it harder to like her the longer the series goes on. Is that how I _should_ be feeling?


----------



## Tonguez

embee said:


> Probably nothing but...
> 
> Who is "Ellis"?
> 
> The twins aren't allowed past Ellis Avenue and at the 20 minute mark, the camera lingers on the stop sign at the corner, which winds up saying "Stop Ellis."
> 
> That shot can't be an accident.



President Ellis is the POTUS in the MCU
,Following the Battle of Sokovia and the Inhuman Outbreak, Ellis authorized the Sokovia Accords and subsequently the formation of the Advanced Threat Containment Unit, the replacement for S.H.I.E.L.D., with a express purpose of containing the Inhuman Threat.



pukunui said:


> I'm finding it harder to like her the longer the series goes on. Is that how I _should_ be feeling?




Yes you should be feeling this way, Wanda is doing bad things and the heroes are working against her. The set up seems to have at least 3 Antagonist with different agendas working against each other.

I like the subversive approach where former heroes become antagonist and those we expect to be villains are actually the hero. Thats why I'm advocating for Agnes as the local witch, whose trying to protect the town from Wanda. I think Vision is the Mcguffin of the scenario, which removes him from hero status. Of course the obvious heroic team in it are the Trio of Jummy Woo, Moniva Rambeau and Dr Darcy Lewis. They make for a great team and there is a fan push for Jimmy Woo to get his own spin off series as a kind of MCU 'X-FIles' - I'd love to see it.


----------



## MarkB

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Just remember that mutants do not exist in the MCU, per the rights belonging to Fox for mutants. And though they now own that part of Fox, and can use mutants, they have yet to be introduced into the MCU, so Hayward cannot be targeting mutants specifically. Rather, he seems to have a dislike for, and animosity toward, supers in general. I am wondering if he lost people close to him in Infinity War and this built up in him for 5 years and now he has plans for revenge.



So far, what he's shown is an extreme dislike and intolerance of Wanda herself, and I'm not yet sure whether that's entirely a genuine dislike, or if he's deliberately painting her as a terrorist threat who must be destroyed, because she knows too much about whatever he had SWORD doing with Vision's remains.


----------



## Rune

Tonguez said:


> I think Vision is the Mcguffin of the scenario, which removes him from hero status.



Vision can’t be a McGuffin. The point of a McGuffin is that it doesn’t matter what it is, only that it is desirable. It very much matters what Vision is.

Also, a McGuffin has no autonomy of any kind. It doesn’t _do_ anything. Vision _does_. He is not a McGuffin.


----------



## Dire Bare

MarkB said:


> And yet, even though Agnes had gone as far as it was possible to go, and clearly had no remaining volition to go further, she was still conscious enough to respond to Vision's questioning.



Agnes was just as unresponsive as the others . . . until Vision gave her a "jolt" of his yellow energy. She was then able to talk to him "out of character". When he jolted her again, she returned to being "Agnes" and drove back into the center of town.


----------



## MarkB

Dire Bare said:


> Agnes was just as unresponsive as the others . . . until Vision gave her a "jolt" of his yellow energy. She was then able to talk to him "out of character". When he jolted her again, she returned to being "Agnes" and drove back into the center of town.



When Vision tries to talk to one of the other 'frozen' residents she doesn't respond at all. When he first speaks to Agnes she responds, asks the way to the Town Square Scare, and claims to have taken a wrong turn and got lost. It's only then that Vision uses his powers to 'wake' her.


----------



## Rune

Dire Bare said:


> Agnes was just as unresponsive as the others . . . until Vision gave her a "jolt" of his yellow energy. She was then able to talk to him "out of character". When he jolted her again, she returned to being "Agnes" and drove back into the center of town.



Not so. They actually exchange dialogue before he wakes her. That is considerably more responsive than the others. She _does_ appear to be on the verge of crying, though.

Also just noticed, when wakened, she reaches for something just under her throat, very much as if searching for something that isn’t there. Like a brooch.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Tonguez said:


> President Ellis is the POTUS in the MCU




Not at the time of WandaVision. Remember that the MCU is still ahead of real time because of the Snap/Blip. It is currently 2023 in the MCU, so Ellis has been out of office at this point for several years. While exact dates are hard to pin down, he was either President in place of Obama from 2009-2016 or Obama only had one term and was defeated by Ellis in 2012 and Ellis was then President from 2013-2020. Either way, he is out and we do not know who was elected in 2020 and is the MCU President in 2023.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

It seems like ALL of the residents know that they're trapped, they just can't usually talk about it, unless they use innocuous phrases. The neighborhood watch guy asked Wanda if it was okay or if she wanted something different (suggesting he knew that she was "boss"). Others have done this sort of behaviour, Agnes most often. 

(I still say she's obviously *Ag*atha Hark*nes*s. It might be nothing more than she's a character inspired by aspects of that one, with not much more going on than what we see here, or she could wind up stealing a portion of Wanda's powers and becoming a "witch" herself, who knows?)


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

FitzTheRuke said:


> It seems like ALL of the residents know that they're trapped, they just can't usually talk about it, unless they use innocuous phrases. The neighborhood watch guy asked Wanda if it was okay or if she wanted something different (suggesting he knew that she was "boss"). Others have done this sort of behaviour, Agnes most often.




That was Herb in that costume and he has seems to be much more aware, like Agnes, so I do not think he is an ordinary resident at all.


----------



## MarkB

Thinking about Mutants, and with there already being speculation that the show may be used to bring them into the MCU, I wonder about the whole thing about peoples' cells being changed when they go through the Hex barrier. There's already a strong suggestion of Monica maybe getting superpowers due to multiple exposures, but what about even single exposures?

Maybe the Hex will wind up sweeping out across the country, even the world, before all of this wraps up, affecting some people more than others, and that's going to be the explanation for the introduction of mutant abilities.


----------



## Tonguez

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Not at the time of WandaVision. Remember that the MCU is still ahead of real time because of the Snap/Blip. It is currently 2023 in the MCU, so Ellis has been out of office at this point for several years. While exact dates are hard to pin down, he was either President in place of Obama from 2009-2016 or Obama only had one term and was defeated by Ellis in 2012 and Ellis was then President from 2013-2020. Either way, he is out and we do not know who was elected in 2020 and is the MCU President in 2023.



Yeah Ellis came after Obama in the MCU.
Still having a street named after a past President still fits, and as an easter egg links to his role in both the Sokovia Accords and the containment of Inhuman threats (ATCU).
Hmmm I wonder if SWORD developed out of the ATCU over the 5 years of the Snappening- or more likely that ATCU being a creation of Agents of SHEILD is being ignored and its functions passed to SWORD


----------



## Maxperson

ART! said:


> Yeah, I think us comic book nerds are being trolled a bit by the writers. Which I'm fine with because it keeps us guessing and seems good-natured.



Yeah.  I was ready to write off that theory until she started cackling like a witch before Vision restored Wanda's control.


----------



## Maxperson

pukunui said:


> Yeah, I’m confused about Agnes. It does appear she’s under Wanda’s control and yet she also seems to know what’s going on.
> 
> It also seems maybe Herb does too.
> 
> And Pietro, if it really is him, definitely knows what’s going on.
> 
> So what about that terrifying ad? It was oh so very 90s claymation but I don’t get the reference. Is it just “yo-magic” as in “your magic” and is implying that Wanda’s magic is killing everyone?



I have two theories about Pietro.

First theory is that he's her subconscious come to voice all of her hidden worries about what she is doing.

Second theory is that since the head of SWORD can see inside the town, and we know he has "something big" going on, maybe he's found a way to insert a fake Pietro to gather intel.  In this last episode, Pietro was really intent on finding out from Wanda how she is doing what she is doing.


----------



## MarkB

So, something I haven't seen much focus on in the thread so far is the revelation that Wanda is not Hayward's primary target. He found a way to see inside the Hex, but he isn't tracking her - he's tracking Vision. Obviously this ties into theories that SWORD were using Vision's corpse to develop something new and nasty, and that they want their 'primary asset' back.

But beyond that, I wonder if Vision _is_ Hayward's means of seeing inside the Hex. Maybe Vision is transmitting data without even being aware of it, as a result of whatever they were doing to him at SWORD.


----------



## TwoSix

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Not at the time of WandaVision. Remember that the MCU is still ahead of real time because of the Snap/Blip. It is currently 2023 in the MCU, so Ellis has been out of office at this point for several years. While exact dates are hard to pin down, he was either President in place of Obama from 2009-2016 or Obama only had one term and was defeated by Ellis in 2012 and Ellis was then President from 2013-2020. Either way, he is out and we do not know who was elected in 2020 and is the MCU President in 2023.



I imagine a President getting snapped is not something they considered in the 22nd Amendment.


----------



## MarkB

TwoSix said:


> I imagine a President getting snapped is not something they considered in the 22nd Amendment.



Which is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the Snap. Half the world's population was declared legally dead. What was their status when they turned up again after the Blip? Ownership, marital status, legal responsibilities, temporal age versus physical age - all a huge, unprecedented mess.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

TwoSix said:


> I imagine a President getting snapped is not something they considered in the 22nd Amendment.




When he was President also makes a difference in this. The only thing we know for sure, because of solid dates, is that Ellis was President from 2013-2016, instead of Obama. There may be some references that put him as President for all of Obama's 8 years, but there are also references from the TV shows about the Obama Presidency. Some of the TV shows had veiled references to Trump and MAGA, since they were more topical and closer to real life. But Marvel has said that, despite some connections between previous TV shows and the movies, they are not all part of a shared universe, only with the Disney+ shows will they be interconnected. So we have to go only with the movie references to the President. So if Ellis was the fictional President for Obama's years, the Snap would not matter with him, but if he were President from 2013-2020, then maybe it would. But you would think between all the movies and other sources out there, that who was elected MCU President in 2016 would be known. Now we just need to bug Marvel about who it was and if he (or she) got Snapped or not.   lol


----------



## TwoSix

MarkB said:


> Which is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the Snap. Half the world's population was declared legally dead. What was their status when they turned up again after the Blip? Ownership, marital status, legal responsibilities, temporal age versus physical age - all a huge, unprecedented mess.



Oh, absolutely.  I’d love to see a show explore the first year or two after the Blip, even with no superheroes.


----------



## Older Beholder

TwoSix said:


> Oh, absolutely.  I’d love to see a show explore the first year or two after the Blip, even with no superheroes.



It's nothing to do with the Marvel universe, but there was a show called 'The Leftovers' which is roughly this.
I've still never seen the final 3rd season, but the first two were very good.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

ModernApathy said:


> It's nothing to do with the Marvel universe, but there was a show called 'The Leftovers' which is roughly this.
> I've still never seen the final 3rd season, but the first two were very good.




The 4400 did something similar, as it was about the return of 4400 people, assumed missing or dead, some have been missing up to 50 years.


----------



## DammitVictor

You know, all this talk of Sentinels and the Weapon X program and the Sokovian Accords reminds me of the time, when I was much younger, that I swore an oath that I would uphold, defend, and obey the legitimate authorities of the Realm.

It was a damned foolish oath, and I'm blessed by the fact that I've still never encountered one.


----------



## pukunui

I’m wondering if the surfer dude shark in the Yo-Magic commercial had any connection to “dude bro” Pietro.

If so that might lend some credence to the theory that Pietro’s _not_ actually Wanda’s brother.


----------



## MarkB

pukunui said:


> I’m wondering if the surfer dude shark in the Yo-Magic commercial had any connection to “dude bro” Pietro.
> 
> If so that might lend some credence to the theory that Pietro’s _not_ actually Wanda’s brother.



I did briefly try to work out a potential connection to the Silver Surfer, but that seemed thin - there's really nothing else there apart from "hey, surfboard".


----------



## pukunui

MarkB said:


> I did briefly try to work out a potential connection to the Silver Surfer, but that seemed thin - there's really nothing else there apart from "hey, surfboard".



I mean, I wonder if the shark is meant to be representing Pietro (or whoever he really is), since they've both got that whole "dude bro" schtick. If Pietro is actually Mephistopheles, as others have suggested, then maybe he's the "shark" feeding on Wanda's magic or whatever the ad is trying to imply.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

pukunui said:


> I’m wondering if the surfer dude shark in the Yo-Magic commercial had any connection to “dude bro” Pietro.
> 
> If so that might lend some credence to the theory that Pietro’s _not_ actually Wanda’s brother.




Well, it is a play on the Yoplait yogurt brand and all their kid-oriented yogurt snacks. As for the shark, I swear I can remember an old series of commercials that used one, but I cannot remember the product it advertised. Or it could just be related to the Street Sharks toys and cartoons of the 90's.


----------



## pukunui

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Well, it is a play on the Yoplait yogurt brand and all their kid-oriented yogurt snacks. As for the shark, I swear I can remember an old series of commercials that used one, but I cannot remember the product it advertised. Or it could just be related to the Street Sharks toys and cartoons of the 90's.



Oh, I am sure there are multiple references. And yes, the whole claymation thing took me back to the 90s big time.

This one just seems a lot less obvious in terms of what it's referencing in-universe. It seems to be less a reference to one of Wanda's trauma points and more a reference to something else ... but what? Hence my wondering if maybe we're supposed to question if Pietro is some kind of "shark" who has come to feed on Wanda's energy.

And do we think that when Wanda sees Vision and Pietro as corpses that it's just her mind playing tricks on her? Or is that what they _actually_ look like and the alive version is just an illusion?


----------



## embee

pukunui said:


> Oh, I am sure there are multiple references. And yes, the whole claymation thing took me back to the 90s big time.
> 
> This one just seems a lot less obvious in terms of what it's referencing in-universe. It seems to be less a reference to one of Wanda's trauma points and more a reference to something else ... but what? Hence my wondering if maybe we're supposed to question if Pietro is some kind of "shark" who has come to feed on Wanda's energy.
> 
> And do we think that when Wanda sees Vision and Pietro as corpses that it's just her mind playing tricks on her? Or is that what they _actually_ look like and the alive version is just an illusion?



It's her mind playing tricks.

Dead Pietro looked like Evan Peter, not Aaron Taylor-Johnson.


----------



## Imaculata

I think if Vision was actually a walking corpse, his little trip outside the anomaly would have revealed that. Instead, he just started falling apart. Still, the previous episode did show Wanda breaking into SWORD to retrieve Vision. So I'm still fuzzy on the details.

I wonder what effect the anomaly will have on Darcy. Will she seemlessly be adopted into the sitcom story? Will she still be handcuffed to a car?


----------



## Nilbog

Imaculata said:


> I wonder what effect the anomaly will have on Darcy. Will she seemlessly be adopted into the sitcom story? Will she still be handcuffed to a car?




I'm going to bet she'll be some sort of performer in the circus, maybe as escapologist


----------



## Umbran

Morrus said:


> Yeah. Looking forward to it is part of the fun, and the shared experience lasts longer than a few days.




It is funny how they are re-inventing the wheel.  Streaming services seem to be slowly moving themselves back to the broadcast TV model of presentation, but now you have to pay for each individual channel.


----------



## Umbran

Imaculata said:


> I think if Vision was actually a walking corpse, his little trip outside the anomaly would have revealed that. Instead, he just started falling apart.




I don't think that was "falling apart" - it looked more like being _ripped_ apart - all his bits streaming back into the Hex, not to the ground.


----------



## Marc Radle

Umbran said:


> It is funny how they are re-inventing the wheel.  Streaming services seem to be slowly moving themselves back to the broadcast TV model of presentation, but now you have to pay for each individual channel.



Agreed.
I’m actually thrilled that they are doing week to week. I never liked the ‘drop an entire season at once’ approach, so I’m very happy to see streaming networks moving away from it


----------



## Umbran

pukunui said:


> Yeah, I’m confused about Agnes. It does appear she’s under Wanda’s control and yet she also seems to know what’s going on.
> 
> It also seems maybe Herb does too.
> 
> And Pietro, if it really is him, definitely knows what’s going on.




So, this seems consistent with what we see:
The closer you are to Wanda, the more active you are - the farther folks are from Wanda (or perhaps more accurately, the less involved people are in the action of the "sitcom"), the more they become like lawn ornaments. 
The more active you are in the Hex, the more aware you are.  Vision and Peitro are very close to Wanda, so they have more awareness and free will.  Agnes became less aware the farther she was from the center of the action.


----------



## Umbran

Marc Radle said:


> I’m actually thrilled that they are doing week to week. I never like the ‘drop an entire season at once’ approach, so I’m very happy to see streaming networks moving away from it




Yeah.  Even when I have the opportunity, I have little desire to binge-watch.  Which has been crummy when virtually everyone else has seen a show, so when I get around to it, nobody else is interested in discussing it, and they all have more information than I do.  The weekly format helps return the social aspect of viewing - like in this thread


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> Of course the obvious heroic team in it are the Trio of Jummy Woo, Moniva Rambeau and Dr Darcy Lewis. They make for a great team and there is a fan push for Jimmy Woo to get his own spin off series as a kind of MCU 'X-FIles' - I'd love to see it.



It has been good to see what in other properties would be throwaway characters get development like this.  And I'd not mind seeing him in the replacement for Agents of SHIELD...

Interestingly - everyone I have seen speak about Jimmy Woo and a spinoff keep referring to it as "Jimmy Woo, Agent of SWORD".  He used to be in SHIELD, and currently works for the FBI.  And with someone like Hayward at the helm, I don't think Woo (who has been set out as a pretty decent guy) would want to be in SWORD at this point..


----------



## Marc Radle

I have a feeling that by the end of the show, Heyward may no longer be in that role. Heck, maybe Jimmy somehow takes over Sword! Or maybe even Monica ...


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Imaculata said:


> I wonder what effect the anomaly will have on Darcy. Will she seemlessly be adopted into the sitcom story? Will she still be handcuffed to a car?




Fortune Teller maybe?


----------



## hawkeyefan

Umbran said:


> I don't think that was "falling apart" - it looked more like being _ripped_ apart - all his bits streaming back into the Hex, not to the ground.




Pretty sure he was reverting to the state he was in before the Hex. Which was in pieces. 



Umbran said:


> It has been good to see what in other properties would be throwaway characters get development like this.  And I'd not mind seeing him in the replacement for Agents of SHIELD...
> 
> Interestingly - everyone I have seen speak about Jimmy Woo and a spinoff keep referring to it as "Jimmy Woo, Agent of SWORD".  He used to be in SHIELD, and currently works for the FBI.  And with someone like Hayward at the helm, I don't think Woo (who has been set out as a pretty decent guy) would want to be in SWORD at this point..




They could go a few different ways with him. In the comics he’s the head of Atlas. Very much like Nick Fury was to SHIELD. Atlas has gone through a few iterations.

Woo and Darcy in a MCU X-Files type show seems to have some traction.


----------



## Umbran

hawkeyefan said:


> In the comics he’s the head of Atlas.




Well, in the comics, he's been many things - he's been around since the 1950s.  So, there's lots of places they could go with him, if they wanted.


----------



## trappedslider

I want him to have his own magic show.....


----------



## Dire Bare

Umbran said:


> It is funny how they are re-inventing the wheel.  Streaming services seem to be slowly moving themselves back to the broadcast TV model of presentation, but now you have to pay for each individual channel.



I used to work customer service for DirecTV. One of our canned responses to customers complaining about the price of the channel bundles was, "If we offered each channel to you individually, everything would cost more."

It's coming true, to a degree.

The streaming landscape is still evolving, but so far I still prefer it to the old cable TV/satellite TV paradigm. I'll usually subscribe to a service for a particular show, like WandaVision, but then also make it a point to watch everything else on the "channel" that piques my interest. Once my show is over, assuming I've mostly exhausted the other content I'm interested in, I hit the "cancel subscription" option.

My biggest challenge with this model is the temptation to subscribe to more than one or two streaming services at a time . . . if there are multiple shows on different services that I'm interested in.

Pretty sure this is part of the reason why Disney+ has sooooo many Marvel and Star Wars shows in the works, they want a tentpole show actively running on the service at all times, so that nobody hits that "cancel subscription" button. They are ahead of the other streaming services on this . . . with maybe HBO Max coming in on their heels.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Dire Bare said:


> I used to work customer service for DirecTV. One of our canned responses to customers complaining about the price of the channel bundles was, "If we offered each channel to you individually, everything would cost more."
> 
> It's coming true, to a degree.
> 
> The streaming landscape is still evolving, but so far I still prefer it to the old cable TV/satellite TV paradigm. I'll usually subscribe to a service for a particular show, like WandaVision, but then also make it a point to watch everything else on the "channel" that piques my interest. Once my show is over, assuming I've mostly exhausted the other content I'm interested in, I hit the "cancel subscription" option.
> 
> My biggest challenge with this model is the temptation to subscribe to more than one or two streaming services at a time . . . if there are multiple shows on different services that I'm interested in.
> 
> Pretty sure this is part of the reason why Disney+ has sooooo many Marvel and Star Wars shows in the works, they want a tentpole show actively running on the service at all times, so that nobody hits that "cancel subscription" button. They are ahead of the other streaming services on this . . . with maybe HBO Max coming in on their heels.




But are you the only one watching each streaming app you subscribe to? I subscribe to Disney+ and there are five people in my household that watch things on it, so it will probably never be cancelled. Same with Netflix. Someone is always watching something on it.

And yes, in that big press reveal they had last year for all the new shows, I am pretty sure they said their release plan was for there to be a new episode of something Marvel every week of the year for 2021. And probably into 2022 also. And then you add in the Star Wars shows to that too.


----------



## Tonguez

Nilbog said:


> I'm going to bet she'll be some sort of performer in the circus, maybe as escapologist



I’m so hoping she ends up in a yellow waitress uniform inside a mobile diner selling cupcake - and with green hair


----------



## hawkeyefan

Umbran said:


> Well, in the comics, he's been many things - he's been around since the 1950s.  So, there's lots of places they could go with him, if they wanted.




Yup, that’s what I said!


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> But are you the only one watching each streaming app you subscribe to? I subscribe to Disney+ and there are five people in my household that watch things on it, so it will probably never be cancelled. Same with Netflix. Someone is always watching something on it.
> 
> And yes, in that big press reveal they had last year for all the new shows, I am pretty sure they said their release plan was for there to be a new episode of something Marvel every week of the year for 2021. And probably into 2022 also. And then you add in the Star Wars shows to that too.



Well that's good, because I subscribed to Disney+ for the1st season of Mandalorian, and I didn't watch anything on it when that finished until the 2nd season of Mandalorian. (I'm terrible at remembering to cancel things, and it's possible that my kids, teenagers, watched something on it)... but it felt like a big waste of money. I'd rather there was something worth watching!


----------



## pukunui

hawkeyefan said:


> Woo and Darcy in a MCU X-Files type show seems to have some traction.



As long as they have a better sense of what they're doing (instead of just making it up as they go along), I could potentially get invested in that. I used to be a fan of the X-Files, and I am liking what I have seen of both Woo and Darcy.


----------



## Umbran

Dire Bare said:


> My biggest challenge with this model is the temptation to subscribe to more than one or two streaming services at a time . . . if there are multiple shows on different services that I'm interested in.




I know.  We have several at the moment, but they all have two or more shows on them we watch at least weekly, so we take it that they're still worth it  But we do have to watch in the long run to make sure that we don't leave them paid when they don't have shows we want...



Dire Bare said:


> Pretty sure this is part of the reason why Disney+ has sooooo many Marvel and Star Wars shows in the works, they want a tentpole show actively running on the service at all times




Yep  CBS All Access did similarly, with 23 weeks of a new episode of a Trek show each week.  Listening to me talk about Discovery made my wife decide she wanted to see it, so that's still on....


----------



## Mallus

I've been doing a bad job unsubscribing from Disney+ for several months now. I have the package deal with ESPN+ and Hulu, and there always seems to be a reason for not cancelling. Wandavision, finishing Archer on Hulu, the expanded Australian Open coverage on ESPN+, watching Hamilton again, etc.

CBS All Access was much easier. Is there new Star Trek content? No? Unsubscribe!


----------



## Umbran

Mallus said:


> CBS All Access was much easier. Is there new Star Trek content? No? Unsubscribe!




There was just The Stand, which was quite good.


----------



## Blue

Umbran said:


> So, this seems consistent with what we see:
> The closer you are to Wanda, the more active you are - the farther folks are from Wanda (or perhaps more accurately, the less involved people are in the action of the "sitcom"), the more they become like lawn ornaments.
> The more active you are in the Hex, the more aware you are.  Vision and Peitro are very close to Wanda, so they have more awareness and free will.  Agnes became less aware the farther she was from the center of the action.



Just to build on what you were saying, there also seems to be the "ethical" points that Pietro brought up - there's been no outside children until this episode, so she must have been keeping them asleep until now regardless of how close/fare they were.  (He also mentioned for the most part couples staying together.)


----------



## pukunui

Blue said:


> Just to build on what you were saying, there also seems to be the "ethical" points that Pietro brought up - there's been no outside children until this episode, so she must have been keeping them asleep until now regardless of how close/fare they were.  (He also mentioned for the most part couples staying together.)



Yes, which puts a new spin on episode 2's creepy "for the children" refrain.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

I think it's interesting how they're still going for the "evil government people want to stop superheroes!" plot point from Captain America: Civil War. I'm not sure if there is a true "villain" in this show, but I've got a feeling that Hayward is going to be the closest thing we get to a villain. I could see them making Pietro be Mephisto, as Wanda seems to not know why Pietro is there, but I'm not sure on that.


----------



## Rune

AcererakTriple6 said:


> I think it's interesting how they're still going for the "evil government people want to stop superheroes!" plot point from Captain America: Civil War. I'm not sure if there is a true "villain" in this show, but I've got a feeling that Hayward is going to be the closest thing we get to a villain. I could see them making Pietro be Mephisto, as Wanda seems to not know why Pietro is there, but I'm not sure on that.



I wonder when we’ll find out what Darcy found out about Hayward; she probably won’t remember/be able to communicate it while inside the hex. Unless Vision wakes her.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

I am going to call this right now: There will be no Mephisto. Disney was never goint to put the "Devil" into this show. They theoretically could do a villain with powers, but they'd more likely use Grim Reaper, Master Pandemonium, or even Blackheart, before they'd do Mephisto. They _might_ use Mephisto, Blackheart, or some other "Devil" character in Helstrom, but not here. It would have to be a horror-style show for that. Mark my words.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Rune said:


> I wonder when we’ll find out what Darcy found out about Hayward; she probably won’t remember/be able to communicate it while inside the hex. Unless Vision wakes her.



Yeah. I'm really excited for the next few episodes. The stakes are getting higher. I love how this show is able to keep us engaged and guessing like this. It's a nice feeling.


----------



## Dire Bare

Umbran said:


> There was just The Stand, which was quite good.



I only get past the first couple of episodes. It was okay, but . . . . not scary. Does it get better further in? I suppose so, if you felt it was "quite good".

Can't be worse then the previous TV adaptation . . . .


----------



## pukunui

Rune said:


> I wonder when we’ll find out what Darcy found out about Hayward; she probably won’t remember/be able to communicate it while inside the hex. Unless Vision wakes her.



She managed to send the files to Woo before she left the room, didn’t she?


----------



## Rune

pukunui said:


> She managed to send the files to Woo before she left the room, didn’t she?



Yup. I missed it because she didn’t say anything about it, but we are briefly shown her typing his email adress (or whatever) just after she found out whatever she found.  Real easy to miss, though (at least for me on my phone). Good catch!


----------



## ART!

MarkB said:


> So far, what he's shown is an extreme dislike and intolerance of Wanda herself, and I'm not yet sure whether that's entirely a genuine dislike, or if he's deliberately painting her as a terrorist threat who must be destroyed, because she knows too much about whatever he had SWORD doing with Vision's remains.



It's _possible_ he knows about the existence of mutants (however recent), fears/hates them, and knows Wanda is one.


Dire Bare said:


> Agnes was just as unresponsive as the others . . . until Vision gave her a "jolt" of his yellow energy. She was then able to talk to him "out of character". When he jolted her again, she returned to being "Agnes" and drove back into the center of town.



...which is weird if he doesn't have a Mind Stone in him. _Interesting_ weird!


----------



## Tonguez

FitzTheRuke said:


> I am going to call this right now: There will be no Mephisto. Disney was never goint to put the "Devil" into this show. They theoretically could do a villain with powers, but they'd more likely use Grim Reaper, Master Pandemonium, or even Blackheart, before they'd do Mephisto. They _might_ use Mephisto, Blackheart, or some other "Devil" character in Helstrom, but not here. It would have to be a horror-style show for that. Mark my words.




Yeah I dont think Mephisto will show up in WandaVision either nor do I think Blackheart will be used, but note that a stained glass window depicting a devil is shown in the Loki trailer (which besides the comic storyline, is another reason why people and jumping at Mephisto). 
I’m ready to see Nightmare if they do in fact bring in an currently unknow supernatural villain, but don’t think they will.


----------



## MarkB

Any guesses which show they'll be riffing off next episode? I'm not really familiar with any family-based sitcoms from the 2000s, though I'm sure there were plenty.

I did have one brief horrified vision of Hannah Montana, but hopefully they have better candidates to choose from.


----------



## BRayne

MarkB said:


> Any guesses which show they'll be riffing off next episode? I'm not really familiar with any family-based sitcoms from the 2000s, though I'm sure there were plenty.
> 
> I did have one brief horrified vision of Hannah Montana, but hopefully they have better candidates to choose from.




The Office and Modern Family I believe


----------



## pukunui

BRayne said:


> The Office and Modern Family I believe



Yeah, the clips of Wanda in a plaid shirt talking to the camera is a reference to Modern Family, and when she says "a case of the Mondays", she's quoting Office Space.


----------



## MarkB

BRayne said:


> The Office and Modern Family I believe



Ah, okay - of those I've seen one episode of the British version of The Office, so I look forward to missing those references.

At least it wasn't reality TV - that could have got entirely too meta.


----------



## Umbran

Dire Bare said:


> I only get past the first couple of episodes. It was okay, but . . . . not scary. Does it get better further in? I suppose so, if you felt it was "quite good".




The Stand isn't a horror story.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Umbran said:


> The Stand isn't a horror story.




That depends on your definition of horror. It is not blood and gore horror, but it is still horror/supernatural/creepy.


----------



## Imaculata

It is odd that Vision finds Agnes in her car at the edge of town. It seems to me like Agnes made an attempt to escape, but was stopped just before she reached the edge of the anomaly. Considering Agnes is a main cast member of Wanda's sitcom world, I'm surprised she even got that far. It seems Wanda's hold over the town is slowly slipping. Herb also seemed more aware of his state. And then there's what Agnes said:

"No one leaves. Wanda won't even let any of us think about it. All is lost."


----------



## Older Beholder

It felt to me like whoever was previously controlling Agnes is now controlling Quicksilver, given that he’s now the one hanging around keeping an eye on the family in much the same way she was previously.

Perhaps that gave Agnes a chance to try and escape?

One thing’s for sure, this show is setting a high bar for the shows that will follow.


----------



## Zardnaar

Between episode 4 and 6 we binge watched 5 seasons of The Wire so took a break. 

 I'm not sure if Wanda is evil or has gone dark or she's doing it because she has to or is the least bad option. 

 Sure there's something tragic going on. Next week on Wandavision.


----------



## Tonguez

ModernApathy said:


> It felt to me like whoever was previously controlling Agnes is now controlling Quicksilver, given that he’s now the one hanging around keeping an eye on the family in much the same way she was previously.
> 
> Perhaps that gave Agnes a chance to try and escape?
> 
> One thing’s for sure, this show is setting a high bar for the shows that will follow.



Im not sure that Agnes and nu-Pietro have the same Source/Controller. Agnes has tended to be helpful and protective of the town and the twin children, she’s also shown a healthy deference to Wanda. Pietro on the other hand has been a disruptive element, disturbing the town and children (Wiccan at least) and has been provocative towards Wanda. Their roles seem to be opposite (though perhaps both focussed on the same goal).
Just recalling too that it still hasnt been identified who Jimmy Woos ‘secret witness’ was - maybe _Agnes_ is the witness and she was trying to reach Jimmy while Wanda was distracted by nu-Pietro.

it is a high bar, I’m quietly confiedent that the next few series will do their utmost to keep pace with Wandavision, so 2021 looks like a good year for streaming superheroes

edit: corrected name from Wanda to _Agnes_


----------



## Older Beholder

Tonguez said:


> Im not sure that Agnes and nu-Pietro have the same Source/Controller. Agnes has tended to be helpful and protective of the town and the twin children, she’s also shown a healthy deference to Wanda. Pietro on the other hand has been a disruptive element, disturbing the town and children (Wiccan at least) and has been provocative towards Wanda. Their roles seem to be opposite (though perhaps both focussed on the same goal).
> Just recalling too that it still hasnt been identified who Jimmy Woos ‘secret witness’ was - maybe Wanda is the witness and she was trying to reach Jimmy while Wanda was distracted by nu-Pietro.
> 
> it is a high bar, I’m quietly confiedent that the next few series will do their utmost to keep pace with Wandavision, so 2021 looks like a good year for streaming superheroes




Yeah, for every theory I have there’s always some doubt in my mind or something that doesn’t quite add up. Agnes did seem to show up whenever Wanda or Vision seemed to be getting suspicious that something was going on in earlier episodes.
I agree she seemed more helpful than Pietro who is clearly trouble. But I just feel since the kids were born the focus has shifted...

Like, I have a feeling that Wanda made a deal for this perfect TV life with Vision that might come at the cost of her twins. There seemed to be something pushing her to have them, ‘For the children’ etc. but maybe that was just her subconscious?

As for the upcoming shows I imagine Falcon and the Snowman (as a guy at my office calls it) will have a much bigger audience than WandaVision, and Loki looks like a lot of fun too.


----------



## Older Beholder

Also I can’t wait to see Dr Darcy show up in the TV reality,

 surely...


----------



## Imaculata

Zardnaar said:


> I'm not sure if Wanda is evil or has gone dark or she's doing it because she has to or is the least bad option.




If we are to believe what she says to Pietro, she does not know how all of this happened. She just felt a great sadness and emptyness, and felt all alone.

I don't believe Wanda is evil. And I suspect there is more at work here, which may reveal that she isn't entirely to blame for all this.


----------



## Umbran

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> That depends on your definition of horror. It is not blood and gore horror, but it is still horror/supernatural/creepy.




Not everything that is creepy is horror.  The Stand is post-apocalyptic dark fantasy.


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> Just recalling too that it still hasnt been identified who Jimmy Woos ‘secret witness’ was - maybe Wanda is the witness and she was trying to reach Jimmy while Wanda was distracted by nu-Pietro.




Did you mean to write, "maybe _Agnes_ is the witness..."?  Because otherwise this doesn't make a whole lot of sense.


----------



## Dire Bare

Umbran said:


> The Stand isn't a horror story.



According to the author, Steven King, it is! It's about what he fears the most, disease. I also found the book pretty terrifying myself when I read it.

When I watched the first few episodes of the recent CBS adaptation, I was probably suffering from, "_the book is better_" syndrome . . . .



Umbran said:


> Not everything that is creepy is horror.  The Stand is post-apocalyptic dark fantasy.



Can't it be both? I agree it's post-apocalyptic dark fantasy, but I also feel that it's horror. Scared the crap out of me (the book)!


----------



## Umbran

Dire Bare said:


> According to the author, Steven King, it is!




Everyone gets an opinion.  And much of the time he's a fine author.  But, that doesn't mean he's particularly good at classifying literature.  

To wit:  Trolls are scary.  Giant spiders are scary.  Being caught by orcs under mountains is scary.  Corrupted people eating raw fish in underground pools and hissing in the dark are scary.  Dragons are scary.

_The Hobbit_ may well have more traditionally scary bits per page than _The Stand_.  However, is not a horror story.  There's scary stuff in lots of things that aren't horror, so that can't be the determiner.  _The Stand_ doesn't have enough of the other bits that make a thing horror to qualify.



Dire Bare said:


> Can't it be both?




I am not the Genre Police.  I just have an opinion.  To my mind, it simply isn't horror, and I think classifying it as such is misleading, and sets expectations incorrectly.  If you aren't an academic, most of the point of genre definition is setting expectations.


----------



## Tonguez

Umbran said:


> Did you mean to write, "maybe _Agnes_ is the witness..."?  Because otherwise this doesn't make a whole lot of sense.



Oops yes I meant Agnes, I didnt even realise I had put the wrong name in


----------



## Omand

So, a bit of a thread detour here.

So, earlier in the thread, some viewers thought that comments Monica made about contacting an astrophysicist were a reference to bringing Reed Richards and the Fantastic Four in the MCU.

What if the comments about an astrophysicist were related to an existing character in the MCU.  What if Jane Foster or Erik Selvig were being referenced.  I think Jane Foster is the more likely reference here.  All of the rumours for Thor: Love and Thunder indicate that Jane is taking on the mantle of Thor.  With the reveals that the energy in the Hex, or going into and out of the Hex, causes cellular changes in people, perhaps that instigates a change in Jane?

I know that the comic version of the story has her dying of cancer when she takes on the mantle of Thor, but the MCU could be tweaking the story slightly.  Or, who knows, perhaps the Hex does cause cancer in some people?

Cheers


----------



## Imaculata

I am completely in favor of Ms Portman making a cameo on Wandavision .


----------



## Omand

Oh, and as a follow up to my own post.  If the Fantastic Four are being subtly introduced into the MCU via WandaVision then I think it is through the offhand comment by Hayward that he still has astronauts out in the space to be recovered after the blip.

Pretty sure that this was brought up before, but I cannot find the post at the moment.

Cheers


----------



## Umbran

Omand said:


> So, earlier in the thread, some viewers thought that comments Monica made about contacting an astrophysicist were a reference to bringing Reed Richards and the Fantastic Four in the MCU.




Sorry - she referred to contacting an "aerospace engineer".  

Especially since Darcy Lewis is herself an astrophysicist, and Jane Foster's former student.  Calling in Jane that way would be kinda awkward.  "Sorry, Darcy, but you aren't awesome enough.  We need your mentor, but we won't name her in front of you..."

In the most recent episode, Rambeau mentioned meeting up with "my guy".  Women don't usually refer to other women as guys.  We can probably expect it to be a man... though he might well have, say, three others in tow, ready to be exposed to the barrier and get powers, just like it looks like Monica has....


----------



## Omand

Umbran said:


> Sorry - she referred to contacting an "aerospace engineer".
> 
> Especially since Darcy Lewis is herself an astrophysicist, and Jane Foster's former student.  Calling in Jane that way would be kinda awkward.  "Sorry, Darcy, but you aren't awesome enough.  We need your mentor, but we won't name her in front of you..."
> 
> In the most recent episode, Rambeau mentioned meeting up with "my guy".  Women don't usually refer to other women as guys.  We can probably expect it to be a man... though he might well have, say, three others in tow, ready to be exposed to the barrier and get powers, just like it looks like Monica has....



Umbran,

You are right, I misremembered the line.

Which might indeed still point us to the Fantastic Four.  We shall see this week hopefully.


----------



## Umbran

Omand said:


> Which might indeed still point us to the Fantastic Four.  We shall see this week hopefully.




I saw word that the last three episodes are hour-long, which would be cool.


----------



## Omand

Oh, one last thing on the Darcy point.

I know that they have referred to Darcy as an Astrophysicist in WandaVision, but I think that might be one of the in-jokes for the show.

When Darcy was introduced in Thor, she was Jane's intern, yes, but with an English Lit degree if I recall correctly (I just rewatched the film about two weeks ago, but I do not remember the exact line).  She was the only one to apply for the internship.  In Thor: The Dark World, she is still Jane's intern, with an "intern" of her own who again appears to not have any science background.

Not saying that Darcy could not have totally changed her field of studies and earned a legitimate PhD in astrophysics (or maybe just an undergrad or Masters'), but I do not think we have had enough time in-universe for that to be true (even with the time stretch).

That said, it could be a MCU hand-wave.

Cheers


----------



## Morrus

Omand said:


> Not saying that Darcy could not have totally changed her field of studies and earned a legitimate PhD in astrophysics (or maybe just an undergrad or Masters'), but I do not think we have had enough time in-universe for that to be true (even with the time stretch).



She had a political science degree._ Thor: The Dark World_ is set in 2013. The current Marvel timeline is our year +5 (the jump forward after the snap), so it's 2026. I'm pretty sure 13 years is long enough to get a PhD!


----------



## Omand

Looks like I am behind on the timeline.

Yes, 13 years would be enough.  Especially if she did her work in the UK or EU (UK is more likely with Jane being at University of London as of Thor: The Dark World) where it is much easier to skip directly from an undergrad degree to Doctoral studies, and where the North American general standard of 6-7 years for a PhD is compressed down to 3-4 based upon differences in the system.

Cheers


----------



## BRayne

The fact that she ideally had some credit in whatever paper's Foster and Selvig wrote probably helped her along, and if they got snapped, she might be the foremost expert on those concepts.


----------



## Umbran

Omand said:


> That said, it could be a MCU hand-wave.



Eh.  Every mention of science in the MCU is a hand-wave.  I mean, hasn't it struck you that they're _ALL_ astrophysicists?  Even those who are not dealing at all with stars and space?  Apparently, they think "astro-" means "extra-"


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Morrus said:


> She had a political science degree._ Thor: The Dark World_ is set in 2013. The current Marvel timeline is our year +5 (the jump forward after the snap), so it's 2026. I'm pretty sure 13 years is long enough to get a PhD!




No, five years in the future from Infinity War and the Snap. That was a 2018 release, so this is 2023 in the MCU, not 2026.


----------



## Rabulias

I was getting kind of a D'Spayre vibe when Wanda was talking about feeling all alone. An obscure Dr Strange villain, but powerful nonetheless.


----------



## BRayne

I don't think Darcy's course of study is mentioned in _Thor: The Dark World_, it's in _Thor _that she is a Political Science Student and intern. Being that she has an intern herself in the second she might be in Grad School for Astrophysics at that point.


----------



## Tonguez

L


Umbran said:


> Eh.  Every mention of science in the MCU is a hand-wave.  I mean, hasn't it struck you that they're _ALL_ astrophysicists?  Even those who are not dealing at all with stars and space?  Apparently, they think "astro-" means "extra-"



lol, good point but ya know Space-Time and Relative Dimensions, at least theyre not all studying the Quantum realm :- eek


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> lol, good point but ya know Space-Time and Relative Dimensions, at least theyre not all studying the Quantum realm :- eek




"Do you guys just put the word 'quantum' in front of everything?"


----------



## Maxperson

Umbran said:


> "Do you guys just put the word 'quantum' in front of everything?"



I ate a quantum hotdog today.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Maxperson said:


> I ate a quantum hotdog today.



LOL.

Radioactivity was replaced by Genetic Engineering was replaced by Quantum X. 

It always goes to show that a lot of people have no idea what any of these things actually _do_, but they are the trendy science of their days.


----------



## Maxperson

FitzTheRuke said:


> LOL.
> 
> Radioactivity was replaced by Genetic Engineering was replaced by Quantum X.
> 
> It always goes to show that a lot of people have no idea what any of these things actually _do_, but they are the trendy science of their days.



Yep.  I'll lay you good odds, though, that my hotdog only had a single quantum of quality meat in it.


----------



## Tonguez

FitzTheRuke said:


> LOL.
> 
> Radioactivity was replaced by Genetic Engineering was replaced by Quantum X.
> 
> It always goes to show that a lot of people have no idea what any of these things actually _do_, but they are the trendy science of their days.



Dont forget Nanotech, like Green Goblin who went from weird biochemicals to nanites and armour


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Tonguez said:


> Dont forget Nanotech, like Green Goblin who went from weird biochemicals to nanites and armour



Right! I missed Nanotech.


----------



## Umbran

Radioactive, genetically engineered, quantum nanotech.  With sprinkles.


----------



## Maxperson

Umbran said:


> Radioactive, genetically engineered, quantum nanotech.  With sprinkles.



It is Mephisto!


----------



## Umbran

Maxperson said:


> It is Mephisto!




Mephisto has burnt caramel.


----------



## Henry

And don’t forget Cyber!


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> Eh.  Every mention of science in the MCU is a hand-wave.  I mean, hasn't it struck you that they're _ALL_ astrophysicists?  Even those who are not dealing at all with stars and space?  Apparently, they think "astro-" means "extra-"



Not so much astronomers as astro-misnomers.


----------



## wicked cool

Herb and Agnes-they make comments to Wanda and clearly have some sort of freewill at times. My theory is they are not human but either robots or minor demons

Does Wanda have mind control powers in the comics? I thought she had powerful magic but not in control?


----------



## Rune

wicked cool said:


> Herb and Agnes-they make comments to Wanda and clearly have some sort of freewill at times. My theory is they are not human but either robots or minor demons
> 
> Does Wanda have mind control powers in the comics? I thought she had powerful magic but not in control?



Actually, I’ve been thinking about a similar idea. While I’m still not ready to rule out the possibility that Pietro is a minion of or is some malevolent third party*, I’m beginning to wonder if he’s a Life Decoy Model sent in by Hayward, made using knowledge gained from years of studying Vision’s corpse.

* It’s clear that something’s up with this Pietro. Not only does he have all kinds of information beyond the scope of his experiences – about the Hex and the outside – his entire personality is different from the Pietro who convinced Wanda to join the good guys in Age of Ultron. This guy doesn’t appeal to _anybody’s_ better nature.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Rune said:


> * It’s clear that something’s up with this Pietro. Not only does he have all kinds of information beyond the scope of his experiences – about the Hex and the outside – his entire personality is different from the Pietro who convinced Wanda to join the good guys in Age of Ultron. This guy doesn’t appeal to _anybody’s_ better nature.




His personality fits the one from the comics and the one from the X-Men movies.


----------



## ART!

ModernApathy said:


> It felt to me like whoever was previously controlling Agnes is now controlling Quicksilver, given that he’s now the one hanging around keeping an eye on the family in much the same way she was previously.
> 
> Perhaps that gave Agnes a chance to try and escape?
> 
> One thing’s for sure, this show is setting a high bar for the shows that will follow.



They have a really good mix of shows lined up right now, in terms of genre and tone. I started writing a list of them and their tones, but we probably all know what's planned, and for those who don't, there's Wikipedia.


----------



## Rune

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> His personality fits the one from the comics and the one from the X-Men movies.



Comics...maybe. X-Men movies? No way. He’s dickish in those, but definitely not malevolently destructive. That’s all he’s been so far in WandaVision. Since the moment he’s shown up, he’s done nothing but actively strain Wanda’s relationships, encourage her sons’ mischief, and attack Wanda’s sanity. He does not mean well. His very first words indicated that he wants to squeeze her to death.


----------



## Imaculata

While I do find Pietro suspicious (especially his interest in how Wanda did all this), so far I feel his personality is in line with a certain type of character often seen in 90's sitcoms. He's the Uncle Joey.


----------



## Umbran

Rune said:


> Comics...maybe. X-Men movies? No way. He’s dickish in those, but definitely not malevolently destructive.




Eh.  He smashes pumpkins and steals candy.  If he wanted to be malevolently destructive, pumpkins wouldn't be the things that get busted up.

He says, and I quote, _“I’m just trying to do my part, okay? Come to town unexpectedly, create tension with the brother-in-law, stir up trouble with the rugrats, and ultimately give you grief. I mean, that’s what you wanted, isn’t it?”_

So, I am not so sure we should be blaming other malevolent beings for his behavior.


----------



## Umbran

wicked cool said:


> Herb and Agnes-they make comments to Wanda and clearly have some sort of freewill at times. My theory is they are not human but either robots or minor demons
> 
> Does Wanda have mind control powers in the comics? I thought she had powerful magic but not in control?




In the comics, Wanda has magic, and her mutant powers.  Her mutant powers were originally massive probability manipulation to make entirely improbable things happen.  They've been retconned several times - once to be natural Chaos Magic manipulation, and then again to be reality warping/probability manipulation.  And since then again to include natural magic.  It's kind of a mess.


----------



## Rune

Umbran said:


> He says, and I quote, _“I’m just trying to do my part, okay? Come to town unexpectedly, create tension with the brother-in-law, stir up trouble with the rugrats, and ultimately give you grief. I mean, that’s what you wanted, isn’t it?”_



Huh. You quoted a thing that supports my argument to suggest that it supports the opposite. 

I’m not saying you’re wrong, but I am going to hold that up as evidence that WandaVision is deliberately using writing that suggests ambiguity. I wouldn’t be terribly surprised if multiple things that now seem mutually exclusive turn out to be true. 

But, also: the Pietro that Wanda grew up with was fundamentally good and this one is evil.


----------



## Imaculata

Rune said:


> But, also: the Pietro that Wanda grew up with was fundamentally good and this one is evil.




I have not seen him perform any outright evil acts. The worst thing he does, is joke about Vision dying again.
But he also cares about the kids and enjoys spending time with them. He also listens to Wanda, when she tells him about her grief.


----------



## Rune

Imaculata said:


> I have not seen him perform any outright evil acts. The worst thing he does, is joke about Vision dying again.
> But he also cares about the kids and enjoys spending time with them. He also listens to Wanda, when she tells him about her grief.



Well, of course not. He didn’t come to be _outright_ evil; the totality of his actions are _subtly_ evil – his every interaction with the kids is well-summed up in his own words: “Raise hell, demon-spawn!”

His every interaction with Vision serves to divide him from Wanda (even replace him as a father-figure — Pietro’s words, not mine). His counseling of Wanda validates her actions and comforts her, but without true empathy, as shown when he says the thing that gets him blasted.

Two other things worth looking at: the telepathic kid thinks he’s a vampire and is afraid of him. And this Pietro says he was shot like a chump – which is a weird thing to say about someone who sacrificed his life to save another.

Okay, one more, addressing the idea this Pietro might be the one from the Fox movies: Fox X-Men Quicksilver is so much faster than bullets that he can rearrange them in flight. That Pietro didn’t get shot like a chump in the street. At least not from the front, like the corpse suggests (and like Age of Ultron Pietro did).

[Edit to clarify: With regard to Pietro’s relationship with the kids (as a replacement father-figure), he is a consistent corrupting influence. He isn’t shown steering them away from mischief once. Always toward. Always at the expense of others.]


----------



## Umbran

Rune said:


> Huh. You quoted a thing that supports my argument to suggest that it supports the opposite.




He thinks he is doing what she wants.  And there's a lot of question about how much free will people in the Hex have.  I am not sure that speaks to _him_ being malevolent.



Rune said:


> But, also: the Pietro that Wanda grew up with was fundamentally good and this one is evil.




What has he done that could be called "evil"?  He smashed up some pumpkins, and has been a bit aggravating.  Has he actually done any significant harm to anyone in the Hex?


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

We now know what will be airing on March 12, the Friday in between the end of WandaVision and start of Falcon & Winter Soldier. There will be a show about the making of WandaVision, so Disney is sticking to what they said about something new Marvel-related every week of the year. It just won't be an episode of one of the shows every week.









						Marvel Studios Announces ASSEMBLED, a Behind-the-Scenes Look at the Making of the Marvel Cinematic Universe
					

'Assembled: The Making of WandaVision' premieres March 12, 2021 on Disney+.




					www.marvel.com


----------



## ART!

So, WandaVision is currently the most popular tv series _in the world_.

"Parrot Analytics, an audience attention measurement system which analyzes social media, fan ratings, and piracy information as indicators of audience demand, says the show moved to the top of its series being watched worldwide as of the fifth episode."

(From this article in Forbes.)


----------



## Umbran

ART! said:


> So, WandaVision is currently the most popular tv series _in the world_.




That's pretty cool.  If they can keep to that with _Falcon and Winter Soldier_, and _Loki_, they may have something.


----------



## Tonguez

ART! said:


> So, WandaVision is currently the most popular tv series _in the world_.
> 
> "Parrot Analytics, an audience attention measurement system which analyzes social media, fan ratings, and piracy information as indicators of audience demand, says the show moved to the top of its series being watched worldwide as of the fifth episode."
> 
> (From this article in Forbes.)


----------



## Gradine

I dunno, I am _significantly _less interested in _Falcon and Winter Soldier _than either _WandaVision _or _Loki_


----------



## Blue

Tonguez said:


> Just recalling too that it still hasnt been identified who Jimmy Woos ‘secret witness’ was - maybe _Agnes_ is the witness and she was trying to reach Jimmy while Wanda was distracted by nu-Pietro.



I seem to remember Jimmy referring to his witness as "him", which would (likely) preclude Agnes.

Can someone double check me if that's correct?


----------



## Gradine

Tonguez said:


> View attachment 132888



Hey Mickey... why are you looking at Vision like that...


----------



## Rune

Blue said:


> I seem to remember Jimmy referring to his witness as "him", which would (likely) preclude Agnes.
> 
> Can someone double check me if that's correct?



It’s correct.


----------



## ART!

Umbran said:


> That's pretty cool.  If they can keep to that with _Falcon and Winter Soldier_, and _Loki_, they may have something.






Gradine said:


> I dunno, I am _significantly _less interested in _Falcon and Winter Soldier _than either _WandaVision _or _Loki_



Of the series known to be in the works, _F&WS, Hawkeye_, and _Secret Invasion_ look like they'll be the ones most in the vein of the MCU as we know it thus far, i.e. continuing the story of the _Avengers_ and _Civil War_ movies and characters. Other planned series might play into that as well, of course.

_Loki_ might play into the _WandaVision_ and _Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness _thread.

_Ms Marvel_ and _She-Hulk_ will probably play into that Avengers stuff, too, but they'll be introducing new major-ish characters, too, so the dynamics might be fairly different.

_Moon Knight_ will, I hope, be very different!


----------



## Gradine

I just want to be saved from more origin stories. If they can keep doing stealth-origins like they appear to be doing with Nebula in _WandaVision _or just skip the dumb thing altogether a la the new _Spider-man _I'll be happy


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Gradine said:


> I just want to be saved from more origin stories. If they can keep doing stealth-origins like they appear to be doing with Nebula in _WandaVision _or just skip the dumb thing altogether a la the new _Spider-man _I'll be happy



I agree. I kinda hope that when they do Fantastic Four they just start with "That mission went wrong and we got powers!" instead of dragging it out. That's been done. To Death.

My favourite Superman Origin in the comics was in All-Star Superman. One Page. Something like four panels, that said something along the lines of "Dying Planet." (Showed Krypton); "Last Hope" (Parents putting baby into a rocket); "New Home" (rocket heading for earth); "Kindly Couple" (Ma and Pa pulling him out of crashed rocket; next page... "Superman!" Done. Short and Sweet, and who doesn't know it anyway?


----------



## Morrus

FitzTheRuke said:


> I agree. I kinda hope that when they do Fantastic Four they just start with "That mission went wrong and we got powers!" instead of dragging it out. That's been done. To Death.
> 
> My favourite Superman Origin in the comics was in All-Star Superman. One Page. Something like four panels, that said something along the lines of "Dying Planet." (Showed Krypton); "Last Hope" (Parents putting baby into a rocket); "New Home" (rocket heading for earth); "Kindly Couple" (Ma and Pa pulling him out of crashed rocket; next page... "Superman!" Done. Short and Sweet, and who doesn't know it anyway?



The kid for whom this is their first Superman. I agree that origin stories get tiresome as you get older, because you keep seeing them, but for every movie there's a generation for whom that's their first. While you can do it too often, once every 10 years or so seems OK to me.


----------



## ART!

FitzTheRuke said:


> I agree. I kinda hope that when they do Fantastic Four they just start with "That mission went wrong and we got powers!" instead of dragging it out. That's been done. To Death.



I can't think about an MCU FF movie without getting giddy. I imagine an FF movie opening _in media res_, with them all on a ship that's tearing through a collapsing wormhole while it's being attacked by Negative Zone hordes, and each of the FF is doing their character-defining schtick. 

That said, I'd be okay if they retold the origin relatively chronologically, as long as the whole thing is working at the level of the MCU's better films. 

Basically, I trust them to do it well.


----------



## Umbran

ART! said:


> Basically, I trust them to do it well.




They have done a really good job overall of finding writers and directors who understand what they are working with, and have done some great casting, too. 

The FF are _hard_ to get right, because of that family dynamic that other teams don't really have.  I wish them luck, because getting it right would be _awesome_.


----------



## ART!

Marvel Studios seems to just not attempt a new project until they feel they've got the "right" take on it. They have their list of priorities, a basic sense (or more) of what it should feel like, and then hunt around for directors and/or stars to get them off the ground. Something like that.

One thing with the FF is there's at least a couple options for how they can configure things, i.e. with or without kids, which then has lots of implications in terms of casting and characterization.


----------



## Tonguez

Umbran said:


> They have done a really good job overall of finding writers and directors who understand what they are working with, and have done some great casting, too.
> 
> The FF are _hard_ to get right, because of that family dynamic that other teams don't really have.  I wish them luck, because getting it right would be _awesome_.



I still think the whole Battle of New York scene remains a masterclass in using action to convey character personality and group dynamic. so if they can keep that up it bodes well for future movies - albeit none of the subsequent movies have managed to be as good.  Maybe get the Russos in to advise on FF?


----------



## ART!

Tonguez said:


> I still think the whole Battle of New York scene remains a masterclass in using action to convey character personality and group dynamic. so if they can keep that up it bodes well for future movies - albeit none of the subsequent movies have managed to be as good.  Maybe get the Russos in to advise on FF?



I'm not _crazy_ about Jon Watts as the director of an FF movie, but I'm hoping I'm just uninformed. His two Spider-man movies are good to great, and I guess they have a gee-whiz fun to them that might serve the FF well. I just don't think of those movies and say "_that_ guy needs to direct the FF movie!", but I might be focusing too much on the cosmic sci-fi aspects too much. His character work in those Spider-man movies is very good, I think.

Back on topic: I hear the upcoming WandaVision episodes are more like an hour long, which is going to make my Friday night schedule very tight! Between getting home from work, eating dinner with the wife and kids while we watch the latest episode, and then getting to my weekly D&D game, it's a carefully-structured evening! But I ain't complainin', cuz it's all good!


----------



## doctorbadwolf

wicked cool said:


> Herb and Agnes-they make comments to Wanda and clearly have some sort of freewill at times. My theory is they are not human but either robots or minor demons
> 
> Does Wanda have mind control powers in the comics? I thought she had powerful magic but not in control?



I think they’re magic users from the comics, who each went to the town when stuff first got weird, out of curiosity or a desire to harness whatever power was being revealed or whatever, and got trapped.


----------



## Gradine

Somebody had to have kicked this whole thing off, and it doesn't _seem _to be Wanda


----------



## Marc Radle

Gradine said:


> I dunno, I am _significantly _less interested in _Falcon and Winter Soldier _than either _WandaVision _or _Loki_



I think that’s what makes the world go ‘round - I’m WAY more interested in Falcon and Winter Soldier than Loki ...


----------



## Imaculata

Gradine said:


> Somebody had to have kicked this whole thing off, and it doesn't _seem _to be Wanda




All clues do seem to point that way, including Wanda's own words. I am inclined to believe her when she says she has no idea how all of this started. SWORD is now clearly super shady, but are they also responsible for starting it (it doesn't seem so) and if not, who is? Is the one responsible a character we've already met? Or is someone new still to be revealed?

What did Agnes mean when she said "All is lost"? This seems to suggest she may have been trying to accomplish something we don't know about yet, but failed to do so.


----------



## Marc Radle

Gradine said:


> I just want to be saved from more origin stories. If they can keep doing stealth-origins like they appear to be doing with Nebula in _WandaVision _or just skip the dumb thing altogether a la the new _Spider-man _I'll be happy




Nebula?


----------



## Gradine

Marc Radle said:


> Nebula?



I meant Photon


----------



## MarkB

Imaculata said:


> All clues do seem to point that way, including Wanda's own words. I am inclined to believe her when she says she has no idea how all of this started. SWORD is now clearly super shady, but are they also responsible for starting it (it doesn't seem so) and if not, who is? Is the one responsible a character we've already met? Or is someone new still to be revealed?
> 
> What did Agnes mean when she said "All is lost"? This seems to suggest she may have been trying to accomplish something we don't know about yet, but failed to do so.



So, one thing I wonder about: SWORD isn't exactly a well-known agency (unless they became so during the five years of the Blip), and yet it seems as though Agent Woo reached out to them for assistance rather than vice versa. Which would make it a pretty huge coincidence that he just happened to have stumbled onto their missing science project and its kidnapper.

It's going to be very interesting learning more about the inciting incident as and when they reveal it.


----------



## Imaculata

MarkB said:


> So, one thing I wonder about: SWORD isn't exactly a well-known agency (unless they became so during the five years of the Blip), and yet it seems as though Agent Woo reached out to them for assistance rather than vice versa. Which would make it a pretty huge coincidence that he just happened to have stumbled onto their missing science project and its kidnapper.




Well, Woo was already familiar with SHIELD, right? So it is possible that since SWORD is a branch of SHIELD, they simply directed him to their new department.


----------



## Umbran

MarkB said:


> So, one thing I wonder about: SWORD isn't exactly a well-known agency (unless they became so during the five years of the Blip), and yet it seems as though Agent Woo reached out to them for assistance rather than vice versa.




IIRC, Woo used to be a SHIELD agent.  He moved to the FBI after SHIELD folded.  It would be sensible that he'd stay on top of things enough to call SWORD when he got something really weird.



MarkB said:


> Which would make it a pretty huge coincidence that he just happened to have stumbled onto their missing science project and its kidnapper.




Yeah.  I doubt it was SWORD.  I don't think it was Wanda - it seems more like she's co-opted what's there.  Maybe Agnes/Agatha and her coven?  Or, at this point, I am open to the idea that it is someone we haven't met yet, so for me Mephisto is back on the table.



MarkB said:


> It's going to be very interesting learning more about the inciting incident as and when they reveal it.




I am not entirely sure we are going to get that information in the series.  It might be a thing for Multiverse of Madness.


----------



## Umbran

ART! said:


> His character work in those Spider-man movies is very good, I think.




Yeah, and that's the part that makes me think it will be okay.


----------



## Tonguez

MarkB said:


> So, one thing I wonder about: SWORD isn't exactly a well-known agency (unless they became so during the five years of the Blip), and yet it seems as though Agent Woo reached out to them for assistance rather than vice versa. Which would make it a pretty huge coincidence that he just happened to have stumbled onto their missing science project and its kidnapper.
> 
> It's going to be very interesting learning more about the inciting incident as and when they reveal it.




Jimmy Woo use to work for SHIELD, he’s got contacts - so when he came across a disappeared town, he calls his contacts and they contact SWORD due to potential interest.


Imaculata said:


> All clues do seem to point that way, including Wanda's own words. I am inclined to believe her when she says she has no idea how all of this started. SWORD is now clearly super shady, but are they also responsible for starting it (it doesn't seem so) and if not, who is? Is the one responsible a character we've already met? Or is someone new still to be revealed?
> 
> What did Agnes mean when she said "All is lost"? This seems to suggest she may have been trying to accomplish something we don't know about yet, but failed to do so.




I still think Wanda is the cause and her not knowing it just points to her trauma. There may be others who got involved (eg Agnes and Hetb) and she may have even opened her world up to the multiverse

The lavender scene in particular points to Agnes attempting to protect the towns folk from ‘evil’ spirits (from the multiverse?). 
Of course we still dont know who ‘husband Ralph’ is - that reveal might be critical (or not)


----------



## Dire Bare

Rune said:


> Actually, I’ve been thinking about a similar idea. While I’m still not ready to rule out the possibility that Pietro is a minion of or is some malevolent third party*, I’m beginning to wonder if he’s a Life Decoy Model sent in by Hayward, made using knowledge gained from years of studying Vision’s corpse.
> 
> * It’s clear that something’s up with this Pietro. Not only does he have all kinds of information beyond the scope of his experiences – about the Hex and the outside – his entire personality is different from the Pietro who convinced Wanda to join the good guys in Age of Ultron. This guy doesn’t appeal to _anybody’s_ better nature.



Peter is an LMD of Pietro . . . and doesn't look anything like Pietro? And Wanda just accepts this different LMD Peter with a small frown of confusion? If you're gonna go through the hassle of making a Life Model Decoy . . . your decoy should look at least a little bit like the person you are replacing.

Nah, this IS Peter/Pietro/Quicksilver . . . . but obviously not quite the same Pietro from Age of Ultron. Hopefully things will become more clear before the series ends.


----------



## Rune

Dire Bare said:


> Peter is an LMD of Pietro . . . and doesn't look anything like Pietro? And Wanda just accepts this different LMD Peter with a small frown of confusion? If you're gonna go through the hassle of making a Life Model Decoy . . . your decoy should look at least a little bit like the person you are replacing.
> 
> Nah, this IS Peter/Pietro/Quicksilver . . . . but obviously not quite the same Pietro from Age of Ultron. Hopefully things will become more clear before the series ends.



My assumption is that _if_ he is an LMD, Wanda’s hex/sub-conscience recognized the threat and altered the appearance ti clue her in. Or Hayward just doesn’t have good enough images of Pietro to know exactly what he looked like.


----------



## Umbran

Rune said:


> My assumption is that _if_ he is an LMD, Wanda’s hex/sub-conscience recognized the threat and altered the appearance ti clue her in. Or Hayward just doesn’t have good enough images of Pietro to know exactly what he looked like.




I think the LMD idea, and these justifications of it are... a stretch suitable for Mr. Fantastic.  

Hayward could make an LMD _with Pietro's superpowers_ and these things aren't the front line of any SWORD deployment?


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

So here is a crazy thought. Assume Pietro is the real deal and is the Fox universe version. What if the Fox version of Wanda, someone never officially appearing in any of the X-Men films, is also real and got over into the MCU somehow and merged with the MCU Wanda. That could explain the differences in behavior and accent. And Elizabeth Olsen could play both roles, And yes, I know there is a deleted scene from one of the X-Men movies that is Pietro maybe with his sister, but she is obviously not a twin in that scene, so I could see Marvel manipulating all of this to have the two Wandas. Plus, good/evil twins is a classic trope of sitcoms, dramas, soap operas, etc. Mirror Universe and so on.


----------



## Tonguez

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> So here is a crazy thought. Assume Pietro is the real deal and is the Fox universe version. What if the Fox version of Wanda, someone never officially appearing in any of the X-Men films, is also real and got over into the MCU somehow and merged with the MCU Wanda. That could explain the differences in behavior and accent. And Elizabeth Olsen could play both roles, And yes, I know there is a deleted scene from one of the X-Men movies that is Pietro maybe with his sister, but she is obviously not a twin in that scene, so I could see Marvel manipulating all of this to have the two Wandas. Plus, good/evil twins is a classic trope of sitcoms, dramas, soap operas, etc. Mirror Universe and so on.



Its a nice idea and I could actually see CW The Flash doing it, but I dont think Marvel will


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Morrus said:


> The kid for whom this is their first Superman. I agree that origin stories get tiresome as you get older, because you keep seeing them, but for every movie there's a generation for whom that's their first. While you can do it too often, once every 10 years or so seems OK to me.



I don't disagree with your conclusion - once every ten years seems fine. F4 have had their origin told more recently than that, though. And between older movies, cartoons, comics, and word-of-mouth, I think we would be hard pressed to find very many people (who would watch a Superman movie) who wouldn't already be familiar with (at least the basics of) his origin.


----------



## Imaculata

It is also a bit of a missed opportunity if we keep retelling the origin stories of super heroes, when there are a lot more interesting comicbook stories out there that haven't been translated to movies yet. I am definitely in favor of a quick recap from now on, or skipping it entirely.


----------



## Umbran

FitzTheRuke said:


> F4 have had their origin told more recently than that, though.




Yeah, but it was really, really bad.  And I don't think anyone saw it.


----------



## ART!

Marc Radle said:


> Nebula?





Gradine said:


> I meant Photon



Well, there _are_ photons _in_ nebulas, so all is forgiven! 


Tonguez said:


> Jimmy Woo use to work for SHIELD, he’s got contacts - so when he came across a disappeared town, he calls his contacts and they contact SWORD due to potential interest.
> 
> 
> I still think Wanda is the cause and her not knowing it just points to her trauma. There may be others who got involved (eg Agnes and Hetb) and she may have even opened her world up to the multiverse
> 
> The lavender scene in particular points to Agnes attempting to protect the towns folk from ‘evil’ spirits (from the multiverse?).
> Of course we still dont know who ‘husband Ralph’ is - that reveal might be critical (or not)



Numerous witch and devil references have been cited in this thread from each of the episodes thus far, including Agnes' mention that her and Ralph's anniversary is June 2nd - which is also the anniversary of the first witch trial in Salem, MA in 1692. So, either we're being magnificently trolled by the writers (which is totally possible), or Mephisto and/or witch-stuff is involved.


----------



## ART!

Umbran said:


> Yeah, but it was really, really bad.  And I don't think anyone saw it.



I did, and somehow lived to tell the tale. But yes: it was really, really bad. Stunningly so.

I think a proper MCU-built FF origin story would be great to see, but then I'm a big FF fan.


----------



## billd91

ART! said:


> I did, and somehow lived to tell the tale. But yes: it was really, really bad. Stunningly so.
> 
> I think a proper MCU-built FF origin story would be great to see, but then I'm a big FF fan.



Same here. I applaud them for going with the Ultimate Fantastic Four as their starting point since the older tropes from the original (cold war space race, older scientist paired with a relative ingénue as his girlfriend) are less relevant. But that's its sole redeeming quality as far as I can tell.


----------



## ART!

billd91 said:


> Same here. I applaud them for going with the Ultimate Fantastic Four as their starting point since the older tropes from the original (cold war space race, older scientist paired with a relative ingénue as his girlfriend) are less relevant. But that's its sole redeeming quality as far as I can tell.



It had a few good actors in it, so that's _something_ - but not enough to say "in the right hands, this cast would have been perfect!". I guess the accident that give them their powers is more from the Ultimate storyline, and I'm cool with that _conceptually_, although definitely not in execution.


----------



## Rabulias

A few weeks after the snap, Tony Stark returns to Earth. One would think he could have made the case that Vision's remains were his "property," or at least be concerned about what became of them. Maybe he was too focused on other world problems and/or building a life with Pepper.


----------



## Umbran

ART! said:


> I think a proper MCU-built FF origin story would be great to see, but then I'm a big FF fan.




It is very possible that you are about to.  Instead of building a space ship, Reed Richards has a transport/system to get into the Hex, but it fails to protect his team, and they get the Rambeau treatment...


----------



## Rabulias

I very much doubt we will see a Fantastic Four origin story in _WandaVision _if the FF are going to get their own film.


----------



## Umbran

Rabulias said:


> I very much doubt we will see a Fantastic Four origin story in _WandaVision _if the FF are going to get their own film.




I expect the refrain of "oh, geeze, not another origin story" has been heard a lot at Marvel.  I think they might well explain the origin, but not bother to make it "a story" in and of itself.  For some characters, the process of the origin is itself very important in establishing who the character is.  For others, it isn't.  I think the FF, and Photon, sit in the latter space, and they can be given a quick justification here without damaging the later story.


----------



## ART!

I wouldn't be surprised if we're introduced to one or more FF _characters_ in WandaVision, but I don't expect their origin to happen there. If they can pull it off well, then I'll be happily wrong. 

As the hex gets larger, it becomes increasingly likely that this reality-warping event will be used to set up more and more characters. Rambeau is already a shoo-in, and Kamala Khan is fairly likely, and explaining/creating mutants seems likely-ish?


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Umbran said:


> Yeah, but it was really, really bad.  And I don't think anyone saw it.



I know _I_ didn't see it!

But, still. Enough people are familiar that a few lines or a quick montage would do it. I think part of the reason that I don't want to see the origin again is because it was done once kinda meh and once terribly. Sure, they could do it again and do it well, but maybe they should just start fresh? Or at least super-quick in the first 10 minutes or so. Like you say, a quick explanation/justification and we're good.


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> It is very possible that you are about to.  Instead of building a space ship, Reed Richards has a transport/system to get into the Hex, but it fails to protect his team, and they get the Rambeau treatment...



They were very specific about the energy being given off by the Hex being cosmic background radiation, which is pretty similar to what gives the FF their powers in the comics. Maybe too similar to be considered a coincidence. And with the Infinity Stones' energy having been effectively distributed through the cosmos when they were destroyed, it'd be easy enough to tie that in as latent energy to provide superpowers.

They could do both, of course. Maybe Reed Richards figures that the Hex's boundary is weaker from above, and proposes a sub-orbital flight as the best means of entry.


----------



## Tonguez

MarkB said:


> They were very specific about the energy being given off by the Hex being cosmic background radiation, which is pretty similar to what gives the FF their powers in the comics. Maybe too similar to be considered a coincidence. And with the Infinity Stones' energy having been effectively distributed through the cosmos when they were destroyed, it'd be easy enough to tie that in as latent energy to provide superpowers.
> 
> They could do both, of course. Maybe Reed Richards figures that the Hex's boundary is weaker from above, and proposes a sub-orbital flight as the best means of entry.




is Von Doom an Aerospace Engineer? They could possibly put him through the Hex origin before creating F4


----------



## ART!

Tonguez said:


> is Von Doom an Aerospace Engineer? They could possibly put him through the Hex origin before creating F4



That...that would kind of be awesome.

And you know - comic book Doom's background includes _magic_ as well as science.



This makes extra sense, because referring to Reed Richards as an aerospace engineer just sounds..._off_ to me. Even young Reed was very multidisciplinary.


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> is Von Doom an Aerospace Engineer? They could possibly put him through the Hex origin before creating F4




Traditionally, Doom doesn't have superpowers. He's got intelligence, massive tech, and a bit of magic from trying to learn how to bring his mother back from the dead, iirc.


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> Traditionally, Doom doesn't have superpowers. He's got intelligence, massive tech, and a bit of magic from trying to learn how to bring his mother back from the dead, iirc.



And an easy option for him would be to spin something out of the aftermath of the Sokovia incident. Maybe some chunks of Vibranium-infused Ultron tech wound up raining down on Latveria, and he's been quietly researching them in the interim.


----------



## Tonguez

Umbran said:


> Traditionally, Doom doesn't have superpowers. He's got intelligence, massive tech, and a bit of magic from trying to learn how to bring his mother back from the dead, iirc.



there is his 'magic' though which could tie directly to Wanda's 'Hex powers' especially when iirc his magic powers were mainly energy manipulation and transferring his consciousness to other bodies(?)


----------



## pukunui

I’m in the camp that Disney won’t want to use the literal devil in one of their products. I think it would freak out too many parents.

Also, re: entering the Hex from above - the promo trailers show what looks to be a reinforced truck of some kind smashing its way through. FWIW.


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> there is his 'magic' though which could tie directly to Wanda's 'Hex powers'




You could do that, but I don't think everything _needs_ to be linked together. 

His ability to transfer his consciousness is originally a psionic power he learns from the alien Ovoids.


----------



## billd91

ART! said:


> This makes extra sense, because referring to Reed Richards as an aerospace engineer just sounds..._off_ to me. Even young Reed was very multidisciplinary.



It would suggest they'd go with a more classic origin story for the FF (spacecraft, cosmic rays) than the extradimensional physics origin from the Ultimate FF.


----------



## billd91

ART! said:


> And you know - comic book Doom's background includes _magic_ as well as science.



And Doom's background crosses with Mephisto...


----------



## Gradine

Reminder: Reed Richards is Useless


----------



## trappedslider

Gradine said:


> Reminder: Reed Richards is Useless



But Alternate Universe Reed Richards Is Awesome


----------



## Blue

@Gradine and @trappedslider , I now have 14 opened tabs on tvtropes to read.  None of them were your original links.  I hope you are happy with what you have done.


----------



## Gradine

Blue said:


> @Gradine and @trappedslider , I now have 14 opened tabs on tvtropes to read.  None of them were your original links.  I hope you are happy with what you have done.



TV Tropes Will Ruin Your Life - TV Tropes


----------



## trappedslider

Blue said:


> @Gradine and @trappedslider , I now have 14 opened tabs on tvtropes to read.  None of them were your original links.  I hope you are happy with what you have done.


----------



## pukunui

Only a few hours left to go till the next episode! (They become available around 9:30pm on a Friday here in NZ.)


----------



## Umbran

Damn you International Date Line!


----------



## pukunui

Episode 7 is up! It's only half an hour long like the others. Maybe it's the last two that are longer?


----------



## BRayne

So can we finally put the "Agnes is really Agatha Harkness" theory to bed?


----------



## Gradine

Womp womp


----------



## BRayne

Also just a heads up there's a mid-credit scene this time around


----------



## pukunui

BRayne said:


> So can we finally put the "Agnes is really Agatha Harkness" theory to bed?



Also the Monica gets super powers theory.

And maybe also the WandaVision intros the Fantastic Four theory? Although that one is still an option, I suppose.


----------



## John R Davis

Least fav "comedy" part. Really like modern family but this didn't work for me. No idea who Agatha is, so will have to read all about her.


----------



## MarkB

BRayne said:


> Also just a heads up there's a mid-credit scene this time around



Thanks for the heads-up. I'd probably have missed it if I hadn't dived into this thread while the credits were still rolling and caught your comment.


----------



## TwoSix

John R Davis said:


> Least fav "comedy" part. Really like modern family but this didn't work for me. No idea who Agatha is, so will have to read all about her.



Oh, I really enjoyed how they borrowed the mockumentary style.  The camera angles were all spot on, and watching Darcy and Vision steal the truck was done in that farcical style those shows love.  Olsen and Bettany did a really good job with the expressiveness and the physical tics in their interview scenes.  And Vision realizing he could just break the interview and leave was really funny.

I'm really impressed with how the show is writing around and leaning into fans' expectations.  The writers are perfectly aware that everyone watching the show thinks Agnes is suspicious.  They also know that the comic-savvy fans are pretty sure Agnes is Agatha Harkness.  So they didn't have the reveal in the basement be the ending bomb, they leaned into it by having an entire sitcom intro for Agatha, showing everything she's done.  Framing it as a sitcom also is a meta-presentation that Agatha's powers are of the type and caliber as Wanda's.  

I also think Agatha's powers being purple just shows that type of magic has an individual signature, not that Wanda's powers have anything to do with the Reality stone, as I've seen some people guess over the last few weeks.


----------



## Nilbog

Nilbog said:


> I'm going to bet she'll be some sort of performer in the circus, maybe as escapologist




Not often I get something right!


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

TwoSix said:


> Oh, I really enjoyed how they borrowed the mockumentary style.  The camera angles were all spot on, and watching Darcy and Vision steal the truck was done in that farcical style those shows love.  Olsen and Bettany did a really good job with the expressiveness and the physical tics in their interview scenes.  And Vision realizing he could just break the interview and leave was really funny.
> 
> I'm really impressed with how the show is writing around and leaning into fans' expectations.  The writers are perfectly aware that everyone watching the show thinks Agnes is suspicious.  They also know that the comic-savvy fans are pretty sure Agnes is Agatha Harkness.  So they didn't have the reveal in the basement be the ending bomb, they leaned into it by having an entire sitcom intro for Agatha, showing everything she's done.  Framing it as a sitcom also is a meta-presentation that Agatha's powers are of the type and caliber as Wanda's.




This episode reminded why I hate early 2000's sitcoms and the first part of the episode was the least enjoyable part for me of the whole series so far.

As for Agnes, this entire series was fully filmed and ready to go before they aired the first episode, so while the writers may have been hoping they got the expectations right, it is not like they were writing and filming this in response to all the fan theories and such, the way your post makes it sound.


----------



## TwoSix

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> As for Agnes, this entire series was fully filmed and ready to go before they aired the first episode, so while the writers may have been hoping they got the expectations right, it is not like they were writing and filming this in response to all the fan theories and such, the way your post makes it sound.



That's why I feel the writing is so impressive.  They weren't filming it based on the reactions they read online, they were filming it based on the reactions they predicted beforehand it would engender.


----------



## DeviousQuail

- I'm sure that Nexus commercial means a lot to those more knowledgeable in Marvel lore. I'm out of the loop so if anyone wants to share I'd appreciate it. 

- We saw Dottie (Emma Caulfield) briefly. Have we seen her since episode 2?

- Snooper's gonna snoop. Just Monica or is Pietro snooping too? Or does Agatha have him completely on a chain. (It's around 31:45 in the credits)


----------



## Davies

BRayne said:


> So can we finally put the "Agnes is really Agatha Harkness" theory to bed?



... goddammit.


----------



## MarkB

DeviousQuail said:


> - Snooper's gonna snoop. Just Monica or is Pietro snooping too? Or does Agatha have him completely on a chain. (It's around 31:45 in the credits)



I was going to say that he seemed to be projecting Agatha's power into Monica as her eyes turn purple when she looks at him, which would make him entirely Agatha's creature, but on a second viewing I saw that her eyes actually change the moment before that, as she opens the cellar hatch and sees the purple tendrils.

For that matter, what is Pietro? Do we still assume a link to the X-Men version of the character, is he just another townsperson controlled by Agatha, or is he entirely some form of construct?

I'm still tending towards the twins being real, simply because Billy seemed to genuinely catch Agatha by surprise with his "it's quiet, inside your head" comment, which wouldn't be possible if he was purely her construct.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

DeviousQuail said:


> - I'm sure that Nexus commercial means a lot to those more knowledgeable in Marvel lore. I'm out of the loop so if anyone wants to share I'd appreciate it.




From one of the Easter Egg/Spoiler articles for the episode:



Spoiler



The commercials in _WandaVision_ have always been crucial, usually focused on Wanda's past experience of trauma. But the one in episode 7 is particularly important, because it directly references something called a _"nexus."_ This apparently allows an individual to anchor themselves to the reality of their choice; side effects include "_feeling your feelings, confronting your truth, seizing your destiny, and possibly more depression._" This is clearly a reference to the Nexus of All Realities, an established part of Marvel lore that was already subtly introduced into the MCU's Multiverse in _Thor: The Dark World_. In the comics, the nexus was created by an ill-thought-through spell woven in the Florida Everglades, and it became guarded by the Man-Thing.


----------



## Vael

So, is Pietro Ralph?

The mockumentary style really worked with all the 4th wall breaks.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Vael said:


> So, is Pietro Ralph?




Or Mephisto. Or both. Or neither. Ralph may not exist at all and was just made up by Agatha so she would not seem weird as a single lady of her age range running around in a 50's sitcom setting.

And we still have no clue if this person in FBI Witness Protection is someone important or just a red herring/throwaway.


----------



## DeviousQuail

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> From one of the Easter Egg/Spoiler articles for the episode:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> The commercials in _WandaVision_ have always been crucial, usually focused on Wanda's past experience of trauma. But the one in episode 7 is particularly important, because it directly references something called a _"nexus."_ This apparently allows an individual to anchor themselves to the reality of their choice; side effects include "_feeling your feelings, confronting your truth, seizing your destiny, and possibly more depression._" This is clearly a reference to the Nexus of All Realities, an established part of Marvel lore that was already subtly introduced into the MCU's Multiverse in _Thor: The Dark World_. In the comics, the nexus was created by an ill-thought-through spell woven in the Florida Everglades, and it became guarded by the Man-Thing.



Thank you.

The next time I watch Thor 2 I'll have to keep an eye out for that.


----------



## pukunui

OK so it seems like Wanda is still the one who created the Hex. Agatha must have sensed it or something, as she showed up almost immediately. 

A review I read last night pointed out that "Agnes" is literally a shortening of Agatha Harkness.

Also, it took me a little while to figure out who the bossy guy at the circus was. He was the annoying SWORD guy who wasn't all that fond of Darcy. He's still playing to type even though the context has changed!

The glitches didn't seem all that random to me -- it looked like they were going back in time step by step through the decades, as if, left unchecked, everything would end up back in the 50s again. I hope we do get a good explanation for this decade-by-decade sitcom thing. Paul Bettany did say there was a reason for it, that it wasn't arbitrary.

It also seems like Agatha was just faking the whole thing with Vision at the edge of the Hex in the Halloween episode. She must have been trying to push him to go out of the boundary to see what would happen.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

New poster from Disney celebrating the release of The Muppets to Disney+


----------



## MarkB

I'm getting a strong urge to re-watch the entire series and see what I can pick up in retrospect. I'll probably hold off until after next episode though.


----------



## Morrus

I was avoiding spoilers all day because the internet was telling me how revealing this episode was. The reveal being that he next door neighbour is (obviously) a fellow magic user was rather underwhelming. And I don’t get what’s interesting about the much-hyped mid-credits sequence? Peter found Monica snooping? I feel like I missed something.


----------



## trappedslider




----------



## Vael

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Or Mephisto. Or both. Or neither. Ralph may not exist at all and was just made up by Agatha so she would not seem weird as a single lady of her age range running around in a 50's sitcom setting.
> 
> And we still have no clue if this person in FBI Witness Protection is someone important or just a red herring/throwaway.




I'm thinking if Mephisto was going to be a factor, they'd have already been introduced. Now that Agatha is in play, I'm pretty sure she's the heavy of the piece. At best, there might be a off-hand reference, but I don't think we'll see Mephisto.


----------



## pukunui

Morrus said:


> And I don’t get what’s interesting about the much-hyped mid-credits sequence? Peter found Monica snooping? I feel like I missed something.



I think it’s not so much the scene itself but the fact that we’re seven episodes in and this is the first time they’ve included one.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Morrus said:


> And I don’t get what’s interesting about the much-hyped mid-credits sequence? Peter found Monica snooping? I feel like I missed something.




I need to watch it again to confirm, but a lot of the talk online about this scene is that Monica's eyes supposedly went purple after she opened the cellar door and saw how weird it looked inside. So it may be saying she is under Agatha's control now, instead of Wanda's or instead of being free of any control. Maybe it is hinting at a Monica vs Vision fight or something?

Edit: Just watched that again and yes, her eyes turn purple right before Pietro surprises her and are still purple when she looks at him. So that means something important in the mind control area.


----------



## Umbran

pukunui said:


> And maybe also the WandaVision intros the Fantastic Four theory? Although that one is still an option, I suppose.




That was mostly based on the "aerospace engineer" thing.  Why hang on to a theory when the basic reason to have the theory has been disproven?


----------



## Umbran

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> From one of the Easter Egg/Spoiler articles for the episode:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ... In the comics, the nexus was created by an ill-thought-through spell woven in the Florida Everglades, and it became guarded by the Man-Thing.




I question the origin you give there - pretty much every source i find says that it is not known if it is natural or created by someone/something.  It certainly wasn't created in recent history.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Umbran said:


> That was mostly based on the "aerospace engineer" thing.  Why hang on to a theory when the basic reason to have the theory has been disproven?




I still say this is a small possibility. I do not think the actual designer/creator of the vehicle was at the site in the episode. The female major could have been this aerospace engineer whom Monica called "my guy", but more likely the engineer is still back in whatever lab they have their job. And instead of this show naming him, the FF movie may have a reference back to designing this special truck for Monica, or should I call her Spectrum now? Or it could be a different character who will show up in another movie or series and tie it back to this.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Prediction: Doctor Strange is going to show up at the end and lay waste to Agatha's minions, whoever they might be. Mindless Ones, or something.


----------



## Nilbog

Is Agatha Harkness from 'our' time (modern day) could she be from the past hence why the items keep slipping back to the past?


----------



## cbwjm

Well, I have not kept up with this thread but I note in the latest episode the bring up the nexus of realities which I guess is a tie in to the multiverse of madness.

I also think that since they used the x-men quicksilver that maybe they are wanting to merge the x-men movies and the Marvel studio movieverse..


----------



## cbwjm

Also cool seeing Monica's powers starting to manifest.


----------



## cbwjm

And Agnes really was Agatha Harkness (I'm watching as I type my comments). I still wasn't 100% certain until Wanda wandered down into the basement and it became all mystical... and then she introduced herself as Agatha Harkness, dead giveaway.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Nilbog said:


> Is Agatha Harkness from 'our' time (modern day) could she be from the past hence why the items keep slipping back to the past?



As per comics, she is really really old. But she isn't "from the past", she just lived through it.

Comic version isn't as evil as TV version appears to be (cackling, as Pratchett would put it). More True Neutral.

It is possible that Harkness, although "behind it all" is not actually acting out of evil motives.

Expansion: "Vision" is actually Ultron, resurrected by SWORD. The Hex is a prison for Ultron, since how better to imprison a villain than to make them believe they are a hero?


----------



## MarkB

One cool thing from the way this episode played out is that Darcy is now effectively a rogue element. With Vision having 'de-whammied' her and then headed off without her, she may well be the only person in the Hex aside from Agatha and possibly Vision himself with a mind of her own.


----------



## trappedslider

Finally watched, and the style with the "interview" parts made me think The Office, which is what they were going along with I guess Modern Family (never watched it), and last week's episode was Malcom in the middle. It seems that the second trip into The Hex has activated Monica's powers or given her them, I wonder if this makes her another "child of the stones" as I call those who have gotten powers from the infinity Stones.

Anyway, I was thinking back to a line that Dr. Strange said in Infinity War:

“What’s your job again?” - Stark

“Protecting your reality, douchebag.” - Strange


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> One cool thing from the way this episode played out is that Darcy is now effectively a rogue element. With Vision having 'de-whammied' her and then headed off without her, she may well be the only person in the Hex aside from Agatha and possibly Vision himself with a mind of her own.



She is also wearing a super-suit...


----------



## Erekose

I know this is a real stretch, no pun intended, but isn’t Monica’s outfit vaguely reminiscent of the FF suits?


----------



## Nikosandros

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> I need to watch it again to confirm, but a lot of the talk online about this scene is that Monica's eyes supposedly went purple after she opened the cellar door and saw how weird it looked inside. So it may be saying she is under Agatha's control now, instead of Wanda's or instead of being free of any control. Maybe it is hinting at a Monica vs Vision fight or something?
> 
> Edit: Just watched that again and yes, her eyes turn purple right before Pietro surprises her and are still purple when she looks at him. So that means something important in the mind control area.



I thought that her eyes glowing showed that she was activating her own powers, like when she came through the barrier.


----------



## trappedslider

Nikosandros said:


> I thought that her eyes glowing showed that she was activating her own powers, like when she came through the barrier.



They are blue when she does that


----------



## Nikosandros

trappedslider said:


> They are blue when she does that



Hmm... I've checked the scenes again and I think you're right. The power-activating color is definitely lighter.


----------



## MarkB

Nikosandros said:


> I thought that her eyes glowing showed that she was activating her own powers, like when she came through the barrier.



Sure, when they were doing that intense blue glow, that's her own powers. But when Agatha ensorcelled Wanda at the end it made Wanda's eyes take on that same purple glow, so it seems more likely that purple-glowy signifies "Agatha's in control". But I'm betting Monica's own powers will let her fight off that influence more easily.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Erekose said:


> I know this is a real stretch, no pun intended, but isn’t Monica’s outfit vaguely reminiscent of the FF suits?



It's based on the character's outfit from the comics:


----------



## Umbran

Erekose said:


> I know this is a real stretch, no pun intended, but isn’t Monica’s outfit vaguely reminiscent of the FF suits?




I think it is far more reminiscent of her own costume as Capt. Marvel/Photon.


----------



## Rabulias

I think Monica was already manifesting her powers somewhat after her return from the Hex. Her x-ray was washed out, like an over-exposed photograph. I think she was subconsciously emitting x-rays as she was hit with them, thus ruining the x-ray exam. Or it was to show her body was energy, and the machine's x-rays just passed through. Either way, her powers were already starting to show.


----------



## MarkB

Paul Farquhar said:


> She is also wearing a super-suit...



I'm not sure I'd call Darcy's outfit a super-suit. It's certainly a costume, but she'd look more at home in a marching band than a superhero team.


----------



## Nellisir

I haven't gone back through this thread, or seen mention of this online, but...
I watched Wandavision. Then I started on Agents of Shield for the first time in months. I hated Season 3 and couldn't finish it, so jumped to Season 4. Binged episodes 1-4, and is my wont, let episode 5 run for a few minutes before shutting the tv off.

This is the episode wherein, in flashback in the first two minutes, the "ghost" people are shown finding the Darkhold.
They go into a basement, and pass a birdcage. There's a poster of a carnival advertising Quentin's Carnival on the wall. Another poster, this one of Voltarra, Mistress of Light. She's a blonde, but with a big "electric" afro. And then the Darkhold, hidden in the floor.

It's not an exact match up, obviously, but...holy smokes. That's a LOT of coincidence for one scene. Agatha's basement features a similar birdcage; Wanda creates a carnival (intentionally?); Monica's superhero identity (one of them) is Photon. Her powers are electro-magnetic based, most notably light. And then, big bad evil book.

I don't know what it means. Very likely it's just a fun throwback. But still...just how long have the threads of this show been around??


----------



## Blue

John R Davis said:


> Least fav "comedy" part. Really like modern family but this didn't work for me. No idea who Agatha is, so will have to read all about her.



Yeah, I didn't get this decade's framing reference.  Felt a little like solo When Harry Met Sally interludes.


----------



## MarkB

I wonder whether we'll even have a framing 'show' next episode, or if that's all abandoned with this show's reveal. Then again, I'm no more familiar with 20teens family sitcoms than I was with this week's so it'll probably make little difference to me.


----------



## Blue

Morrus said:


> I was avoiding spoilers all day because the internet was telling me how revealing this episode was. The reveal being that he next door neighbour is (obviously) a fellow magic user was rather underwhelming. And I don’t get what’s interesting about the much-hyped mid-credits sequence? Peter found Monica snooping? I feel like I missed something.



For those of us who didn't follow the comics it was.  Remember even on this thread in our wonderful geek-haven that is ENWorld, some people haven't even watched all the MCU films, much less be familiar with the comics.

Also I don't know if I'd call the mid-credit scene "hyped"  so much as "alerted" - we haven't had one and wouldn't have a reason to expect one, so the call went out to be on the lookout.


----------



## Blue

cbwjm said:


> I also think that since they used the x-men quicksilver that maybe they are wanting to merge the x-men movies and the Marvel studio movieverse..



When they stopped Monica from going back before, they said her cells had mutated.  I'm wondering if the Hex passing over people (and perhaps expanding worldwide in a later episode) isn't the event that bring mutants into the MCU now that they have the rights to do so.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

MarkB said:


> I wonder whether we'll even have a framing 'show' next episode, or if that's all abandoned with this show's reveal. Then again, I'm no more familiar with 20teens family sitcoms than I was with this week's so it'll probably make little difference to me.




There were only 6 decade-themed episodes teased and we have had all of them now. I think things are going to get real in the final two episodes.


----------



## Older Beholder

Perhaps next week will be framed from Agnes/Agatha perspective, giving more of the villain(s) motives and backstory before the resolution?

I thought this episode had the most laugh out loud moments ‘in show’ so far. All of Vision’s direct to camera stuff was great. Also this ep had 2 of the best scenes of the series for me - Monica going through the hex wall and Agatha reveal / theme song


----------



## ART!

Blue said:


> Yeah, I didn't get this decade's framing reference.  Felt a little like solo When Harry Met Sally interludes.



It's like _The Office'_s "documentary" interview snippets.


----------



## Umbran

Blue said:


> I'm wondering if the Hex passing over people (and perhaps expanding worldwide in a later episode) isn't the event that bring mutants into the MCU now that they have the rights to do so.




Well, Photon isn't generally classified as a mutant.  

Only a small number of people have encountered the Hex.  I don't think that is going to explain mutants, worldwide.


----------



## pukunui

ART! said:


> It's like _The Office'_s "documentary" interview snippets.



Also the Modern Family interview snippets.


----------



## Umbran

Nellisir said:


> I don't know what it means. Very likely it's just a fun throwback. But still...just how long have the threads of this show been around??




Probably not as long a you think.

Marvel creators are always putting _tons_ of unnecessary details into their works.  It is awesome, for two reasons - one is that it makes the world seem complete, with a history and all.  The other is that it gives later Marvel creators something to hook into.

I don't expect there was already a plan in place, back when they were making Agents of Shield, to have a carnival, the Darkhold, and Photon all show up in one episode of a Disney+ show.  I think they were making the series, decided it was a great vehicle to introduce Photon, and looked back and went, "Hey, you know, this would be cool..."

Kind of like a GM who hacks together a link between your character background an a campaign plot after the fact, but makes it look like it was in the plan all along...


----------



## Dire Bare

Umbran said:


> Probably not at long a you think.
> 
> Marvel creators are always putting _tons_ of unnecessary details into their works.  It is awesome, for two reasons - one is that it makes the world seem complete, with a history and all.  The other is that it gives later Marvel cretors something to hook into.
> 
> I don't expect there was already a plan in place, back when they were making Agents of Shield, to have a carnival, the Darkhold, and Photon all show up in one episode of a Disney+ show.  I think they were making the series, decided it was a great vehicle to introduce Photon, and looked back and went, "Hey, you know, this would be cool..."
> 
> Kind of like a GM who hacks together a link between your character background an a campaign plot after the fact, but makes it look like it was in the plan all along...



That . . . and the fact that the folks making these shows are super huge NERDS. They put in all of these easter eggs and references BECAUSE THEY CAN. It's like flexing your nerd knowledge for all the world, and only the elite will notice . . . well, and those of us reading internet summaries afterwards . . . .


----------



## Dire Bare

MarkB said:


> I wonder whether we'll even have a framing 'show' next episode, or if that's all abandoned with this show's reveal. Then again, I'm no more familiar with 20teens family sitcoms than I was with this week's so it'll probably make little difference to me.



This week's sitcom style was pretty . . . _modern _(heh, see what I did there) in the style of _Modern Family_, which is still on the air. With each episode so far pushing the sitcom style forward a decade or so . . . I'm not sure where there is left to go!


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Umbran said:


> Only a small number of people have encountered the Hex. I don't think that is going to explain mutants, worldwide.



Alternatively, they could use the Snap/Blip as an explanation for mutants. They could say something like, "For reasons unknown to us, a small percentage of the population that was Blipped had their genome partially rewritten after they came back, mutating them and granting them strange and unique abilities."

Or, they could just use the Multiverse. Either could work, but would have different and interesting consequences.


----------



## hawkeyefan

I feel like they need to avoid some inciting event for mutants. Like, a person shouldn’t be a mutant because something happened to them. It messes with the allegory quite a lot, and I bet there’d be some serious backlash if they went that route. 

Mutants should probably be born mutants.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> I wonder whether we'll even have a framing 'show' next episode, or if that's all abandoned with this show's reveal. Then again, I'm no more familiar with 20teens family sitcoms than I was with this week's so it'll probably make little difference to me.



That is something the show makes apparent. As time moves on TV becomes more diverse, so it becomes increasingly difficult to find a TV show - never mind a family sit-com - that is iconic for that decade.

Maybe for the 2010s they will do _Agents of SHIELD_, and 2020s, _Wandavision?_

NB, 2000s episode:  Monica Rambeau transformed into a superhero (complete with supersuit and ground punch). 2000 _X-Men_ released. 2008 _Iron Man_ released.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Blue said:


> When they stopped Monica from going back before, they said her cells had mutated.  I'm wondering if the Hex passing over people (and perhaps expanding worldwide in a later episode) isn't the event that bring mutants into the MCU now that they have the rights to do so.



A worldwide Hex could alter reality so that mutants had been there all along.

It's basically a massive Retcon engine.


----------



## cbwjm

hawkeyefan said:


> I feel like they need to avoid some inciting event for mutants. Like, a person shouldn’t be a mutant because something happened to them. It messes with the allegory quite a lot, and I bet there’d be some serious backlash if they went that route.
> 
> Mutants should probably be born mutants.



I think they were going to run with the inhumans as the mutant substitute but the show ended after one season.


----------



## MarkB

hawkeyefan said:


> I feel like they need to avoid some inciting event for mutants. Like, a person shouldn’t be a mutant because something happened to them. It messes with the allegory quite a lot, and I bet there’d be some serious backlash if they went that route.
> 
> Mutants should probably be born mutants.



It would lose some of the narrative hooks of the original version, but it would explain why mutants haven't been around in the MCU until now.

Plus it ties in as a naming convention. It can be the mutant Hex-factor, leading to the superhero team of the Uncanny Hex-Men.


----------



## BRayne

Obviously at the end of the show Wanda will say "No, More Mutants"


----------



## Umbran

hawkeyefan said:


> Mutants should probably be born mutants.




Yeah.  I think if they just work with the Multiverse idea, they can get what they need in that regard.


----------



## Umbran

ModernApathy said:


> Perhaps next week will be framed from Agnes/Agatha perspective, giving more of the villain(s) motives and backstory before the resolution?




Yeah, I have to wonder if Agatha's been actually villainous here, or if she is just handling a situation in the best way she could manage.


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> Yeah, I have to wonder if Agatha's been actually villainous here, or if she is just handling a situation in the best way she could manage.



She killed Sparky.


----------



## Umbran

MarkB said:


> She killed Sparky.




Given that Agatha showed up with a doghouse without ever having been told there was a dog, it is quite possible that the dog was a magical construct she created for the boys, not an actual dog.

As an example of how this could all work - imagine the entire Hex may be intended as a bit of a cage or terrarium for Wanda, possibly to allow her to work through her grief in a relatively safe space, so that she's not a danger to the rest of humanity.  The harms necessary to allow this to happen inside the Hex may be considered better than having her rampage with her powers.  

Or, you know, Agnes or others are taking advantage of her to bring a couple of shards of a supernatural entity (Chthon, or Mephisto) into the world.  That's always a possibility.  It'd be a bit of a turn from comics Agatha, but, _c'est la vie_.


----------



## Rune

MarkB said:


> She killed Sparky.



Plus, her theme-song says she’s been “pulling every evil string.”


----------



## Umbran

Rune said:


> Plus, her theme-song says she’s been “pulling every evil string.”




Whether that's reliable depends on whether you trust the person writing the theme song.


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> Whether that's reliable depends on whether you trust the person writing the theme song.



Hmm, that's a tough one. I'm pretty sure it was Agatha who wrote it, and I don't trust her at all.

Y'know, on account of how evil she is.


----------



## Umbran

MarkB said:


> Hmm, that's a tough one. I'm pretty sure it was Agatha who wrote it, and I don't trust her at all.
> 
> Y'know, on account of how evil she is.




Circular logic: see Logic, Circular.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> She killed Sparky.



Sparky wasn't real.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> Hmm, that's a tough one. I'm pretty sure it was Agatha who wrote it, and I don't trust her at all.
> 
> Y'know, on account of how evil she is.



Or Wanda wrote it, because there is a dream within the dream (see: Inception). Evil Agatha is just another fictional creation.


----------



## Umbran

Paul Farquhar said:


> Or Wanda wrote it, because there is a dream within the dream (see: Inception). Evil Agatha is just another fictional creation.




I think the most likely situation is that Wanda went looking for a way to bring Vision back, found Agatha.  Agatha told her that could be managed.  Wanda fetches Vision, and then Agatha gives Wanda exactly what she wants, but in a way that serves Agatha's own ends.

Doubly likely if the book on the podium was the Darkhold, and Wanda rescued it from SWORD custody...


----------



## Dire Bare

hawkeyefan said:


> I feel like they need to avoid some inciting event for mutants. Like, a person shouldn’t be a mutant because something happened to them. It messes with the allegory quite a lot, and I bet there’d be some serious backlash if they went that route.
> 
> Mutants should probably be born mutants.



I agree.

There doesn't really need to be some sort of inciting event at all. Mutants have always existed in the MCU, they just stayed under the radar until they haven't . . . . some are perhaps the heroes we already have met, like Wanda. Others are at home concealing their abilities. Others are "out", but we simply haven't seen any movies about them yet.

In most of the older X-Men movies, the general public wasn't aware of mutants until some catastrophe brought them to the world's attention. But mutants were always there. Growing in frequency perhaps, but always there.


----------



## Dire Bare

cbwjm said:


> I think they were going to run with the inhumans as the mutant substitute but the show ended after one season.



They were.

That was before Disney acquired Fox. And before they made that awful Inhumans TV show, that killed that idea dead in the water.


----------



## MarkB

Paul Farquhar said:


> Sparky wasn't real.



How do you know? Were there no dogs in Westview when it got Hexed?


----------



## Umbran

Dire Bare said:


> . . . . some are perhaps the heroes we already have met, like Wanda.




If you wanted to do that, you'd have to sling the story that Wanda always had powers, and the Mind Stone really didn't have much to do with it.  I'm not sure if that's the way you'll go with it.


----------



## cbwjm

MarkB said:


> She killed Sparky.



Sparky had it coming!

#AgathaDidNothingWrong


----------



## Tonguez

Umbran said:


> If you wanted to do that, you'd have to sling the story that Wanda always had powers, and the Mind Stone really didn't have much to do with it.  I'm not sure if that's the way you'll go with it.



Or the stone acted as a catalyst to unlock her X-gene


----------



## Older Beholder

MarkB said:


> She killed Sparky.


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> Or the stone acted as a catalyst to unlock her X-gene




I count that under "the stone didn't have much to do with it".


----------



## trappedslider




----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Tonguez said:


> Or the stone acted as a catalyst to unlock her X-gene




No, I think they are finally shifting her powers firmly into the Magic category and away from mutant or mutated by Infinity Stone, or whatever.


----------



## Imaculata

I'm proud that I was correct about Agnes after episode 4. Love how they snuck that in.

I laughed out loud when Agnes said she killed Sparky too. Perfect!

Considering how the camera deliberately showed the book, I think we can be sure it will be important.


----------



## Rabulias

I think they missed an opportunity in the commercial to list "Vision problems" as a potential side effect...


----------



## Maxperson

Blue said:


> When they stopped Monica from going back before, they said her cells had mutated.  I'm wondering if the Hex passing over people (and perhaps expanding worldwide in a later episode) isn't the event that bring mutants into the MCU now that they have the rights to do so.



Powers gained from energy, etc. don't make mutants.  They make super beings like Spiderman, who isn't a mutant.  Mutants are born with the mutant gene and manifest those powers usually around puberty.  It might set things up for their kids to be mutants, though.


----------



## Umbran

Maxperson said:


> Powers gained from energy, etc. don't make mutants.  They make super beings like Spiderman, who isn't a mutant.  Mutants are born with the mutant gene and manifest those powers usually around puberty.  It might set things up for their kids to be mutants, though.




There's mutants (like the X-men), altered humans (Spider-man, Hulk), hi-tech wonders (Iron Man), robots (Vision), and aliens (Thor), if I recall the game correctly.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

_City of Heroes _divided superhero origins into Mutant, Natural*, Science, Technology and Magic.

*This included aliens - natural for you!


----------



## wicked cool

i had no idea the 4th wall was related to the show types  like modern family/office

wonder what next weeks show theme will be? What is todays best family show/comedy? Simpsons?

Is Rambo now the same as Captain Marvel in powers? Is she a strong match for quicksilver? 

Ive heard theories this is how marvel introduces mutants and fantastic 4.


----------



## Imaculata

Umbran said:


> Doubly likely if the book on the podium was the Darkhold, and Wanda rescued it from SWORD custody...




The book looks different from the last time we saw it on Agents of Shield.







But then again, it would have to be the Darkhold wouldn't it? What other book could it be? Wandavision already has so many ties to Thor the Dark World and Doctor Strange, plus the Darkhold originates from the Dark Dimension, which is featured prominently in both movies. I can't imagine it being any other book really. It is one of Marvel's favorite MacGuffins.

As a side note, I really hope Doctor Strange makes a cameo on the final episode of Wandavision.


----------



## Umbran

Imaculata said:


> The book looks different from the last time we saw it on Agents of Shield.




If you trust the outward appearance of anything on the show, you may have missed the point.  

(That said, as they moved into the basement, I think they switched to the "real world" aspect ratio, so I think what we see may be what we get in the Basement)



Imaculata said:


> But then again, it would have to be the Darkhold wouldn't it? What other book could it be?




The Necronomicon.  It also has a history in the MCU as a bit of a "lesser Darkhold".  

The Book of the Vishanti is supposed to be filled with "white magic", and so it probably isn't that.
The Book of Cagliostro gets mentioned in the Doctor Strange movie.  Would it have left the library?
Marvel comics have several other magical tomes of note (the Book of Demonicus, the Tome of Zhered-Na, the Iron Bound Books of Shuma Gorath, etc) but they are all kind of obscure, and would just be "magical book" in this context... which is fine, actually.  Agatha doesn't have to be working from a specific known book.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maybe it's a bound bumper edition of Marvel comics?

Or the WandaVision scripts?

Because it's impossible to get _too_ meta.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

My bet on the ending: People in a 1960s sitcom watching TV. They at watching you watch WandaVision.


----------



## Maxperson

Umbran said:


> There's mutants (like the X-men), altered humans (Spider-man, Hulk), hi-tech wonders (Iron Man), robots (Vision), and aliens (Thor), if I recall the game correctly.



Yeah.  The game called the ones like Spiderman altered aumans and also in the Ultimate Powers Book, mutants - induced.  Either way, though, they didn't register to things like the Sentinals or Cerebro which detected mutants.


----------



## Imaculata

Umbran said:


> If you trust the outward appearance of anything on the show, you may have missed the point.




Fair point. But it would be a bit odd of them to make the book look like another book. If they wanted to disguise it, they could have disguised it as any other household item. So in that respect, I think it is fair to assume that the book is as we see it.



Umbran said:


> The Necronomicon.  It also has a history in the MCU as a bit of a "lesser Darkhold".




Possible, but it has less ties to Doctor Strange and Thor the Dark World as far as I know. Plus it is more commonly associated with the works of HP Lovecraft and the Cthulhu mythos. It would be fun to see the Necronomicon make its way into the MCU though. 



Umbran said:


> The Book of Cagliostro gets mentioned in the Doctor Strange movie.  Would it have left the library?




Not just mentioned, don't we also get to see it?








Umbran said:


> Marvel comics have several other magical tomes of note (the Book of Demonicus, the Tome of Zhered-Na, the Iron Bound Books of Shuma Gorath, etc) but they are all kind of obscure, and would just be "magical book" in this context... which is fine, actually.  Agatha doesn't have to be working from a specific known book.




But I think given how prominently we are shown the book, that it isn't just a simple spellbook, or a book we've never heard of. It must be something very vital to the plot, and possibly also to Doctor Strange. The show is now really leaning into the witchcraft. Still, that does not exclude the possibility that they are introducing an all new book as their MacGuffin.


----------



## Wolfram stout

So, Tommy and Billy.  Not a lot of talk on them (unless I missed it).  But they are going to be major players in the final battle of the season right?

With Agnes saying in Episode 5   "{Sigh} Kids {Chuckles} You can't control 'em.  No matter how hard you try."  That now _Means Something_, right?

With Wanda vs Agnes, Monica vs Pietro, Darcy and Woo vs Heyward.  That leaves Vision fairly alone with the boys being at least wildcards in the situation.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Wolfram stout said:


> So, Tommy and Billy.  Not a lot of talk on them (unless I missed it).  But they are going to be major players in the final battle of the season right?



They will likely be deleted from existence when the big bad absorbs them to fully manifest. Thus casing Wanda to go completely librarian-poo and have to be imprisoned in the Dungeon Dimension by Doctor Who Strange.

I doubt they will be involved in any slugfest.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Paul Farquhar said:


> They will likely be deleted from existence when the big bad absorbs them to fully manifest. Thus casing Wanda to go completely librarian-poo and have to be imprisoned in the Dungeon Dimension by Doctor Who Strange.
> 
> I doubt they will be involved in any slugfest.



I think if that happens, it will be to fuel her going full godmode, and overwriting reality on a cosmic scale, creating a multiversal conflux that brings mutants and perhaps other stuff into the same world as the MCU.


----------



## MarkB

Paul Farquhar said:


> They will likely be deleted from existence when the big bad absorbs them to fully manifest. Thus casing Wanda to go completely librarian-poo and have to be imprisoned in the Dungeon Dimension by Doctor Who Strange.
> 
> I doubt they will be involved in any slugfest.



I understand that's more-or-less what happens in the comic-book line that inspired much of the show, but that doesn't necessarily mean they'll take the same tack here. I'm not sure Disney are going to be keen on essentially killing off a couple of kids - or jettisoning a popular female superhero character.

I expect that there will be some threat of it happening, and it will be serious motivation for both Wanda and Vision.


----------



## Umbran

Imaculata said:


> Fair point. But it would be a bit odd of them to make the book look like another book. If they wanted to disguise it, they could have disguised it as any other household item. So in that respect, I think it is fair to assume that the book is as we see it.




Have you not been watching?  Cars turn into different cars.  Drones turn into toy helicopters.  People get fashion makeovers - the _actual function_ doesn't change, but outward appearance does. It isn't so much disguise, as it is changing to match genre.



Imaculata said:


> But I think given how prominently we are shown the book, that it isn't just a simple spellbook, or a book we've never heard of. It must be something very vital to the plot, and possibly also to Doctor Strange. The show is now really leaning into the witchcraft. Still, that does not exclude the possibility that they are introducing an all new book as their MacGuffin.




I wouldn't call it a MacGuffin.  The MacGuffin is the object that has _no other use_ than to drive the plot.  The Maltese Falcon being the iconic example.  It doesn't do anything at all in the story, but it is desired and sought.  Nobody's looking for this book.  If it wasn't set dressing to dirve the point that Agatha's about _MAGIC_ to those who don't know the comics, it probably has significant actual function.  So, not a MacGuffin.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

MarkB said:


> I understand that's more-or-less what happens in the comic-book line that inspired much of the show, but that doesn't necessarily mean they'll take the same tack here. I'm not sure Disney are going to be keen on essentially killing off a couple of kids - or jettisoning a popular female superhero character.
> 
> I expect that there will be some threat of it happening, and it will be serious motivation for both Wanda and Vision.



I expect the kids to age-up one more time to help out their parents, leaving them properly Speed and Wiccan for the Young Avengers (show or movie - probably show). There almost certainly won't be a WandaVision season two, but a sequel show (not just Multiverse of Magic) should be fully expected.


----------



## Rune

Umbran said:


> If you trust the outward appearance of anything on the show, you may have missed the point.
> 
> (That said, as they moved into the basement, I think they switched to the "real world" aspect ratio, so I think what we see may be what we get in the Basement)



Maybe not, but if the basement is under/outside of the hex, I’d think they’d have to pass through an energy barrier?


Umbran said:


> The Necronomicon.  It also has a history in the MCU as a bit of a "lesser Darkhold".
> 
> The Book of the Vishanti is supposed to be filled with "white magic", and so it probably isn't that.
> The Book of Cagliostro gets mentioned in the Doctor Strange movie.  Would it have left the library?
> Marvel comics have several other magical tomes of note (the Book of Demonicus, the Tome of Zhered-Na, the Iron Bound Books of Shuma Gorath, etc) but they are all kind of obscure, and would just be "magical book" in this context... which is fine, actually.  Agatha doesn't have to be working from a specific known book.



Speaking of which, that orange energy coming from the book looks a lot like the color-signature from the type of magic the sorcerers use. Can anyone confirm if it matches?


----------



## Rune

FitzTheRuke said:


> I expect the kids to age-up one more time to help out their parents, leaving them properly Speed and Wiccan for the Young Avengers (show or movie - probably show). There almost certainly won't be a WandaVision season two, but a sequel show (not just Multiverse of Magic) should be fully expected.



I expect Agatha was aging them. She was always present, after all.


----------



## Umbran

Rune said:


> I expect Agatha was aging them. She was always present, after all.




It looked to me like acts of will on the kids part.  They tend to look at each other, as if making a mutual decision, and such.  She may be invested in encouraging them to age....


----------



## Umbran

Rune said:


> Maybe not, but if the basement is under/outside of the hex, I’d think they’d have to pass through an energy barrier?




If, as they sang, it was Agatha all along, I don't doubt that she might have a location inside the barrier, but not subject to the transformations of appearance.


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> It looked to me like acts of will on the kids part.  They tend to look at each other, as if making a mutual decision, and such.  She may be invested in encouraging them to age....



A bit of both, maybe. Their initial jump from newborns seemed to be the direct result of Agatha's influence, but when they were considering doing it to escape the traumatic feelings brought on by losing Sparky, it certainly seemed to be their choice. A choice seemingly deliberately influenced by Agatha, but not actually controlled by her.


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> If, as they sang, it was Agatha all along, I don't doubt that she might have a location inside the barrier, but not subject to the transformations of appearance.



I got the impression that her whole house was that. When Wanda was initially in there looking all weirded-out, it seemed like what was troubling her was that this was a space that clearly wasn't under her control, either directly or stylistically.


----------



## ART!

FitzTheRuke said:


> I expect the kids to age-up one more time to help out their parents, leaving them properly Speed and Wiccan for the Young Avengers (show or movie - probably show). There almost certainly won't be a WandaVision season two, but a sequel show (not just Multiverse of Magic) should be fully expected.



Yeah, it depends on how soon they plan to use those two characters. If it's not going to be fairly soon, then they might leave them as is or slightly older. Then when they get to using them as major characters elsewhere, they can cast them however they want then. Or something.


----------



## Blue

Maxperson said:


> Powers gained from energy, etc. don't make mutants.  They make super beings like Spiderman, who isn't a mutant.  Mutants are born with the mutant gene and manifest those powers usually around puberty.  It might set things up for their kids to be mutants, though.



Then it's very interesting that they _specifically_ said that her cells were mutating.  Perhaps to let people know that the rules in the MCU are different than in the comics.


----------



## Maxperson

Blue said:


> Then it's very interesting that they _specifically_ said that her cells are mutating.  Perhaps to let people know that the rules in the MCU are different than in the comics.



I don't know.  I think in the MCU mutating and mutants are two different things.  I don't think Spiderman got his powers without his cells mutating, but he's not a mutant.


----------



## Umbran

ART! said:


> Yeah, it depends on how soon they plan to use those two characters.




In the comics, the demon from whom they stem takes their souls back, and they are just gone.  They are reincarnated later on, because there's no such thing as a permanent death in comics, but I don't think they've got a lot of need to use them any time soon.


----------



## Rabulias

Blue said:


> Then it's very interesting that they _specifically_ said that her cells were mutating.  Perhaps to let people know that the rules in the MCU are different than in the comics.



Actually, they never say the M word. The say "changing" or "re-writing," but never anything about mutating/mutation/mutants.


----------



## Tonguez

My theory is coming together!! Agatha is the true Hero of Westview protecting the Nexus of All Realities from the madness of Wanda.

Maybe the Book is just a key to the Nexus?

The creepy vines in the basement dungeon are certainly a cool nod too


----------



## Blue

Maxperson said:


> I don't know.  I think in the MCU mutating and mutants are two different things.  I don't think Spiderman got his powers without his cells mutating, but he's not a mutant.





Rabulias said:


> Actually, they never say the M word. The say "changing" or "re-writing," but never anything about mutating/mutation/mutants.




You were right and I was wrong.  I found a transcript site and looked it up.



> *DARCY LEWIS:* Hayward has your blood work. You've gone through the boundary twice already, Monica. The energy inside has re-written your cells on a molecular level twice. It's changing you.
> 
> *MONICA RAMBEAU:* Seen enough lab results to last me a lifetime. Cells metastasizing, cells in remission. I know what Wanda's feeling and I won't stop until I help her.




It's in Episode 6.





						Wiki Index | Transcripts Wiki | Fandom
					






					transcripts.fandom.com


----------



## Marc Radle

Umbran said:


> In the comics, the demon from whom they stem takes their souls back, and they are just gone.  They are reincarnated later on, because there's no such thing as a permanent death in comics, but I don't think they've got a lot of need to use them any time soon.



Well, if the rumors of an upcoming Young Avengers movie and/or series are true, they’ll need them sooner than later.

That’s supposedly why they cast Haley Stinefeld as the young new Hawkeye and an new, older actress as Scott Lang’s daughter etc. - they are putting the pieces in place to introduce the Young Avengers


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> I understand that's more-or-less what happens in the comic-book line that inspired much of the show, but that doesn't necessarily mean they'll take the same tack here. I'm not sure Disney are going to be keen on essentially killing off a couple of kids - or jettisoning a popular female superhero character.



They won't jettison them. But they could delete them on a temporary basis. We know Wanda is in _Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness, _possibly as a villain. So _WandaVision_ (which reportedly has a "very sad" ending) ends with Vision dead dead dead, the twins deleted and Wanda memory wiped or imprisoned. Wanda then escapes/regains her memories in _Dr Strange 2_ and alters reality to bring back the twins, triggering all sorts of bad stuff.

And you have the twins back with an elaborate backstory just in time for _Young Avengers_.


----------



## Older Beholder

Tommy and Billy have a little bit of an 'X-men mutant' feel to them in that their powers seem to have activated as they've hit a certain age.
(apart from the aging up in the first place)


----------



## Horwath

So I watched 6 episodes and will watch 7th today.

And it's kind of a mixed bag for me. Mostly as I expected a lot from this series and delivery is OKish.

The sitcom style was nice touch and quirky, but it gets real old real fast.

Maybe I made a mistake of watching it late at night before going to sleep, as I fall asleep during 3 episodes.
maybe because I was tired or maybe because the pace is so dreadfully slow.

I feel that this show is suffering from same thing as STicard, a single plot(that is not really that great so it can carry whole season in the first place) that is stretched over too many episodes for it's own good.

episodes 1-3 could have all been in one episode, same as 4-6.

Maybe I will rewatch it all after all episodes come out.
Right now I give it a solid 6/10.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

You have to actually _enjoy_ watching the sitcom parodies and easteregg hunts. It's not the story that matters, it's the way it's told.


----------



## Older Beholder

I've been re-watching it from the start before each new episode comes out.
It helps that it comes out on a Friday night in Australia, so I get home from work, start it from the beginning and have the latest episode drop sometime during the previous episodes.

With each previous reveal there was usually a reason to go back through the earlier episodes.


----------



## ART!

Paul Farquhar said:


> They won't jettison them. But they could delete them on a temporary basis. We know Wanda is in _Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness, _possibly as a villain. So _WandaVision_ (which reportedly has a "very sad" ending) ends with Vision dead dead dead, the twins deleted and Wanda memory wiped or imprisoned. Wanda then escapes/regains her memories in _Dr Strange 2_ and alters reality to bring back the twins, triggering all sorts of bad stuff.
> 
> And you have the twins back with an elaborate backstory just in time for _Young Avengers_.



Yeah, it really depends on what they want to do with Wanda in DS&TMOM. Is she a villain? An antagonist? Is she someone who has worked through her trauma and wants to master her powers? If Vision is actually, finally dead and/or the kids aren't real/alive, then that is just too sad for words and I can see her being a very broken person, but she could also grieve through it in a healthy way after all that. I'm not crazy about the "female character can't handle her powers" trope, so I hope the focus isn't on that.


----------



## embee

Sudden realization:

The "It Was Agatha All Along" music is an homage to "The Munsters" theme song.


----------



## Umbran

embee said:


> Sudden realization:
> 
> The "It Was Agatha All Along" music is an homage to "The Munsters" theme song.




Yep.  And I believe the lead woman's voice in the song is Kathryn Hahn, who plays Agnes/Agatha.  In general, the theme music has been exceptional.  It has all been written by the same couple, so that while it changes from decade to decade of the sitcom, there's some musical phrases that appear across all of them, giving them a kind of unity.


----------



## ART!

Umbran said:


> Yep.  And I believe the lead woman's voice in the song is Kathryn Hahn, who plays Agnes/Agatha.  In general, the theme music has been exceptional.  It has all been written by the same couple, so that while it changes from decade to decade of the sitcom, there's some musical phrases that appear across all of them, giving them a kind of unity.



...and it's the same couple that did the songs for the _Frozen_ movies. Pretty cool.


----------



## trappedslider




----------



## Tonguez

trappedslider said:


> View attachment 133277




personally I think the audience is being played, and Agnes’ villain song was a red hearing generated by Wanda’s mind responding to Agatha confronting her - Wanda is deflecting blame for all the bad stuff on to Agnes...


----------



## pukunui

Had to cancel tonight's D&D session (not enough players) ... which means I won't have to stay up late to watch tonight's episode of WandaVision! Can hardly wait!

EDIT: Well, this one's a little bit longer at 47 mins! Starting now ...

EDIT 2: Hot damn! Can't wait for next week's finale!


----------



## Davies

Tonguez said:


> personally I think the audience is being played, and Agnes’ villain song was a red hearing generated by Wanda’s mind responding to Agatha confronting her - Wanda is deflecting blame for all the bad stuff on to Agnes...



 Nope. Agatha is clearly bad news all around.


----------



## pukunui

Davies said:


> Nope. Agatha is clearly bad news all around.



She has certainly positioned herself as the antagonist to Wanda's protagonist. Let's put it that way.


----------



## trappedslider

So many questions answered, while others remain. Also mid credit scene


----------



## Zardnaar

pukunui said:


> Had to cancel tonight's D&D session (not enough players) ... which means I won't have to stay up late to watch tonight's episode of WandaVision! Can hardly wait!
> 
> EDIT: Well, this one's a little bit longer at 47 mins! Starting now ...
> 
> EDIT 2: Hot damn! Can't wait for next week's finale!




 Doh forgot helping move house tomorrow morning. Double doh. 

  Gonna have to rewatch. Terrible with names etc.


----------



## John R Davis

very cool episode


----------



## Nikosandros

Spoiler: So, about Wanda stealing Vision's body...



She didn't do it, right? Director Hayward just lied, because she recreated Vision from scratch and SWORD reanimates the body in the mid-credit scene.


----------



## pukunui

Nikosandros said:


> Spoiler: So, about Wanda stealing Vision's body...
> 
> 
> 
> She didn't do it, right? Director's Hayward just lied, because she recreated Vision from scratch and SWORD reanimates the body in the mid-credit scene.



Correct.


----------



## MarkB

pukunui said:


> Correct.



And that's why he was being dragged back into the Hex piece by piece when he tried to leave.


----------



## Gradine

So the fly was a misdirect, yes?


----------



## Gradine

Paul Bettany, Jan 2021:
“I *work with* this *actor* that I've *always wanted to work with* and we have fireworks together, the scenes are great and I think people are going to be really excited. I've *always wanted to work with* this guy and the scenes are pretty intense.”


.....mf was talking about himself, wasn't he


----------



## MarkB

So, on the one hand this establishes that Agatha is a bad person, at least by the standards of her coven. "I can be good." "No, you can't."

On the other hand, it also establishes that Wanda was indeed responsible for the Hex and everything in it all along - Agatha's had some influence here and there, and her understanding of magic far exceeds Wanda's, but in terms or raw power she's small fry compared to Wanda's industrial-scale talent, and her interference through the series has been mostly directed toward trying to get Wanda to face up to reality. Which leaves both Agatha and Wanda in an interestingly morally-ambiguous position.

Agatha's motivations aren't actually that bad - she recognises Wanda as a serious potential threat to the world around her, and wants to stop her. It's just that her methods are likely to be ruthless - she's already holding Wanda's kids hostage, and isn't averse to murdering people in order to acheive her goals.

Meanwhile Wanda is motivated by a need to hold onto Vision, and seems to have genuinely re-created him as an individual, even if one only able to be sustained within the Hex. But her methods are holding hundreds of people prisoner within their own bodies, and she seems to have been running largely on instinct, with no clear endgame in sight.

I'm still rooting for Wanda in that confrontation, but it's not straightforward.


----------



## Gradine

Girl killed a puppy. She evil.


----------



## TwoSix

MarkB said:


> Agatha's motivations aren't actually that bad - she recognises Wanda as a serious potential threat to the world around her, and wants to stop her. It's just that her methods are likely to be ruthless - she's already holding Wanda's kids hostage, and isn't averse to murdering people in order to acheive her goals.



I got the impression from the first scene in Agatha's basement that her interest in Wanda's magic was more rooted in envy than in anything altruistic.  She seemed frustrated that Wanda could do things (wide-range mind control, easy transmutation, "magic on autopilot") that she wasn't able to do, despite her sacrifices and centuries gaining power.


----------



## Davies

MarkB said:


> So, on the one hand this establishes that Agatha is a bad person, at least by the standards of her coven. "I can be good." "No, you can't."



I think the two best indications of her morality are one that is explicitly shown, and one that isn't. After the coven die -- and I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt that this wasn't something she wanted to happen, but something she could not prevent -- she ambles over to her mother's corpse and robs it. The other is her desire to know how Wanda accomplished what she did, asking "What's the trick?" It never even occurs to her that Wanda's grief could have allowed her to access more power than she consciously understands ... because Agatha doesn't know what grief is.

I suspect that her goal, in all of this, is to get Wanda angry enough that she'll attack her, like the coven did, so that she can do to her as was done to them. In other words, the good intentions are an excuse -- she's just hungry.


----------



## Wishbone

Gradine said:


> Girl killed a puppy. She evil.



But she's played by Kathryn Hahn, so we root for her anyway!


----------



## Wishbone

Davies said:


> I think the two best indications of her morality are one that is explicitly shown, and one that isn't. After the coven die -- and I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt that this wasn't something she wanted to happen, but something she could not prevent -- she ambles over to her mother's corpse and robs it. The other is her desire to know how Wanda accomplished what she did, asking "What's the trick?" It never even occurs to her that Wanda's grief could have allowed her to access more power than she consciously understands ... because Agatha doesn't know what grief is.
> 
> I suspect that her goal, in all of this, is to get Wanda angry enough that she'll attack her, like the coven did, so that she can do to her as was done to them. In other words, the good intentions are an excuse -- she's just hungry.



You think Agatha is like the shark in the yogurt commercial?


----------



## Davies

Wishbone said:


> You think Agatha is like the shark in the yogurt commercial?



Exactly.


----------



## TwoSix

Wishbone said:


> You think Agatha is like the shark in the yogurt commercial?



I didn't before, but since Agatha definitely showed a "power absorption" motif in the coven scene, I'm definitely leaning towards that interpretation now.  With only one episode left, Agatha being a cover for something bigger and badder seems less likely.


----------



## trappedslider

Wishbone said:


> But she's played by Kathryn Hahn, so we root for her anyway!



She's clearly been enjoying herself.

Also: THEY CALLED HER SCARLET WITCH!


----------



## Davies

trappedslider said:


> She's clearly been enjoying herself.
> 
> Also: THEY CALLED HER SCARLET WITCH!



And did you notice the vis-- ahem, _image_ that Wanda saw in her first encounter with the Mind Stone?


----------



## pukunui

What if fake Vision takes over white Vision’s body so he can live again fully? I suppose that would be a happy ending, and we’re supposedly getting a sad one ...

Still, I don’t think we’re going to see Wanda become an antagonist in the Dr Strange movie. Things don’t seem to be leading towards her going back to being an antagonist again.


----------



## Wishbone

pukunui said:


> What if fake Vision takes over white Vision’s body so he can live again fully? I suppose that would be a happy ending, and we’re supposedly getting a sad one ...
> 
> Still, I don’t think we’re going to see Wanda become an antagonist in the Dr Strange movie. Things don’t seem to be leading towards her going back to being an antagonist again.



My favorite post-episode theory was that Hayward's Vision will be Ultron's consciousness in Vision's body that Vision will need to put down again.


----------



## Tonguez

MarkB said:


> So, on the one hand this establishes that Agatha is a bad person, at least by the standards of her coven. "I can be good." "No, you can't."
> 
> On the other hand, it also establishes that Wanda was indeed responsible for the Hex and everything in it all along - Agatha's had some influence here and there, and her understanding of magic far exceeds Wanda's, but in terms or raw power she's small fry compared to Wanda's industrial-scale talent, and her interference through the series has been mostly directed toward trying to get Wanda to face up to reality. Which leaves both Agatha and Wanda in an interestingly morally-ambiguous position.
> 
> Agatha's motivations aren't actually that bad - she recognises Wanda as a serious potential threat to the world around her, and wants to stop her. It's just that her methods are likely to be ruthless - she's already holding Wanda's kids hostage, and isn't averse to murdering people in order to acheive her goals.
> 
> Meanwhile Wanda is motivated by a need to hold onto Vision, and seems to have genuinely re-created him as an individual, even if one only able to be sustained within the Hex. But her methods are holding hundreds of people prisoner within their own bodies, and she seems to have been running largely on instinct, with no clear endgame in sight.
> 
> I'm still rooting for Wanda in that confrontation, but it's not straightforward.




I was right, its All Wamda's fault : )

Wanda wielding uncontrolled Chaos Magic is a serious threat to the Multiverse and Agatha came to Westview to try and reign in that power. Agatha is ambitious and willing to break the rules to get want she wants, but she only killed people who were attempting to kill her first and she knows the children on the leash are magical constructs. The moral ambiguity of the show and the confrontation is great - and personally I'm Team Agatha!

Oh and the whole mythology of Scarlet Witch being a legendary being was a nice touch - Scarlet Witch is the new Pheonix Force

I'm a bit confused about Vision though since its seems that SWORD (Haywood) still has VISIONS body and Wanda's Vision is a mental construct - though I did notice the yellow energy which might suggest that the Mindstone power/AI is present in Wandas version Vision 2.0.


----------



## TwoSix

Wishbone said:


> My favorite post-episode theory was that Hayward's Vision will be Ultron's consciousness in Vision's body that Vision will need to put down again.



Hayward seemed to be goading Wanda into jumpstarting Vision.  I feel like a purely mercenary rationale for trying to build a new Vision is too simple; I wonder if there's a deeper threat that they feel they need a Vision to combat?


----------



## MarkB

Wishbone said:


> My favorite post-episode theory was that Hayward's Vision will be Ultron's consciousness in Vision's body that Vision will need to put down again.



Yeah, it's going to come down to what exactly Hayward's awakened in the absence of Vision's consciousness, and why. Bear in mind that we now know that he knew all along it wasn't the 'real' physical Vision in there, and yet he was still tracking that version as his "primary asset". Even though he's brought Vision's body back online and effectively got his own sentient weapon, he still wants the version of Vision that exists in the Hex.


----------



## Wishbone

MarkB said:


> Yeah, it's going to come down to what exactly Hayward's awakened in the absence of Vision's consciousness, and why. Bear in mind that we now know that he knew all along it wasn't the 'real' physical Vision in there, and yet he was still tracking that version as his "primary asset". Even though he's brought Vision's body back online and effectively got his own sentient weapon, he still wants the version of Vision that exists in the Hex.



It's funny, I didn't realize until someone pointed it out to me that Hayward would have had no stated reason to expect Wanda to be in Westview, or that she would have made her own Vision construct. When he sent Monica to meet with Jimmy Woo it was to use one of their drones on a missing persons case. Now he could have tracked Wanda to Westview since it looks like she went directly there from SWORD but it seems like he's seizing an opportunity. Might be its a CIA-FBI style jurisdictional thing with the FBI as a pretense for SWORD to operate in the U.S. like the plot of _Sicario_?

Simply getting another copy of Vision to study also would be a good enough reason to be after the Hex-Vision. That's a free $3 billion dollars of vibranium Wanda just magicked up!


----------



## Tonguez

MarkB said:


> Yeah, it's going to come down to what exactly Hayward's awakened in the absence of Vision's consciousness, and why. Bear in mind that we now know that he knew all along it wasn't the 'real' physical Vision in there, and yet he was still tracking that version as his "primary asset". Even though he's brought Vision's body back online and effectively got his own sentient weapon, he still wants the version of Vision that exists in the Hex.



It could be that the Hex-Vision has the true Vision AI (yellow glow) and the body at SWORD is empty (Wanda couldnt 'feel' Vision there)


----------



## MarkB

Wishbone said:


> Simply getting another copy of Vision to study also would be a good enough reason to be after the Hex-Vision. That's a free $3 billion dollars of vibranium Wanda just magicked up!



Plus whatever passes for a Mind Stone in his head.


----------



## trappedslider

Well,we know from the interactions between Banner,Vision and Shuri that if done right, He doesn't need the mind stone to operate.


----------



## Wishbone

trappedslider said:


> Well,we know from the interactions between Banner,Vision and Shuri that if done right, He doesn't need the mind stone to operate.



Hypothetically at least for when Shuri was surgically extracting the stone for Wanda to destroy. Doesn't account for what happens when Thanos cracks the front of Vision's skull for the thing.



> _"Because you might have a choice. Your mind is made up of a complex construct of overlays. J.A.R.V.I.S., Ultron, Tony, me, the Stone. All of them mixed together. All of them learning from one another."
> ―Bruce Banner to Vision_


----------



## TwoSix

trappedslider said:


> Well,we know from the interactions between Banner,Vision and Shuri that if done right, He doesn't need the mind stone to operate.



I think building up new sources of power that aren't the Infinity Stones is going to be a major point of Phase 4.  They did go out of their way to show that Wanda's power was initially inborn, and just enhanced by the Mind stone, not caused by it.  

I'm betting the Eternals is going to do a lot of the heavy lifting in that regard, although I'm also curious how Shang-Chi is going to be depicted.


----------



## pukunui

TwoSix said:


> They did go out of their way to show that Wanda's power was initially inborn, and just enhanced by the Mind stone, not caused by it.



Are you referring to the idea that Wanda unknowingly used magic to stop the bomb from exploding? That seemed to be the implication there. She thought it was a dud because she didn’t know she’d stopped it with magic.

The question I have is: has she become the Scarlet Witch, or has the Scarlet Witch become her?

What I mean is: Agatha has heard of the Scarlet Witch, either through a prophecy of her coming or because she already exists (or existed in the past). When Wanda saw the Scarlet Witch outline in the Infinity Stone glow, was it just a vision of her future, or was it the pre-existing Scarlet Witch coming to possess her / take her over?

Also, I find it amazing how they can make the same actress / character look so different in so many different ways!


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Regarding Agatha and her powers and the different colors of the magic energy, as the members of the coven were punishing/killing? her with their blue magic energy, Agatha's neck and face started glowing a reddish-orange, like the book in the basement, and then red and blue made purple for Agatha's magic energy. Since she was not the same as all the others, including her mother, I think there was something she got into/made a pact with that made her glow red and then combined with the blue as it drained the magic and life from the coven. And that reddish-orange is different from the darker scarlet red that is Wanda's power.


----------



## TwoSix

pukunui said:


> Are you referring to the idea that Wanda unknowingly used magic to stop the bomb from exploding? That seemed to be the implication there. She thought it was a dud because she didn’t know she’d stopped it with magic.



Yep, exactly.  I don't see a reason to have that portion of the scene (where Agatha talks about Wanda hexing the bomb) except to make sure that Wanda having inborn witch powers is demonstrated.



pukunui said:


> The question I have is: has she become the Scarlet Witch, or has the Scarlet Witch become her?
> 
> What I mean is: Agatha has heard of the Scarlet Witch, either through a prophecy of her coming or because she already exists (or existed in the past). When Wanda saw the Scarlet Witch outline in the Infinity Stone glow, was it just a vision of her future, or was it the pre-existing Scarlet Witch coming to possess her / take her over?



Definitely ambiguous, although I lean towards "The Mind Stone unlocked a potential she already had".  I don't think possession fits the story line they've been building; it strips Wanda of too much of her agency.


----------



## TwoSix

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Regarding Agatha and her powers and the different colors of the magic energy, as the members of the coven were punishing/killing? her with their blue magic energy, Agatha's neck and face started glowing a reddish-orange, like the book in the basement, and then red and blue made purple for Agatha's magic energy. Since she was not the same as all the others, including her mother, I think there was something she got into/made a pact with that made her glow red and then combined with the blue as it drained the magic and life from the coven. And that reddish-orange is different from the darker scarlet red that is Wanda's power.



Yea, contrasting Agatha's purple with her coven's blue was definitely intentional, to highlight that she's tainted her normal blue magic with something darker (whatever dark magic was being referenced in the conversation between Agatha and her mother).  I do think the red-orange glow is that dark source, and was being contrasted for the audience with Wanda's scarlet chaos magic.  Especially since Agatha seems shocked Wanda can use real chaos magic.


----------



## pukunui

Did anybody else notice how sad everyone in Westview looked when Wanda first arrived?


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

TwoSix said:


> Definitely ambiguous, although I lean towards "The Mind Stone unlocked a potential she already had".  I don't think possession fits the story line they've been building; it strips Wanda of too much of her agency.




And is too similar to the possessing the Phoenix Force does. I was only joking about that happening to Wanda many pages back here, but when Agatha starts talking about Wanda's powers, and before calling her the Scarlet Witch, I wondered for just a moment if my joke was actually correct.   lol


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

pukunui said:


> Did anybody else notice how sad everyone in Westview looked when Wanda first arrived?




<insert jokes about New Jersey here>


----------



## TwoSix

pukunui said:


> Did anybody else notice how sad everyone in Westview looked when Wanda first arrived?



I didn't, that's a good catch.  I wonder if that's something specifically Westview or just Wanda's powers leaking out?


----------



## trappedslider




----------



## pukunui

TwoSix said:


> I didn't, that's a good catch.  I wonder if that's something specifically Westview or just Wanda's powers leaking out?



I don’t think so. The whole place had a rundown vibe. I wonder if somehow Wanda will make things better for the town somehow when she finally gets rid of the hex (assuming that’s what she does).

We’ve yet to see the previewed scene with Wanda and Vision where they talk about it being their town and they should fight for it.


----------



## Sacrosanct

TwoSix said:


> I didn't, that's a good catch.  I wonder if that's something specifically Westview or just Wanda's powers leaking out?



It's new Jersey...


----------



## TwoSix

Sacrosanct said:


> It's new Jersey...



As a NJ resident, I appreciate these jokes.


----------



## Sacrosanct

TwoSix said:


> As a NJ resident, I appreciate these jokes.



I went to basic training Jersey lol. Don't plan on going back


----------



## Morrus

I like how witches shoot blue and purple laser beams at each other. Very witchy.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Morrus said:


> I like how witches shoot blue and purple laser beams at each other. Very witchy.




Yes, more like a sorcerer, than a wizard/witch. They did do some ritual magic, with the chanting in Latin and all, but when it came to doing damage, it was more pure channeling of their magic energy. Which does make sense for the Marvel version of their magic, what with Doctor Strange having the title of Sorcerer Supreme.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

TwoSix said:


> I didn't, that's a good catch.  I wonder if that's something specifically Westview or just Wanda's powers leaking out?



Remember, the Blip had just happened. They had just had 5 years of half of the world being dead, and a lot of that grief would still be there after just a couple weeks.


----------



## Rune

Morrus said:


> I like how witches shoot blue and purple laser beams at each other. Very witchy.



Eldritch blast?


----------



## Morrus

Rune said:


> Eldritch blast?



D&D has never done mystical well. It’s not built for it. Laser beams are very D&D though!


----------



## Lidgar

Morrus said:


> D&D has never done mystical well. It’s not built for it. Laser beams are very D&D though!



So Westview is in the Barrier Peaks? Very cool.


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> I was right, its All Wamda's fault : )
> 
> Wanda wielding uncontrolled Chaos Magic is a serious threat to the Multiverse and Agatha came to Westview to try and reign in that power.




I don't believe that's correct.  I don't think Agatha knew what Wanda was.  She came to investigate massive power, because that's what Agatha deals in. 

Let us be clear - Agatha was willing and able to kill something like a dozen people, _including her own mother_ to be allowed to use power as she desired, after trying to rules-lawyer her way out of their judgement.  Agatha is not a hero.  Not a nice person, protecting the world.  Agatha is a centuries-old accumulator of great power.  If she now opposes Wanda, it is because Wanda threatens _Agatha_.  The world is secondary, as the place she keeps all her stuff.



Tonguez said:


> I'm a bit confused about Vision though since its seems that SWORD (Haywood) still has VISIONS body and Wanda's Vision is a mental construct




Agatha tells us that Wanda is capable of acts of creation.  Her Vision is not just a "mental construct".  He's a real thing, assembled by Wanda out of her pure power, within the space of the Hex.


----------



## Dire Bare

MarkB said:


> Agatha's motivations aren't actually that bad - she recognises Wanda as a serious potential threat to the world around her, and wants to stop her. It's just that her methods are likely to be ruthless - she's already holding Wanda's kids hostage, and isn't averse to murdering people in order to acheive her goals.





Tonguez said:


> Wanda wielding uncontrolled Chaos Magic is a serious threat to the Multiverse and Agatha came to Westview to try and reign in that power. Agatha is ambitious and willing to break the rules to get want she wants, but she only killed people who were attempting to kill her first and she knows the children on the leash are magical constructs. The moral ambiguity of the show and the confrontation is great - and personally I'm Team Agatha!



Agatha clearly recognizes the threat Wanda's chaos magic poses . . . . but that doesn't make Agatha the slightly bit altruistic. I'm sure Agatha doesn't want the world to explode or anything, but she's been toying with and studying Wanda because she wants what Wanda has . . . power.


----------



## Umbran

Wishbone said:


> My favorite post-episode theory was that Hayward's Vision will be Ultron's consciousness in Vision's body that Vision will need to put down again.




I hope not.  

Comics history - there was a time when rogue agents of the US government were manipulated by Immortus (one possible form of Kang the Conqueror) and captured and disassembled the Vision.  When rescued, Hank Pym reassembled him, but the source of his brain engrams that gave him emotion (Wonder Man aka Simon WIlliams) refused to allow his mind to be used again to imprint on Vision.  So, Vision was reactivated, but in a logical, emotionless state.  In disassembling him, his skin was damaged, thus the pale appearance.

Just after this, Mephisto took the bits of his should back from Wanda's kids...

So, they're really just playing back that segment of the comics.  They could play the Ultron card, but... why?  I mean, narratively - the next big bad is Kang, not Ultron.  Why bring back Ultron again?  Do we have narrative space in the movies for Ultron at this point?  I don't think so.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Umbran said:


> I hope not.
> 
> Comics history - there was a time when rogue agents of the US government were manipulated by Immortus (one possible form of Kang the Conqueror) and captured and disassembled the Vision.  When rescued, Hank Pym reassembled him, but the source of his brain engrams that gave him emotion (Wonder Man aka Simon WIlliams) refused to allow his mind to be used again to imprint on Vision.  So, Vision was reactivated, but in a logical, emotionless state.  In disassembling him, his skin was damaged, thus the pale appearance.
> 
> Just after this, Mephisto took the bits of his should back from Wanda's kids...
> 
> So, they're really just playing back that segment of the comics.  They could play the Ultron card, but... why?  I mean, narratively - the next big bad is Kang, not Ultron.  Why bring back Ultron again?  Do we have narrative space in the movies for Ultron at this point?  I don't think so.




Well, a lot of the rumors/theories out there now are about James Spader using his Ultron voice as the voice of White Vision in episode 9. And while IMDB does not list him, Google has him listed as part of the cast for the show. So not really Ultron, just sounding like him?





__





						wandavision cast - Google Search
					





					www.google.com


----------



## pukunui

Have we heard Ultron’s voice in any flashbacks? I can’t remember.


----------



## Henry

Umbran said:


> Let us be clear - Agatha was willing and able to kill something like a dozen people, _including her own mother_ to be allowed to use power as she desired, after trying to rules-lawyer her way out of their judgement.  Agatha is not a hero.  Not a nice person, protecting the world.



She killed a DOG. If puppy-killin‘ don’t scream “evil,” I’m not sure what does.


----------



## Campbell

What I got from Agatha was mostly jealousy : the same sort of jealousy you might see from an old hand at the gym for someone with good genetics who builds more muscle in 2 years than they have in 20. Agatha seemed incredulously that Wanda was able to accomplish so much more than Agatha could with basically no training. How dare Wanda.


----------



## Umbran

pukunui said:


> Have we heard Ultron’s voice in any flashbacks? I can’t remember.




Was there a scene with a cacophony of voices?


----------



## pukunui

Umbran said:


> Was there a scene with a cacophony of voices?



I think so? Just wondering if maybe that’s why Spader is listed in the cast.

But you know we could at least get Ultron’s voice with white Vision because he’s powered by Wanda’s chaos magic, and having Ultron’s voice coming out of her husband’s body would be pretty traumatic ...


----------



## Umbran

pukunui said:


> But you know we could at least get Ultron’s voice with white Vision because he’s powered by Wanda’s chaos magic, and having Ultron’s voice coming out of her husband’s body would be pretty traumatic ...




It is possible.

And stuffing Wanda-Vision into Pale-Vision's body is a clean way of ressurecting Vision in the MCU.


----------



## Maxperson

Henry said:


> She killed a DOG. If puppy-killin‘ don’t scream “evil,” I’m not sure what does.



We don't know that it was real, and even if it was real, it could have been a cockroach she changed into a dog in the first place.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

pukunui said:


> I think so? Just wondering if maybe that’s why Spader is listed in the cast.
> 
> But you know we could at least get Ultron’s voice with white Vision because he’s powered by Wanda’s chaos magic, and having Ultron’s voice coming out of her husband’s body would be pretty traumatic ...




None of the actors who had lines recycled from the movies have been listed in any of the credits, so for Spader to be listed, it would have to be for new voice work.


----------



## Wishbone

Umbran said:


> So, they're really just playing back that segment of the comics.  They could play the Ultron card, but... why?  I mean, narratively - the next big bad is Kang, not Ultron.  Why bring back Ultron again?  Do we have narrative space in the movies for Ultron at this point?  I don't think so.



They're namedropped Ultron a few times so it seems like they could be building to it for sure. Not that I'd expect him to make it out of the show to the movies at all mind you.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

TwoSix said:


> Hayward seemed to be goading Wanda into jumpstarting Vision.  I feel like a purely mercenary rationale for trying to build a new Vision is too simple; I wonder if there's a deeper threat that they feel they need a Vision to combat?



Absolutely. Wanda's breakdown wasn't an accident, Hayward deliberately pushed her and pushed her.

Now it could be that he is just an evil military type trying to make an android superweapon. But someone else would have reason for wanting a vision-body repaired: Ultron.


----------



## Umbran

Wishbone said:


> They're namedropped Ultron a few times so it seems like they could be building to it for sure. Not that I'd expect him to make it out of the show to the movies at all mind you.




The show has all of about a half hour left, though.  So, I don't know if they can really develop this into a "return of Ultron" before they have to un-return him.  

I mean, unless they're making him a pawn on the board for the next BBEG to play with, which I suppose may be a fairly comic-book style plot.



Paul Farquhar said:


> Now it could be that he is just an evil military type trying to make an android superweapon. But someone else would have reason for wanting a vision-body repaired: Ultron.




And, let us remember that the original version of this was effectively instigated by Kang, who we know is coming up.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Good episode. They did a really good job of conveying the trauma that Wanda’s been through. It’s easy to understand why she’s kind of snapped, without pushing her into villainous territory. The comics never quite managed that when they did her breakdown. 

I’m hoping that somehow Quicksilver and Vision make it out of this, but after this episode, I’m doubtful of both. We’ll see.


----------



## trappedslider

I gotta admit, i kept going "show us the name come on" when the bomb landed in the apartment.......


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Ultron's head did appear in Spider-Man: Homecoming on Stark's invisible jet, but that was probably just an Easter Egg. They could bring Ultron back, but I'm not sure why they would do that at this point.


----------



## Tonguez

trappedslider said:


> I gotta admit, i kept going "show us the name come on" when the bomb landed in the apartment.......




Yeah I kept repeating to myself “we wait for two days for Tony Stark to kill us”



Paul Farquhar said:


> Absolutely. Wanda's breakdown wasn't an accident, Hayward deliberately pushed her and pushed her.
> 
> Now it could be that he is just an evil military type trying to make an android superweapon. But someone else would have reason for wanting a vision-body repaired: Ultron.




If it was just movies I’d say the return of Ultron was highly unlikely, since unlike comics, movies dont tend to bring villains back in the same run.
 The TV shows however do change that so a TV Ultron might be possible as a secondary villain, but it would need to be a really good story, especially as there are other ‘Android’ villains that could be used instead


----------



## Umbran

AcererakTriple6 said:


> They could bring Ultron back, but I'm not sure why they would do that at this point.




So, on a drive with my wife today, we came up with this, that is totally in-genre and type, and it starts with the question - how in the world does _Heyward_ know Wanda has the power to resurrect the Vision?  _Someone_ had to give him that idea.  There's no sign of it in what she has done to date.

So, Immortus knows Kang is coming.  He needs the Avengers to stop Kang, but now there are effectively no Avengers.  So, he needs to kick the Avengers back into motion, and so arranges for Heyward to try to bring back Vision, which will bring back Ultron, which will get some new Avengers to stand up.  All this is totally in-character for Immortus in the comics.

Alternatively, Kang is behind the scenes, and intends to use Ultron as a tool.  Which is also totally in character for Kang.

Or, you know, Ultron is there just to up the ante for one episode, and doesn't mean anything long term.


----------



## Rabulias

Wishbone said:


> It's funny, I didn't realize until someone pointed it out to me that Hayward would have had no stated reason to expect Wanda to be in Westview, or that she would have made her own Vision construct. When he sent Monica to meet with Jimmy Woo it was to use one of their drones on a missing persons case. Now he could have tracked Wanda to Westview since it looks like she went directly there from SWORD but it seems like he's seizing an opportunity. Might be its a CIA-FBI style jurisdictional thing with the FBI as a pretense for SWORD to operate in the U.S. like the plot of _Sicario_?



Except it looks like Wanda was purchasing a home in Westview (the empty foundation she visits before making the hex). Hayward, as head of SWORD would likely have access to some governmental records on Wanda (including public records like real estate sales). And I agree with others here that he has manipulated Wanda in an attempt to "jumpstart" Vision for him. He probably did a deep dive on her after the Blip, so when he hears about strange goings-on in Westview that started _right after_ she came to see Vision at SWORD, well, it all adds up to me.


----------



## trappedslider

Umbran said:


> Alternatively, Kang is behind the scenes, and intends to use Ultron as a tool.  Which is also totally in character for Kang.



All this talk about Kang reminds me of a short story i read years ago in a collection of super-villain focused stories. Kang sets off a nuke in NYC and thus taking out all of the heroes there,letting he finally conquer the US or world (i forgot which one it was) he also deals with Hulk but finds it's not so easy to rule when Galactus shows up and he gets back stabbed by Baron Mordo. So he travels back in time and stops himself from setting off the nuke.





__





						The Ultimate Super-Villains: New Stories Featuring Marvel's Deadliest Villains: Lee, Stan: 9781572971134: Amazon.com: Books
					

The Ultimate Super-Villains: New Stories Featuring Marvel's Deadliest Villains [Lee, Stan] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. The Ultimate Super-Villains: New Stories Featuring Marvel's Deadliest Villains



					www.amazon.com


----------



## Rabulias

I wonder if Wanda, learning that she is a Chaos Mage and realizing the dire threat she poses to reality, seeks out Dr Strange to help her learn to control her magic. Dr Strange would kind of take over Agatha's role from the comics.

And I believe Agatha created Sparky (and killed him) as one of her attempts to "wake Wanda up" from her fantasy, setting up the "life lesson" Wanda tells the twins. Agatha hoped the irony of what Wanda was saying about bringing back the dead would do the trick.


----------



## Tonguez

Rabulias said:


> Except it looks like Wanda was purchasing a home in Westview (the empty foundation she visits before making the hex). Hayward, as head of SWORD would likely have access to some governmental records on Wanda (including public records like real estate sales). And I agree with others here that he has manipulated Wanda in an attempt to "jumpstart" Vision for him. He probably did a deep dive on her after the Blip, so when he hears about strange goings-on in Westview that started _right after_ she came to see Vision at SWORD, well, it all adds up to me.




Is Wanda even legally in the US at the moment? I thought she was still  confined to the Avengers base.  
Of course the blip might have changed things, but I’m not sure if a former foreign terrorist with super powers would be causally out buying real estate in New Jersey


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> Or, you know, Ultron is there just to up the ante for one episode, and doesn't mean anything long term.



Everything transforms when it goes into the Hex, so I'm imagining white-Vision sailing on in, transforming into Ultron, and saying "There are no strings on m-"

Then Agatha lassos him with half a dozen of those magic energy-lariats, and puppets him into battle against Wanda.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Tonguez said:


> Is Wanda even legally in the US at the moment? I thought she was still  confined to the Avengers base.
> Of course the blip might have changed things, but I’m not sure if a former foreign terrorist with super powers would be causally out buying real estate in New Jersey




If the deed and note on it were not just a setup to get her to go there, then the property was bought by Vision as a surprise for her, to give them a place to build their own home and life together.


----------



## Omand

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> If the deed and note on it were not just a setup to get her to go there, then the property was bought by Vision as a surprise for her, to give them a place to build their own home and life together.



Yes, that is what I took away from it as well.

Either the deed was a set up by Hayward, or Wanda had it in the car before her meeting at SWORD and we, the audience, were kept in the dark until the reveal at the foundations of the house to help build up the emotion of the scene.

I have to admit, it did work.  Not a tear inducing moment, but it did make me feel sad for Wanda that the romance we saw between her and Vision was no longer there.  It made the creation of the Hex very believable in the moment.

Cheers


----------



## FitzTheRuke

AcererakTriple6 said:


> Remember, the Blip had just happened. They had just had 5 years of half of the world being dead, and a lot of that grief would still be there after just a couple weeks.



It _might_ be that, or it might be that Agatha was already living there, with the Darkhold in her basement. I love Agatha too (I mean, she seemed to _honestly_ wipe a tear while watching Vision and Wanda fall in love - how can you hate that). But still. She's probably a pure villain. Also, what exactly _are_ those catacombs in her basement?

Also... did Vision buy that empty foundation in that town before he died? Is that what that note she read implied?


----------



## Omand

FitzTheRuke said:


> It _might_ be that, or it might be that Agatha was already living there, with the Darkhold in her basement. I love Agatha too (I mean, she seemed to _honestly_ wipe a tear while watching Vision and Wanda fall in love - how can you hate that). But still. She's probably a pure villain. Also, what exactly _are_ those catacombs in her basement?
> 
> Also... did Vision buy that empty foundation in that town before he died? Is that what that note she read implied?



See above in Post #979, but I believe that is the case.

I think that is what we as the audience are supposed to believe.  That Vision was planning for a future with the two of them together once the split in the Avengers was worked out (or perhaps even if was not; remember that in Infinity War, Wanda and Vision do talk about running away from it all).

Cheers


----------



## Umbran

Rabulias said:


> And I believe Agatha created Sparky (and killed him) as one of her attempts to "wake Wanda up" from her fantasy, setting up the "life lesson" Wanda tells the twins. Agatha hoped the irony of what Wanda was saying about bringing back the dead would do the trick.




With respect, I don't think Agatha's could have made plan based on _the specific choice of words_ Wanda might use in the future.


----------



## Umbran

Omand said:


> I think that is what we as the audience are supposed to believe.  That Vision was planning for a future with the two of them together once the split in the Avengers was worked out (or perhaps even if was not; remember that in Infinity War, Wanda and Vision do talk about running away from it all).




And really - Avengers were headquartered in New York.  Westview is in NJ.  The commute isn't all that big a deal for superheroes who can fly.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Umbran said:


> With respect, I don't think Agatha's could have made plan based on _the specific choice of words_ Wanda might use in the future.




But she did somehow know the MCU-version of her brother was dead. Of course, she may have also just somehow heard the exchange between Monica and Wanda about Ultron and Pietro and that gave her time to set various things up. After all, time passes differently inside the Hex, than outside it. Months could have passed for everyone inside in the 2 weeks that have passed in the outside world since the Hex was established. the only thing inside that went super fast was the pregnancy because that was on-camera.


----------



## Wishbone

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> After all, time passes differently inside the Hex, than outside it. Months could have passed for everyone inside in the 2 weeks that have passed in the outside world since the Hex was established. the only thing inside that went super fast was the pregnancy because that was on-camera.



Based on what? The events of the episodes so far seem to show a consistency in the time outside and inside the Hex.


----------



## Umbran

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> But she did somehow know the MCU-version of her brother was dead.




It isn't like what happened in Sokovia was _secret_.  They blew up a city, and Hawkeye brought back a corpse on the transport.  This led to the Sokovia Accords, which were quire public.  I expect Pietro Maximoff's death got media play.


----------



## Tonguez

Umbran said:


> It isn't like what happened in Sokovia was _secret_.  They blew up a city, and Hawkeye brought back a corpse on the transport.  This led to the Sokovia Accords, which were quire public.  I expect Pietro Maximoff's death got media play.



Why would Pietro‘s death specifically get media play though? The Battle in Sokovia was a chaotic affair featuring Killer Robots, Avengers and SHIELD, and, afaik, no media were on site. Pietro Maximoff was a pretty minor player in that fight, a foreign national, from a small east european warzone and NOT an avenger.


----------



## Davies

FitzTheRuke said:


> It _might_ be that, or it might be that Agatha was already living there, with the Darkhold in her basement. I love Agatha too (I mean, she seemed to _honestly_ wipe a tear while watching Vision and Wanda fall in love - how can you hate that).



I didn't take that for a sincere tear, more in the way of mockery. YMMV.


----------



## MarkB

Tonguez said:


> Why would Pietro‘s death specifically get media play though? The Battle in Sokovia was a chaotic affair featuring Killer Robots, Avengers and SHIELD, and, afaik, no media were on site. Pietro Maximoff was a pretty minor player in that fight, a foreign national, from a small east european warzone and NOT an avenger.



It probably wouldn't have got much coverage at the time, but once Wanda was established as an Avenger she'd be effectively a celebrity in the public's eyes, leading to much public examination of her life in retrospect. Which would have massively snowballed after her involvement in the incident that kicks off Civil War.


----------



## Omand

Tonguez said:


> Why would Pietro‘s death specifically get media play though? The Battle in Sokovia was a chaotic affair featuring Killer Robots, Avengers and SHIELD, and, afaik, no media were on site. Pietro Maximoff was a pretty minor player in that fight, a foreign national, from a small east european warzone and NOT an avenger.



Good points, but I think a bit off the mark.

Sure, at the time of the Battle of Sokovia the Maximoff's likely got little media play.  You have to remember though that Wanda got a whole lot of media play as an Avenger, and even more so after the events of Captain America: Civil War.

Assuming the MCU Earth is fairly similar in societal terms to our own (a pretty safe assumption), the news networks would have had a field day with Wanda after the events we see depicted in that film.  Indeed, we see some of that in the background of the debates around the Sokovia Accords.  I would have to image that MCU Earth news would dig up everything they could on Wanda (including her family) when she became a hot media story, and the cause of a "massacre" to boot.

Cheers


----------



## Omand

And beaten to the punch by @MarkB


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Wishbone said:


> Based on what? The events of the episodes so far seem to show a consistency in the time outside and inside the Hex.




You mean aside from the fact that many times it was night in the outside world, but day inside the Hex? And there was a line in there somewhere by Darcy to the effect of she had been watching whole seasons for each decade, not the single episode per that we saw?


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> Why would Pietro‘s death specifically get media play though?




Because they're gorram superheroes, and they saved hundred of people in a huge fight with hundreds of robots in the presence of civilians!  Because every single person who got out of that city would have been interviewed by media.  Because Pietro saved a young boy's life, and Hawkeye would have made sure people knew it.  Because some politicos used this event to come up with laws, which would have been talked about a lot in the media, who have every reason to try to look at it from every angle, because that gets eyeballs and clicks.

And because, quite simply, there's _no specific reason_ to keep Pietro secret, and there's no specific in-canon statement that his presence was hidden.

We are trying to figure out what Agatha's up to, sure.  But there's enough clearly weird stuff that we shouldn't go manufacturing it.


----------



## Umbran

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> You mean aside from the fact that many times it was night in the outside world, but day inside the Hex?




You can do that by producing light.  You don't need a temporal anomaly for that.



Enevhar Aldarion said:


> And there was a line in there somewhere by Darcy to the effect of she had been watching whole seasons for each decade, not the single episode per that we saw?




A season of 20-odd half-hour episodes would be... 10 hours real-time action inside the Hex - so one day.


----------



## MarkB

So, one prediction for how Wanda could short-circuit the whole confrontation with Agatha - I think, unless she was being very smart and setting Wanda up, Agatha may have out-smugged herself back in the basement when she was showing off her superior witchy knowledge.

She pointed out the warding runes to Wanda, and told her that when a practitioner puts them up in her domain it prevents anyone else's magic from working there.

Well, the whole Hex is Wanda's domain, its physicality under her control, and there's nothing stopping her from erecting a set of 500-foot-tall warding runes at its borders and powering them up with chaos magic.


----------



## Tonguez

MarkB said:


> So, one prediction for how Wanda could short-circuit the whole confrontation with Agatha - I think, unless she was being very smart and setting Wanda up, Agatha may have out-smugged herself back in the basement when she was showing off her superior witchy knowledge.
> 
> She pointed out the warding runes to Wanda, and told her that when a practitioner puts them up in her domain it prevents anyone else's magic from working there.
> 
> Well, the whole Hex is Wanda's domain, its physicality under her control, and there's nothing stopping her from erecting a set of 500-foot-tall warding runes at its borders and powering them up with chaos magic.



Which also raises the question why doesn’t the sorcerer supreme do the same thing for The Entire Planet


----------



## MarkB

Tonguez said:


> Which also raises the question why doesn’t the sorcerer supreme do the same thing for The Entire Planet



Isn't that kind-of what the Sanctums were doing? Not stopping all magic, but certainly warding against external threats.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

MarkB said:


> So, one prediction for how Wanda could short-circuit the whole confrontation with Agatha - I think, unless she was being very smart and setting Wanda up, Agatha may have out-smugged herself back in the basement when she was showing off her superior witchy knowledge.
> 
> She pointed out the warding runes to Wanda, and told her that when a practitioner puts them up in her domain it prevents anyone else's magic from working there.
> 
> Well, the whole Hex is Wanda's domain, its physicality under her control, and there's nothing stopping her from erecting a set of 500-foot-tall warding runes at its borders and powering them up with chaos magic.




Except that Wanda could not see the runes when Agatha tried to point them out to her and she would have no knowledge of the right ones to use or how to cast them. But if the power of the Phoenix ...... Scarlet Witch fully manifests in her, it will not matter what Agatha tries to do.


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> Which also raises the question why doesn’t the sorcerer supreme do the same thing for The Entire Planet




Because users of magic have limits to their power, generally speaking.  Wanda seems to be about at her limits with her control of Westview, for example.  Warding an _entire planet_ would just be too big.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Umbran said:


> Because users of magic have limits to their power, generally speaking.  Wanda seems to be about at her limits with her control of Westview, for example.  Warding an _entire planet_ would just be too big.




Plus, the infinity stone that each Sorcerer Supreme had been guarding, and maybe drawing power from, is now gone. That is sure to be a hit to what the MCU version of the character can do.


----------



## Campbell

Tonguez said:


> Which also raises the question why doesn’t the sorcerer supreme do the same thing for The Entire Planet




For one they are guardians of Earth, but it does not belong to them.

Also the Sorcerer Supreme is dedicated to protecting Earth from outside threats. The last thing they are looking to do in that process is suppressing the magic of latent sorcerers who could be brought into the fight. "No more sorcerers" is Mordo's cause -  not Doctor Strange's cause.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Umbran said:


> Or, you know, Ultron is there just to up the ante for one episode, and doesn't mean anything long term.



I suspect Ultron might be back just for this series finale, and killed off again in the same episode.

Also, notice how Agatha explains how the runes stop any other witch using their powers? Who wants to bet that this is used against Agatha in the final episode?

Villains: never ever explain to heroes how clever your evil trap is!


----------



## MarkB

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Except that Wanda could not see the runes when Agatha tried to point them out to her and she would have no knowledge of the right ones to use or how to cast them. But if the power of the Phoenix ...... Scarlet Witch fully manifests in her, it will not matter what Agatha tries to do.



What do you mean? Wanda saw them just fine, she just didn't know what they were until Agatha told her.


----------



## Imaculata

I suspect that the plot will tie into the Nexus of all Realities, since it was teased in one of the commercials. It might be where Wanda is getting her powers from.

Agatha on the other hand, seems to be getting her powers from elsewhere. In the opening of the episode, we see how the coven uses blue magic. Agatha's power is purple, as if her coven powers are tainted. Perhaps from the book? According to Marvel lore, the Darkhold originates from the dark dimension. If this book is indeed the Darkhold, how did Agatha get it, and is this what turned her powers purple?

Although this episode shows us that Wanda had her powers even as a child, it is suggested that she taps into the powers of the mindstone, which is also when she sees the silhouette. It seems as if part of the mindstone's powers now exist in her, and that she used it to will Vision back into existence. But who is the woman she saw? The previous Scarlet Witch? Natalya Maximoff?


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Did someone say purple?


----------



## Imaculata

I'm still a bit fuzzy on the timeline of events though. Presumably, Agatha has been looking for the Scarlet Witch for some time now. And its not like Wanda has been keeping her powers a secret. But that still wouldn't explain how Agatha came to be inside Westview before S.W.O.R.D was even aware of the anomaly. She couldn't have known that Wanda would go to Westview, unless she was the one who left Wanda that property deed.

But even then, how was Agatha able to resist Wanda's reality warping powers? Is she naturally immune? I would presume not. The only way she would be immune, is if she made magical preparations before she either entered the anomaly, or before it even manifested. I suppose if she were the one that left the deed in Wanda's car, she could have prepped her own little purple sanctum underneath Westview. 

But then what is her ultimate goal? I presume one of her goals was to locate and confirm Wanda as the Scarlet Witch. The other was to learn how she created the Hex. But it also seems she really tried everything she could to break Wanda out of her manufactured reality. Did she need to do this to learn what she wanted to learn?

If her goal is to feast on Wanda's powers, as she did on the magic of her coven, then why lure her a warded sanctum where she can't use her powers? Or why not allow the Hex to persist, feasting on its existence? Maybe she needed to know for sure that Wanda was the Scarlet Witch first? 

At the end of the episode we do see Agatha face Wanda outside the sanctum, while holding her children captive, which may be a ploy to get Wanda to use her powers against her. But would Agatha even be able to handle the power of the mindstone, even if it is just a fraction of it? It also seems like a strategic error to show Wanda her sanctum and her magic book, if she intends to be Wanda's enemy. Such knowledge could easily be used against her.

Or will we see a twist, where Wanda teams up with Agatha against S.W.O.R.D?


----------



## MarkB

Imaculata said:


> I'm still a bit fuzzy on the timeline of events though. Presumably, Agatha has been looking for the Scarlet Witch for some time now. And its not like Wanda has been keeping her powers a secret. But that still wouldn't explain how Agatha came to be inside Westview before S.W.O.R.D was even aware of the anomaly. She couldn't have known that Wanda would go to Westview, unless she was the one who left Wanda that property deed.
> 
> But even then, how was Agatha able to resist Wanda's reality warping powers? Is she naturally immune? I would presume not. The only way she would be immune, is if she made magical preparations before she either entered the anomaly, or before it even manifested. I suppose if she were the one that left the deed in Wanda's car, she could have prepped her own little purple sanctum underneath Westview.
> 
> But then what is her ultimate goal? I presume one of her goals was to locate and confirm Wanda as the Scarlet Witch. The other was to learn how she created the Hex. But it also seems she really tried everything she could to break Wanda out of her manufactured reality. Did she need to do this to learn what she wanted to learn?
> 
> If her goal is to feast on Wanda's powers, as she did on the magic of her coven, then why lure her a warded sanctum where she can't use her powers? Or why not allow the Hex to persist, feasting on its existence? Maybe she needed to know for sure that Wanda was the Scarlet Witch first?
> 
> At the end of the episode we do see Agatha face Wanda outside the sanctum, while holding her children captive, which may be a ploy to get Wanda to use her powers against her. But would Agatha even be able to handle the power of the mindstone, even if it is just a fraction of it? It also seems like a strategic error to show Wanda her sanctum and her magic book, if she intends to be Wanda's enemy. Such knowledge could easily be used against her.
> 
> Or will we see a twist, where Wanda teams up with Agatha against S.W.O.R.D?



I didn't get the impression that Agatha was looking for the Scarlet Witch - more that she just knew about the concept, sufficiently to be able to identify Wanda once she'd gone through her backstory.

I think the sequence of events would be roughly:


Agatha is off doing other things, just living her life, when she senses a massive burst of magic from Westview, and comes to investigate.
She uses her powers to protect herself when she enters the Hex. She's much less powerful than Wanda, but also far more experienced, and has actually studied magic, so it's not that surprising that she can protect herself.
She marvels at the scope of power on display, and wants to learn more about the person who's doing it, so she approaches Wanda but quickly realises that Wanda is caught up in her own fantasy world. She'll need to be snapped out of it before she can actually provide more detailed information.
Agatha ingratiates herself into Wanda's life, and attempts a series of decreasingly subtle interventions to pull her out of her fantasy world. At the same time she sets up her own sanctum in a nearby basement to ensure that she has a bastion if Wanda turns hostile.
Finally Wanda seems to be coming back to herself sufficiently to actually provide useful information if interrogated, so Agatha kidnaps her children and encourages her into Agatha's sanctum.
That's when she finds out how little Wanda actually knows. While she was aware of Wanda's status as an Avenger, she didn't know the source of her powers and had been working under the assumption that Wanda was a formally-trained practitioner. Startled to find that Wanda actually doesn't have any powerful spells or rituals that she can steal, Agatha instead endeavours to learn how she came to have such a degree of raw talent, by embarking upon a trip down memory lane with her.
It's only after this that Agatha makes the connection that Wanda is something called the Scarlet Witch, and it scares her.


----------



## Staffan

Imaculata said:


> At the end of the episode we do see Agatha face Wanda outside the sanctum, while holding her children captive, which may be a ploy to get Wanda to use her powers against her.



Do we?

There's a subtle thing going on that I didn't notice until it was pointed out elsewhere: different places have different aspect ratios. Inside the hex started out as 4:3, and changed to 16:9 (or thereabouts — basically, it's full-screen on my monitor) when it changed to color. But the outside is (I think) 2.35:1 — at the very least, significantly wider than inside the hex. We see this as Wanda is entering Agatha's sanctum — it's somewhat subtle as the picture is fairly dark, but as she is approaching the sanctum we see black bars cover the top and bottom of the screen.

And then, move forward to Wanda hearing the cries of her children, she rushes out through a door into a white light and out on the street and sees Agatha having the kids on leashes... but we're still in 2.35:1 aspect ratio. I think this is still a thing that Agatha's showing Wanda, not something that's happening in reality.


----------



## Imaculata

Good point. Maybe it is all an illusion, and Wanda is still inside Agatha's sanctum. I had not considered that yet.


----------



## Umbran

Imaculata said:


> Good point. Maybe it is all an illusion, and Wanda is still inside Agatha's sanctum. I had not considered that yet.




Wanda's hands power up - which should not be possible within the sanctum.  It would have to be part of the illusion.  

Plus, as we saw in her origin - Agatha's shtick to take down other magicians is to let other practitioners fire at her, and then to use that channel to corrupt and draw out the opponent's energy until they are a withered husk.  Agatha may be trying to do that again by making herself a huge target.  If so, boy is that going to be a mistake.  Sure, Agatha, drink from the fire hose. That'll work out well for you :/

I think the aspect ratios may be less about the physical location, and more about its relation to Wanda's state of mind.  The sanctum and outside the Hex are reality.  Wanda's _mind_ is in reality now.  Basically, the aspect ratio is "stuff got real".


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

MarkB said:


> What do you mean? Wanda saw them just fine, she just didn't know what they were until Agatha told her.




Go back and watch that part again. The camera shows us the runes, but Wanda looks all confused, and Agatha, I am pretty sure, says something like "What? You can't see them?"


----------



## Maxperson

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Go back and watch that part again. The camera shows us the runes, but Wanda looks all confused, and Agatha, I am pretty sure, says something like "What? You can't see them?"



I thought she said something like, "What, you didn't see/notice them?"  I got the impression that Wanda didn't know to look for them and/or wouldn't have recognized them if she had seen them.


----------



## MarkB

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Go back and watch that part again. The camera shows us the runes, but Wanda looks all confused, and Agatha, I am pretty sure, says something like "What? You can't see them?"



It's not that she didn't see them, it's just that she didn't know what they meant - which Agatha couldn't understand, because she's never seen someone that strong with magic who's never received any training in it.


----------



## Staffan

Umbran said:


> Wanda's hands power up - which should not be possible within the sanctum.  It would have to be part of the illusion.
> 
> Plus, as we saw in her origin - Agatha's shtick to take down other magicians is to let other practitioners fire at her, and then to use that channel to corrupt and draw out the opponent's energy until they are a withered husk.  Agatha may be trying to do that again by making herself a huge target.  If so, boy is that going to be a mistake.  Sure, Agatha, drink from the fire hose. That'll work out well for you :/



My impression was not that this was a deliberate ploy on Agatha's part — she certainly doesn't seem happy with being assaulted the way you'd expect a villain with an absorption power to be. You'll also note that the charge leveled against her by the coven is "stealing magic above her age and station" and "practicing the darkest of magics" – nothing about what she actually *did* with the magic. If you'll allow me to provide an alternate interpretation of Agatha:

Young Agatha is a talented witch, and is taught by a coven of several witches including her own mother. She comes across some sort of Forbidden Knowledge and learns it, and the coven is aghast and terrified of her power. They likely believe that even if she hasn't done anything really bad *yet*, the Forbidden Knowledge will corrupt her, and decide to kill her before she becomes a threat they can't handle. You'll note that during the trial/execution, Agatha exclaims that she "cannot control it", and begs the coven to teach her. When the beams turn purple and start draining the coven, she looks *surprised*. Before her mother makes her final attempt on her life, Agatha begs her "Please, I can be good", but her mother rejects the possibility and attacks, sacrificing her life in vain. (As a side note, during this final attack there is a magic manifestation similar to a crown or tiara on Agatha's mother's brow, not entirely dissimilar to the headdress Scarlet Witch wears in the comics. I do not believe this to be a random coincidence, but I'm not sure what the meaning is - perhaps Agatha's mother was linked to some "opposite number" of the Scarlet Witch or something). This is what we know.

And sure, it's easy to go from there to assuming Agatha's goal with coming to Westview is to acquire Wanda's power. But I think that would be too easy. I could easily see young Agatha deciding to prove her mother wrong, by deciding that she *can* be good, and to also take it upon herself to seek out practicioners in similar situations and aid them and teach them (and possibly deal with them if it turns out they're too far gone). So, 230 years later, she detects an immense burst of magic over in New Jersey, and decides to investigate. She wards herself against the hex, and infiltrates it. She does assorted mischief, poking and prodding Wanda to see what's going on. As she can't figure it out, she resorts to summoning some form of simulacrum of Pietro, but apparently grabs/copies one from an alternate reality, and has him try to learn what happened from Wanda. Fietro pushes too far and Wanda rejects him, violently. So she decides to up the ante even more by kidnapping Wanda's children and use them as leverage to make Wanda show her her background, which leads Agatha to conclude that Wanda is the Scarlet Witch.

At this point, I believe Agatha sees herself in Wanda – a young witch with far more power than craft, one who doesn't even know how to create a sanctum. And yes, Agatha probably sees Wanda as a potential threat, but also as someone with a good heart, and someone who could be taught to do great deeds with that power.

Of course, Hayward's probably going to screw that up by sending in White Vision and mess with Wanda's stability even more.



Umbran said:


> I think the aspect ratios may be less about the physical location, and more about its relation to Wanda's state of mind.  The sanctum and outside the Hex are reality.  Wanda's _mind_ is in reality now.  Basically, the aspect ratio is "stuff got real".



Could be, but they've generally been pretty good about cinema = real world, regular widescreen = inside the hex. The only exception I can remember is the hex's expansion, but that could be because changing it during the "axiom wash" would draw attention to it and look REALLY weird.

Edit: it also takes a while to catch up when Monica pushes through the barrier, and doesn't start changing until she gets her bearings and start running inward.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

MarkB said:


> It's not that she didn't see them, it's just that she didn't know what they meant - which Agatha couldn't understand, because she's never seen someone that strong with magic who's never received any training in it.





Maxperson said:


> I thought she said something like, "What, you didn't see/notice them?"  I got the impression that Wanda didn't know to look for them and/or wouldn't have recognized them if she had seen them.




Just rewatched that scene with closed captioning on and Agatha says " Didn't you notice? Basic protection spell. One on each wall?" Wanda looks around all confused, as if there is nothing there. Then Agatha says "No? Nothing?"

So I interpret that to mean Wanda does not see them at all, not that she sees them and just does not recognize them for what they are.

Maybe, just maybe, as Agatha is explaining to Wanda how they work, she also made them visible to her, but even if so, I still believe she could not see them before that.


----------



## Omand

So, slight digression, but where do people think Monica Rambeau is?

Is she a captive of Agatha along with the twins?  Still frozen outside of the cellar entrance?  Breaking a fake Pietro out of Agatha's control?  Something else entirely?

I am sure she will have a part to play in the finale, but what?

Cheers


----------



## MarkB

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Just rewatched that scene with closed captioning on and Agatha says " Didn't you notice? Basic protection spell. One on each wall?" Wanda looks around all confused, as if there is nothing there. Then Agatha says "No? Nothing?"
> 
> So I interpret that to mean Wanda does not see them at all, not that she sees them and just does not recognize them for what they are.
> 
> Maybe, just maybe, as Agatha is explaining to Wanda how they work, she also made them visible to her, but even if so, I still believe she could not see them before that.



Then why was Agatha surprised she couldn't see them? The only reason Wanda wouldn't be able to see them is if Agatha had made them invisible to her.

Your interpretation requires a stretch. Wanda seeing the symbols but not understanding them does not.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

I have read before how turning on audio commentary for the blind can reveal stuff from scripts that we would otherwise have to guess at. I wonder if that would say anything more about that scene, one way or the other? Or was it something in additional subtitles for the deaf? I won't have time to test that until later tonight, but if someone else wants to give it a try and post any results, that would be cool.


----------



## Tonguez

Staffan said:


> My impression was not that this was a deliberate ploy on Agatha's part — she certainly doesn't seem happy with being assaulted the way you'd expect a villain with an absorption power to be. You'll also note that the charge leveled against her by the coven is "stealing magic above her age and station" and "practicing the darkest of magics" – nothing about what she actually *did* with the magic. If you'll allow me to provide an alternate interpretation of Agatha:
> 
> Young Agatha is a talented witch, and is taught by a coven of several witches including her own mother. She comes across some sort of Forbidden Knowledge and learns it, and the coven is aghast and terrified of her power. They likely believe that even if she hasn't done anything really bad *yet*, the Forbidden Knowledge will corrupt her, and decide to kill her before she becomes a threat they can't handle. You'll note that during the trial/execution, Agatha exclaims that she "cannot control it", and begs the coven to teach her. When the beams turn purple and start draining the coven, she looks *surprised*. Before her mother makes her final attempt on her life, Agatha begs her "Please, I can be good", but her mother rejects the possibility and attacks, sacrificing her life in vain. (As a side note, during this final attack there is a magic manifestation similar to a crown or tiara on Agatha's mother's brow, not entirely dissimilar to the headdress Scarlet Witch wears in the comics. I do not believe this to be a random coincidence, but I'm not sure what the meaning is - perhaps Agatha's mother was linked to some "opposite number" of the Scarlet Witch or something). This is what we know.
> 
> And sure, it's easy to go from there to assuming Agatha's goal with coming to Westview is to acquire Wanda's power. But I think that would be too easy. I could easily see young Agatha deciding to prove her mother wrong, by deciding that she *can* be good, and to also take it upon herself to seek out practicioners in similar situations and aid them and teach them (and possibly deal with them if it turns out they're too far gone). So, 230 years later, she detects an immense burst of magic over in New Jersey, and decides to investigate. She wards herself against the hex, and infiltrates it. She does assorted mischief, poking and prodding Wanda to see what's going on. As she can't figure it out, she resorts to summoning some form of simulacrum of Pietro, but apparently grabs/copies one from an alternate reality, and has him try to learn what happened from Wanda. Fietro pushes too far and Wanda rejects him, violently. So she decides to up the ante even more by kidnapping Wanda's children and use them as leverage to make Wanda show her her background, which leads Agatha to conclude that Wanda is the Scarlet Witch.
> 
> At this point, I believe Agatha sees herself in Wanda – a young witch with far more power than craft, one who doesn't even know how to create a sanctum. And yes, Agatha probably sees Wanda as a potential threat, but also as someone with a good heart, and someone who could be taught to do great deeds with that power.
> 
> Of course, Hayward's probably going to screw that up by sending in White Vision and mess with Wanda's stability even more.
> 
> 
> Could be, but they've generally been pretty good about cinema = real world, regular widescreen = inside the hex. The only exception I can remember is the hex's expansion, but that could be because changing it during the "axiom wash" would draw attention to it and look REALLY weird.
> 
> Edit: it also takes a while to catch up when Monica pushes through the barrier, and doesn't start changing until she gets her bearings and start running inward.




Thats my interpretation too, great summary


----------



## Umbran

MarkB said:


> Then why was Agatha surprised she couldn't see them? The only reason Wanda wouldn't be able to see them is if Agatha had made them invisible to her.
> 
> Your interpretation requires a stretch. Wanda seeing the symbols but not understanding them does not.




Yeah. I saw that not as "she literally could not see them".  I think if they had wanted us to get that idea, they'd have shown it explicitly. 

Wanda knows little or nothing about magic.  She thinks she has superpowers.  He is just boggled and scared by the whole situation.


----------



## Omand

Umbran said:


> Yeah. I saw that not as "she literally could not see them".  I think if they had wanted us to get that idea, they'd have shown it explicitly.
> 
> Wanda knows little or nothing about magic.  She thinks she has superpowers.  He is just boggled and scared by the whole situation.



I have to agree.

We as the audience cannot see the runes/spells until Agatha reveals them in that scene either.  If they were meant to be visible, and therefore something Wanda should have noticed, then we, the audience, should have been able to see them in advance.  This would then contrast our knowledge with what Wanda demonstrates on screen.

The fact that we cannot see the spells until they are revealed to Wanda means they are warded/invisible to the naked eye.

I think Agatha's comment is more supposed to be in the line of "if you were a true witch you would have had your true-seeing spell up at all times to identify spells" or perhaps "if you were a true witch you would have known to expect magical wards around a sanctum such as this amd would have been looking for them."

Cheers


----------



## MarkB

Omand said:


> I have to agree.
> 
> We as the audience cannot see the runes/spells until Agatha reveals them in that scene either.  If they were meant to be visible, and therefore something Wanda should have noticed, then we, the audience, should have been able to see them in advance.  This would then contrast our knowledge with what Wanda demonstrates on screen.
> 
> The fact that we cannot see the spells until they are revealed to Wanda means they are warded/invisible to the naked eye.



They weren't invisible, they just weren't in-shot at that moment. We see them clearly when Wanda first enters the basement the previous episode. She even looks up at them.


----------



## Omand

MarkB said:


> They weren't invisible, they just weren't in-shot at that moment. We see them clearly when Wanda first enters the basement the previous episode. She even looks up at them.



Do we?  I blame my faulty aging memory then.

I will have to go back and rewatch.

In that case, ignore what I said.


----------



## Tonguez

Paul Farquhar said:


> View attachment 133473
> Did someone say purple?




I didnt watch it all but iirc the Runaways TV show also had magic users channeling the Dark Dimension manifest purple energy.
However SHEILDS Ghost Rider and Howard Stark opened portals to the Dark dimension manifesting orange (though in Ghost Riders case it might have been fire)

The Dark Dimension gives immortality (explaining Agathas long life) but also madness. Its also the realm of Dormammu - so maybe Mephisto and Dormammu have been merged for the purpose of MCU?


so 
Space Stone (blue) - standard magic channeling power from Universe
Reality Stone (red) - Chaos magic transforming reality
Power Stone (purple) - Dark Dimension
Mind Stone (yellow) - Visions power source, maybe the Odinforce?
Time Stone (green) - Eye of Agamotto
Soul Stone (orange) - The Ancient One and Dr Strange manifest orange


----------



## Umbran

MarkB said:


> They weren't invisible, they just weren't in-shot at that moment. We see them clearly when Wanda first enters the basement the previous episode. She even looks up at them.




I thought they came to glow when Agatha spoke about them.  How often do you look at dark carvings on walls when you are searching for your missing kids and a witch is assaulting you and tying you up in magical bonds?

Agatha's, "What, nothing?" isn't about Wanda's _seeing_ the runes.  It is about Wanda showing no _comprehension_ of them.  Agatha at that point is only starting to realize that Wanda's not another witch, and is probing to see what Wanda does or does not know.


----------



## Imaculata

It would be interesting plot-wise if Agatha is more of a neutral mentor in all this, rather than her enemy. Hayward and his reconstructed White Vision will already be opponents for Wanda to deal with.


----------



## Rabulias

Imaculata said:


> It would be interesting plot-wise if Agatha is more of a neutral mentor in all this, rather than her enemy.



Like a magical "Scared Straight"?    It could happen. We would need to see that what Agatha's mother and the coven thought was "bad" was "good," or if Agatha has had an attack of conscience in the last 400 years and is seeking redemption.


----------



## Gradine

SHE. KILLED. A. PUPPY.


----------



## Umbran

Gradine said:


> SHE. KILLED. A. PUPPY.




It is possible that puppy was actually a cockroach.  However....

She. Killed. Her. Own. Mother.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Rabulias said:


> Like a magical "Scared Straight"?    It could happen. We would need to see that what Agatha's mother and the coven thought was "bad" was "good," or if Agatha has had an attack of conscience in the last 400 years and is seeking redemption.




Agatha's mother and her coven tried to murder her before she could do bad things. Reminds me of Minority Report. Also, the coven was not at the traditional full size of 13 members. I wonder if that will ever have any more to do with her story?


----------



## Tonguez

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Agatha's mother and her coven tried to murder her before she could do bad things. Reminds me of Minority Report. Also, the coven was not at the traditional full size of 13 members. I wonder if that will ever have any more to do with her story?



Iirc there were Seven members of the coven besides Mother Evanora.

so in the comics the Salem Seven were Agatha Harkness grandchildren (all fathered by her son Nicholas Scratch) and each was able to magically transform into a superpowered monstrous form. I had previously thought that Dottie and the ladies at her meeting were the Salem Seven - so maybe they were just a nod or maybe Evanoras coven has been reincarnated (is Dottie the reincarnated Evanora?) - and note that in the comics the Salem Seven did declare Agatha a traitor and eventually burned her at the stake (however - comics)

NB Evanora however doesnt come from the comics, but the name is used for the Wicked Witch of the East in the Oz the Great and Powerful prequel movie


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Umbran said:


> It is possible that puppy was actually a cockroach.  However....
> 
> She. Killed. Her. Own. Mother.



To be fair, her mother tried to kill her first.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Tonguez said:


> Iirc there were Seven members of the coven besides Mother Evanora.
> 
> so in the comics the Salem Seven were Agatha Harkness grandchildren (all fathered by her son Nicholas Scratch) and each was able to magically transform into a superpowered monstrous form. I had previously thought that Dottie and the ladies at her meeting were the Salem Seven - so maybe they were just a nod or maybe Evanoras coven has been reincarnated (is Dottie the reincarnated Evanora?) - and note that in the comics the Salem Seven did declare Agatha a traitor and eventually burned her at the stake (however - comics)
> 
> NB Evanora however doesnt come from the comics, but the name is used for the Wicked Witch of the East in the Oz the Great and Powerful prequel movie




In the scene, there are 7 generic witches and Agatha and Agatha's mother, so that is 9 members, as I am pretty sure Agatha was already a member of the coven. Also, I don't know any of what you are saying, if that is supposed to be from the comics, it was from when I was not reading them. Also, none of the recaps or easter egg articles I have read for episode 8 mentioned the coven or the Salem Seven at all.

However, some previous articles have wondered if Westview is supposed to be the MCU version of New Salem. That would explain why Agatha's house is already there and the basement is the way it is. Also, that the Nexus was relocated from Florida to Agatha's basement in Westview, because of all the swampy vines and stuff in it.


----------



## Tonguez

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> In the scene, there are 7 generic witches and Agatha and Agatha's mother, so that is 9 members, as I am pretty sure Agatha was already a member of the coven. Also, I don't know any of what you are saying, if that is supposed to be from the comics, it was from when I was not reading them. Also, none of the recaps or easter egg articles I have read for episode 8 mentioned the coven or the Salem Seven at all.
> 
> However, some previous articles have wondered if Westview is supposed to be the MCU version of New Salem. That would explain why Agatha's house is already there and the basement is the way it is. Also, that the Nexus was relocated from Florida to Agatha's basement in Westview, because of all the swampy vines and stuff in it.




The Salem Seven were introduced in the Fantastic Four comics and yup come from New Salem - it was the Seven who kidnapped Franklin Richards back when Agatha Harkness was acting as his nanny


----------



## Maxperson

Umbran said:


> It is possible that puppy was actually a cockroach.  However....
> 
> She. Killed. Her. Own. Mother.



It's possible that was accidental, though.  She didn't look in control of herself at that time.  Whatever magic she was in over her head with seemed to be in control of that.


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> ... I had previously thought that Dottie and the ladies at her meeting were the Salem Seven - so maybe they were just a nod or maybe Evanoras coven has been reincarnated (is Dottie the reincarnated Evanora?)




Too.  Much.  Plot.  We should only be expecting about a half hour more of show in the series.

And, it isn't the Agatha Harkness show, where all things in Agatha's backstory reside.  She's an antagonist, not the main character.  There are nods, but they aren't likely to be relevant most of the times we see them


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Umbran said:


> Too.  Much.  Plot.  We should only be expecting about a half hour more of show in the series.



Surely the last episode is an hour-long one, though.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

FitzTheRuke said:


> Surely the last episode is an hour-long one, though.




It will be at least as long as episode 8, which, minus credits, was about 40 minutes long.


----------



## Marc Radle

FitzTheRuke said:


> Surely the last episode is an hour-long one, though.



Reports are that it is indeed an hour or so


----------



## Lidgar

FitzTheRuke said:


> To be fair, her mother tried to kill her first.



How do we know if the cockroach-puppy didn’t also try? “It was Agatha (in self defense) all along!”


----------



## Umbran

Marc Radle said:


> Reports are that it is indeed an hour or so




Reports were also that the last three episodes were so.  Thus, I am skeptical.  

If the worst thing I am wrong about this week is the length of a TV episode... that's a pretty good week.


----------



## Umbran

Maxperson said:


> It's possible that was accidental, though.  She didn't look in control of herself at that time.  Whatever magic she was in over her head with seemed to be in control of that.




That's the drunk driver's excuse too.  Sorry - if you meddle in powers beyond mortal ken, and it goes bad, that's still on you.


----------



## Maxperson

Umbran said:


> That's the drunk driver's excuse too.  Sorry - if you meddle in powers beyond mortal ken, and it goes bad, that's still on you.



Yeah.  I agree.  She is absolutely responsible. It's still different from intentionally killing your mother.  The former doesn't have to mean evil, horrible person.  The latter kinda does.

Edit: Thinking further, it's not the same as drunk driving.  In this case, the "drunk" was at home and a bunch of people stormed the house and tried to kill her, and she accidentally killed them back due to "drunken" lack of control.  That's not the same as getting drunk, getting behind the wheel and then accidentally killing someone.  The witches came to Agnes and attacked her first.


----------



## Umbran

We can also talk about the music...


----------



## Umbran

Maxperson said:


> Edit: Thinking further, it's not the same as drunk driving.  In this case, the "drunk" was at home and a bunch of people stormed the house and tried to kill her, and she accidentally killed them back due to "drunken" lack of control.




You mean, when the cops catch her after she does something horrible while drunk....

Or, are you contending that witches get together to kill one of their own for no good reason?  Have you forgotten that users of magic in the Marvel universe bring things like Dormammu or Cthon into the world?

Also, do we actually know that they were trying to _kill_ Agatha - as opposed to, say, sever her connection to some ugly mystical power?


----------



## Tonguez

Umbran said:


> Too.  Much.  Plot.  We should only be expecting about a half hour more of show in the series.
> 
> And, it isn't the Agatha Harkness show, where all things in Agatha's backstory reside.  She's an antagonist, not the main character.  There are nods, but they aren't likely to be relevant most of the times we see them



Yeah I’m not expecting to see the seven show up in the next episode (although a bit more on Dottie would be welcome) but if Agatha does survive beyond the series to get involved in later movies/shows then the seven might have a place - 

maybe in Loki:Time Cop?


----------



## Tonguez

Umbran said:


> You mean, when the cops catch her after she does something horrible while drunk....
> 
> Or, are you contending that witches get together to kill one of their own for no good reason?  Have you forgotten that users of magic in the Marvel universe bring things like Dormammu or Cthon into the world?
> 
> Also, do we actually know that they were trying to _kill_ Agatha - as opposed to, say, sever her connection to some ugly mystical power?




Well, we dont know that the Coven actually had ‘police’ authority or if they were a lynch mob punishing Agatha for reaching above her age and station (and as far as we know the Coven wasnt actually opposed to summoning Cthon, they just thought Agatha had no right to do so).

During the Covens attack Agatha initially appears distressed and begging for mercy, when there is a reversal and she gets the upper hand, she seems surprised. It’s at that point she makes the choice to go all out, draining the coven and even to the point that she drains her mother - if anything its at this point that she is drunk with power, adrenaline and magic

Agatha has ‘self defence’ and ‘they pushed me too far’ as a arguments in her favour, Perhaps later she felt grief and decided to seek redemption


----------



## Imaculata

Gradine said:


> SHE. KILLED. A. PUPPY.




Sparky had it coming!


----------



## Hatmatter

Umbran said:


> We can also talk about the music...



I loved that, Umbran, thank you for sharing!


----------



## reelo

Imaculata said:


> Sparky had it coming!



Teeheehee


----------



## MarkB

Maxperson said:


> Yeah.  I agree.  She is absolutely responsible. It's still different from intentionally killing your mother.  The former doesn't have to mean evil, horrible person.  The latter kinda does.
> 
> Edit: Thinking further, it's not the same as drunk driving.  In this case, the "drunk" was at home and a bunch of people stormed the house and tried to kill her, and she accidentally killed them back due to "drunken" lack of control.  That's not the same as getting drunk, getting behind the wheel and then accidentally killing someone.  The witches came to Agnes and attacked her first.



If, as seems likely, she knew in advance that the forbidden powers she was dabbling in would oblige her fellow coven members to hunt her down in response, and further, that those powers would allow her to overcome them with deadly force, then she's responsible for their deaths. She chose a course of action that would oblige them to place themselves in harm's way.


----------



## Maxperson

MarkB said:


> If, as seems likely, she knew in advance that the forbidden powers she was dabbling in would oblige her fellow coven members to hunt her down in response, and further, that those powers would allow her to overcome them with deadly force, then she's responsible for their deaths. She chose a course of action that would oblige them to place themselves in harm's way.



I don't agree that she is responsible for vigilante action.  They didn't have to come after her.  They chose to do so. If on the other hand she made pacts with evil powers that corrupted her and she went on to intentionally kill and harm due to her choice, she would be fully responsible for those actions.  Defending yourself against vigilantes, though, is still self-defense.  This was just her coven, not magic cops or even the Sorcerer Supreme.


----------



## Umbran

Maxperson said:


> They didn't have to come after her..... Defending yourself against vigilantes, though, is still self-defense.




Eh.  That's a kind of deep ethical question there, and "they didn't have to" really depends on what happened before that scene, now doesn't it?  Or are you going to argue that, just based on the final fight of Endgame, that Thanos was the victim?  

In the comics, Agatha was at the Salem witch trials - Agatha actually ensured that several of her fellow witches were tried, as a form of test - to Agatha, no witch worthy of the name could be caught and slain in such a way.

She may not be Doctor Doom, but Agatha's not a nice person.


----------



## billd91

Omand said:


> I think Agatha's comment is more supposed to be in the line of "if you were a true witch you would have had your true-seeing spell up at all times to identify spells" or perhaps "if you were a true witch you would have known to expect magical wards around a sanctum such as this amd would have been looking for them."
> 
> Cheers



Yeah, basically, Agatha is approaching the situation like Wanda has to have a substantial magical education to be manipulating magic the way she's doing so and, initially, is incredulous that Wanda can't have the kind of magical sophistication she has. Whether it's about any kind of true-seeing spell or not, she expected a magically-educated Wanda to have spotted the signs of the wards if not the wards themselves. It's as the evidence mounts that she starts to believe Wanda's something different.

What I wonder is why Tyler Haywood knows Wanda has the power to reanimate/resurrect Vision, as he comments in the flashback, when Wanda herself does not know or believe that.


----------



## Maxperson

Umbran said:


> Eh.  That's a kind of deep ethical question there, and "they didn't have to" really depends on what happened before that scene, now doesn't it?  Or are you going to argue that, just based on the final fight of Endgame, that Thanos was the victim?
> 
> In the comics, Agatha was at the Salem witch trials - Agatha actually ensured that several of her fellow witches were tried, as a form of test - to Agatha, no witch worthy of the name could be caught and slain in such a way.
> 
> She may not be Doctor Doom, but Agatha's not a nice person.



No, we don't know what happened before that scene.  And I know she's not a nice person.  The MCU makes too many changes to rely too heavily on the comics, though.  I'm primarily looking at what we know from the show, and it looked to me like the coven went vigilante on her because she over stepped in what she learned, not from any prior actions against others.


----------



## Umbran

billd91 said:


> What I wonder is why Tyler Haywood knows Wanda has the power to reanimate/resurrect Vision, as he comments in the flashback, when Wanda herself does not know or believe that.




I'm gonna go with Kang.

I'm also going to go with the idea that we will only learn that in hindsight much later in the next phase.


----------



## Imaculata

billd91 said:


> What I wonder is why Tyler Haywood knows Wanda has the power to reanimate/resurrect Vision, as he comments in the flashback, when Wanda herself does not know or believe that.




Yes, I noticed it as well. It was very strange. 

And if he had reason to suspect that she could resurrect Vision, him causing Wanda extra distress by showing her Vision being cut to pieces, would be a great way to provoke her powers to manifest. I keep thinking that the deed of the house waiting in Wanda's car is a bit suspect also.  All of this stinks.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

billd91 said:


> What I wonder is why Tyler Haywood knows Wanda has the power to reanimate/resurrect Vision, as he comments in the flashback, when Wanda herself does not know or believe that.



Because he's Mephisto! Dun dun dun....


----------



## MarkB

billd91 said:


> What I wonder is why Tyler Haywood knows Wanda has the power to reanimate/resurrect Vision, as he comments in the flashback, when Wanda herself does not know or believe that.



SWORD have been taking apart and reassembling Vision for five years. They basically restored him to full working order barring a power source.

That being the case, it's not a big leap to conclude that someone empowered by the same thing that was powering Vision might be able to re-power him. Hayward might not even have been as sure as he sounded - he might have simply wanted to provoke her to trying in order to see what happened.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Just to point something else out, but looking at the IMDB page for the show, several of the actors have there roles listed as "character name"/....

Some of those with the .... we now know are same person with two different names, like Agnes/.... and Monica/....

But some of the others listed that way include Darcy and Hayward and several of the town residents. Now the residents are probably just their Wanda show name and their normal Westview name, but what about the ones not from Westview? Darcy could just be that way because she got pulled into the Hex and given another persona, though I don't think we ever heard that name? But that does not explain Hayward being listed with a secret alternate name or some of the others on the cast list.

Interestingly, Wanda does not have the /.... even though we know she will also be called Scarlet Witch.


----------



## trappedslider

Imaculata said:


> Sparky had it coming!



if you'd been there you would have done the same


----------



## Dire Bare

billd91 said:


> What I wonder is why Tyler Haywood knows Wanda has the power to reanimate/resurrect Vision, as he comments in the flashback, when Wanda herself does not know or believe that.



Does he know?

Or, does he hope? I got the impression he was fishing in that scene.


----------



## Blue

I'm severely confused by the Vision's body that S.W.O.R.D has.  We know from Age of Ultron that he's a living body, just with vibranium bonded to the cells.

From AoU:


> *Dr. Helen Cho*: The regeneration cradle prints tissue, it can't build a living body.
> *Ultron*: It can, you can. You lack the materials. You're a brilliant woman, Helen. But we all have room to improve. [Ultron uses the scepter to mind-control Cho]
> ...
> 
> *Dr. Helen Cho*: It's beautiful. The Vibranium atoms aren't just compatible with the tissue cells, they're binding them. And SHIELD never even thought...
> *Ultron*: The most versatile substance on the planet and they used it to make a Frisbee. Typical of humans, they scratch the surface and never think to look within. [Ultron breaks open the scepter's blue gem and a yellow gem that was inside floats out and lands in his hand. He places it in the head of the body]
> ...
> 
> *Dr. Helen Cho*: Cellular cohesion will take a few hours, but we can initiate the consciousness stream. We're uploading your cerebral matrix...now.
> *Wanda Maximoff*: I can read him. He is dreaming.
> *Dr. Helen Cho*: I wouldn't call it dreams. It's Ultron's base consciousness, informational noise. Soon...
> *Ultron*: How soon? I'm not being pushy.
> *Dr. Helen Cho*: We're imprinting a physical brain. There are no shortcuts. Even if your magic gem is... [Wanda, reading Ultron's mind, sees a vision of global annihilation, which horrifies her and she screams]



But what S.W.O.R.D. had looked like a robot.  Wires and stuff.  Not flesh. Not a "physical brain" that Ultron needs to take hours when he can upload into his own robots (with presumably computers for brains) near instantaneously,  What S.W.O.R.D. has makes no sense.

Now, when Thanos rips the mindstone from Vision's head, the attachment looks fibrous.  But that still wasn't the wires and technological bits we are seeing.

Another point along the same line - in the flashback the S.W.O.R.D. techs were _grinding_ at Vision's body. That would leave bits missing, yet he's reassebled and the only thing missing is color. And grinding to take him apart seems like something they wouldn't have to do after five years of taking him apart and putting him together again and again.

(Transcript from: Avengers: Age of Ultron)


----------



## Tonguez

Blue said:


> I'm severely confused by the Vision's body that S.W.O.R.D has.  We know from Age of Ultron that he's a living body, just with vibranium bonded to the cells.
> 
> From AoU:
> 
> But what S.W.O.R.D. had looked like a robot.  Wires and stuff.  Not flesh. Not a "physical brain" that Ultron needs to take hours when he can upload into his own robots (with presumably computers for brains) near instantaneously,  What S.W.O.R.D. has makes no sense.
> 
> Now, when Thanos rips the mindstone from Vision's head, the attachment looks fibrous.  But that still wasn't the wires and technological bits we are seeing.
> 
> Another point along the same line - in the flashback the S.W.O.R.D. techs were _grinding_ at Vision's body. That would leave bits missing, yet he's reassebled and the only thing missing is color. And grinding to take him apart seems like something they wouldn't have to do after five years of taking him apart and putting him together again and again.
> 
> (Transcript from: Avengers: Age of Ultron)




No the regeneration cradle creates a simulacrum of organic tissue that can then bond to a living hosts organic tissue - Dr Helen Cho thought it could NOT create a whole body, however Ultron reveals that one of Vibraniums properties is that  it can mimic organic tissue - so the regeneration cradle + Vibranium created a biosynthetic body that mimics organic tissue but is primarily Vibranium


----------



## Umbran

trappedslider said:


> if you'd been there you would have done the same



Thor 
Stark 
SMASH!
Ultron
Civil War
Endgame
He had it coming.  He had it coming.  He had it coming all along...


----------



## Staffan

Umbran said:


> It is possible that puppy was actually a cockroach.  However....
> 
> She. Killed. Her. Own. Mother.



Looked more like her mother killed herself by trying to murder her daughter. Particularly after having seen the same thing happen to the rest of her coven. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

I mean, if I try to punch Johnny Storm and I get third degree burns from it, am I or he to blame? Or to take an actual Marvel example, if I try to activate my glider in order to impale Spider-Man from behind and he dodges it so it impales me instead, is Spider-Man to blame or am I?


----------



## Umbran

Blue said:


> Another point along the same line - in the flashback the S.W.O.R.D. techs were _grinding_ at Vision's body. That would leave bits missing, yet he's reassebled and the only thing missing is color.




I wouldn't put trust in such technical details.  They make stuff that would look good on the screen, not stuff that's technically accurate, or anything.


----------



## Umbran

Staffan said:


> Looked more like her mother killed herself by trying to murder her daughter. Particularly after having seen the same thing happen to the rest of her coven. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.




Right.  So, you expect people to... just stand aside when something more powerful comes along?  Blame them for their own deaths when the powerful villain kills them?  Are you failing to recall that this is superhero genre, not gritty dystopia?

Note to self - do not put Staffan on the team that's standing up against Thanos.


----------



## Blue

Tonguez said:


> No the regeneration cradle creates a simulacrum of organic tissue that can then bond to a living hosts organic tissue - Dr Helen Cho thought it could NOT create a whole body, however Ultron reveals that one of Vibraniums properties is that  it can mimic organic tissue - so the regeneration cradle + Vibranium created a biosynthetic body that mimics organic tissue but is primarily Vibranium



Regardless if it's organic tissue or merely mimicking organic tissue, Ultron specifically states that it can be used to make a living body.


----------



## MarkB

Blue said:


> Another point along the same line - in the flashback the S.W.O.R.D. techs were _grinding_ at Vision's body. That would leave bits missing, yet he's reassebled and the only thing missing is color. And grinding to take him apart seems like something they wouldn't have to do after five years of taking him apart and putting him together again and again.



That scene was pretty obviously staged specifically for Wanda's benefit. She had to be convinced that she was seeing a lifeless wreck, not their nearly-completed science project. It wouldn't surprise me if that wasn't even Vision's body at all.


----------



## Tonguez

Blue said:


> Regardless if it's organic tissue or merely mimicking organic tissue, Ultron specifically states that it can be used to make a living body.



Yes a living metalic body (so it sparks when grinding) but not a _flesh_ body (no blood splatter).

iirc in the comics Vision turns white due to his skin being damaged in the rebuild (which is a simple explanation) - for the MCU his colours already been drain to grey after he died, so the white might just be a slow recovery


----------



## Blue

Tonguez said:


> Yes a living metalic body (so it sparks when grinding) but not a _flesh_ body (no blood splatter).
> 
> iirc in the comics Vision turns white due to his skin being damaged in the rebuild (which is a simple explanation) - for the MCU his colours already been drain to grey after he died, so the white might just be a slow recovery



I don't have a problem with a living metallic body - that's what I expect after the vibranium bonded to the flesh from the Regeneration Cradle. 



I have a problem with the lack of a living metallic body and the body being full of wires and actuators and bits instead.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Umbran said:


> You mean, when the cops catch her after she does something horrible while drunk....
> 
> Or, are you contending that witches get together to kill one of their own for no good reason?  Have you forgotten that users of magic in the Marvel universe bring things like Dormammu or Cthon into the world?
> 
> Also, do we actually know that they were trying to _kill_ Agatha - as opposed to, say, sever her connection to some ugly mystical power?



They came for her pre-emptively, far as I can tell.
The charge was that she got drunk, not that she did something bad while drunk.




Umbran said:


> It is possible that puppy was actually a cockroach.  However....
> 
> She. Killed. Her. Own. Mother.



Eh. If her mother was trying to kill her because she came into a power that she didn’t approve of, she was justified. Hell, even if her mom was justified in thinking it wasn’t possible to “be good” while holding that power, Agatha was justified.


----------



## Staffan

Umbran said:


> Right.  So, you expect people to... just stand aside when something more powerful comes along?  Blame them for their own deaths when the powerful villain kills them?  Are you failing to recall that this is superhero genre, not gritty dystopia?
> 
> Note to self - do not put Staffan on the team that's standing up against Thanos.




Agatha's mother tried to *murder* her. For learning magic "above her age and station." After Agatha begged the coven and her mother to help teach her how to control the magic. There's no indication that Agatha had *done* anything other than learning magic she wasn't supposed to — the coven didn't accuse her of killing people, or mind-controlling them, or doing anything concrete. Agatha killing her, if it was at all under her control, was a clear case of self-defense.

Look at Agatha's face in the prologue, as the coven's attack reverses itself back on her assailants:




That is not the face of an evil mastermind who goes "Ha-ha, you fell for my trap!" That's the face of a young woman who thought she was about to die at the hands of those she considered friends and mentors, has *no idea* what is going on with her would-be murderers' attack being turned against them. This is a very different situation from stopping Thanos who's bent on conquest and destruction.

Edit: Here's another thought: do you also think the Kree were justified in attempting to brainwash and control Carol Danvers, who after all came into possession of a power that would be a threat to them? If not, why is Agatha's situation different?


----------



## Davies

Staffan said:


> That is not the face of an evil mastermind who goes "Ha-ha, you fell for my trap!" That's the face of a young woman who thought she was about to die at the hands of those she considered friends and mentors, has *no idea* what is going on with her would-be murderers' attack being turned against them.



What did she do in the immediate aftermath, though? Did she mourn? Did she express any regret?

Are you ignoring the possibility that the excellent actress who pretended to be Wanda's good friend through all those episodes was _pretending_ to be scared?


----------



## Umbran

doctorbadwolf said:


> They came for her pre-emptively, far as I can tell.
> The charge was that she got drunk, not that she did something bad while drunk.




She had to try to weasel herself out of an accusation that she broke the rules - a weaseling they didn't buy.  So, there was some infraction already extant for which they came.

You don't think that, in a multiverse with Mephistos and Cthons and Dormammus, that there aren't magical rules that _shouldn't_ be broken?  That societies of magic should not police?  I mean, after seeing what happens with Kaecilius almost ending the world?  She joined a group.  She gained power from that.  They had rules.  She knew she was flouting them.  The attempt at punishment was undesired, but _not a surprise_.  

With great power comes great responsibility.  Fail in that responsibility, and there will be consequences.  No?  You don't figure that's a thing?


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Umbran said:


> She had to try to weasel herself out of an accusation that she broke the rules - a weaseling they didn't buy.  So, there was some infraction already extant for which they came.
> 
> You don't think that, in a multiverse with Mephistos and Cthons and Dormammus, that there aren't magical rules that _shouldn't_ be broken?  That societies of magic should not police?  I mean, after seeing what happens with Kaecilius almost ending the world?  She joined a group.  She gained power from that.  They had rules.  She knew she was flouting them.  The attempt at punishment was undesired, but _not a surprise_.
> 
> With great power comes great responsibility.  Fail in that responsibility, and there will be consequences.  No?  You don't figure that's a thing?



All irrelevant, unless she actually did something evil with the power. Excuses for making a truth of the anarchist accusation that laws are just a threat of violence by those in power. 

They came, they accused, they tried to kill her. Defending herself is reasonable and justified, barring further information.


----------



## Gradine

What's the over/under on how many of the takes in this thread since last episode will have shed poorly by Friday?


----------



## Imaculata

I honestly dare not make any predictions regarding the final episode. I just hope Vision survives in the end, though in my heart that seems unlikely. And what will happen of the kids? Are they real, or just more of Agatha's trickery?


----------



## Erekose

Vision surviving is simultaneously what I want most to happen in the final episode and the least likely thing to happen


----------



## MarkB

Imaculata said:


> I honestly dare not make any predictions regarding the final episode. I just hope Vision survives in the end, though in my heart that seems unlikely. And what will happen of the kids? Are they real, or just more of Agatha's trickery?



We've seen the kids still being themselves in a scene where only Agatha was present. That speaks to them being more than just her constructs.


----------



## Staffan

Umbran said:


> She had to try to weasel herself out of an accusation that she broke the rules - a weaseling they didn't buy.  So, there was some infraction already extant for which they came.



The charges were "stole knowledge above her age and station" and "practicing the darkest magics". That's *super* vague. They don't say she summoned a demon, or hurt anyone (or to what degree), or used it to enrich herself at the expense of others, or anything like that. Here's how I see this going down:

The coven has some sort of system for providing access to magical knowledge based on seniority. Presumably there are dual reasons for doing so – both to make sure you have the requisite skills to actually make use of the knowledge, and also the emotional maturity to be ready for such power. Young Agatha is probably exceptionally talented, and breezed through the earlier lessons, and she's arrogant and wants more. She gets her hands on a book she's not meant to have, and reads it and gains access to its magic. Likely, she has the skills to use the magic ("the rules bent to my power"), but not the wisdom to control it and to know *when* to use it. There's probably some sort of incident where something minorly bad happens because of it, alerting the coven to the problem. The coven goes "Nope, last time a baby witch read the Necronomicon we had Pompeji, so let's nip this in its bud", which leads to the attempted murder we see on screen. Note that Agatha begs them to train her to control "it", and she tells her mother that she can be good, but they evidently decide she's too big a threat.

I definitely see the parallels to Wanda here: Wanda tried using her magic to protect her allies from a bomb and throw it away, but didn't account for the fact that she instead put other people in harm's way leading to their death. Had she had more training, perhaps we'd never have the Sokovia accords.


----------



## Imaculata

Remember that Dr Strange also took a magical book and artifact he wasn't supposed to have, and they didn't kill him for it. The Coven are not good people.


----------



## Nilbog

Until we know the nature of power Agatha 'took' it's hard to guess her true status, maybe whatever it is has corrupted her or maybe even controlling her, so although so may have been harshly judged at her trial, she is now way beyond that point


----------



## Staffan

Nilbog said:


> Until we know the nature of power Agatha 'took' it's hard to guess her true status, maybe whatever it is has corrupted her or maybe even controlling her, so although so may have been harshly judged at her trial, she is now way beyond that point



Is she? What have we actually seen her do? Messing with the stage magic show? Some whammy on Herb to enlist his help in sowing doubt in Vision's mind? The whole Fietro thing? I mean, those are certainly (bleep) moves, but I don't see them as indications of unforgivable corruption.

There's Sparky, and there's the kidnapping/hostage-taking of the twins, but at this point I'm not sure if those are even real or just constructs of Wanda's imagination.


----------



## tomBitonti

I dunno.  We are missing a lot of details re: The fight with the coven.  But ...

Who else would police secretive and powerful witches except the witches themselves?

it is conceivable that certain powers irrevocably cause a descent into madness or evil.  It is also conceivable that the coven’s acts were entirely lawful, with already explained rules and consequences, which Agatha knowingly broke.

Agatha’s lack of apparent grief after her mother died is telling, to me.  I can see the deaths as being accidental.  But they seem to have no impact on Agatha.

TomB


----------



## Staffan

Sure. For all we know, she could have sacrificed a whole village for the purpose of summoning Mephisto. But I think that if there was a concrete atrocity, the writers would have specified that, but couching it in vague language leaves things open. And so far we've only *seen* Agatha do things to try to understand Wanda and to test her. Maybe not nice things, but certainly not things she deserves to be killed for.

Edit: And as for the lack of grief... well, *they* attacked *her*. If you punch Colossus and break your hand, do you expect Colossus to feel sorry for you?


----------



## Umbran

Gradine said:


> What's the over/under on how many of the takes in this thread since last episode will have shed poorly by Friday?




Oh, goodness, most of what we speculate is nonsense.  If anyone has ego tied up in being "right", then that's apt to turn into a problem.


----------



## tomBitonti

Staffan said:


> Sure. For all we know, she could have sacrificed a whole village for the purpose of summoning Mephisto. But I think that if there was a concrete atrocity, the writers would have specified that, but couching it in vague language leaves things open. And so far we've only *seen* Agatha do things to try to understand Wanda and to test her. Maybe not nice things, but certainly not things she deserves to be killed for.
> 
> Edit: And as for the lack of grief... well, *they* attacked *her*. If you punch Colossus and break your hand, do you expect Colossus to feel sorry for you?



Sure.  But staying within what was presented:  Agatha trifled with forbidden power, and Agatha’s mother truly believed that Agatha could not possibly control them or do good with them.  “Daughter, you’ve saturated your body with radioactive plutonium.”  “I can suppress it so that it won’t hurt people.”  “No, you can’t.”
Then, instead of presenting grief, Agatha takes her mother’s broach.
TomB


----------



## Umbran

Staffan said:


> The charges were "stole knowledge above her age and station" and "practicing the darkest magics". That's *super* vague.




So?

Think, a minute, about the storytelling going on here.  Do they have sufficient time left to tell Wanda's story of grief and trauma, as well as a nuanced story about Agatha's past?  

I'll repeat - this show is not Agatha's story.


----------



## Maxperson

Davies said:


> What did she do in the immediate aftermath, though? Did she mourn? Did she express any regret?
> 
> Are you ignoring the possibility that the excellent actress who pretended to be Wanda's good friend through all those episodes was _pretending_ to be scared?



She expressed the very human emotions of bitterness and anger that her closest friends and allies, including her own mother, betrayed her and tried to murder her.


----------



## tomBitonti

Umbran said:


> So?
> 
> Think, a minute, about the storytelling going on here.  Do they have sufficient time left to tell Wanda's story of grief and trauma, as well as a nuanced story about Agatha's past?
> 
> I'll repeat - this show is not Agatha's story.



Well, they could have said more.  I’m thinking the vagueness is deliberate.  They’ve painted Agatha darkly, but not enough to keep us from wondering.  That also makes Agatha much more interesting.  Note that the director of SWORD even has some ambiguity.  Heck, even Thanos made a valid point.  Gardeners prune their plants all the time.  Marvel has been great at having complexly motivated characters, and I would hesitate to label most of them as simply evil or simply good.


----------



## Imaculata

I'm kinda hoping that they don't kill off Agatha in the final episode. She is way too much fun.


----------



## ART!

Imaculata said:


> I'm kinda hoping that they don't kill off Agatha in the final episode. She is way too much fun.



Yup! I'm really curious to see what they do with her. I can see her being just a WandaVision character who we never see again, and I can see her playing a role in at least some of whatever Wanda is in afterwards, like _Multiverse of Madness_. Hahn is a level of actress and star that I wouldn't be surprised to see her in a big tentpole movie now. The not knowing about so many things is at least half the fun of this series!


----------



## Blue

Imaculata said:


> Remember that Dr Strange also took a magical book and artifact he wasn't supposed to have, and they didn't kill him for it. The Coven are not good people.



Eh, not so much of Strange.

First, the book isn't forbidden:


> *Dr. Stephen Strange: *What are those?
> *Wong: *The Ancient One’s private collection.
> *Dr. Stephen Strange: *So they’re forbidden?
> *Wong: *No knowledge in Kamar-Taj is forbidden. Only certain practices. Those books are far too advanced for anyone other than the Sorcerer Supreme.




Second, the Eye of Agamotto was curiously undefended - no traps, walk right up from the library and grab it, for something the Sorcerer Supreme is vitally tasked with guarding ... until it is explained in Avengers: End Game that the Ancient One is specifically waiting for Stephen Strange and that he will be "the best of them".  Then the lack of protections makes more sense, in that he is being given tact permission to experiment with it.  The Ancient One had future knowledge of Strange five years before - she had probably used the Eye to look at possible futures much as Strange himself did in Infinity War.


----------



## Blue

Umbran said:


> So?
> 
> Think, a minute, about the storytelling going on here.  Do they have sufficient time left to tell Wanda's story of grief and trauma, as well as a nuanced story about Agatha's past?
> 
> I'll repeat - this show is not Agatha's story.



"You have summoned demons and committed unspeakable acts" takes about as long to say.  What's put there is intentional.

The writers are being intentionally vague, which is not something you can mistake for she's justified - or that she's not justified.  Which makes reveals in the last episode still have punch.


----------



## Blue

tomBitonti said:


> Well, they could have said more.  I’m thinking the vagueness is deliberate.  They’ve painted Agatha darkly, but not enough to keep us from wondering.  That also makes Agatha much more interesting.  Note that the director of SWORD even has some ambiguity.  Heck, even Thanos made a valid point.  Gardeners prune their plants all the time.  Marvel has been great at having complexly motivated characters, and I would hesitate to label most of them as simply evil or simply good.



Absolutely agree.  Killmonger is another example, where T'Challa at least acepts that he was right in that Wakanda standing apart and not helping to shape the future of the planet is wrong.  I'm sure some could make an argument for Zemo as well.


----------



## Umbran

Blue said:


> The writers are being intentionally vague, which is not something you can mistake for she's justified - or that she's not justified.  Which makes reveals in the last episode still have punch.




I expect they are being vague because _exactly_ what she did is not relevant to the plot of the show.  In the MCU, you don't create canon details unless you have to.  I don't expect any deep reveals about Agatha in the final episode.


----------



## tomBitonti

Umbran said:


> I expect they are being vague because _exactly_ what she did is not relevant to the plot of the show.  In the MCU, you don't create canon details unless you have to.  I don't expect any deep reveals about Agatha in the final episode.



I’m thinking Agatha is being used, in part, to flesh out the “magic” part of the MCU universe.  Previously, MCU only had Dr Strange, Wanda, and bits from the TV shows.  Putting in Agatha seems to be a first step into stories that feature magic more prominently.

I agree, we will only get bits and pieces for a long time, as fits the need of the story.  I suspect there will be questions still for years.

TomB


----------



## ART!

tomBitonti said:


> I’m thinking Agatha is being used, in part, to flesh out the “magic” part of the MCU universe.  Previously, MCU only had Dr Strange, Wanda, and bits from the TV shows.  Putting in Agatha seems to be a first step into stories that feature magic more prominently.
> 
> I agree, we will only get bits and pieces for a long time, as fits the need of the story.  I suspect there will be questions still for years.
> 
> TomB



Except previously Wanda was not considered or depicted as a magic-user - other than some baddie referring to her as "the witch" in AoU, IIRC. So we just had Dr. Strange, and Thor talking about magic and science as kind of the same thing...and maybe some other references in Thor movies?


----------



## tomBitonti

ART! said:


> Except previously Wanda was not considered or depicted as a magic-user - other than some baddie referring to her as "the witch" in AoU, IIRC. So we just had Dr. Strange, and Thor talking about magic and science as kind of the same thing...and maybe some other references in Thor movies?



Yup.  This whole idea of ”magic” was only briefly hinted-at.  The audience is being introduced to some additional structure: Witches exist, and have power sources and spells and covens, and a detailed history.


----------



## MarkB

ART! said:


> Except previously Wanda was not considered or depicted as a magic-user - other than some baddie referring to her as "the witch" in AoU, IIRC. So we just had Dr. Strange, and Thor talking about magic and science as kind of the same thing...and maybe some other references in Thor movies?



Such as Loki doing really quite a lot of illusion magic.


----------



## pukunui

So is MCU magic just some kind of really advanced science, as per Asimov’s Third Law (“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic”)?


----------



## ART!

pukunui said:


> So is MCU magic just some kind of really advanced science, as per Asimov’s Third Law (“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic”)?



I think the first Thor movie would have us think that, but outside of that there's no argument being made than magic is fancy science. I think magic in the MCU is actual magic - whatever that means.


----------



## Rune

pukunui said:


> So is MCU magic just some kind of really advanced science, as per Asimov’s Third Law (“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic”)?



Pretty sure that was from Arthur C. Clarke’s _Profiles of the Future: An Inquiry into the Limits of the Possible_. 

Asimov’s Third Law [of Robotics] states: “A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.”


----------



## Davies

Maxperson said:


> She expressed the very human emotions of bitterness and anger that her closest friends and allies, including her own mother, betrayed her and tried to murder her.



No, she didn't. _Without visible emotion_, she sauntered up to her mother's corpse and robbed it. And she later mocked Wanda's pain. You are inventing excuses for a sociopath. Their only mistake was using magic to try and execute her. They should have just hung her by the neck or cut her throat.


----------



## Umbran

ART! said:


> I think the first Thor movie would have us think that, but outside of that there's no argument being made than magic is fancy science. I think magic in the MCU is actual magic - whatever that means.




I don't think we need to think of magic as science.  From what we have seen, it is perhaps most accurate to say... energy is energy.  You can manipulate it any number of ways.  Some cultures (like Asgardians) use so much of both that they hardly care about the distinction.  It is all "ways the universe works" to them.


----------



## Umbran

Davies said:


> No, she didn't. _Without visible emotion_, she sauntered up to her mother's corpse and robbed it. And she later mocked Wanda's pain. You are inventing excuses for a sociopath. Their only mistake was using magic to try and execute her. They should have just hung her by the neck or cut her throat.




I can No Prize that to be... with whatever powers she was playing with, simply cutting her throat may not have done the job.  Either she may not be terribly vulnerable to normal physical weapons, or she'd continue to be a spiritual issue afterwards.


----------



## Maxperson

Davies said:


> No, she didn't. _Without visible emotion_, she sauntered up to her mother's corpse and robbed it. And she later mocked Wanda's pain. You are inventing excuses for a sociopath. Their only mistake was using magic to try and execute her. They should have just hung her by the neck or cut her throat.



After the hurt looks, angry looks and betrayed looks, sure.  She showed plenty of emotion during the ordeal  After it was over, shutting down emotionally in emotional overload is also human.  You're calling her a sociopath based on 2 seconds after an tremendous ordeal where he closest friends and family tried to murder her.


----------



## embee

Davies said:


> No, she didn't. _Without visible emotion_, she sauntered up to her mother's corpse and robbed it. And she later mocked Wanda's pain. You are inventing excuses for a sociopath. Their only mistake was using magic to try and execute her. They should have just hung her by the neck or cut her throat.



And Voldemort should have smothered Harry with a pillow.


----------



## Umbran

Maxperson said:


> You're calling her a sociopath based on 2 seconds after an tremendous ordeal where he closest friends and family tried to murder her.




So, let us be clear here - you have as much right and evidence to call it murder as Davies does to call her a sociopath.  Same couple of minutes of footage.  Similarly emotionally loaded language.

How about the high-horses get put back in their stalls, folks?  Thanks.


----------



## pukunui

Rune said:


> Pretty sure that was from Arthur C. Clarke’s _Profiles of the Future: An Inquiry into the Limits of the Possible_.
> 
> Asimov’s Third Law [of Robotics] states: “A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.”



Whoops. Yes, you're right. I was thinking of Asimov's use of the concept in his Foundation series and mistakenly assumed it was his idea, rather than Clarke's. I feel like I often conflate the two authors anyway. Thanks for straightening me out.


----------



## Davies

Maxperson said:


> After the hurt looks, angry looks and betrayed looks



As faked as her regret over Sparky.


----------



## tomBitonti

Can we label this as undecided?  I had a hard time reading Agnes during her confrontation with the coven.  She displays just hints of a few thinks.  Not enough to tell clearly.  To me she seems a little unaffected, but there are possibles reasons.  I suspect the confrontation was deliberately presented with inconclusive details.

Now, holding the children later on, that is more damning.  Except we don’t know really what is up with the children.

It might be that ultimately (and ironically) Wanda is the biggest danger, with her unconstrained use of chaos magic.

TomB


----------



## Dire Bare

tomBitonti said:


> Can we label this as undecided?



No! We have to come to a group decision NOW! Before Friday!

 I kid . . . . folks are getting a bit worked up over this, we'll all find out this Friday. Or not. It's all good either way.


----------



## Maxperson

Davies said:


> As faked as her regret over Sparky.



There was nothing fake about her emotions during that ordeal.


----------



## Tonguez

ART! said:


> I think the first Thor movie would have us think that, but outside of that there's no argument being made than magic is fancy science. I think magic in the MCU is actual magic - whatever that means.



In Dr Strange the Ancient One refers to magic being like code “_The sorcerers of antiquity called the use of this language "spells," but if that word offends your modern sensibilities, you can call it a "program"; the source code that shapes reality. We harness energy drawn from other dimensions of the Multiverse to cast spells, to conjure shields and weapons, to make magic."_

So MCU magic is a natural phenomena that helps shape reality, as such it is fully compatible with MCU ‘science’ - I read somewhere else that MCU magic draws power from other dimensions in order to preserve the ’conservation of energy’ (thermodynamics)


----------



## Davies

Maxperson said:


> There was nothing fake about her emotions during that ordeal.



Yes there was -- specifically, everything.


----------



## Tonguez

Dire Bare said:


> No! We have to come to a group decision NOW! Before Friday!
> 
> I kid . . . . folks are getting a bit worked up over this, we'll all find out this Friday. Or not. It's all good either way.



most likely not - the latest word from the director is that while the WandaVision narrative will have completion, the story very much works to set up and go in to Dr Strange 2. So there may well be a few cliffhangers that will not be resolved until later


----------



## Maxperson

Davies said:


> Yes there was -- specifically, everything.



What proof do you have?


----------



## Davies

Maxperson said:


> What proof do you have?



Can't prove a negative. The onus is on you to prove they were real.


----------



## Maxperson

Davies said:


> Can't prove a negative. The onus is on you to prove they were real.



Sociopaths are real.  You can prove it and you made the claim first.  Prove your claim.


----------



## Davies

Maxperson said:


> Sociopaths are real.  You can prove it and you made the claim first.  Prove your claim.



Her subsequent sadistic behavior, in the series' present, demonstrates these tendencies to anyone not biased in her favor.


----------



## Maxperson

Davies said:


> Her subsequent sadistic behavior, in the series' present, demonstrates these tendencies to anyone not biased in her favor.



Not really, no.  Much in that town isn't even real.  There's no proof that the dog existed, was more than a cockroach or anything else.  You can assume reality for those things, but I'm certainly not going to make those assumptions.  

We can see that she's not a nice person.  We can't see proof that she's a sociopath.


----------



## Davies

Maxperson said:


> Not really, no.  Much in that town isn't even real.  There's no proof that the dog existed, was more than a cockroach or anything else.  You can assume reality for those things, but I'm certainly not going to make those assumptions.



It doesn't matter if he was a cockroach or not; killing another living being, that is not trying to kill you, just to provoke an emotional reaction in someone else is a an act of sadistic cruelty, as is her behavior while observing Wanda's painful past.


----------



## Maxperson

Davies said:


> It doesn't matter if he was a cockroach or not; killing another living being, that is not trying to kill you, just to provoke an emotional reaction in someone else is a an act of sadistic cruelty, as is her behavior while observing Wanda's painful past.



Yes.  She's not a nice person.  There's a hell of a lot of difference between not being a nice person and being a sociopath.  It's possible that she is one, but it's far from proven at this point.


----------



## Davies

Maxperson said:


> Yes.  She's not a nice person.  There's a hell of a lot of difference between not being a nice person and being a sociopath.  It's possible that she is one, but it's far from proven at this point.



It is proven, you're just refusing to accept it.


----------



## Tonguez

Davies said:


> It doesn't matter if he was a cockroach or not; killing another living being, that is not trying to kill you, just to provoke an emotional reaction in someone else is a an act of sadistic cruelty, as is her behavior while observing Wanda's painful past.



Agatha’s cruel approach to observing Wanda’s past was really no different to her mothers treatment of Agatha when she had the coven tie her to a stake and blast her as punishment.

SO Agatha is displaying learnt behaviour, she’s doing no different to what the Coven did when they identified a powerful threat acting above its age and station.

Also note Wanda has imprisoned the minds of an entire town forcing them to play out her fantasy, how is Agatha‘s confronting her more sadistic than that?


----------



## Davies

Tonguez said:


> Agatha’s cruel approach to observing Wanda’s past was really no different to her mothers treatment of Agatha when she had the coven tie her to a stake and blast her as punishment.



Yes it is. In the first instance, Agatha was a member of their society ("Are you a witch?" "I am a witch.") who had transgressed against its regulations; in the second, Agatha is a self-appointed judge, jury and torturer.



Tonguez said:


> Also note Wanda has imprisoned the minds of an entire town forcing them to play out her fantasy, how is Agatha‘s confronting her more sadistic than that?



The former is the accidental outcome of an unwitting act, and the latter is the deliberate result of conscious choices. The latter is clearly more sadistic.


----------



## pukunui

Do we even know for certain that she genuinely killed the puppy? We just see her holding a bundle that may or may not contain a dead dog. Yes, I know she later admits to killing the dog, but we don't necessarily have to believe her.

I think people are making mountains out of molehills here.


----------



## Tonguez

Davies said:


> Yes it is. In the first instance, Agatha was a member of their society ("Are you a witch?" "I am a witch.") who had transgressed against its regulations; in the second, Agatha is a self-appointed judge, jury and torturer.
> 
> 
> The former is the accidental outcome of an unwitting act, and the latter is the deliberate result of conscious choices. The latter is clearly more sadistic.




it may have been unwitting at the start, but we now know that Wanda is aware of whats happening and is able to leave the Hex and/or remove people from it.
She is now knowingly subjecting the towns people to her fantasy and refusing to let them go.


----------



## Davies

Tonguez said:


> it may have been unwitting at the start, but we now know that Wanda is aware of whats happening and is able to leave the Hex and/or remove people from it.
> She is now knowingly subjecting the towns people to her fantasy and refusing to let them go.



Still not as sadistic.

Besides, how do you know that they're not cockroaches? The resemblance to people living in the town could just be coincidence.


----------



## Tonguez

pukunui said:


> Do we even know for certain that she genuinely killed the puppy? We just see her holding a bundle that may or may not contain a dead dog. Yes, I know she later admits to killing the dog, but we don't necessarily have to believe her.
> 
> I think people are making mountains out of molehills here.



Yeah, I’ve said before, that villain song was a red herring.

When it happened Wanda and Agnes were both in the basement which the aspect ratio suggested was occuring in the real world, however Agatha’s song was presented in TV-land form (which we know is Wanda’s mindscape) I’d suggest ‘It was Agatha all along’ was not Agatha’s confession but Wanda projecting her response to being confronted (It was the Scarlet Witchs chaos magic working on autopilot)

Note that Agnes still had to identify who she was after the song, and was still unsure who Wanda was


----------



## Tonguez

Davies said:


> Still not as sadistic.



So can you give actual examples of Agnes doing things that were more sadistic?


----------



## Davies

Tonguez said:


> So can you give actual examples of Agnes doing things that were more sadistic?



Forcing Wanda to relive the death of her parents.


----------



## Imaculata

pukunui said:


> Do we even know for certain that she genuinely killed the puppy? We just see her holding a bundle that may or may not contain a dead dog. Yes, I know she later admits to killing the dog, but we don't necessarily have to believe her.




I'd like to think that she did, because I'd like to think of Agatha as the hero of this story.


----------



## Tonguez

Davies said:


> Forcing Wanda to relive the death of her parents.



Having people confront painful memories isnt sadistic, its sometimes an important therapy.
Its certainly not more sadistic than what Wanda is doing to the towns folk like Norm - torturing his mind with overwhelming grief, forcing him to play out a role against his will and barring him from going home to attend to his sister and sick father. The SWORD note on Norm says that there is now reason to be concerned about the physical safety of the towns residents


----------



## Davies

Tonguez said:


> Having people confront painful memories isnt sadistic, its sometimes an important therapy.



Her goal is not to help, it's to inflict the same thing on Wanda that she did to the members of the coven, draining her magic and stealing her life. The denial of this obvious truth by people on this board is nauseating.

And no one asked her to be Wanda's therapist. Self-appointment again. Her doing this is no different from any abusive parent who claims that they're trying to toughen their kid up through physical cruelty.


----------



## Staffan

Davies said:


> Yes it is. In the first instance, Agatha was a member of their society ("Are you a witch?" "I am a witch.") who had transgressed against its regulations; in the second, Agatha is a self-appointed judge, jury and torturer.



At this point, I see her more as an investigator than a judge. She has found a witch exhibiting terrible power, and she wants to know what's up with that. She has spent an unknown amount of subjective time (we don't really know how fast time appears to move in the hex, but it's definitely longer than the few days it's been outside) trying to understand what's up with Wanda, and when all other methods have failed she holds Wanda's children hostage in order to force Wanda to allow her to access Wanda's memories, and in the process providing Wanda with context for her memories.

I think she's doing what her coven didn't do for her: when faced with a potential threat, she *evaluates* it. She's certainly doing so in a harsh manner, but that's more than she got from her own coven. Where the coven went "You're using the forbidden stuff, so we're going to kill you", I think Agatha is being more nuanced. I would not be surprised at all if the end result is either Agatha taking Wanda under her own tutelage to teach her how to control her chaos magic, or refer her to Doctor Strange.


----------



## Maxperson

Tonguez said:


> So can you give actual examples of Agnes doing things that were more sadistic?



No he can't. 

You're arguing with an account that has been around for 16 years and has only 200ish posts, about 10% of those were in this thread.  At this point there's stronger proof of this being an account made purely stir the pot than there is of Agnes being as bad as he makes out.  I stopped engaging him.  I recommend that you do as well.


----------



## Davies

Deleted post.


----------



## Umbran

Maxperson said:


> You're arguing with an account that has been around for 16 years and has only 200ish posts




*Mod Note:*
Apparently, good advice to get off the high horses on this was not enough.

So, now, you get the red text.  All of you.  This is supposed to be discussion of an enjoyable show, not a venue for you to flex your egos and insult each other.  

Treat each other with respect, or you'll be removed from the conversation, without further warning or discussion.


----------



## TheAlkaizer

I watched the first episode and fell asleep during the second (I was quite tired though).

It wasn't really my jam. From what's being said here, I take it that the mood and energy level changes a lot as it progresses?


----------



## Tonguez

TheAlkaizer said:


> I watched the first episode and fell asleep during the second (I was quite tired though).
> 
> It wasn't really my jam. From what's being said here, I take it that the mood and energy level changes a lot as it progresses?



Yeah the first two episodes focus on the sitcom aspect of the set up but by the end of 3 it becomes more markedly a Marvel show


----------



## Imaculata

TheAlkaizer said:


> I watched the first episode and fell asleep during the second (I was quite tired though).
> 
> It wasn't really my jam. From what's being said here, I take it that the mood and energy level changes a lot as it progresses?




It starts off as a cheesy sitcom, but it really is a mystery that demands a bit of attention. At least for the first 3 episodes. Yes, it progresses a lot and becomes very suspenseful. It is worth your time.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

TheAlkaizer said:


> I watched the first episode and fell asleep during the second (I was quite tired though).
> 
> It wasn't really my jam. From what's being said here, I take it that the mood and energy level changes a lot as it progresses?



It does, but it still helps if enjoy the meta. I grew up with Bewitched (episode 2) so it was more meaningful to me. It's also better if you _don't_ binge it.


----------



## Umbran

Paul Farquhar said:


> It's also better if you _don't_ binge it.




Very much agreed.  Some shows are really just one long narrative, and the break between episodes is merely one of convenience.  This show is built to use that break as part of its rhythm.


----------



## ART!

Maxperson said:


> There was nothing fake about her emotions during that ordeal.






Davies said:


> Yes there was -- specifically, everything.



Yeah, I _definitely_ got the sense that she had rigged the whole thing so that she could suck every iota of power out of the whole coven, mom included. The way she switches from "no, don't kill me" to "yep, I'm bad", and from the screams of the other witches assault to controlliing the situation - it just all seems like she was playing them.


----------



## Maxperson

ART! said:


> Yeah, I _definitely_ got the sense that she had rigged the whole thing so that she could suck every iota of power out of the whole coven, mom included. The way she switches from "no, don't kill me" to "yep, I'm bad", and from the screams of the other witches assault to controlliing the situation - it just all seems like she was playing them.



She seemed surprised when she started sucking the power out of the witches.  If she could just do it, why the charade?  Why not just suck out all the power and be done with it?


----------



## ART!

Maxperson said:


> She seemed surprised when she started sucking the power out of the witches.  If she could just do it, why the charade?  Why not just suck out all the power and be done with it?



I think she wasn't sure how it would play out _exactly_, but that she had a chance of turning it around.

I think she was surprised, but not completely surprised.


----------



## Maxperson

ART! said:


> I think she wasn't sure how it would play out _exactly_, but that she had a chance of turning it around.
> 
> I think she was surprised, but not completely surprised.



Maybe.  I just don't think it was clear cut enough to say sociopath or planned.  I can't wait for tomorrow.  Well, I can, because I have to, but I don't want to wait for tomorrow.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

I got the feeling she had no control over what it did to the regular members, but when it came to her mother, I think Agatha was in full control of the draining/killing. So part accidental/not controlled and part intentional/controlled. And not showing emotion on camera over her mother does not mean much. Delayed emotional reactions are very much a real thing.


----------



## Maxperson

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> I got the feeling she had no control over what it did to the regular members, but when it came to her mother, I think Agatha was in full control of the draining/killing. So part accidental/not controlled and part intentional/controlled. And not showing emotion on camera over her mother does not mean much. Delayed emotional reactions are very much a real thing.



As is emotional shutdown, which that situation could have caused.


----------



## Rune

But let’s not forget. The one thing we know about Agatha’s personality is that she is manipulative. It may be true that she feels remorse and has empathy, but we would be unwise to trust it.


----------



## Umbran

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Delayed emotional reactions are very much a real thing.




With respect, in the real world, that is true.  But this is television.  This is _telling a story_, which is not the same as "depicting the way it is in the real world in realtime."  Stuff has to appear on screen for it to be relevant.  They have ways and tropes for telegraphing, "this character is so shocked by events that they have no real response yet."

And taking jewelry off the dead body (with a _satisfied_ look iirc) isn't among those ways.

Edit:  I just re-watched the scene.  She starts with claims she knows nothing of the crimes1.  Then moves to claiming she didn't break "your rules"2, but merely bent them.  Then, after everyone but her mother is dead, she retreats to, "I can be good," effectively recognizing that she has not been good to this point.

I don't see how this gets read as her being on teh right side of morals or ethics, or secretly a good (or even okay) person.  I can only take it as a deep expectation that the writers will pull a "Gotcha!" moment for Agatha, because none of that is present in the text to date.


1. Which includes taking magics above her age and station, _and_ practicing the darkest of magics - so it isn't that she hasn't actually done anything yet.  She used forbidden stuff.

2. Thus, positioning herself as separate from the others from whom she's been learning, which traditionally is an assertion that she's above or beyond the rule of her peers.


----------



## pukunui

I wonder if her mother’s brooch is a magic item or if she just took it for sentimental reasons or what.

That said, it’s unlikely we’ll find out tonight. It’s a curiosity rather than a plot point.

I hope we get to see Monica _use_ her newfound powers in the finale!

And wouldn’t it be nice to find out what happened to agent Franklin?


----------



## Blue

Davies said:


> Yes it is. In the first instance, Agatha was a member of their society ("Are you a witch?" "I am a witch.") who had transgressed against its regulations; in the second, Agatha is a self-appointed judge, jury and torturer.



Torturer - that's the part you need to show.  That Agnes is doing it to hurt Wanda.

Show that it's not the cut of a scapel trying to break Wanda out of whatever mental trap she's retreated to.  To wake up and see what she's doing.  Not even just for altruistic reasons - she's clearly not a hero - but just because that might bring attention of the magical world that is unwanted.

Heck, just show that the dog is even dead, since we know Agnes can do illusions.



Davies said:


> The former is the accidental outcome of an unwitting act, and the latter is the deliberate result of conscious choices. The latter is clearly more sadistic.



"Sadistic" is a judgement about her motives.  You seem sure on them, but what's been presented in the show has ambiguity.  If the writers wanted us to _know_ she's evil, a change in the line of the witch's execution to show unpardonable acts or some other aspect outside her reactions (which you claim as faked) could easily have been included.

But instead the charge is vague, her own mother rejects her, and the only information we have is her begging for guidance and the feelings of surprise, which even if you ignore without reason doesn't leave any proof she's sadistic and just trying to harm Wanda.  The best guess we have from her words _and actions_ is that she's jealous, greedy and vain about her magic, and wants to know Wanda's secrets.  But none of that supports sadistic and a want to cause pain.


----------



## Umbran

Blue said:


> Torturer - that's the part you need to show.  That Agnes is doing it to hurt Wanda.




Yeah.  That's not supported in the text.  Agnes is out to get information from Wanda, not specifically to cause her pain.



Blue said:


> Show that it's not the cut of a scapel trying to break Wanda out of whatever mental trap she's retreated to.  To wake up and see what she's doing.




Minor correction - to wake up _and tell Agness how she's doing it_.  While Agnes may not specifically out to hurt Wanda, personally, this is not for Wanda's benefit.  It is for Agnes' benefit.



Blue said:


> Heck, show that the dog is even dead, since we know Agnes can do illusions.




She says so.  "I killed Sparky".  What we have seen no longer supports the idea that Agnes/Agatha was ever under Wanda's control.  Therefore, she's not making Agnes say those things.  That's Agnes' statement, not a Wanda-show-rewrite of reality.

If you really want it, there's is an argument that Sparky wasn't a real dog, but just a bug that was transformed, but that Agnes didn't kill Sparky seems off the table.  And, I think that's quite deliberate.  Being willing to hurt animals is a big, "I don't have real empathy," flag for the viewer in all sorts of genres.


----------



## ART!

Blue said:


> But instead the charge is vague, her own mother rejects her, and the only information we have is her begging for guidance and the feelings of surprise, which *even if you ignore without reason* doesn't leave any proof she's sadistic and just trying to harm Wanda.  The best guess we have from her words _and actions_ is that she's jealous, greedy and vain about her magic, and wants to know Wanda's secrets.  But none of that supports sadistic and a want to cause pain.



If the bolded part refers to the assertion that she knew what would happen with her coven sisters and mother, my post about that was based on my _reading_ of Kathryn Hahn's performance. It's possible I've misread her performance, which could be her fault, mine, the director's, the editor's, or one or more of the above, but it's not "without reason" - art criticism doesn't consist of verifiable facts only. I read the scene as "Agatha kind of knows what she's doing here".

If that's not what you're refering to, then







.


----------



## Blue

ART! said:


> If the bolded part refers to the assertion that she knew what would happen with her coven sisters and mother, my post about that was based on my _reading_ of Kathryn Hahn's performance. It's possible I've misread her performance, which could be her fault, mine, the director's, the editor's, or one or more of the above, but it's not "without reason" - art criticism doesn't consist of verifiable facts only. I read the scene as "Agatha kind of knows what she's doing here".
> 
> If that's not what you're refering to, then
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .



I was refering to Davies repeated claim without providing support that everything Agnes did in the witch trial scene was faked and that this was an absolute.

You on the other hand discuss in good faith.  You talk about why, and don't try to just claim it multiple times without supporting detail.  While we don't have the same read on it, it's a pleasure discussing and debating with you.

And my actual read on it is: the writers are intentionally vague in some spots to leave open multiple interpretations.  I don't think Agatha is nice, but I do think that there's enlightened self-interest in what she does to Wanda, not pure sadism or evil-for-evil's sake.  For instance I think -- but don't have firm support -- that Agatha bares no malice to the Westview residents and isn't taking sadistic glee from their entrapment and agony.


----------



## pukunui

Only 11-ish hours to go till the finale (for me)!!


----------



## ART!

Th' missus and our daughter quickly established a Friday night WandaVision viewing routine, when we're all off work and done with school, and yet before I run off to my D&D game - where we talk about WandaVision! It's a tight squeeze, but it makes for a great night!


----------



## Umbran

Blue said:


> You on the other hand discuss in good faith.




*Mod note:*

It is interesting to speculate how you think a passive but openly stated accusation of bad faith argument fits in with the order to treat folks with respect.  

Hint:  It does not.  Next time, if you feel someone is arguing in bad faith, disengage.  For now, I'll disengage you form the discussion, as was previously warned.


----------



## Vael

In an odd mood, awaiting the finale. I've preferred the episodes that are more in the sitcom style than 4 and 8, so I'm not sure whether Wandavision can stick the landing. But I've really enjoyed the entire run, and so it's a little bittersweet that this is the last episode. Regardless, I'm going to watch it as soon as it drops. And possible twice.


----------



## tomBitonti

Vael said:


> In an odd mood, awaiting the finale. I've preferred the episodes that are more in the sitcom style than 4 and 8, so I'm not sure whether Wandavision can stick the landing. But I've really enjoyed the entire run, and so it's a little bittersweet that this is the last episode. Regardless, I'm going to watch it as soon as it drops. And possible twice.



Hear hear!  Bittersweet indeed.  I’m looking forward to the resolution, yet am sad the series is ending.  Thanks all for the lively speculation.

TomB


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

pukunui said:


> I wonder if her mother’s brooch is a magic item or if she just took it for sentimental reasons or what.




For those who did not get a good look at the brooch in any of the scenes, it has a rabbit on it, and Agatha has a "pet" rabbit. Senor Scratchy. Her son in the comic books is Nicholas Scratch. Ol' Scratch, Old Scratch, Mister Scratch, Old Nick, are all nicknames for the Devil. Which in the comics is Mephisto, usually.


----------



## Umbran

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> For those who did not get a good look at the brooch in any of the scenes, it has a rabbit on it, and Agatha has a "pet" rabbit. Senor Scratchy. Her son in the comic books is Nicholas Scratch. Ol' Scratch, Old Scratch, Mister Scratch, Old Nick, are all nicknames for the Devil. Which in the comics is Mephisto, usually.




Note - in the comics her son is _not_ Mephisto, or the literal devil.  He's just even a bigger jerk than Agatha is.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Umbran said:


> Note - in the comics her son is _not_ Mephisto, or the literal devil.  He's just even a bigger jerk than Agatha is.




Oh, I know. He is the son of Agatha and maybe Mephisto? That part is pretty vague, though.


----------



## Umbran

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Oh, I know. He is the son of Agatha and maybe Mephisto? That part is pretty vague, though.



I don't know that his paternity has ever been established.


----------



## Rune

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> For those who did not get a good look at the brooch in any of the scenes, it has a rabbit on it, and Agatha has a "pet" rabbit. Senor Scratchy. Her son in the comic books is Nicholas Scratch. Ol' Scratch, Old Scratch, Mister Scratch, Old Nick, are all nicknames for the Devil. Which in the comics is Mephisto, usually.



Not a rabbit. Three figures, the middle holding a scythe.


----------



## Rabulias

I am still hoping we find out about Agent Woo's witness, too, though they could just be a MacGuffin to get everything going.


----------



## Omand

Rune said:


> Not a rabbit. Three figures, the middle holding a scythe.



Thanks for sharing the close up @Rune 

If they are going with standard witch tropes, then the three figures on the brooch would likely be the triple goddess/three ages of woman - maiden, mother and crone.  The scythe would indicate death, so likely the crone aspect as dominant.

Just speculating based upon some general myth which the MCU does like to use for background.

Cheers


----------



## Rune

Rabulias said:


> I am still hoping we find out about Agent Woo's witness, too, though they could just be a MacGuffin to get everything going.



Not a McGuffin. Leaving aside the fact that a McGuffin is necessarily not a person (it could, after all, be argued that the witness functionally isn’t either), it also necessarily is a thing that _everyone_ (important to the plot) wants. 

I’m not even sure _Woo_ cares that much anymore. No one else has yet.


----------



## Umbran

Rune said:


> I’m not even sure _Woo_ cares that much anymore. No one else has yet.




I believe the words "bigger fish to fry" come to mind.


----------



## tomBitonti

Umbran said:


> I believe the words "bigger fish to fry" come to mind.



Haha, a fish called Wanda!


----------



## Umbran

tomBitonti said:


> Haha, a fish called Wanda!



There are some Fierce Creatures inside the Hex that have to be dealt with...


----------



## Rune

Umbran said:


> I believe the words "bigger fish to fry" come to mind.



Exactly my point!


----------



## Davies

At this point, I suspect that the witness is going to be dealt with in a post credit stinger that sets up some later series or film. Between Wanda, Agatha, the two Visions, Monica and Darcy, I don't think there's going to be enough time to address the subject in any detail.


----------



## Rabulias

Rune said:


> Not a McGuffin. Leaving aside the fact that a McGuffin is necessarily not a person (it could, after all, be argued that the witness functionally isn’t either), it also necessarily is a thing that _everyone_ (important to the plot) wants.



Fiiine… Woo's witness may end up just being a _plot device _to get everything going.  

Though now you have me thinking it was Sparky...


----------



## Tonguez

Omand said:


> Thanks for sharing the close up @Rune
> 
> If they are going with standard witch tropes, then the three figures on the brooch would likely be the triple goddess/three ages of woman - maiden, mother and crone.  The scythe would indicate death, so likely the crone aspect as dominant.
> 
> Just speculating based upon some general myth which the MCU does like to use for background.
> 
> Cheers




Are we sure they are three women? |
1 The Grim Reaper has already been referenced in the show so maybe the Brooch features Grim Reaper, Wonder Man and Vision 

2 If it is three women then the Norns/Fates have appeared in Marvel Comics (and Norns link to Asgard and Thor).

3 Hecate also appears in the Marvel Comics as the _triple faced_ goddess of  magic - she was the first Witch on Earth and as the first entity to teach humans to use magic (even before Chthon and Agamotto) is invoked as the Mother of witches.
Maybe Hecate is the vision that Wanda saw in the Infinity Stone and that later Wanda will seek out Hecate - the _first_ Scarlet Witch (plot for season 2?)


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Rune said:


> Not a rabbit. Three figures, the middle holding a scythe.
> 
> View attachment 133686




I remember that one, but I could have sworn the brooch also looked like a profile of a rabbit at one point in the show.


----------



## Rune

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> I remember that one, but I could have sworn the brooch also looked like a profile of a rabbit at one point in the show.



I don’t think so.


----------



## pukunui

The finale is 50 minutes long (including credits). Starting now ...

EDIT: FWIW the "previously on" bit reminds us about Agatha's runes.

EDIT 2: There are _two_ mid-credit scenes in this one!


----------



## Vael

So, as I suspected, a very Marvel-y ending. But ... I really enjoyed the ride. I do think I'll find the sitcom stuff more interesting in the rewatch.


----------



## pukunui

Well, I think a number of theories have proven to be correct, while others have fallen by the wayside. I won't spoil anything yet, but I'm keen for the rest of you guys to watch so I can talk about it!



Spoiler: my thoughts (in no particular order)



*The "snacking on yo' magic" shark from the one ad was definitely foreshadowing for Agatha's power-sucking magic. That poor kid ended up looking like both Agatha's coven and, at least temporarily, Wanda herself.
*Fake Pietro was Ralph! But Ralph wasn't Mephisto. Neither was Hayward.
*White Vision wasn't Ultron, unless James Spader was also speaking at the same time as Paul Bettany? I couldn't really tell.
*It would appear that Paul Bettany was talking about himself when he was talking about that one actor.
*Wanda is now officially the Scarlet Witch, and she was "forged" by taking back Agatha's powers.
*Wanda paid attention with the runes and used that knowledge against Agatha.
_That book *was_ the Darkhold.
*Monica's going to team up with Nick Fury in a future movie / TV show.
*I would like to see more of both Woo and Darcy.
*We never found out who Woo's witness protection person was.
*We never found out what happened to poor Agent Franklin.
*Wanda's kids still exist somewhere. That must be her connection to the multiverse of madness -- perhaps in her efforts to locate her kids in another multiverse, she messes things up and everything goes mad. Hopefully that's not exactly what happens, as that could result in Dr Strange, a man, coming to fix the mess that Scarlet Witch, a woman, has made. Erk.
*The residents of Westview seemed to be at least somewhat aware of what Wanda was doing to them, but her magic was nevertheless forcing them to play parts.
*I think it's fair that Wanda left Westview with the residents giving her the evil eye, and I acknowledge that she never meant to cause them pain or torture them in the way she did. However, I still feel a little bit like she snuck away a little too easily.

That'll do for now.


----------



## MarkB

Called it. 


Spoiler






MarkB said:


> So, one prediction for how Wanda could short-circuit the whole confrontation with Agatha - I think, unless she was being very smart and setting Wanda up, Agatha may have out-smugged herself back in the basement when she was showing off her superior witchy knowledge.
> 
> She pointed out the warding runes to Wanda, and told her that when a practitioner puts them up in her domain it prevents anyone else's magic from working there.
> 
> Well, the whole Hex is Wanda's domain, its physicality under her control, and there's nothing stopping her from erecting a set of 500-foot-tall warding runes at its borders and powering them up with chaos magic.


----------



## John R Davis

Nice ending. And very cool costume!


----------



## Staffan

Spoiler



I sure did NOT nail it. I was thinking at first that Agatha might have given Wanda some moral quandry (e.g. "Release the inhabitants from the cost of your mistakes, but it'll cost you your cozy family life") with the right response leading to mentorship and/or referral to the good Doctor (no, the other one), but nope. I was a little disappointed by this, but there was enough coolness going on anyway.

I definitely got the feeling that Monica did not gain powers from entering the hex, but rather had them already. She was way too comfortable diving in front of a bullet, and didn't seem surprised at what happened.

Cool thing by Wanda with the runes, though it had a feeling it was coming given that it was in the "Previously on". I think she also drained Agatha of her magic, so I wonder if Wanda's magic is now tainted by whatever tainted Agatha. And a grieving Mind Stone-empowered witch with access to the Darkhold, well, there's no possible way *that* can go wrong.

I wasn't exactly happy that they made the book the Darkhold, actually. The Darkhold is supposed to be unique, and had already featured on both Agents of SHIELD and Runaways. I was also a little disappointed they used cinema-aspect ratio for the inside of the hex though – it was a nice touch to have that as a thing indicating the realness of a location.

Also, Paul Bettany's troll level is epic.



And yeah, I want more Marvel TV shows. I generally prefer episodic TV to movies, because they allow for exactly the kind of longer-form storytelling that comics also excel at: shortish stories that weave into one another to create a greater whole.


----------



## Campbell

Spoiler



It's pretty much an open secret that Kevin Feige is not a fan of Agents of Shield. I would not be surprised that the inclusion of this very different version of the Darkhold is an indication that Agents of Shield is emphatically not part of the MCU continuity.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Campbell said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> It's pretty much an open secret that Kevin Feige is not a fan of Agents of Shield. I would not be surprised that the inclusion of this very different version of the Darkhold is an indication that Agents of Shield is emphatically not part of the MCU continuity.




Not just that, but all the previous tv shows are only very loosely tied to the MCU. Sure, a crossover character here and there and some clean up by SHIELD in the aftermath of the first Avengers movie, but Marvel has stated before that they are not fully a part of the MCU canon.


----------



## DeviousQuail

Some solid fight scenes, a decent ending, some intriguing set ups for future movies, and the reveal of Ralph. As a whole it was a fun series and I'm excited to see if the upcoming shows can match or out do it.

My hope is that we get more of Darcy and Woo. I don't know if they're headliner material but certainly characters I want to see again.


----------



## tomBitonti

Spoiler: About that ...



Did we definitely see the Darkhold in the second trailer?  I thought that that was taken away by Ghost Rider.  And that reading it was a bad thing.  Were there two Wandas?  One physical and the other ghostly?


TomB


----------



## Nilbog

I thought that was a fantastic end to a fantastic series, wrapped things up, but left just enough threads to leave you wanting more


----------



## Davies

Finally got to watch it.

I think Agatha got off much more easily than she merited, now that her utterly self-serving and _definitely_ sadistic (Telling someone that you were lying about helping them if they surrendered, right before you try to deliberately murder them?) motives are clear. I think this episode was definitely a good backdoor pilot for a Jimmy Woo-focused show. I look forward to what comes next.

On the other hand, perhaps I don't mean any of that and am just stirring the pot some more, since that's clearly my only joy in life.


----------



## MoonSong

I liked it. The ending, the moment of the truth just made me squee in glee. However, there is one thing I don't understand.




Davies said:


> Finally got to watch it.
> 
> I think Agatha got off much more easily than she merited, now that her utterly self-serving and _definitely_ sadistic (Telling someone that you were lying about helping them if they surrendered, right before you try to deliberately murder them?) motives are clear. I think this episode was definitely a good backdoor pilot for a Jimmy Woo-focused show. I look forward to what comes next.
> 
> On the other hand, perhaps I don't mean any of that and am just stirring the pot some more, since that's clearly my only joy in life.



I'm currently watching The Right Stuff, not the same, but it will keep me engaged until the next thing comes. I hope I don't have to wait too much.


----------



## MarkB

I liked the stingers. I was sad but not surprised not to see one for iVision, to get an idea how he'll be going forward. But I was surprised not to see some form of villainous stinger for Agatha's carnivorous bunny - either him revealing some kind of true form, or breaking the spell on Agatha.


----------



## trappedslider

MoonSong said:


> I'm currently watching The Right Stuff, not the same, but it will keep me engaged until the next thing comes. I hope I don't have to wait too much.



A couple of weeks for Falcon and the winter soldier


----------



## Maxperson

I think that if we're going to see a spin-off show, it's going to be the woman at the end that went off with the Skrull.


----------



## BRayne

Maxperson said:


> I think that if we're going to see a spin-off show, it's going to be the woman at the end that went off with the Skrull.



Pretty sure that was setting up Captain Marvel 2 being mostly space based


----------



## Umbran

tomBitonti said:


> Spoiler: About that ...
> 
> 
> 
> Did we definitely see the Darkhold in the second trailer?  I thought that that was taken away by Ghost Rider.  And that reading it was a bad thing.  Were there two Wandas?  One physical and the other ghostly?






Spoiler: About that book...



It is the Darkhold.  Nobody puts the Darkhold in a corner.

Plus, I think by the timeline, Morgan Le Fay had it over in Runaways after it was on AoS.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

BRayne said:


> Pretty sure that was setting up Captain Marvel 2 being mostly space based



Probably gonna have Nick Fury in it, too, based off of one of the mid-credit scenes from Spider-Man: Far From Home.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Maxperson said:


> I think that if we're going to see a spin-off show, it's going to be the woman at the end that went off with the Skrull.




Captain Marvel 2 and the Secret Invasion Disney+ series.


----------



## Omand

AcererakTriple6 said:


> Probably gonna have Nick Fury in it, too, based off of one of the mid-credit scenes from Spider-Man: Far From Home.



Well, I would take that as a given.  The Skrull said something along the lines of "a friend of your mother, he wants to see you."  So, I would take that as referring to Fury rather than Carol Danvers.

That actually is another interesting point.  Monica has more history, as far as we know, with Carol than with Fury, but Fury is the on hinted at.

Cheers


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

trappedslider said:


> A couple of weeks for Falcon and the winter soldier




And before that, next Friday we get the big Making Of show about WandaVision. Maybe we will get some insight into all the easter eggs from the series.


----------



## Umbran

Omand said:


> That actually is another interesting point.  Monica has more history, as far as we know, with Carol than with Fury, but Fury is the on hinted at.



Yes, well...
Carol isn't the one heading an intelligence agency, who now has no team of Avengers to rely on any more.


----------



## hawkeyefan

A solid ending. Properly bittersweet, but with just enough of a glimmer of hope to not be depressing. 

And it felt complete, too. I feel if they had veered too much into setting up other movies/series, than it would have cheapened what was a very well crafted work.

All in all, this was a really good show that managed to be its own thing, while also tying into the MCU. A solid start to the D+ shows.


----------



## Omand

Umbran said:


> Yes, well...
> Carol isn't the one heading an intelligence agency, who now has no team of Avengers to rely on any more.



True enough.

I just found it interesting the link was made with Fury, not Danvers.

It is understandable, but still interesting.

Cheers


----------



## Umbran

Omand said:


> I just found it interesting the link was made with Fury, not Danvers.
> 
> It is understandable, but still interesting.




Did you not note, early in the series, Rambeau mentioned that she's... not at all happy with Carol, for some reason?  I am not of the opinion that, if Carol called, Monica would answer.


----------



## Omand

Umbran said:


> Did you not note, early in the series, Rambeau mentioned that she's... not at all happy with Carol, for some reason?  I am not of the opinion that, if Carol called, Monica would answer.



No, I do remember that scene.  It was not so much a mention as a look as I recall (but I do need to rewatch).

Makes things even more interesting, as we do not get the background.  Likely to be explored in Captain Marvel 2?

We will see.

Cheers


----------



## Davies

Combine that with the "Don't invoke her name," line in _Far From Home_ ... I think it's possible that a number of people are unhappy with Carol for some reason.


----------



## Lidgar

I kept waiting for the Dr. Strange cameo. Ah well.

Great series overall. I liked how they set up Agatha as a future potential teacher for Wanda - “I’ll know where you are.”


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Omand said:


> Well, I would take that as a given.  The Skrull said something along the lines of "a friend of your mother, he wants to see you."  So, I would take that as referring to Fury rather than Carol Danvers.
> 
> That actually is another interesting point.  Monica has more history, as far as we know, with Carol than with Fury, but Fury is the on hinted at.
> 
> Cheers



I was assuming that to be Talos.


----------



## Dire Bare

hawkeyefan said:


> All in all, this was a really good show that managed to be its own thing, while also tying into the MCU. A solid start to the D+ shows.



For a moment, you had me confused . . . I thought you were giving the show a grade!


----------



## Gradine

But wait are we still sure Agatha is _really_ evil though guys?


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Lidgar said:


> I kept waiting for the Dr. Strange cameo. Ah well.
> 
> Great series overall. I liked how they set up Agatha as a future potential teacher for Wanda - “I’ll know where you are.”



Dr Strange was watching WandaVision on his crystal ball. It ended okay without deus ex machina, so he stayed at home and had a cup of tea instead.


----------



## Tonguez

So what are the implications now of Wanda and Scarlet Witch being 2 (semi) independent beings?


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Tonguez said:


> So what are the implications now of Wanda and Scarlet Witch being 2 (semi) independent beings?



When he saw the second post credits scene Doctor Strange spilled his tea...


----------



## Staffan

Omand said:


> That actually is another interesting point.  Monica has more history, as far as we know, with Carol than with Fury, but Fury is the on hinted at.



As far as we know, Carol's been off in space since the 90s, doing space things.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Important question: is Wanda's cabin-in-the-wilderness next door to Banner's cabin-in-the-wilderness?


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Staffan said:


> As far as we know, Carol's been off in space since the 90s, doing space things.



She might just be pissed that her favourite auntie went off on a 20 year jolly and didn't take her along.


----------



## MarkB

Tonguez said:


> So what are the implications now of Wanda and Scarlet Witch being 2 (semi) independent beings?



I was thinking it might be similar to what she was doing to the people of Westview. She pops her astral form out of her body, but then instead of leaving it as just an empty shell she loads it up with an 'acting' persona, capable of everyday tasks such as eating, sleeping and self-care.


----------



## Marc Radle

Tonguez said:


> So what are the implications now of Wanda and Scarlet Witch being 2 (semi) independent beings?




I think the idea there was that she was astral projecting herself like Doctor Strange does, not that there are 2 (semi) independent beings


----------



## Janx

Saw it last night.  Have thoughts, will babble.

a) Unlike Stephen Strange, Wanda can multitask

b) if she trapped Agnes in the Hex, what happened when the Hex shrinks and disappears

c) I assume reVision abandoned his "destroy vision" programming once he got his memories unlocked

d) Monica was left standing around, literally.  Saving boys who don't need saving doesn't count

e) Darcy only one one line/scene. Kinda lame send off


----------



## MarkB

Janx said:


> c) I assume reVision abandoned his "destroy vision" programming once he got his memories unlocked



One would hope so. But for someone who's partly machine, that "primary mission" might not be so easy to just ignore. Could be much angst for him going forward.


----------



## Nikosandros

Janx said:


> a) Unlike Stephen Strange, Wanda can multitask




It is commonly said that women can multitask better than men...


Janx said:


> b) if she trapped Agnes in the Hex, what happened when the Hex shrinks and disappears




I don't think she's trapped in the hex. Simply, she's been "brain-washed" into being Agnes.


Janx said:


> c) I assume reVision abandoned his "destroy vision" programming once he got his memories unlocked




He said: "I'm Vision", so I guess we'll see more of him...


Janx said:


> d) Monica was left standing around, literally.  Saving boys who don't need saving doesn't count




She'll probably play an important role in Captain Marvel 2.


Janx said:


> e) Darcy only one one line/scene. Kinda lame send off



Agreed.


----------



## Janx

Nikosandros said:


> She'll probably play an important role in Captain Marvel 2.



That's a given.  My beef is they introduced one black character who is alleged to be a legend, very awesome, and we see her tenacity in earlier episodes, but when it comes to the final fight, she's just standing there like the rest of the townsfolk. Underwhelming.

Granted, this is supposed to be wanda and vision's big battle, but they brought in a character and built her up and left her standing around after she escaped from Pietro.  The kids could have saved themselves from Heyward.  She didn't really matter in this episode, which seems a waste.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Interesting "coincidence": In _Bewitched _Samantha's evil witch mother was played by Agnes Moorehead.

Also, meta to the end: spot the Wizard of Oz easteregg in this episode?


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Paul Farquhar said:


> Interesting "coincidence": In _Bewitched _Samantha's evil witch mother was played by Agnes Moorehead.
> 
> Also, meta to the end: spot the Wizard of Oz easteregg in this episode?




Also, even though the house does not have the exact same look, because of remodels and stuff over the decades, the film lot used for the show includes the house from Bewitched, the exterior of that house was used as Agnes/Agatha's house for this show.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Janx said:


> That's a given.  My beef is they introduced one black character who is alleged to be a legend, very awesome, and we see her tenacity in earlier episodes, but when it comes to the final fight, she's just standing there like the rest of the townsfolk. Underwhelming.
> 
> Granted, this is supposed to be wanda and vision's big battle, but they brought in a character and built her up and left her standing around after she escaped from Pietro.  The kids could have saved themselves from Heyward.  She didn't really matter in this episode, which seems a waste.



BMX Bandit.


----------



## Nikosandros

Paul Farquhar said:


> Also, meta to the end: spot the Wizard of Oz easteregg in this episode?



Yes, that was a lovely touch.


----------



## Omand

AcererakTriple6 said:


> I was assuming that to be Talos.



You know, I had not thought of that angle.

He certainly did share some screen time with both Rambeaus.

Cheers


----------



## RangerWickett

I enjoyed the climax, but I feel like it didn't match the quality of many of the earlier episodes. It wasn't as tightly paced, and . . . I dunno, I'm sad there wasn't any remaining TV-isms.

The actual victory Wanda and Vision each had was great, but I feel the conflict of the episode suffered from something you see in a lot of D&D adventures: the 'threat' of the fight was just "the bad guy will kill us." That ends up lowering the stakes, and makes the heroes less heroic. I mean, _anyone_ would fight to stay alive, but you want to see heroes fight to protect someone else, or even just to fix the problems they caused.


----------



## Eric V

Anyone else bothered by how easy Wanda was let off?

"They'll never know what you sacrificed for them."  What?!  Yeah, ok...Wanda has been mind-raping them for I-don't-know-how-long and she gets to just fly away?  And they present _Agatha _as the main bad guy? Please.

Mind you, this is the same universe that saw Tony Stark face ZERO consequences for Ultron, so...

I really hoped that it wouldn't end in a blasty-fight-against-the-bad-guy but...Marvel.

I also wish Bettany and Olson hadn't made the comments they did (Skywalker?  Really?).  After training their audiences for years to look for meaningful clues, etc. to have Pietro be nothing was just...ugh.  Tell me why I should care the next time.


----------



## Tonguez

RangerWickett said:


> I enjoyed the climax, but I feel like it didn't match the quality of many of the earlier episodes. It wasn't as tightly paced, and . . . I dunno, I'm sad there wasn't any remaining TV-isms.
> 
> The actual victory Wanda and Vision each had was great, but I feel the conflict of the episode suffered from something you see in a lot of D&D adventures: the 'threat' of the fight was just "the bad guy will kill us." That ends up lowering the stakes, and makes the heroes less heroic. I mean, _anyone_ would fight to stay alive, but you want to see heroes fight to protect someone else, or even just to fix the problems they caused.



Yeah, I was a little disappointed really, While the Vision and Wanda battles were very Marvelesque, I do agree they lost much of the complexity which raised the rest of the show to superlative levels. 

I also think Wanda got off a bit too easy with what she did to the Townsfolk, them pleading with her to let them go or at least let them die shows just how harrowing the experience was and then she retaliates by trying to strangle them - sure she let them go afterwards, but does that mean now everything is forgiven because she is an Avenger?
surely the poor townsfolk need better justice than that


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Tonguez said:


> Yeah, I was a little disappointed really, While the Vision and Wanda battles were very Marvelesque, I do agree they lost much of the complexity which raised the rest of the show to superlative levels.
> 
> I also think Wanda got off a bit too easy with what she did to the Townsfolk, them pleading with her to let them go or at least let them die shows just how harrowing the experience was and then she retaliates by trying to strangle them - sure she let them go afterwards, but does that mean now everything is forgiven because she is an Avenger?
> surely the poor townsfolk need better justice than that



I imagine that consequences will be a theme again in the MCU again at some point, and the hex will come back to haunt her.


----------



## Eric V

Tonguez said:


> Yeah, I was a little disappointed really, While the Vision and Wanda battles were very Marvelesque, I do agree they lost much of the complexity which raised the rest of the show to superlative levels.
> 
> I also think Wanda got off a bit too easy with what she did to the Townsfolk, them pleading with her to let them go or at least let them die shows just how harrowing the experience was and then she retaliates by trying to strangle them - sure she let them go afterwards, but does that mean now everything is forgiven because she is an Avenger?
> surely the poor townsfolk need better justice than that



In fact...

If Agatha hadn't come along, what would have happened in Westview...?

Look, not for heroic reasons, obviously, but there's no denying Agatha's actions saved the people of Westview from Wanda.


----------



## BRayne

Eric V said:


> Anyone else bothered by how easy Wanda was let off?
> 
> "They'll never know what you sacrificed for them."  What?!  Yeah, ok...Wanda has been mind-raping them for I-don't-know-how-long and she gets to just fly away?  And they present _Agatha _as the main bad guy? Please.
> 
> Mind you, this is the same universe that saw Tony Stark face ZERO consequences for Ultron, so...
> 
> I really hoped that it wouldn't end in a blasty-fight-against-the-bad-guy but...Marvel.
> 
> I also wish Bettany and Olson hadn't made the comments they did (Skywalker?  Really?).  After training their audiences for years to look for meaningful clues, etc. to have Pietro be nothing was just...ugh.  Tell me why I should care the next time.




Olson never said Skywalker level, she just said there was an exiting casting that she was surprised hadn't leaked. Which was pretty clearly Evan Peters.


----------



## Imaculata

I'm glad Agatha was spared, so she can make a come back later in the MCU.

Hope that's not the last we've seen of Vision.


----------



## Eric V

Tonguez said:


> Yeah, I was a little disappointed really, While the Vision and Wanda battles were very Marvelesque, I do agree they lost much of the complexity which raised the rest of the show to superlative levels.
> 
> I also think Wanda got off a bit too easy with what she did to the Townsfolk, them pleading with her to let them go or at least let them die shows just how harrowing the experience was and then she retaliates by trying to strangle them - sure she let them go afterwards, but does that mean now everything is forgiven because she is an Avenger?
> surely the poor townsfolk need better justice than that






BRayne said:


> Olson never said Skywalker level, she just said there was an exiting casting that she was surprised hadn't leaked. Which was pretty clearly Evan Peters.



Really?

"When asked by TV Line if the show will have its own Luke Skywalker moment, Lizzie simply said "yes"."

OK, so it's Pietro.  Oh no, wait...it's a dick joke.


----------



## MarkB

Eric V said:


> In fact...
> 
> If Agatha hadn't come along, what would have happened in Westview...?



It's hard to say for sure, but I think Vision would still have figured out what was going on, and would eventually have been able to confront Wanda with the full extent of what she was doing to Westview's residents. Wanda wouldn't have found out about the true nature of her power, but she'd still have ultimately made the same choice.


----------



## Eric V

MarkB said:


> It's hard to say for sure, but I think Vision would still have figured out what was going on, and would eventually have been able to confront Wanda with the full extent of what she was doing to Westview's residents. Wanda wouldn't have found out about the true nature of her power, but she'd still have ultimately made the same choice.



I don't see it.  Wanda has already shown she's capable of re-programming the Vision on the fly when something he says isn't to her liking. She did it in the series.


----------



## RangerWickett

Eric V said:


> I also wish Bettany and Olson hadn't made the comments they did (Skywalker?  Really?).




They didn't. Olsen said there was a casting that hadn't been leaked. The site reporting it said it was Luke Skywalker level.


----------



## Eric V

RangerWickett said:


> They didn't. Olsen said there was a casting that hadn't been leaked. The site reporting it said it was Luke Skywalker level.



They asked her point blank if there was a Skywalker-moment and she said yes.


----------



## MarkB

Eric V said:


> I don't see it.  Wanda has already shown she's capable of re-programming the Vision on the fly when something he says isn't to her liking. She did it in the series.



Early on. Later, she was definitely losing any control over him, and I don't think that was just down to Agatha's interference.


----------



## DeviousQuail

Eric V said:


> Really?
> 
> "When asked by TV Line if the show will have its own Luke Skywalker moment, Lizzie simply said "yes"."
> 
> OK, so it's Pietro.  Oh no, wait...it's a dick joke.



From the link: 
"Now four episodes into its run, the Disney+ series has welcomed back multiple familiar faces from the Marvel Cinematic Universe — not only Elizabeth Olsen and Paul Bettany’s title characters, but also Randall Park’s FBI Agent Jimmy Woo and Kat Dennings’ Dr. Darcy Lewis.

But as Olsen hints to TVLine, _another_ MCU vet could be making a visit to Westview — one that fans have not already heard about, as was the case with Park and Dennings. Back in December, fellow Disney+ series _The Mandalorian_ stunned viewers with Mark Hamill’s appearance as Luke Skywalker, which had shockingly remained a secret until the Season 2 finale aired.

When asked if _WandaVision_ has anything similar in store — namely a casting that she can’t believe hasn’t leaked yet — Olsen gave us a quick, “_Yes_.” And though she dared not offer any specifics, she did share with a laugh that “I’m _really_ excited” for viewers to see what (or _who_) is coming."

I don't think you can read the above and say that Olsen suggested there was going to be a Skywalker moment. It reads like she was surprised the casting hadn't leaked, similar to Mark Hamill's appearance not being leaked.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

I think people place an unfair high standard on off-hand comments from actors during interviews. I mean, Bettany thought he was being funny (and regretted it later) and Olsen probably has no idea what would get the fans excited on a Luke Skywalker-level. Frankly, a LOT of people were pretty surprised by Peters being there (and a bunch confused). Just because it didn't hit quite Mando-levels, does not make her entirely wrong. I mean, really, anyone expects her to be able to predict fan reaction to a perfect degree? Really?


----------



## Janx

MarkB said:


> It's hard to say for sure, but I think Vision would still have figured out what was going on, and would eventually have been able to confront Wanda with the full extent of what she was doing to Westview's residents. Wanda wouldn't have found out about the true nature of her power, but she'd still have ultimately made the same choice.



in fact that wouldn't been a good confrontation between wanda and vision.  But alas, they curtailed it with Agnes.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

I think it's interesting how Wanda being the Scarlet Witch is basically the MCU version of the Phoenix Force. (At least, it feels that way to me.) I wonder how they're going to handle this in the future, as she's supposedly destined to "destroy the world".


----------



## Umbran

Eric V said:


> "They'll never know what you sacrificed for them."  What?!  Yeah, ok...Wanda has been mind-raping them for I-don't-know-how-long and she gets to just fly away?




We can expect it was as Heyward said - Wanda visited SWORD HQ about nine days before the series start.  We don't know exactly how long SWORD is outside the Hex... but all in all it seems on the order of two weeks, perhaps a bit more.



Eric V said:


> And they present _Agatha _as the main bad guy? Please.




Yeah, they do.  And Wanda lays out why - "the difference between you and me is that you _chose_ to do this".  

Maybe we should review - they gave us an entire episode of laying out the trauma Wanda's been through.  The people of Westview have been having those dreams, and they claim they are torture.  Which means... that's what Wanda's living every day.  Torture.  


Eric V said:


> Mind you, this is the same universe that saw Tony Stark face ZERO consequences for Ultron, so...




Both Wanda and Tony Stark are examples of what you get when trauma isn't treated.  Tony shows _classic_ signs of PTSD.  Wanda's is uncontrolled grief and loss.  If there's a blame here, it is on folks who should know better.  Tony and Wanda didn't need "consequences".  They needed some really good therapists.


Eric V said:


> I really hoped that it wouldn't end in a blasty-fight-against-the-bad-guy but...Marvel.




These are the comics, dude.  And at least one fight was resolved with a philosophical discussion, rather than violence.  



Eric V said:


> After training their audiences for years to look for meaningful clues, etc. to have Pietro be nothing was just...ugh.  Tell me why I should care the next time.




They didn't really train us to look for meaningful clues.  We do it of our own accord.  They put in loads of details, but the vast majority of what we do is pareidolia.  It is just fun to engage in speculation.  If that's not your bag, then don't engage.  

We don't have to (and indeed shouldn't) tell you why you should care.  You should figure out if you care.  And if you don't, take a pass next time.  If you fail to take a pass, that's on you, not on them.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

AcererakTriple6 said:


> I think it's interesting how Wanda being the Scarlet Witch is basically the MCU version of the Phoenix Force. (At least, it feels that way to me.) I wonder how they're going to handle this in the future, as she's supposedly destined to "destroy the world".




But which world? When we see her again in Doctor Strange 2: MULTIVERSE of Madness, it sounds like there will be multiple versions of Earth out there, so maybe Strange will see on-camera one of those worlds being destroyed/reshaped by Wanda's chaos magic and that gets him to find her and make sure it does not happen to any other worlds.


----------



## Imaculata

I liked how Vision basically defeated himself with logic and reason. Really well written. But what will happen with white Vision now? We didn't see him destroy himself did we?


----------



## billd91

Eric V said:


> Anyone else bothered by how easy Wanda was let off?
> 
> "They'll never know what you sacrificed for them."  What?!  Yeah, ok...Wanda has been mind-raping them for I-don't-know-how-long and she gets to just fly away?  And they present _Agatha _as the main bad guy? Please.



Honestly, no, I'm not bothered at all. For a lot of Marvel characters, the accountability is a personal matter rather than external and it's been that way a long time, not just in the MCU. Yes, the locals were pretty angry with her and felt abused - on the other hand, none of them seemed to be particularly out for her blood either. They *knew* quite intimately about her grief and trauma because they experienced her nightmares. That might not make them particularly understanding given their anger, but they would also know that their experience was temporary while hers are deeper and more lasting wounds.


----------



## Tonguez

billd91 said:


> Honestly, no, I'm not bothered at all. For a lot of Marvel characters, the accountability is a personal matter rather than external and it's been that way a long time, not just in the MCU. Yes, the locals were pretty angry with her and felt abused - on the other hand, none of them seemed to be particularly out for her blood either. They *knew* quite intimately about her grief and trauma because they experienced her nightmares. That might not make them particularly understanding given their anger, but they would also know that their experience was temporary while hers are deeper and more lasting wounds.




dude, one of them begged Wanda to let them die! The only reason they werent out for blood is that they were all traumatised themselves, and terrified of what Wanda would do to them - and she retaliated against them by trying to strangle all of them.




Umbran said:


> Both Wanda and Tony Stark are examples of what you get when trauma isn't treated.  Tony shows _classic_ signs of PTSD.  Wanda's is uncontrolled grief and loss.  If there's a blame here, it is on folks who should know better.  Tony and Wanda didn't need "consequences".  They needed some really good therapists.



Then why cant the same argument be applied to Agatha? She didnt need consequences, she needed a good teacher to show her the right way....


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Imaculata said:


> I liked how Vision basically defeated himself with logic and reason. Really well written. But what will happen with white Vision now? We didn't see him destroy himself did we?



Trigger's Broom.


----------



## Davies

Tonguez said:


> Then why cant the same argument be applied to Agatha? She didnt need consequences, she needed a good teacher to show her the right way....



Because she'd murder someone like that to steal their power. Because she's had four hundred years to learn better, and hasn't learned a single thing in all that time about simple human compassion. Because she did not make a mistake, she acted with malice aforethought. Because she went on and on about how people were suffering and did absolutely nothing to personally alleviate any of that. Because you can feel sorry for the dog and still think it needs to be put down.


----------



## Imaculata

Paul Farquhar said:


> Trigger's Broom.




Not entirely. Wanda's Vision shared his knowledge and memories with White Vision. So there are elements of the personality of Wanda's Vision, which may now live on in White Vision.


----------



## MarkB

Imaculata said:


> Not entirely. Wanda's Vision shared his knowledge and memories with White Vision. So there are elements of the personality of Wanda's Vision, which may now live on in White Vision.



That's possible, but it doesn't match the dialogue. What Wanda's Vision said he was doing was removing the blocks preventing iVision from accessing his own stored memories. There was no transfer of data from one Vision to the other.


----------



## Staffan

My impression was that iVision, once unblocked, had access to the Vision's original memories, but not necessarily the emotional context of them. That's basically the situation Carol Danvers was in for a long time in the comics — she had her powers and memories permanently drained by Rogue, and when Xavier helped her regain her memories it was like they had happened to someone else.


----------



## Erekose

Staffan said:


> My impression was that iVision, once unblocked, had access to the Vision's original memories, but not necessarily the emotional context of them. That's basically the situation Carol Danvers was in for a long time in the comics — she had her powers and memories permanently drained by Rogue, and when Xavier helped her regain her memories it was like they had happened to someone else.



Well it’s a big “if” but if White Vision does have full access to his memories (including the context), he is essentially the “real” Vision as opposed to a magical construct created by Wanda’s needs. That said, it would feel like he is a more ”complete” Vision if he also has Wanda’s Vision’s experiences ...


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Tonguez said:


> dude, one of them begged Wanda to let them die! The only reason they werent out for blood is that they were all traumatised themselves, and terrified of what Wanda would do to them - and she retaliated against them by trying to strangle all of them.




That was her chaos magic at work. She had not clue when she said to stop it, and waved her hands, that her magic would interpret that as choking everyone into silence/death. Anyone who believes she specifically meant to choke them was not paying attention.

But yeah, who was going to try and step in and arrest her or something after all that had just happened?


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> Then why cant the same argument be applied to Agatha? She didnt need consequences, she needed a good teacher to show her the right way....




So, the difference is trauma.  Some people act badly because of the results of trauma, others because they are horrible people.  We have no indication that Agatha had suffered trauma, we have an entire episode outlining Wanda's.

Overall, when Agatha hurts people, she comes out _satisfied_.  Agatha shows no signs of caring or empathy for the pain she causes.  She at best pays lip service to it in a "I can remove your pain" way, but lies in the process.  Wanda feels remorse when she realizes what she's done.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Umbran said:


> So, the difference is trauma.  Some people act badly because of the results of trauma, others because they are horrible people.  We have no indication that Agatha had suffered trauma, we have an entire episode outlining Wanda's.
> 
> Overall, when Agatha hurts people, she comes out _satisfied_.  Agatha shows no signs of caring or empathy for the pain she causes.  She at best pays lip service to it in a "I can remove your pain" way, but lies in the process.  Wanda feels remorse when she realizes what she's done.



Agatha quite probably suffered plenty of trauma in her four-hundred-plus years, but you are right: in the end it comes down to empathy and remorse. Agatha seems to enjoy causing pain, winning with consequences, and finds people being miserable to be amusing. Wanda does not.


----------



## Eric V

Umbran said:


> Maybe we should review - they gave us an entire episode of laying out the trauma Wanda's been through.  The people of Westview have been having those dreams, and they claim they are torture.  Which means... that's what Wanda's living every day.  Torture.
> 
> 
> Both Wanda and Tony Stark are examples of what you get when trauma isn't treated.  Tony shows _classic_ signs of PTSD.  Wanda's is uncontrolled grief and loss.  If there's a blame here, it is on folks who should know better.  Tony and Wanda didn't need "consequences".  They needed some really good therapists.



Wow.

One's personal grief does not make one immune from reasonable consequences for one's horrific actions. Here's news: _Everyone is grieving something_, that includes gangbangers, terrorists, and anyone else we normally like to see face consequences for what they have done. Wanda is not special in this regard.*

Yeah, she should have gotten therapy...so...why didn't she?  Same thing with Stark.  Their respective support systems should be constantly encouraging it, but ultimately, it's on them to look for help.  It just is. 

Which makes Monica's line at the end absolute trash.  "They'll never know what you sacrificed for them."  Am I supposed to believe Wanda is heroic for no longer mind-raping a bunch of innocent people so that she can play pretend with her constructed-out-of-nothing family?

Yeah, ok.  

*Well, except for the fact that she's far more destructive.  William Stryker is looking at this and saying "See?!"


----------



## Umbran

Imaculata said:


> I liked how Vision basically defeated himself with logic and reason. Really well written. But what will happen with white Vision now? We didn't see him destroy himself did we?




No.  I think we can expect that he's free-willed at this point.  Heyward and his people may be bright, but they don't outclass Tony Stark and the Mindstone in terms of programming.


----------



## Eric V

billd91 said:


> Honestly, no, I'm not bothered at all. For a lot of Marvel characters, the accountability is a personal matter rather than external and it's been that way a long time, not just in the MCU. Yes, the locals were pretty angry with her and felt abused - on the other hand, none of them seemed to be particularly out for her blood either. They *knew* quite intimately about her grief and trauma because they experienced her nightmares. That might not make them particularly understanding given their anger, but they would also know that their experience was temporary while hers are deeper and more lasting wounds.



"At least let us die."

They are afraid of her at the end.  If we believe their testimonies, they were _severely abused._  Thinking that they would all be understanding towards Wanda is more unrealistic than the ultra-civil behaviour on the ferries in The Dark Knight.


----------



## Dire Bare

Eric V said:


> Wow.
> 
> One's personal grief does not make one immune from reasonable consequences for one's horrific actions. Here's news: _Everyone is grieving something_, that includes gangbangers, terrorists, and anyone else we normally like to see face consequences for what they have done. Wanda is not special in this regard.*
> 
> Yeah, she should have gotten therapy...so...why didn't she?  Same thing with Stark.  Their respective support systems should be constantly encouraging it, but ultimately, it's on them to look for help.  It just is.
> 
> Which makes Monica's line at the end absolute trash.  "They'll never know what you sacrificed for them."  Am I supposed to believe Wanda is heroic for no longer mind-raping a bunch of innocent people so that she can play pretend with her constructed-out-of-nothing family?
> 
> Yeah, ok.
> 
> *Well, except for the fact that she's far more destructive.  William Stryker is looking at this and saying "See?!"



Wanda isn't facing any serious consequences for her treatment of the Westview townsfolk . . . . yet. This story isn't over, even if the television series is. Still, something would have been nice within the context of WandaVision, you're not the only one to feel dissatisfaction on this point, I've read it in several online reviews.

But she certainly made a sacrifice. One only possible in comic book stories. Wanda could have continued to power the hex and control all within in order to keep Dream Vision and their kids alive, but she was able to finally see what she was doing and choose to end the hex instead.

As far as justice is concerned . . . . what exactly needs to happen to Wanda? Who has the authority and power to arrest, try, and punish her for her crimes against the people of Westview? What would be the appropriate punishment? What about the significant mitigating circumstances of her apparent disassociative personality and not being fully aware of what she was doing? Could Wanda somehow offer restitution to the people of Westview on her own? What would that look like? Granted, these are all questions to be answered by the writers of WandaVision, or the follow-up in later MCU shows . . . . but this sort of thing is a problem in comic-book stories in general. How do you bring our modern sense of justice to super-powered beings?

Imagine a more mundane parallel . . . a woman hurts others while acting out in extreme grief, trauma, and a dissassociative personality break, but minus the super-powers. What would be appropriate? Jail? Counseling? Some sort of mental institution? We don't handle these sorts of things in the real world all that well, add super-powers to the mix and I can see why the writers punted the issue other than Wanda's walk-of-shame through the townsfolk towards the end.


----------



## Davies

Eric V said:


> Which makes Monica's line at the end absolute trash.  "They'll never know what you sacrificed for them."  Am I supposed to believe Wanda is heroic for no longer mind-raping a bunch of innocent people so that she can play pretend with her constructed-out-of-nothing family?



Yes. She chose their freedom over her own happiness. She freely made that choice, as there was no power on Earth that could have compelled her to make it if she chose otherwise.


----------



## MarkB

Eric V said:


> Which makes Monica's line at the end absolute trash.  "They'll never know what you sacrificed for them."  Am I supposed to believe Wanda is heroic for no longer mind-raping a bunch of innocent people so that she can play pretend with her constructed-out-of-nothing family?



They may have been constructed out of nothing, but they were pretty clearly independent, sentient beings once she had done so. She was literally killing her husband and children in order to free the townsfolk. Sure, she got herself into that situation in the first place, but that doesn't make it not a sacrifice.

And in her reply to Monica, Wanda acknowledges that, even if they did know, it wouldn't make any difference to them - nor should it.


----------



## Eric V

Davies said:


> Yes. She chose their freedom over her own happiness. She freely made that choice, as there was no power on Earth that could have compelled her to make it if she chose otherwise.



This doesn't make her heroic.  It doesn't even make her good.  It makes her barely decent.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Imaculata said:


> I liked how Vision basically defeated himself with logic and reason. Really well written. But what will happen with white Vision now? We didn't see him destroy himself did we?



I imagine he is just Vision, now.


Eric V said:


> more unrealistic than the ultra-civil behaviour on the ferries in The Dark Knight.



I have a hard time taking seriously a comment on realism by someone who thinks that what happened on the ferries was unrealistic.


Dire Bare said:


> Imagine a more mundane parallel . . . a woman hurts others while acting out in extreme grief, trauma, and a dissassociative personality break, but minus the super-powers. What would be appropriate? Jail? Counseling? Some sort of mental institution?



I mean, I have a close friend who went through exactly that, except it was instigated by a negligently bad psych med prescription, depression, and PTSD. She got arrested, put in a psych ward until she normalized, an actually competent professional figured out what happened, she had a day in court to determine if she was legally responsible for her actions, and the determination was that she wasn't.

Now, in order for that to happen for Wanda, there would have to be a state-sanctioned expert in chaos magic and sorcery. Otherwise, any "consequences" she faces will be an unjust trial at best, and violent retribution at worst. There is no real way for her to face genuine justice, outside of her putting in the work herself to make amends, or someone like Strange coming to put her down if she goes the other way.


----------



## Eric V

Dire Bare said:


> As far as justice is concerned . . . . what exactly needs to happen to Wanda? Who has the authority and power to arrest, try, and punish her for her crimes against the people of Westview? What would be the appropriate punishment? What about the significant mitigating circumstances of her apparent disassociative personality and not being fully aware of what she was doing? Could Wanda somehow offer restitution to the people of Westview on her own? What would that look like? Granted, these are all questions to be answered by the writers of WandaVision, or the follow-up in later MCU shows . . . . but this sort of thing is a problem in comic-book stories in general. How do you bring our modern sense of justice to super-powered beings?
> 
> Imagine a more mundane parallel . . . a woman hurts others while acting out in extreme grief, trauma, and a dissassociative personality break, but minus the super-powers. What would be appropriate? Jail? Counseling? Some sort of mental institution? We don't handle these sorts of things in the real world all that well, add super-powers to the mix and I can see why the writers punted the issue other than Wanda's walk-of-shame through the townsfolk towards the end.



Wanda obviously needs to be incarcerated with a ton of therapy.  Think the Raft combined with a top-tier mental institution.

In real life, people with mental illness who commit crimes _a fraction as bad_ as Wanda's aren't just let go. They get institutionalized, where their freedoms are curtailed so that the damage they inflict can be contained. It's worth noting that, at the end, she's still not trying to get therapy...she's off trying to become more powerful. What happens the next time she feels bad?

Now, who could bring her in?  No idea.  My issue is that apparently that's a non-issue.  No one seems to be thinking that anything needs to be done (hence, Rambeau's catastrophically dumb line).  I appreciate the punt metaphor you used, but...in football we punt when the opposing team has stopped us from what we are trying to accomplish.  Who was stopping the writers here?  In other words, why did they write themselves into a situation where this happens and all logical questions about accountability get swept under the rug?

Justice is definitely a theme in the MCU.  It's not hugely different from our own: people need to be accountable for their actions.

I mean, unless you're an Avenger?   Maybe Zemo was right after all.


----------



## Tonguez

Dire Bare said:


> Wanda isn't facing any serious consequences for her treatment of the Westview townsfolk . . . . yet. This story isn't over, even if the television series is. Still, something would have been nice within the context of WandaVision, you're not the only one to feel dissatisfaction on this point, I've read it in several online reviews.
> 
> But she certainly made a sacrifice. One only possible in comic book stories. Wanda could have continued to power the hex and control all within in order to keep Dream Vision and their kids alive, but she was able to finally see what she was doing and choose to end the hex instead.
> 
> As far as justice is concerned . . . . what exactly needs to happen to Wanda? Who has the authority and power to arrest, try, and punish her for her crimes against the people of Westview? What would be the appropriate punishment? What about the significant mitigating circumstances of her apparent disassociative personality and not being fully aware of what she was doing? Could Wanda somehow offer restitution to the people of Westview on her own? What would that look like? Granted, these are all questions to be answered by the writers of WandaVision, or the follow-up in later MCU shows . . . . but this sort of thing is a problem in comic-book stories in general. How do you bring our modern sense of justice to super-powered beings?
> 
> Imagine a more mundane parallel . . . a woman hurts others while acting out in extreme grief, trauma, and a dissassociative personality break, but minus the super-powers. What would be appropriate? Jail? Counseling? Some sort of mental institution? We don't handle these sorts of things in the real world all that well, add super-powers to the mix and I can see why the writers punted the issue other than Wanda's walk-of-shame through the townsfolk towards the end.




Yeah the Sokovia Accords were created specifically because of Wanda and in Wanda’s case the Scorcerer Supreme exist for the purpose of policing criminals/threats with Magic powers - like Wanda. There are facilities like the Raft and the hospital seen in New Mutants* designed for Powered Individuals (albeit they tend to be easily escaped)

Allowing for her trauma, Wanda should probably be in a ‘mental’ institution designed with strongly warded magical barriers - I’m sure the scorcerers training Dr Strange could help.

*okay not canon but afaik the only magical prison seen in the Mavel-adjacent properties so far


----------



## MarkB

doctorbadwolf said:


> Now, in order for that to happen for Wanda, there would have to be a state-sanctioned expert in chaos magic and sorcery. Otherwise, any "consequences" she faces will be an unjust trial at best, and violent retribution at worst. There is no real way for her to face genuine justice, outside of her putting in the work herself to make amends, or someone like Strange coming to put her down if she goes the other way.



All things considered in the Marvel universe, it doesn't seem outside the realm of possibility for Dr Strange to become a state-sanctioned expert in chaos magic and sorcery.


----------



## Eric V

doctorbadwolf said:


> I have a hard time taking seriously a comment on realism by someone who thinks that what happened on the ferries was unrealistic.



Ha.  It was noble.  It was what _should _happen.  However...

I know more than a few cops and prosecutors, though...and they assure me that the most likely scenario was someone grabbing the detonator before the Joker could even finish.  Unless you also walk in that world, I'll say their experiences give them a more informed opinion than either of us.


----------



## Davies

Eric V said:


> I know more than a few cops



What a surprise. One should be judged by the company one keeps.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

MarkB said:


> All things considered in the Marvel universe, it doesn't seem outside the realm of possibility for Dr Strange to become a state-sanctioned expert in chaos magic and sorcery.



Not at all. I'd say it's damn near guaranteed to never happen, unless things change a lot first.


Eric V said:


> Ha.  It was noble.  It was what _should _happen.  However...
> 
> I know more than a few cops and prosecutors, though...and they assure me that the most likely scenario was someone grabbing the detonator before the Joker could even finish.  Unless you also walk in that world, I'll say their experiences give them a more informed opinion than either of us.



Sure, cops tend not to be noble, and their biases against anyone who has ever even been accused of a crime, much less done time, is well known for a reason. I also, unfortunately, know more than a few cops.

Had it been cops on one boat, and inmates on the other, the only determinor of who got blown up would be who was faster on the draw.

But that wasn't the situation, and most cops would hesitate to blow up a boat full of commuters long enough for someone with a conscience to step in. It's not the only possible outcome, by any means, but there isn't anything unrealistic about it.


----------



## Rune

Eric V said:


> This doesn't make her heroic.  It doesn't even make her good.  It makes her barely decent.



Heroic is _exactly_ what that makes her, _in the moment_. Also good, as I understand the word (willing to sacrifice self for others). Whether or not she continues to make heroic/good choices remains to be seen. 

That _does not_ mean, however, that she should not face consequences for her bad actions (although, no one around at the end of the episode was actually in a position to enforce them – except maaaybe Monica). I would argue that, in a just world, at least some of those consequences would amount to time served, since she’s already spent _years_ paying for Crossbones’ crime. 

More generally, though, the thrust of your arguments seem to be that _the bad that a character does in the past invalidates the good that they do in the future_. _At least in balance?_ Yes?

To which I respond: that just isn’t how Marvel does things. If you want villains (and heroes) who are unchanging archeypes, there are comics that do that (cough...DC), but Marvel has a long history of growing villains into heroes (and vice versa). It seems evident that the MCU will do likewise.


----------



## Dire Bare

Davies said:


> What a surprise. One should be judged by the company one keeps.



Not cool.

We're here to debate and explore a comic-book show, not insult police officers and those who count them among friends.

We have serious problems with police culture and police brutality in our society, but to casually toss off a comment implying _cops are bad people, as are those who associate with them_ . . . not cool.


----------



## Davies

Dire Bare said:


> We're here to debate and explore a comic-book show, not insult police officers and those who count them among friends.



When the friend of the police has also cited Zemo, Striker and Ross as admirable figures, if anything, the police are the ones who are tainted by association with them.


----------



## Eric V

Rune said:


> Heroic is _exactly_ what that makes her, _in the moment_. Also good, as I understand the word (willing to sacrifice self for others). Whether or not she continues to make heroic/good choices remains to be seen.
> 
> That _does not_ mean, however, that she should not face consequences for her bad actions (although, no one around at the end of the episode was actually in a position to enforce them – except maaaybe Monica). I would argue that, in a just world, at least some of those consequences would amount to time served, since she’s already spent _years_ paying for Crossbones’ crime.
> 
> More generally, though, the thrust of your arguments seem to be that _the bad that a character does in the past invalidates the good that they do in the future_. _At least in balance?_ Yes?
> 
> To which I respond: that just isn’t how Marvel does things. If you want villains (and heroes) who are unchanging archeypes, there are comics that do that (cough...DC), but Marvel has a long history of growing villains into heroes (and vice versa). It seems evident that the MCU will do likewise.



Nah, it doesn't make her heroic.  Simply stopping hurting others out of your own self-centredness is not heroic.  It's minimum decency.

And no, that's not the thrust of my argument.  Sorry if it came off that way.  When the episode ended, my kids and I looked at each other like...that's it?  I mentioned before that it's that the issue isn't even brought up.  Monica just delivers her poor line and Wanda flies away...leaving behind all her victims with no recourse, no justice...nothing.  Now they all need therapy because Wanda (for whatever reason) decided not to get any.

Do I think Disney will "grow heroes (in this case, Wanda) into villains?"  I am afraid I don't.  I think we're expected to just gloss over this...the "punt" Dire Bare mentioned before.  After all, Tony faced nothing for Ultron.

As an aside, I am not sure the DCEU has unchanging heroes...Cavill's Kent goes through a lot of changes, and I appreciated his performance as a result.


----------



## Dire Bare

Tonguez said:


> Yeah the Sokovia Accords were created specifically because of Wanda and in Wanda’s case the Scorcerer Supreme exist for the purpose of policing criminals/threats with Magic powers - like Wanda. There are facilities like the Raft and the hospital seen in New Mutants* designed for Powered Individuals (albeit they tend to be easily escaped)
> 
> Allowing for her trauma, Wanda should probably be in a ‘mental’ institution designed with strongly warded magical barriers - I’m sure the scorcerers training Dr Strange could help.
> 
> *okay not canon but afaik the only magical prison seen in the Mavel-adjacent properties so far



Wanda, both in the comics and now apparently now in the MCU . . . is an "omega-level threat", cosmically powerful. The Raft isn't going to hold her, Agatha explicitly mentions the Scarlet Witch is more powerful than the Sorcerer Supreme . . . not to mention the ethical questions raised about how the Raft is used, much less the mutant "hospital" from New Mutants.

Even in the real world, we of course have prisons and mental institutions . . . . but they are highly troubled and problematic institutions. To have the writers throw Wanda in magical jail, or a magical mental institution . . . would be highly unsatisfying in a different way than WandaVision's conclusion.

I do think it's a flaw in the series writing that Wanda seemingly gets to fly out of Westview without much in the way of consequences, other than continuing to deal with her own grief, trauma, guilt, and now search for her children . . . but I'm hard-pressed to imagine what a more satisfying conclusion would have been. And it doesn't bother me overly much, as it's very much in genre, both for super-hero stories and magical fantasy stories.

Wanda did bad, somewhat unknowingly, fixed the problem (if not the lasting trauma of her victims), and now has a chance to hopefully earn some redemption for her actions. Depending on how her character is treated going forward, I'm okay with the end of WandaVision. The finale wasn't perfect, and was perhaps the weakest episode . . . . but the weakest episode in an otherwise very strong show.


----------



## Eric V

Davies said:


> When the friend of the police has also cited Zemo, Striker and Ross as admirable figures, if anything, the police are the ones who are tainted by association with them.



Quote where I did that.  "Admirable figures."  Lol.


----------



## Eric V

Dire Bare said:


> Even in the real world, we of course have prisons and mental institutions . . . . but they are highly troubled and problematic institutions. To have the writers throw Wanda in magical jail, or a magical mental institution . . . would be highly unsatisfying in a different way than WandaVision's conclusion.



Yeah, I think that's true too.  But apparently asking her for accountability wasn't even on the radar...


----------



## Davies

Eric V said:


> Quote where I did that.  "Admirable figures."  Lol.



Okay.



Eric V said:


> *Well, except for the fact that she's far more destructive. *William Stryker is looking at this and saying "See?!"*





Eric V said:


> I mean, unless you're an Avenger? Maybe *Zemo was righ*t after all.




The Ross support was from tonguez, I can't imagine how I got you two confused.


----------



## Dire Bare

Davies said:


> When the friend of the police has also cited Zemo, Striker and Ross as admirable figures, if anything, the police are the ones who are tainted by association with them.



You seem to be doubling-down on the idea that _cops are bad people, as are those who associate with them_. Still very not cool.

You also seem set on insulting and demeaning @Eric V. Disagree with his point of view, go for it. Make it personal? Not cool. You need to chill.

Zemo and Ross (and maybe some incarnations of Striker?) make good villains because _they do actually have a point_. They then take that legitimate grievance and take it to extreme and villainous ends, but they aren't wrong in their initial concerns. Wanda and her brother Pietro start off as very similar villains, but end up redeeming themselves and joining the heroes.


----------



## Eric V

Davies said:


> Okay.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Ross support was from tonguez, I can't imagine how I got you two confused.





When I write that, I am writing that if the current view continues (Wanda has no accountability), it adds strength to the arguments of people like Zemo and Stryker.

Which is not a thing that should ethically happen.  Hence, my criticism of the writing.

I am sorry you didn't get that.  I don't see how you got "admirable" though.


----------



## Davies

Dire Bare said:


> You need to chill.



Okay. <leaves thread>


----------



## MarkB

doctorbadwolf said:


> Not at all. I'd say it's damn near guaranteed to never happen, unless things change a lot first.



Why not? With incidents like the Snap and the Hex bringing the extraordinary into everyday life in the MCU, and with the Sokovia accords having already made superheroes effectively intergovernmental agents, the world is having to recognise the existence of these extraordinary beings and powers - and part of that acceptance is finding ways to police them.

Once superpowered - or magically empowered - beings start being arrested and placed on trial, the court system will need people who can provide expert testimony. And who better to do so than someone who is still a respected and qualified medical professional while also being an expert in magic?


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Hey, maybe they'll have Wanda in an episode of She-Hulk, where She-Hulk gets to defend her in a class-action lawsuit from the people of Westview, and we can find out that the town was pretty rough before she got there (remember her arrival scene?) and that she actually did them some good in the end.

Another comment I have on the current discussion: Wanda "freed" the people of Westview (at the cost of her own family) almost as soon as she realized that it was her doing it. Before the confrontation scene in the final episode, we have reason to believe that she didn't have _any idea_ that she was causing them pain.


----------



## Rune

Eric V said:


> Nah, it doesn't make her heroic.  Simply stopping hurting others out of your own self-centredness is not heroic.  It's minimum decency.
> 
> And no, that's not the thrust of my argument.  Sorry if it came off that way.  When the episode ended, my kids and I looked at each other like...that's it?  I mentioned before that it's that the issue isn't even brought up.  Monica just delivers her poor line and Wanda flies away...leaving behind all her victims with no recourse, no justice...nothing.  Now they all need therapy because Wanda (for whatever reason) decided not to get any.
> 
> Do I think Disney will "grow heroes (in this case, Wanda) into villains?"  I am afraid I don't.  I think we're expected to just gloss over this...the "punt" Dire Bare mentioned before.  After all, Tony faced nothing for Ultron.
> 
> As an aside, I am not sure the DCEU has unchanging heroes...Cavill's Kent goes through a lot of changes, and I appreciated his performance as a result.



I didn’t get that at all. My takeaway was that, by showing us Wanda studying the Darkhold immediately after showing her make a heroic sacrifice, WandaVision is sowing the seeds of a redemption arc in our expectations, but that first she actually _is_ going to have to be a villain.

Of course, it would be far better, morally, for her to turn herself in to face the consequences of her actions, but she has a goal (finding her kids’ souls) and that wouldn’t let her achieve it. Hence, the step toward villainy. But then, redemption.

If the audience takeaway were meant to be that empathy (especially from Monica) is a mistake (as I would expect if the redemption arc were not suggested), I would think Hayward (the primary voice for holding Wanda accountable) would have been less unlikeable (and villainous).


----------



## doctorbadwolf

MarkB said:


> Why not? With incidents like the Snap and the Hex bringing the extraordinary into everyday life in the MCU, and with the Sokovia accords having already made superheroes effectively intergovernmental agents, the world is having to recognise the existence of these extraordinary beings and powers - and part of that acceptance is finding ways to police them.
> 
> Once superpowered - or magically empowered - beings start being arrested and placed on trial, the court system will need people who can provide expert testimony. And who better to do so than someone who is still a respected and qualified medical professional while also being an expert in magic?



It's very hard to imagine Strange agreeing to do that work. He is an arrogant douche who genuinely has more important things to do with his time.


----------



## Tonguez

Davies said:


> Okay.
> 
> The Ross support was from tonguez, I can't imagine how I got you two confused.



You mean Lieutenant General of the United States Army later US Secretary of State Ross?

You do realise that in those roles he was representing the legitimate authority of the US State and via the Sokovia Accords was representing the MCU’s ‘UN’?

Thaddeus Ross may be a douche but he is Legitimate Authority & the strong arm of the Law


----------



## MarkB

doctorbadwolf said:


> It's very hard to imagine Strange agreeing to do that work. He is an arrogant douche who genuinely has more important things to do with his time.



Oh, I'm sure he'd only ever agree to do the very most prestigious cases, of the very most notorious/powerful defendants - but for those cases, he'd absolutely love the attention.


----------



## Rabulias

MarkB said:


> That's possible, but it doesn't match the dialogue. What Wanda's Vision said he was doing was removing the blocks preventing iVision from accessing his own stored memories. There was no transfer of data from one Vision to the other.



Exactly. Note the scenes that play out include Wanda destroying the Mind Stone and Thanos ripping it out of Vision's head, both scenes from _Avengers: Infinity War_, neither of which Westview Vision would have, even after Darcy told him the history. White Vision is the physical form that experienced those events 5 years ago and would have stored those memories somewhere.


----------



## Umbran

Eric V said:


> One's personal grief does not make one immune from reasonable consequences for one's horrific actions.




I don't argue that she should be immune.  I argue that they are ineffective and pointless in such cases.  

I'm going to keep this to the realm of psychology.  I have no desire to get into the politics of punishment.  In addition, we are talking about comic books, so I am not going to cite support for assertions like I would in a public policy piece.  You're free to disagree.  I'm not going to argue over their truth.  I will merely present them.

"Consequences" as we normally talk about them, have pretty limited utility.  We should establish a few things:

1) Consequences need to have a positive end result to be useful.  If the basic reason for consequences is "They hurt me, so they _deserve_ to be hurt," that is vengeance, and vengeance is not justice.  

2) Outside of financial considerations, consequences do not generally help the victims.  If one has been abused or assaulted, we generally want the perpetrator punished.  However, this does not generally lead to better outcomes for the victim.  There may be specific situations where it is relevant, but broadly, the idea of "closure"1 in this sense is fundamentally flawed, as it does not help the victim process or resolve the issues they are left with.  To put it colloquially, seeing the perpetrator go to jail does not typically lessen the time it takes to stop having the nightmares.

Consequences can sometimes be a teaching tool, but they are a poor one, at best.  Humans don't respond to negative stimuli significantly differently from other mammals - swatting your dog after they pee in the house is an unreliable form of training a dog, and it isn't really all that more effective on humans.  But, in cases of major psychological or emotional distress, the person can know the act was wrong, but do it anyway.

Consequences can sometimes act as a deterrent, but... we see how well that works.  We have been levelling consequences on people for bad behavior for ages, but we still have crime.  At best, consequences act in the cost-benefit analysis of an action.  That doesn't apply when the person is not driven by cost/benefit analysis, like in cases great acute anger, psychological disturbance or trauma.  When the behavior isn't rational, assessment of cost goes out the window.

There is a last form of consequence - removing the person from society as a protection for the rest of us.  This is what happens to Agatha - locked away where she cannot hurt anyone.  

But, Wanda seems to have removed herself from society.  For another, it is not clear that any mortal force can imprison her.  Killing her may be equally difficult.  So, I'm not sure what consequences you think should be levelled at her that would make the situation better.



Eric V said:


> Here's news: _Everyone is grieving something_,




Our culture at large has a great many misunderstandings about grief.  We may say that everyone has suffered something that has caused grief, but for purposes of this discussion, the issue isn't grief itself, so much as grief and loss that _were not successfully processed_ that causes issues.  Again, "consequences" would not help her process her grief.



Eric V said:


> that includes gangbangers, terrorists, and anyone else we normally like to see face consequences for what they have done.




That we like to see it does not mean it will actually help us.  See (2) above.



Eric V said:


> Yeah, she should have gotten therapy...so...why didn't she?  Same thing with Stark.  Their respective support systems should be constantly encouraging it, but ultimately, it's on them to look for help.  It just is.




Sure.  But consequences (aka "punishment") won't make it better, either.



Eric V said:


> Which makes Monica's line at the end absolute trash.  "They'll never know what you sacrificed for them."




If you hadn't realized, Monica has her own unresolved issues around a death and recent events. She also remarks that she'd have done the same, if she'd had the power.  This is to let the audience know that Wanda's failing is a very basic human one.  Any human can have it.  Many do have it.  Wanda's not a villain for why she did what she did, but only because she had the power to do it.  Or, alternatively, everyone is potentially a villain, so maybe we should be careful in our judgements.

The telling line, however, is the one that follows, from Wanda, "That wouldn't change what they think of me," tells us _Wanda_ realizes something about it all.  To the people of the town, Wanda's issues are not the point, and she recognizes that, and doesn't think ill of them for it.  And that there's really nothing Wanda can do to make it better at this point.



Eric V said:


> Am I supposed to believe Wanda is heroic for no longer mind-raping a bunch of innocent people so that she can play pretend with her constructed-out-of-nothing family?




I, at least, was not trying to tell you what to believe.  Much like we don't tell you why you should care.  

If you don't like it, that's fine.  Continuing to gripe to folks who do like it does not seem to serve a useful purpose, though, so maybe you want to consider how you want to engage with this thread, if at all.




1. "Closure" does sometimes have an impact when the primary issue is about not knowing something - if a person has disappeared, learning finally that they are conclusively dead can help a mourner finally process the result.


----------



## Tonguez

FitzTheRuke said:


> Another comment I have on the current discussion: Wanda "freed" the people of Westview (at the cost of her own family) almost as soon as she realized that it was her doing it. Before the confrontation scene in the final episode, we have reason to believe that she didn't have _any idea_ that she was causing them pain.



Except she didnt free them as soon as she realized that it was her doing - when the the townsfolk confront her, Wanda retaliates by trying to choke them into silence and its Agathas words that cause her to relent and actually open the Hex up again. 

And really what did Wanda lose other than her own traumatic delusions? Hex-Vision and the twins were constructs of her mind which she imposed on the world, she gives up nothing but her own vanity.


----------



## MarkB

Tonguez said:


> Except she didnt free them as soon as she realized that it was her doing - when the the townsfolk confront her, Wanda retaliates by trying to choke them into silence and its Agathas words that cause her to relent and actually open the Hex up again.



The choking wasn't deliberate and she undid it as soon as she realised it was happening.


Tonguez said:


> And really what did Wanda lose other than her own traumatic delusions? Hex-Vision and the twins were constructs of her mind which she imposed on the world, she gives up nothing but her own vanity.



Vision and the kids were created by Wanda, but they were clearly fully-sentient independent beings once she'd created them. They were people, people she cared deeply about, and she had to choose to let the die - effectively, kill them - in order to free the townsfolk.


----------



## Umbran

Davies said:


> What a surprise. One should be judged by the company one keeps.




*Mod Note:*
Don't make this personal.  Really.  Don't.


----------



## Umbran

MarkB said:


> The choking wasn't deliberate and she undid it as soon as she realised it was happening.




I read that as her powers seem to be strongly linked to her emotions and subconscious.  She had a momentary reaction of anger and rejection, like most anyone would, and that manifested before she could consciously control it.


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> I read that as her powers seem to be strongly linked to her emotions and subconscious.  She had a momentary reaction of anger and rejection, like most anyone would, and that manifested before she could consciously control it.



Pretty much, yeah. The fact that her powers were manifesting in ways she wasn't aware of or in control of is why she ultimately chose to seclude herself and study the Darkhold, along with whatever other sources of information she can find. She's not trying to increase her power, she's trying to understand it, so that ultimately she can control it.

Not that such a pursuit isn't fraught with the possibility of going very badly - as the saying goes, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Wanda wasn't the villain of this series. If you watched it and came to that conclusion, you watched it incorrectly. Hayward was a villain. He wanted to kill a grieving woman who was unconsciously acting out in her highly traumatic past, _and her innocent family,_ because he wanted a super-bot that could give him whatever he wanted. Agatha Harkness was a villain. She was exploiting and gaslighting a grieving woman for her own selfish desire to have Wanda's power, and was willing to kill Wanda and her family in order to get what she wanted. 

In this show, the real villains are the ones that want to harm/exploit Wanda. Wanda did mess up and caused a lot of trauma in her own grief, however, she did not try to or mean to do what she did. She doesn't need anyone else to try and force more punishments onto her for her actions, she has already received them. She lost her family. She gave up everything she ever wanted in exchange for the wellbeing of everyone she was imprisoning in the Hex. It doesn't matter that her family was created by her, they were real. They were conscious, independent entities that could feel all the emotions that any normal person could. They were real, and chose to give up their lives in exchange for the freedom of the people of Westview. That was heroic. What Wanda chose to do was heroic.

Furthermore, there really isn't anyone with the power to punish her, and trying to punish her for her actions would likely result in dire consequences for the rest of the world. That is not to say what she did was okay. It wasn't. She knows that, and doesn't need to have a "lesson" forced upon her. She knows what she did was wrong, forced herself into isolation in order to discover herself (in a way) and protect others from her powers, and based on what we saw in the show, she is not going to repeat the same mistake again. 

As @Umbran said upthread, the justice system is intended to stop bad behavior from being repeated. Wanda won't repeat her bad behavior. She stopped the person that was trying to take control of her power and intentionally use it to do even more harm than Wanda did. As far as we know, no one else in the current MCU has the power to do what she did, so trying to "set an example" by punishing her would do no good (and as I mentioned above, it would likely do much more harm). 

I'm certain some other superheroes are going to try and seek out Wanda. The most likely one (and probably the most qualified one) seems to be Doctor Strange, as we know that Wanda will appear in some capacity in Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness. He could become a sort of mentor to her, helping her control her powers and make sure she doesn't do something drastic with her powers, like, you know, destroy the world.


----------



## BRayne

Umbran said:


> I read that as her powers seem to be strongly linked to her emotions and subconscious.  She had a momentary reaction of anger and rejection, like most anyone would, and that manifested before she could consciously control it.




Chaos Magic as a concept is also called "results-based magic" where you put out a desire into the world and it's fulfilled magically though not always in the way you want. So Wanda wants them to stop and her magic produces that result by choking them. The actual effects aren't in her control, only the completion of her desired outcome.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

BRayne said:


> Chaos Magic as a concept is also called "results-based magic" where you put out a desire into the world and it's fulfilled magically though not always in the way you want. So Wanda wants them to stop and her magic produces that result by choking them. The actual effects aren't in her control, only the completion of her desired outcome.



So, basically an internal genie with infinite wishes and practically infinite power that are dependent on Wanda's mood. That's just . . . great for the rest of the heroes and the world they live in. She needs help fast.


----------



## Eric V

Umbran said:


> I don't argue that she should be immune.  I argue that they are ineffective and pointless in such cases.
> 
> I'm going to keep this to the realm of psychology.  I have no desire to get into the politics of punishment.  In addition, we are talking about comic books, so I am not going to cite support for assertions like I would in a public policy piece.  You're free to disagree.  I'm not going to argue over their truth.  I will merely present them.
> 
> "Consequences" as we normally talk about them, have pretty limited utility.  We should establish a few things:
> 
> 1) Consequences need to have a positive end result to be useful.  If the basic reason for consequences is "They hurt me, so they _deserve_ to be hurt," that is vengeance, and vengeance is not justice.
> 
> 2) Outside of financial considerations, consequences do not generally help the victims.  If one has been abused or assaulted, we generally want the perpetrator punished.  However, this does not generally lead to better outcomes for the victim.  There may be specific situations where it is relevant, but broadly, the idea of "closure"1 in this sense is fundamentally flawed, as it does not help the victim process or resolve the issues they are left with.  To put it colloquially, seeing the perpetrator go to jail does not typically lessen the time it takes to stop having the nightmares.
> 
> Consequences can sometimes be a teaching tool, but they are a poor one, at best.  Humans don't respond to negative stimuli significantly differently from other mammals - swatting your dog after they pee in the house is an unreliable form of training a dog, and it isn't really all that more effective on humans.  But, in cases of major psychological or emotional distress, the person can know the act was wrong, but do it anyway.
> 
> Consequences can sometimes act as a deterrent, but... we see how well that works.  We have been levelling consequences on people for bad behavior for ages, but we still have crime.  At best, consequences act in the cost-benefit analysis of an action.  That doesn't apply when the person is not driven by cost/benefit analysis, like in cases great acute anger, psychological disturbance or trauma.  When the behavior isn't rational, assessment of cost goes out the window.
> 
> There is a last form of consequence - removing the person from society as a protection for the rest of us.  This is what happens to Agatha - locked away where she cannot hurt anyone.
> 
> But, Wanda seems to have removed herself from society.  For another, it is not clear that any mortal force can imprison her.  Killing her may be equally difficult.  So, I'm not sure what consequences you think should be levelled at her that would make the situation better.
> 
> 
> 
> Our culture at large has a great many misunderstandings about grief.  We may say that everyone has suffered something that has caused grief, but for purposes of this discussion, the issue isn't grief itself, so much as grief and loss that _were not successfully processed_ that causes issues.  Again, "consequences" would not help her process her grief.
> 
> 
> 
> That we like to see it does not mean it will actually help us.  See (2) above.
> 
> 
> 
> Sure.  But consequences (aka "punishment") won't make it better, either.
> 
> 
> 
> If you hadn't realized, Monica has her own unresolved issues around a death and recent events. She also remarks that she'd have done the same, if she'd had the power.  This is to let the audience know that Wanda's failing is a very basic human one.  Any human can have it.  Many do have it.  Wanda's not a villain for why she did what she did, but only because she had the power to do it.  Or, alternatively, everyone is potentially a villain, so maybe we should be careful in our judgements.
> 
> The telling line, however, is the one that follows, from Wanda, "That wouldn't change what they think of me," tells us _Wanda_ realizes something about it all.  To the people of the town, Wanda's issues are not the point, and she recognizes that, and doesn't think ill of them for it.  And that there's really nothing Wanda can do to make it better at this point.
> 
> 
> 
> I, at least, was not trying to tell you what to believe.  Much like we don't tell you why you should care.
> 
> If you don't like it, that's fine.  Continuing to gripe to folks who do like it does not seem to serve a useful purpose, though, so maybe you want to consider how you want to engage with this thread, if at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. "Closure" does sometimes have an impact when the primary issue is about not knowing something - if a person has disappeared, learning finally that they are conclusively dead can help a mourner finally process the result.



So, I think Kant disagrees on your definition of revenge.  What would be argued (though not by me in this case) is retribution, which has proportionality as a key feature that distinguishes it from revenge.  That's not what I was arguing for, however.  Not 2, 3 nor 4 either.

No, I mean the last one. She is not really removed from society; she's in a cabin learning to become more powerful. _And still not getting therapy_. As I mentioned before, ultimately it's her responsibility to get help and she's still not doing it. It's what she should be doing...ideally while wearing a power-dampening collar or something for when she gets really upset. She should be in a mental health institution, plain and simple, and not seeing anyone even suggest mental help is just nuts. It's dumb.

Sure, we are all susceptible to unprocessed grief...but society still needs to protect people from the destruction that can cause, whether it's terrorists bombing an embassy because they lost their family or the Scarlet Witch.  I understand why it's happening, but ultimately, it's still on her; though I would argue her support system let her down as well in a big way.

I am fine with the idea that anyone can be a villain; when they do become one though, they need to be dealt with appropriately.  That doesn't appear to be even on the radar for Wanda.

But hey, if I misunderstood the thread, and it's just supposed to be a "Isn't the show great?" kind of deal...fine.


----------



## Tonguez

AcererakTriple6 said:


> I'm certain some other superheroes are going to try and seek out Wanda. The most likely one (and probably the most qualified one) seems to be Doctor Strange, as we know that Wanda will appear in some capacity in Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness. He could become a sort of mentor to her, helping her control her powers and make sure she doesn't do something drastic with her powers, like, you know, destroy the world.



The Scarlet Witch defeated by the power of Mansplaining mwahahaha!
that would be hilarious, but can you imagine the internet response!!!


----------



## Eric V

Of course Wanda didn't mean to do anything bad...but, so?

A few years ago, some guys were drag-racing through a residential neighbourhood.  One jumped the curb and killed two kids playing in the front yard.  He kept saying over and over how it was an accident, how he didn't mean to kill those kids.

Good.  I would hope it wasn't on purpose.  Doesn't mean they aren't responsible.

Hayward and Agatha had bad intentions, and are cartoonishly typical bad guys.  No doubts there.

But they didn't do nearly the damage to Westview residents as Wanda did.  That's just the truth.

If someone lost their parents, and in their grief started drinking and as a result killed some people while driving drunk...we'd take away their license and force AA and counseling.  We wouldn't be like "Well, he was sad."  There may be jail-time in there, and maybe that's a good idea and maybe it isn't, but the other stuff?  Completely reasonable.

Wanda should have had a talk with Uncle Ben.  If you're that powerful and it's emotion-based...see a bloody therapist.  It's the responsible thing to do.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Tonguez said:


> The Scarlet Witch defeated by the power of Mansplaining mwahahaha!
> that would be hilarious, but can you imagine the internet response!!!



If they handle it well, that won't be a major concern. Of course people will complain about there being an intelligent, arrogant man coming to clean up the mess an emotional woman made (which has been mentioned before in this thread), but the amount of backlash from it will really come from how they deal with it. 

If they literally do the demeaning Captain Marvel-y "you women need to control your emotions" thing, that would obviously not be okay. However, if they do it more as an understanding, yet a bit snarky, mentor that just wants to help her guide through her powers and not try to control/demean her, I think the complaints about perceived misogyny would be very minor. 

It would also be better if we got to see some of the flaws of Stephen Strange that they didn't really go into in the first Doctor Strange movie (which is one of the big flaws of the movie, IMO). His character has had a much easier life than Wanda, and the problems he has had in it have largely been his fault (we all know how he broke his hands and lost his job). Wanda, on the other hand, has been an innocent victim through most of her life, through the death of her parents and brother, manipulation by Hydra, imprisoned by the Sokovia Accords, the multiple deaths of Vision, and so on. This could make an interesting dynamic, if they do it well. 

If they keep Doctor Strange as the "Tony Stark without the charm" type of his first movie and do the "man helps woman with her emotions" route, that would very likely be a mistake resulting in a lot of warranted criticism. They could do it better, though. This is the reason I have always preferred Marvel to DC. Marvel heroes/characters _generally* _are more relatable than DC ones. 

* There are exceptions to this, of course. Batman and the Flash, IMO, are more relatable than Doctor Strange or Thor.


----------



## Umbran

Eric V said:


> Of course Wanda didn't mean to do anything bad...but, so?
> 
> A few years ago, some guys were drag-racing through a residential neighbourhood.  One jumped the curb and killed two kids playing in the front yard.  He kept saying over and over how it was an accident, how he didn't mean to kill those kids.
> 
> Good.  I would hope it wasn't on purpose.  Doesn't mean they aren't responsible.




Responsibility comes with _choice_.  The drag racers didn't intend anything bad, but they did _choose_ to take risky actions.  They are responsible for the results of the choice.

It doesn't seem that Wanda made a choice to have her power.  She was not, to start with, consciously aware that she'd set up the Hex, or done things to the people.  She didn't _choose_ to set it up in that way, and if given a conscious choice, would not have done so.

There are times when our culture deems a person not responsible for their actions.

It is possible to view her as a rabid dog, too dangerous and out of control to have around.  But the dog is nor _morally responsible_ for being rabid, either.


----------



## Rune

Tonguez said:


> And really what did Wanda lose other than her own traumatic delusions? Hex-Vision and the twins were constructs of her mind which she imposed on the world, she gives up nothing but her own vanity.



If that were the case, Haward wouldn’t have been able to track construct-Vision’s vibranium from the outside. Vision (and presumably also the kids) were made manifest and real within the Hex. That the reality could only be sustained while the hex lasts presents the ultimate dilemma Wanda must face. 

Downplaying the stakes of that dilemma not only does a disservice to Wanda’s character (and the storytelling that got us here), it also stands contrary to evidence that the show has previously given us.


----------



## Eric V

Umbran said:


> Responsibility comes with _choice_.  The drag racers didn't intend anything bad, but they did _choose_ to take risky actions.  They are responsible for the results of the choice.
> 
> It doesn't seem that Wanda made a choice to have her power.  She was not, to start with, consciously aware that she'd set up the Hex, or done things to the people.  She didn't _choose_ to set it up in that way, and if given a conscious choice, would not have done so.
> 
> There are times when our culture deems a person not responsible for their actions.
> 
> It is possible to view her as a rabid dog, too dangerous and out of control to have around.  But the dog is nor _morally responsible_ for being rabid, either.



I don't think this is one of those times.  I think she has a responsibility to seek therapy considering her power set and the ties to her emotional state.

As well, she did make conscious choices in the hex when confronted with stuff she didn't like (Vision questioning, Monica, the guy emerging from the sewer).  And she warned the military to back off and let her have her Westview playground. That was very consciously done. She may not have made the initial choice to make the hex, but she certainly made choices after that.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Eric V said:


> Of course Wanda didn't mean to do anything bad...but, so?
> 
> A few years ago, some guys were drag-racing through a residential neighbourhood.  One jumped the curb and killed two kids playing in the front yard.  He kept saying over and over how it was an accident, how he didn't mean to kill those kids.
> 
> Good.  I would hope it wasn't on purpose.  Doesn't mean they aren't responsible.



False equivalency. Drag racing is illegal for a reason, because it can and does cause accidents like this. It is inherently dangerous and they knew better than doing that, but chose to not heed the warnings of the law. Accidentally killing someone due to your own negligence is manslaughter.

Wanda didn't kill anyone (that we know of. We still don't know what happened to the Bee-Keeper), and was not doing anything unlawful or negligent that resulted in the harm she caused to the people of Westview.

Though an accidental consequence of your purposeful negligence does put you at fault for any damage/harm caused as a result of your actions, if you were not in control at the time of your action and were actively trying to keep others from being harmed as soon as you discovered that you were harming others, you are not at fault. If someone was mind-controlled into shooting another person, they are not guilty of murder. The same applies to Wanda. Her emotions took control of her, and thus she is not at fault for her actions in Westview.

That is not to say that she has a Get-Out-of-Jail-Free card in the future. She is aware of her true potential now, and if she chooses to not seek out help controlling her powers, she is indeed at fault for any harm she causes in the future. It's very similar to Cyclops. If he killed/harmed someone accidentally with his powers when they first manifested, that wasn't his fault, as he was not in control. However, if he had the capability to stop his laser-vision, and killed/harmed someone, it would be his fault.

Make sense? Fault is dependent on control of one's actions. A drunk driver is in control of being drunk and driving. A drag-racer chose to drag race. Wanda did not choose to be the Scarlett Witch anymore than I chose to have green eyes. If I am not at fault for having green eyes, Wanda is not at fault for the Westview Incident.


Eric V said:


> Hayward and Agatha had bad intentions, and are cartoonishly typical bad guys.  No doubts there.
> 
> But they didn't do nearly the damage to Westview residents as Wanda did.  That's just the truth.



Trying to do harm is a greater crime than accidentally causing harm. What they accomplished doesn't matter, their intentions do. Attempted murder is a greater crime than accidental killing.


Eric V said:


> If someone lost their parents, and in their grief started drinking and as a result killed some people while driving drunk...we'd take away their license and force AA and counseling.  We wouldn't be like "Well, he was sad."  There may be jail-time in there, and maybe that's a good idea and maybe it isn't, but the other stuff?  Completely reasonable.
> 
> Wanda should have had a talk with Uncle Ben.  If you're that powerful and it's emotion-based...see a bloody therapist.  It's the responsible thing to do.



Grief doesn't force you to start drunk driving. If you choose to drink and drive, your grief doesn't get you off the hook. You're still at fault for drunk driving. Think of this incident more like someone being strapped into a car. This car is special, though. It is hooked up to you in order to determine your emotions, causing the car to go faster the more anxious/distraught you are. The only thing that you have control of is the wheel. In the car are two people, one person that wants to kill you and take the wheel in order to run over as many people as possible, and the other that is constantly trying to strangle you in order to stop the car so they can be free to get out and take over the world. To complicate things even more, many of the people outside the car are actually killer mannequins that are being controlled by the people inside your car, and you can't tell the difference between a real person and a killer mannequin.

This is basically the situation Wanda was in during this series. She had control of the wheel (the direction of her power), but not the force she applied to it and the consequences of her power, while just coming out of a very traumatic and stressful experience, and also being attacked from seemingly every direction.


----------



## Tonguez

Rune said:


> If that were the case, Haward wouldn’t have been able to track construct-Vision’s vibranium from the outside. Vision (and presumably also the kids) were made manifest and real within the Hex. That the reality could only be sustained while the hex lasts presents the ultimate dilemma Wanda must face.
> 
> Downplaying the stakes of that dilemma not only does a disservice to Wanda’s character (and the storytelling that got us here), it also stands contrary to evidence that the show has previously given us.



Not really

the appearance of Zombie Vision in episode 2 (3?) was a tell that Wanda was aware that she had created an illusion and that the Vision we were seeing in the Hex was her creation (albeit at the time many of us thought she was puppeting real Visions remains) - that Wanda increasing lost control of Hex-Vision was proof of her loss of sanity as much as it was Hex-Vision being an independent sentient conciousness  and indeed in the last episoide Hex-Vision himself confesses that meeting White Vision has disabused him of the beleif that he was the ‘real’ Vision.

Vision logically accepts that he is not a real being and thus despite emotional ties to Wanda is able to ‘give up the ghost’.


----------



## Dire Bare

MarkB said:


> Once superpowered - or magically empowered - beings start being arrested and placed on trial, the court system will need people who can provide expert testimony. And who better to do so than someone who is still a respected and qualified medical professional while also being an expert in magic?



True, but . . . do the writers want to tell that kind of story? It's a way to go, certainly, but not the only way to go.

Bringing "realistic" consequences into the super-hero genre. It's almost a sci-fi approach, "What if there really were super-heroes? How would the world react?" It's certainly been done before,, both in the Marvel comics and, to a degree, in the MCU . . . but do they want to escalate that storyline? They certainly could and make some more great movies and TV shows as the world steps up its reaction to powered beings and escalates responses like the Sokovia Accords and the Raft . . . . maybe the governments of the world will unite and create sentinels . . . .


----------



## Dire Bare

FitzTheRuke said:


> Another comment I have on the current discussion: Wanda "freed" the people of Westview (at the cost of her own family) almost as soon as she realized that it was her doing it. Before the confrontation scene in the final episode, we have reason to believe that she didn't have _any idea_ that she was causing them pain.



I wouldn't say she had no idea . . . . it wasn't addressed directly, but I really got the impression she had some sort of disassociative personality disorder. At times, blissful and ignorant of the pain being caused, and the ethics of what she was doing . . . at others seemingly very aware that the Hex was her domain to control and protect, including those within, even Vision and the kids.

But, yeah, once she was forced to fully confront what was going on, it took a good moment or two for her to process it all . . . but then she made the right call and ended the Hex, her control over Westview, and the existence of Dream Vision and the kids.


----------



## MarkB

Dire Bare said:


> True, but . . . do the writers want to tell that kind of story? It's a way to go, certainly, but not the only way to go.
> 
> Bringing "realistic" consequences into the super-hero genre. It's almost a sci-fi approach, "What if there really were super-heroes? How would the world react?" It's certainly been done before,, both in the Marvel comics and, to a degree, in the MCU . . . but do they want to escalate that storyline? They certainly could and make some more great movies and TV shows as the world steps up its reaction to powered beings and escalates responses like the Sokovia Accords and the Raft . . . . maybe the governments of the world will unite and create sentinels . . . .



It certainly seems like more of a subject to be covered during a TV series than a movie - I was frustrated that Civil War did a poor job of really addressing the issues of accountability and responsibility, but I can see how doing so would have bogged it down.

I feel like the MCU movies have done a generally good job of slowly building up their world from having almost no publicly-known superpowered aspects to them being a part of that world's everyday life, and all of that helps that setting feel more real. Having some of that worldbuilding expanded through the TV shows seems like a good way to go.


----------



## Eric V

AcererakTriple6 said:


> Wanda didn't kill anyone (that we know of. We still don't know what happened to the Bee-Keeper), and was not doing anything unlawful or negligent that resulted in the harm she caused to the people of Westview.
> 
> Though an accidental consequence of your purposeful negligence does put you at fault for any damage/harm caused as a result of your actions, if you were not in control at the time of your action and were actively trying to keep others from being harmed as soon as you discovered that you were harming others, you are not at fault. If someone was mind-controlled into shooting another person, they are not guilty of murder. The same applies to Wanda. Her emotions took control of her, and thus she is not at fault for her actions in Westview.
> 
> That is not to say that she has a Get-Out-of-Jail-Free card in the future. She is aware of her true potential now, and if she chooses to not seek out help controlling her powers, she is indeed at fault for any harm she causes in the future. It's very similar to Cyclops. If he killed/harmed someone accidentally with his powers when they first manifested, that wasn't his fault, as he was not in control. However, if he had the capability to stop his laser-vision, and killed/harmed someone, it would be his fault.
> 
> Make sense? Fault is dependent on control of one's actions. A drunk driver is control of being drunk and driving. A drag-racer chose to drag race. Wanda did not choose to be the Scarlett Witch anymore than I chose to have green eyes. If I am not at fault for having green eyes, Wanda is not at fault for the Westview Incident.
> 
> Trying to do harm is a greater crime than accidentally causing harm. What they accomplished doesn't matter, their intentions do. Attempted murder is a greater crime than accidental killing.
> 
> Grief doesn't force you to start drunk driving. If you choose to drink and drive, your grief doesn't get you off the hook. You're still at fault for drunk driving. Think of this incident more like someone being strapped into a car. This car is special, though. It is hooked up to you in order to determine your emotions, causing the car to go faster the more anxious/distraught you are. The only thing that you have control of is the wheel. In the car are two people, one person that wants to kill you and take the wheel in order to run over as many people as possible, and the other that is constantly trying to strangle you in order to stop the car so they can be free to get out and take over the world. To complicate things even more, many of the people outside the car are actually killer mannequins that are being controlled by the people inside your car, and you can't tell the difference between a real person and a killer mannequin.
> 
> This is basically the situation Wanda was in during this series. She had control of the wheel (the direction of her power), but not the force she applied to it and the consequences of her power, while just coming out of a very traumatic and stressful experience, and also being attacked from seemingly every direction.



The number of people who would love to use this: "My emotions took control of me, and thus I am not at fault for my actions" to escape blame for what they have done is staggering.  In law, even if you lose it and murder your boyfriend after finding him in bed with someone else...you still go to jail, intensity of emotions notwithstanding.

"Wanda was not doing anything unlawful or negligent that resulted in the harm she caused to the people of Westview."  Might be because there's no law yet about magically trapping people in an endless loop that causes them to suffer so much they hope to die.  Besides, this isn't really about the law.  It's about responsibility and accountability.  The way people are arguing here, it seems she is not being held to any level of responsibility nor accountability.  She gets to just fly off (and still not get the therapy that she so desperately needs as the people of Westview will tell you).  

Oh and Wanda absolutely had more control than you are giving her credit for:  She changed the Vision, she threatened the military to back off and let her live in her Hex, she messed with the guy in the beekeeper outfit, and she flung Monica away.  She knew what she was doing there: protecting her made up world against what she perceived as a threat.  There's no denying that.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Eric V said:


> The number of people who would love to use this: "My emotions took control of me, and thus I am not at fault for my actions" to escape blame for what they have done is staggering.  In law, even if you lose it and murder your boyfriend after finding him in bed with someone else...you still go to jail, intensity of emotions notwithstanding.



The fact that people will lie to make themselves look better does not negate the fact that there are people that have are actually not guilty of their crimes. Just because a ton of murderers claim that they're innocent doesn't mean that we should imprison the innocents. That's why we have the famous saying of "innocent until proven guilty".


Eric V said:


> "Wanda was not doing anything unlawful or negligent that resulted in the harm she caused to the people of Westview."  Might be because there's no law yet about magically trapping people in an endless loop that causes them to suffer so much they hope to die.  Besides, this isn't really about the law.  It's about responsibility and accountability.  The way people are arguing here, it seems she is not being held to any level of responsibility nor accountability.  She gets to just fly off (and still not get the therapy that she so desperately needs as the people of Westview will tell you).



There are laws against kidnapping others. There are laws against torture. However, there is also the poorly named "insanity defense" that states that you are not guilty of a crime if you are not in control of your actions at the time. In a real court of law, I would suspect that Wanda's defense attorney would argue that though Wanda's powers are her actions, she did not have control of them and thus is not guilty of the crime.


Eric V said:


> Oh and Wanda absolutely had more control than you are giving her credit for:  She changed the Vision, she threatened the military to back off and let her live in her Hex, she messed with the guy in the beekeeper outfit, and she flung Monica away.  She knew what she was doing there: protecting her made up world against what she perceived as a threat.  There's no denying that.



When did she change the Vision? She did threaten the military, but there is no proof that Wanda was aware of the torment she was putting through the people of Westview at the time, and SWORD did try to kill her. The beekeeper was early on when she obviously did not completely know what was going on, and if her powers are based off of her emotions (as is evident throughout this series and the movies), she would obviously have responded to a trespasser in her home with anger. Even then, she managed to protect Monica from harm.

She does need therapy and training, but that will probably be further explored in Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness. The show's finale would be a bit less dramatic if it ended with Wanda in therapy, IMO. That is likely going to be off-screen, if it does happen. 

You have seemed to have taken it upon yourself to prove Wanda's guilt, so I will ask you to present your case for her guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Prove that she is guilty of knowingly and willingly imprisoning and torturing the town of Westview. The burden of proof is on you. Wanda was suffering from grief and trauma, and her emotion-driven powers took control without her knowing what they were doing at first and created the Hex.


----------



## Rune

Tonguez said:


> Not really
> 
> the appearance of Zombie Vision in episode 2 (3?) was a tell that Wanda was aware that she had created an illusion and that the Vision we were seeing in the Hex was her creation (albeit at the time many of us thought she was puppeting real Visions remains) - that Wanda increasing lost control of Hex-Vision was proof of her loss of sanity as much as it was Hex-Vision being an independent sentient conciousness  and indeed in the last episoide Hex-Vision himself confesses that meeting White Vision has disabused him of the beleif that he was the ‘real’ Vision.



Except, no. Vision certainly _is_ Wanda’s creation and cannot exist outside of the Hex, but we _know_ that he isn’t an illusion, because the vibranium he is made of is real and trackable. 


Tonguez said:


> Vision logically accepts that he is not a real being and thus despite emotional ties to Wanda is able to ‘give up the ghost’.



Except that the conclusion of that logical paradox is that both reconstructed ships (the one with all new parts and the later one made with all of the old parts) simultaneously _are_ AND _are not_ the original ship. Neither Vision is real, but also, _both are_!


----------



## Staffan

Umbran said:


> But, Wanda seems to have removed herself from society. For another, it is not clear that any mortal force can imprison her.



The show did demonstrate that it is possible to nullify the magic of even a witch as powerful as Wanda, so imprisoning her should be possible as long as you can find someone to rune it up. Getting her into that cell is a different matter though.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Rune said:


> Except, no. Vision certainly _is_ Wanda’s creation and cannot exist outside of the Hex, but we _know_ that he isn’t an illusion, because the vibranium he is made of is real and trackable.



Exactly this. If Hawyard could track Vision, he was real. Vision was independent of Wanda, having agency and his own personality. He depended on the Hex to live, just like we depend on the atmosphere to live. 


Rune said:


> Except that the conclusion of that logical paradox is that both reconstructed ships (the one with all new parts and the later one made with all of the old parts) simultaneously _are_ AND _are not_ the original ship. Neither Vision is real, but also, _both are_!



Shrodinger's Vision! We just need to collapse the superposition to figure out where Vision actually is. 

Oh. . . wait. That already happened, didn't it?


----------



## Tonguez

Staffan said:


> The show did demonstrate that it is possible to nullify the magic of even a witch as powerful as Wanda, so imprisoning her should be possible as long as you can find someone to rune it up. Getting her into that cell is a different matter though.



She could accept responsibility and do so willingly


----------



## Tonguez

AcererakTriple6 said:


> Exactly this. If Hawyard could track Vision, he was real. Vision was independent of Wanda, having agency and his own personality. He depended on the Hex to live, just like we depend on the atmosphere to live.




Well now we’re getting in to the definition of Implied Reality in a Multiversal Field. We don’t know if Hayward was tracking the Vibranium from which Vision was made or if Wanda had spontanenously created the illusion of the tracking of Vibranium that was being tracked by Hayward - _because Quantum_!


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Tonguez said:


> Well now we’re getting in to the definition of Implied Reality in a Multiversal Field. We don’t know if Hayward was tracking the Vibranium from which Vision was made or if Wanda had spontanenously created the illusion of the tracking of Vibranium that was being tracked by Hayward - _because Quantum_!



She seemed to not know where Vision was during the Halloween episode, so I'm sticking with my opinion here.


----------



## Eric V

AcererakTriple6 said:


> You have seemed to have taken it upon yourself to prove Wanda's guilt, so I will ask you to present your case for her guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.



Yeah, okay.

I am actually not saying she needs to be found guilty in a court of law.  I am saying she needs to be held accountable, and take responsibility.  Those people who get off with the poorly-named insanity defense?  They rarely get to just go back to whatever crazy sh!t they were doing before; they just don't go to jail.  There are still stipulations of therapy, etc.

I mean, really: the episode ended and we're like "Hey, she had unprocessed grief so it's not her fault. Now let her fly off _to continue to not address her grief_ and let's all just hope she doesn't enslave a town again."

My criticism is of the writing of the show that they are making this seem reasonable.  Someone with that much power, who is that unstable has a responsibility to curtail it and her grief that causes it to go ker-plooey.  You know how we know that?  The Incredible Hulk.  Huge power capable of disaster based on his emotions.  Years of comics of Banner trying to get rid of it and trying to have as much emotional control as possible (a great little scene in the Norton movie).  But no, they write Wanda as not accountable, and I think that writing is childish.


----------



## Older Beholder

You don't pass judgement on a God for natural disasters.
Wanda set up the hex as quarantine to stop her grief growing.

I thought that Monica telling Wanda she understood was the best thing she could have done at that point.
We end with Wanda trying to better understand her powers so she can control them.
I'm pretty sure the consequences/fallout will be addressed in future movies.


----------



## BRayne

Eric V said:


> Yeah, okay.
> 
> I am actually not saying she needs to be found guilty in a court of law.  I am saying she needs to be held accountable, and take responsibility.  Those people who get off with the poorly-named insanity defense?  They rarely get to just go back to whatever crazy sh!t they were doing before; they just don't go to jail.  There are still stipulations of therapy, etc.
> 
> I mean, really: the episode ended and we're like "Hey, she had unprocessed grief so it's not her fault. Now let her fly off _to continue to not address her grief_ and let's all just hope she doesn't enslave a town again."
> 
> My criticism is of the writing of the show that they are making this seem reasonable.  Someone with that much power, who is that unstable has a responsibility to curtail it and her grief that causes it to go ker-plooey.  You know how we know that?  The Incredible Hulk.  Huge power capable of disaster based on his emotions.  Years of comics of Banner trying to get rid of it and trying to have as much emotional control as possible (a great little scene in the Norton movie).  But no, they write Wanda as not accountable, and I think that writing is childish.




"Character with immense power tied to their emotional state and escaping judgement from authorities flees to remote, mountainside cabin to better understand how to control their power" is in fact the end state of both Norton's Hulk and Wanda here


----------



## FitzTheRuke

For all we know Wanda may fully plan to "turn herself in" - once she understands her powers well enough to know that it _would be safe to do so_. 

As it stands, again for all we know, if she goes to prison, she might just think one morning "gee, it would be nice to go outside today!" Only to find that she disintegrated a prison wall. Or made all the guards dance showtunes while opening the doors. Or if she goes to therapy, and the therapist asks "so how did it feel when you put your imaginary kids to bed for the last time?" she could make everyone in the neighbourhood feel just how it felt.

Getting someone to make runes every time _might_ help, but those runes didn't bring down the Hex just because she was in Agnes' basement, did they? They seem to just stop her from doing conscious magic tricks, not negate whatever thing she has subconsciously going on.

No, she's too DANGEROUS to face punishment for her crimes. Now, anyway. She might come back when she's got a better understanding and control of her abilities and ask for the town's forgiveness. We'll have to see.


----------



## Rune

Tonguez said:


> Well now we’re getting in to the definition of Implied Reality in a Multiversal Field. We don’t know if Hayward was tracking the Vibranium from which Vision was made or if Wanda had spontanenously created the illusion of the tracking of Vibranium that was being tracked by Hayward - _because Quantum_!



But how would she know that vibranium decays? You are imparting on Wanda a degree of scientific knowledge that we have no reason to believe she has.

But, of course, we also know (_if_ Monica was correct) that Wanda can’t create matter from nothing. Conclussion: _Wanda must have pulled the matter that became Vision and her kids from a different place._

Which means there must have been at least two moments (or one extended moment) in which the barrier(s) between worlds was/were breached.  

Also, worth pointing out, the souls of her kids we heard in the post-credit scene were in torment. That’s not like any of the afterlives we’ve seen so far.


----------



## Umbran

Rune said:


> Which means there must have been at least two moments (or one extended moment) in which the barrier(s) between worlds was/were breached.




Hardly.  Do remember your D&D schools of magic!  Agatha demonstrated _transmutation_.  So, some normal, base material could be transmuted into vibranium for the purpose, like spinning straw into gold.  Getting mere physical matter for a body, even an unusual one, does not require breaching the barriers between worlds.

Now, the animus for her kids, that (especially considering the original comics) probably required reaching out to _elsewhere_.


----------



## Tonguez

BRayne said:


> "Character with immense power tied to their emotional state and escaping judgement from authorities flees to remote, mountainside cabin to better understand how to control their power" is in fact the end state of both Norton's Hulk and Wanda here




Yeah but Banner has the advantage of being one of the genius science bros whose an expert in biochemistry, medicine (physician) and gamma physics and during Nortons era was shown to be actively practicing breath control techniques and playing with pipettes and purple test tubes to find a cure to his problem.
Wanda doesnt have that training and up to and including last Friday hadnt shown much control of her emotional outburst at all. 

Unlike Banner she hasnt gone away from civilisation so she can find a cure, Wanda has gone so she can read the most dangerous book possible which has historically been all but guaranteed to cause chaos and hellish doom for anyone silly enough to open it


----------



## Staffan

Rune said:


> But, of course, we also know (_if_ Monica was correct) that Wanda can’t create matter from nothing. Conclussion: _Wanda must have pulled the matter that became Vision and her kids from a different place._



On the other hand, creating matter from nothing is one of the things the Scarlet Witch specifically can do, at least according to Agatha.


----------



## Rune

Umbran said:


> Hardly.  Do remember your D&D schools of magic!  Agatha demonstrated _transmutation_.  So, some normal, base material could be transmuted into vibranium for the purpose, like spinning straw into gold.  Getting mere physical matter for a body, even an unusual one, does not require breaching the barriers between worlds.
> 
> Now, the animus for her kids, that (especially considering the original comics) probably required reaching out to _elsewhere_.





Staffan said:


> On the other hand, creating matter from nothing is one of the things the Scarlet Witch specifically can do, at least according to Agatha.



Good points.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Eric V said:


> A few years ago, some guys were drag-racing through a residential neighbourhood. One jumped the curb and killed two kids playing in the front yard. He kept saying over and over how it was an accident, how he didn't mean to kill those kids.



Terrible comparison. She wasn’t willfully doing something she knew was dangerous and could reasonably end in harm to innocents.


----------



## BRayne

Tonguez said:


> Yeah but Banner has the advantage of being one of the genius science bros whose an expert in biochemistry, medicine (physician) and gamma physics and during Nortons era was shown to be actively practicing breath control techniques and playing with pipettes and purple test tubes to find a cure to his problem.
> Wanda doesnt have that training and up to and including last Friday hadnt shown much control of her emotional outburst at all.
> 
> Unlike Banner she hasnt gone away from civilisation so she can find a cure, Wanda has gone so she can read the most dangerous book possible which has historically been all but guaranteed to cause chaos and hellish doom for anyone silly enough to open it




She went to go learn about her power from the one source that she knows has information on it in a place she is unlikely to encounter stressors or affect many people if she does. The fact that the book is generally bad news to those who read it is a separate thing.


----------



## Eric V

doctorbadwolf said:


> Terrible comparison. She wasn’t willfully doing something she knew was dangerous and could reasonably end in harm to innocents.



No.  She didn't bother to find out.  She didn't care.  It was all about her own grief.  And I'm sorry, but when you're that powerful, you have a responsibility to care to find out.

Look, she was making the town go into a 50s sitcom.  She knew she was doing that.  What did she think it was doing to the populace?  It's mind control at a minimum.  She might not have known, but it's because she didn't care to know.

Watch the scene where she emerges to confront SWORD.  She warns them to back off and let her be in her home...that's all she cares about.

...ok, but what about all the innocents in there, forced to abandon their lives (remember, there's a little girl stuck in her room for 8 days and her mom can't reach her) being mind-raped the whole time?  Nope, doesn't matter.  She's grieving.

Ok, let's hope she doesn't screw _any other people_ up while she's off not getting therapeutic help and reading the freakin' Darkhold on her own with no guidance.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Eric V said:


> Yeah, okay.
> 
> I am actually not saying she needs to be found guilty in a court of law.  I am saying she needs to be held accountable, and take responsibility.  Those people who get off with the poorly-named insanity defense?  They rarely get to just go back to whatever crazy sh!t they were doing before; they just don't go to jail.  There are still stipulations of therapy, etc.
> 
> I mean, really: the episode ended and we're like "Hey, she had unprocessed grief so it's not her fault. Now let her fly off _to continue to not address her grief_ and let's all just hope she doesn't enslave a town again."
> 
> My criticism is of the writing of the show that they are making this seem reasonable.  Someone with that much power, who is that unstable has a responsibility to curtail it and her grief that causes it to go ker-plooey.  You know how we know that?  The Incredible Hulk.  Huge power capable of disaster based on his emotions.  Years of comics of Banner trying to get rid of it and trying to have as much emotional control as possible (a great little scene in the Norton movie).  But no, they write Wanda as not accountable, and I think that writing is childish.



And who would hold her accountable? And how? I could see them doing a second Sokovian Accords plot line, where Wanda's actions in Westview are reviewed by the United Nations, but what would they do? They don't have the power to stop Wanda from doing anything, and likely don't know who the right people to contact for this matter are (Doctor Strange). The only thing Strange has over Wanda is his knowledge of magic, Wanda has the brute force. If they tried to send Strange to try and involuntarily take Wanda into a magic prison (Marvel's Azkaban. Mazkaban, anyone?), the battle that ensues would very likely have reality-shaking events, and after the events of the Snap/Blip, I think the people of the MCU have had enough trauma within the past 5 years to allow one rogue superhero to go off the radar so long as she isn't harming them in any way. 

My point is not that she should be free of consequence, it's that she both has already faced most of those consequences (losing her family and dream home), that the consequences are likely unneeded, that there is likely no good way to try to enforce these consequences, and it is likely more dangerous for the world if they try to enforce these unnecessary consequences than by just letting Wanda go for a bit. It's not a matter of should, it's more of the practicality of trying to enforce some kind of "punishment", whether that be therapy, education in magic, or imprisonment. (Like I have said before, I also think Wanda has already gotten a significant amount of the consequences that would be warranted by her actions here.)

(Granted, I would be cool if Doctor Strange 2 skipped over a lot of this and just started with the UN in a room with Wanda and Doctor Strange basically ordering Wanda to house arrest with Strange as her mentor.)


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Eric V said:


> Ok, let's hope she doesn't screw _any other people_ up while she's off not getting therapeutic help and reading the freakin' Darkhold on her own with no guidance.



In general, I am a pessimist, but in this case I am hopeful for the character's ability to not harm people while off on her own in the middle of the woods. She's reading the Darkhold to learn about the Scarlett Witch in order to master her powers. Her intentions are good, and the book could mention the Sorcerer Supreme and how to find him. 

She needs help, she doesn't need punishment, even if the punishment is for a good cause. It's going to need to be voluntary. If the character needs a bit of time to read in the woods before turning herself in to the authorities, I would hardly fault that as dangerously reckless or unsafe.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

It is silly to compare the damage or harm she did to what other superheroes have done elsewhere in the MCU because of one big difference. All the others knew what they were doing and how they were using their powers. It was their conscious choice to take the actions they did. Wanda uses Chaos Magic. It, and the Scarlet Witch force within her, control her more than she controls it. Chaos Magic warps and distorts what she wants or desires to do with her powers into results that do the job, but are not always the best outcome for everyone involved. She came back from the Snap, tracked down Vision's body, realized he was really gone, fell into despair, drove to Westview, to the building lot Vision had bought for them, had a total breakdown resulting in the feeling of emptiness, etc, and then was suddenly existing in the sitcom version of Westview, created by her subconscious/Chaos Magic. It is the closest thing to a temporary insanity defense the MCU would give her in a courtroom and she would be found not guilty because of it, just like cases are in the real world when that defense is found legitimate. That would not stop the civil lawsuits, though, that would demand financial compensation for the pain and suffering the people of the town went through.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Eric V said:


> Look, she was making the town go into a 50s sitcom. She knew she was doing that. What did she think it was doing to the populace? It's mind control at a minimum. She might not have known, but it's because she didn't care to know.



No, she literally didn’t know. It’s...a major and explicit part of the plot.


----------



## Rabulias

AcererakTriple6 said:


> If they handle it well, that won't be a major concern. Of course people will complain about there being an intelligent, arrogant man coming to clean up the mess an emotional woman made (which has been mentioned before in this thread), but the amount of backlash from it will really come from how they deal with it.



A man who was mentored and trained _by a woman_.


----------



## Tonguez

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> It is silly to compare the damage or harm she did to what other superheroes have done elsewhere in the MCU because of one big difference. All the others knew what they were doing and how they were using their powers. It was their conscious choice to take the actions they did. Wanda uses Chaos Magic. It, and the Scarlet Witch force within her, control her more than she controls it. Chaos Magic warps and distorts what she wants or desires to do with her powers into results that do the job, but are not always the best outcome for everyone involved. She came back from the Snap, tracked down Vision's body, realized he was really gone, fell into despair, drove to Westview, to the building lot Vision had bought for them, had a total breakdown resulting in the feeling of emptiness, etc, and then was suddenly existing in the sitcom version of Westview, created by her subconscious/Chaos Magic. It is the closest thing to a temporary insanity defense the MCU would give her in a courtroom and she would be found not guilty because of it, just like cases are in the real world when that defense is found legitimate. That would not stop the civil lawsuits, though, that would demand financial compensation for the pain and suffering the people of the town went through.




1 Wanda's  lack of control is comparable to Hulks lack of control with the caveat that Wanda still has to make a concious choice before her powers activate. Hulk is also actively hunted by the military as a rogue WMD

2 The Insanity Plea also doesn't mean no incarceration, it just means no Prison time, the Dangerous Insane are still put into secure hospitals for their treatment as long as they are deemed a threat - thats whats being asked for in Wanda's case, an assessment that she is no longer a threat.


----------



## Tonguez

Rabulias said:


> A man who was mentored and trained _by a woman_.



Every man is mentored and trained by a woman, she is called Mother


----------



## trappedslider

Finally watched it and my brain went I know that reference when they showed the marquee of the theater "Tannhäuser Gate"


----------



## Paul Farquhar

trappedslider said:


> Finally watched it and my brain went I know that reference when they showed the marquee of the theater "Tannhäuser Gate"



It's the sequel to "Off the Shoulder of Orion".

P.S. This would make a good question for _Only Connect_.


----------



## Zardnaar

Really enjoyed episode 7 but fell asleep through most of 8 so need to rewatch. 

 Nothing to do with the quality of the episode was just really shattered.


----------



## Eric V

doctorbadwolf said:


> No, she literally didn’t know. It’s...a major and explicit part of the plot.



She corrects people and events within to match her liking.  She knows she's got a whole town under control when she confronts Hayward about the drone.  A responsible person checks to see what exactly her fantasy is doing to the people involved.

If they care to do so.


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> 2 The Insanity Plea also doesn't mean no incarceration, it just means no Prison time, the Dangerous Insane are still put into secure hospitals for their treatment as long as they are deemed a threat - thats whats being asked for in Wanda's case, an assessment that she is no longer a threat.




And, as we've already noted, there's not a facility in the world that can hold her if she doesn't want to be held.  Any incarceration would have to be entirely willing on her part.  She has, at least for now, sequestered herself away from civilization.  She is farther away from other people to hurt than she would be in any facility you could name.  She is as effectively incarcerated as she can get.

What she still isn't getting is treatment.  But, that can't help her until she's ready to be helped anyway.  It is not clear that there's a mental health practitioner in the world with sufficient experience in cases like hers (because, really, in the MCU, there are only a handful of super-powered beings, much less of her power level) to certify her safety with any confidence.



Tonguez said:


> Every man is mentored and trained by a woman, she is called Mother




Um... you know lots of people lose their moms, right?


----------



## Maxperson

Tonguez said:


> Yeah but Banner has the advantage of being one of the genius science bros whose an expert in biochemistry, medicine (physician) and gamma physics and during Nortons era was shown to be actively practicing breath control techniques and playing with pipettes and purple test tubes to find a cure to his problem.
> Wanda doesnt have that training and up to and including last Friday hadnt shown much control of her emotional outburst at all.



Go far enough back and the first wizards and witches didn't know what they were doing either.  It's a rougher road, but you can learn from practice and trial and error.


Tonguez said:


> Unlike Banner she hasnt gone away from civilisation so she can find a cure, Wanda has gone so she can read the most dangerous book possible which has historically been all but guaranteed to cause chaos and hellish doom for anyone silly enough to open it



You don't know that.  All you know is that an addition to anything else she might or might not have gone away to that place for, she also is looking at the book.  She may not be trying to gain a measure of control over her power while she is there, but then again she might.


----------



## Umbran

Maxperson said:


> You don't know that.  All you know is that an addition to anything else she might or might not have gone away to that place for, she also is looking at the book.  She may not be trying to gain a measure of control over her power while she is there, but then again she might.




She did explicitly state that she was going to seek to learn how to control her powers. It stands to reason that the next thing she does is towards that end, especially when she's been told the book has a lot to say about the Scarlet Witch.


----------



## ART!

I really, really enjoyed this show for the most part. Everything with Wanda and Vision I thought was just great. Monica was nicely fleshed out and I think they cast her really well - I look forward to seeing more of her. It was great to see Jimmy and Darcy, and I really hope they get used much more somewhere. 

I think the show's weakest scenes were expository ones. Most of those just felt really flat to me. For instance, as great as it was to get the tour of Wanda's traumas and as good as Olsen was in all that, Agnes narrating and "explaining" it was almost painful. 

Anyway, I'm glad we got this series, and that Olsen and Bettany all got lots of room to dig into their characters. I'm really looking forward tot he new dynamics of the MCU, with movies for the big tent-pole stuff, and series for the more in-depth explorations.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

I don't think anyone has discussed it yet, but with this series, magic is now able to give normal people superpowers, and I mean aside from what the energy of the Hex did to Monica. I am talking about the necklace that Agatha put on Ralph that turned him into Quicksilver. But another question about that is did the necklace just give him the disguise of Pietro and then Wanda's subconscious provided the powers through her magic, or did the powers come from the necklace and Agatha's magic? And of course, Wanda's magic made Vision and the boys superpowered also. It is confusing, but it opens the door to having people with item-granted powers in the MCU. Imagine another powerful, and actually evil, witch or sorcerer with an army of item-empowered troops. Doctor Doom was always tech, but he also learned magic.


----------



## Staffan

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> I don't think anyone has discussed it yet, but with this series, magic is now able to give normal people superpowers, and I mean aside from what the energy of the Hex did to Monica. I am talking about the necklace that Agatha put on Ralph that turned him into Quicksilver. But another question about that is did the necklace just give him the disguise of Pietro and then Wanda's subconscious provided the powers through her magic, or did the powers come from the necklace and Agatha's magic? And of course, Wanda's magic made Vision and the boys superpowered also. It is confusing, but it opens the door to having people with item-granted powers in the MCU. Imagine another powerful, and actually evil, witch or sorcerer with an army of item-empowered troops. Doctor Doom was always tech, but he also learned magic.



I'm very much not certain at all that Monica got powers from the Hex. I think she had powers before. Note that when she's examined after her first trip into the Hex, they have concerns about her bloodwork, and her X-Ray is mostly all white, as if it was over-exposed... and Monica just shrugs and says "Whatever." She also doesn't seem particularly surprised when the bullets meant for the twins hit her and get disintegrated.

The theory here would be that Monica got powered up by something related to Carol Danvers, and this lead to her "leaking" radiation at first. This would be what gives Maria cancer, which would then explain why Monica has a hostile reaction to the mention of Carol's name — she blames her for her mother's death.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Eric V said:


> She corrects people and events within to match her liking.  She knows she's got a whole town under control when she confronts Hayward about the drone.  A responsible person checks to see what exactly her fantasy is doing to the people involved.
> 
> If they care to do so.





You are assuming a level of rationality that is not only not in evidence, but is not reasonable to expect from a human. We are not especially rational animals. 

She doesn’t know anything beyond the fact that she has some control over the hex. She specifically doesn’t believe she made it or is making all this happen.


----------



## MarkB

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> I don't think anyone has discussed it yet, but with this series, magic is now able to give normal people superpowers, and I mean aside from what the energy of the Hex did to Monica. I am talking about the necklace that Agatha put on Ralph that turned him into Quicksilver. But another question about that is did the necklace just give him the disguise of Pietro and then Wanda's subconscious provided the powers through her magic, or did the powers come from the necklace and Agatha's magic? And of course, Wanda's magic made Vision and the boys superpowered also. It is confusing, but it opens the door to having people with item-granted powers in the MCU. Imagine another powerful, and actually evil, witch or sorcerer with an army of item-empowered troops. Doctor Doom was always tech, but he also learned magic.



We've already seen such items in the Doctor Strange movie. Cloak of levitation, air-walking boots, various magically empowered weapons. Maybe you need to be magical yourself in order to wield them, but that's not certain.


----------



## billd91

Eric V said:


> Yeah, okay.
> 
> I am actually not saying she needs to be found guilty in a court of law.  I am saying she needs to be held accountable, and take responsibility.  Those people who get off with the poorly-named insanity defense?  They rarely get to just go back to whatever crazy sh!t they were doing before; they just don't go to jail.  There are still stipulations of therapy, etc.
> 
> I mean, really: the episode ended and we're like "Hey, she had unprocessed grief so it's not her fault. Now let her fly off _to continue to not address her grief_ and let's all just hope she doesn't enslave a town again."
> 
> My criticism is of the writing of the show that they are making this seem reasonable.  Someone with that much power, who is that unstable has a responsibility to curtail it and her grief that causes it to go ker-plooey.  You know how we know that?  The Incredible Hulk.  Huge power capable of disaster based on his emotions.  Years of comics of Banner trying to get rid of it and trying to have as much emotional control as possible (a great little scene in the Norton movie).  But no, they write Wanda as not accountable, and I think that writing is childish.



No, that's not it. She's not unaccountable any more than Banner is as the Hulk. In both cases, they generally *hold themselves accountable*, as it usually is in the superhero genre (minus any big blockbuster crossover story event like the Civil War shenanigans that include an extradimensional concentration camp). What did Banner do? He went into relative seclusion. What has Wanda done, the same. As we see at the end of WandaVision, she's taken herself out of society to figure things out. And I'm sure we'll see how that goes in the next Dr. Strange movie.


----------



## Eric V

doctorbadwolf said:


> She doesn’t know anything beyond the fact that she has some control over the hex. She specifically doesn’t believe she made it or is making all this happen.



The scene with Hayward doesn't support this.


----------



## billd91

doctorbadwolf said:


> You are assuming a level of rationality that is not only not in evidence, but is not reasonable to expect from a human. We are not especially rational animals.
> 
> She doesn’t know anything beyond the fact that she has some control over the hex. She specifically doesn’t believe she made it or is making all this happen.



She knows something more than that, but as the show makes clear, there are plenty of things she *doesn't* consciously know. She knows, ultimately, that she created this idyllic bubble based on her knowledge and experience with American sitcoms - places she could experience and enjoy while the world was falling apart outside her parents' family flat. She doesn't know that the experience is actually painful for the residents. She gave them better jobs, better homes and lives... as far as her grieving mind's ability to adapt the sitcoms into reality via magic she doesn't know she has. She doesn't know the residents are experiencing her nightmares. She doesn't know the kids are all sequestered away too or that she's actually controlling people in general and that they get trapped in a robotic existence the farther they are from her.
As far as she knows, she's created a fantasy world that's *better* for everyone involved. Hell, even the city public pools has gone from being brackish and unmaintained to clean and tidy.


----------



## Umbran

billd91 said:


> She knows something more than that, but as the show makes clear, there are plenty of things she *doesn't* consciously know. She knows, ultimately, that she created this idyllic bubble based on her knowledge and experience with American sitcoms




She doesn't appear to start with this as conscious knowledge.  Her original claim that she didn't do it does not seem to be a knowing, canny lie, but an honest belief that she didn't create it.  She does seem to come around to this as time goes on, until Agatha frees up the minds of some of the townsfolk to confront her with the full reality.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Eric V said:


> The scene with Hayward doesn't support this.



Yes, it does. She gains more understanding over the course of the show, but episode 1 she is pretty clueless, and has little reason to question it. 

By that scene she knows she is happy in the bubble, and that she can control it. She certainly doesn’t know she is controlling people, that people are in any distress, or any of that, until Agnes makes her see it in the last episode.


----------



## Eric V

doctorbadwolf said:


> Yes, it does. She gains more understanding over the course of the show, but episode 1 she is pretty clueless, and has little reason to question it.
> 
> By that scene she knows she is happy in the bubble, and that she can control it. She certainly doesn’t know she is controlling people, that people are in any distress, or any of that, until Agnes makes her see it in the last episode.



She doesn't know she's controlling people...

...so, what?  She thinks the' citizens are naturally stuck in a 50s type world?  And then quickly and of their own will a 60s world? 

When you say "she is happy in the bubble, and that she can control it" what is the "it" that does not involve the people?


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Eric V said:


> She doesn't know she's controlling people...
> 
> ...so, what?  She thinks the' citizens are naturally stuck in a 50s type world?  And then quickly and of their own will a 60s world?
> 
> When you say "she is happy in the bubble, and that she can control it" what is the "it" that does not involve the people?



She knows she can boot people, and control the bubble itself, ie the period, color, style, etc. She doesn’t seem to know she can make people act a certain way, and seem surprised or distressed when she sees direct evidence of that (usually from Agnes or Vision).

She definitely doesn’t know that she is causing the above to be the case, and even what I describe above she may not know at the start of episode 1.

She gains more understanding over the course of the show. 

If you wanna complain that this is somehow unrealistic or unbelievable, go ahead, but it is what the show establishes as basically the major arc of the show.


----------



## Tonguez

Another thing

White Vision seemed to have the power to Phase etc even though he didnt have the Infinity Stone, albeit he was powered by residual magic funneled from the drone - so is Phasing a property of Vibranium and thus usable by anyone with a suffient quantity of the stuff?


----------



## FitzTheRuke

She specifically explained several times that she didn't know what was going on and argued with people that she was doing anything, until it was shown to her (in the final episode) that the people were being hurt, and that she was the one doing it, and what did she do then? She shut the whole thing down (as soon as she finished beating the bad guy). 

I didn't find the final episode to be as satisfying as the rest of the series (they had too much to do - they should have split it into two episodes and gave everyone, especially Monica, "Pietro", Darcy, and Hayward, more time to give depth to their final scenes.)


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Tonguez said:


> Another thing
> 
> White Vision seemed to have the power to Phase etc even though he didnt have the Infinity Stone, albeit he was powered by residual magic funneled from the drone - so is Phasing a property of Vibranium and thus usable by anyone with a suffient quantity of the stuff?



It's just something that Vision can do. It's not a "normal" property of Vibranium, but Vibranium can do a lot of things if you know how to make it do it. I don't think it's about "quantity" of the stuff, but about understanding it (or lucking out) enough in your use of it that you can make it do things. Amazing things.


----------



## Tonguez

Maxperson said:


> Go far enough back and the first wizards and witches didn't know what they were doing either.  It's a rougher road, but you can learn from practice and trial and error.



Marvel canon is that Humans were taught magic by extra-dimensional powers and gods (Hecate, Cthon, Agamotto etc) so the first witches did have mentors available to teach/guide/manipulate/exploit them.

Those beings dont use spells, they are magical by nature - arguably the Scarlet Witch force which has come to Wanda is also at the level of those Magical-by-nature Powers which changes the question to what is the fundamental relationship between the entity called Wanda and the entity called PheonixScarlet Witch


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Tonguez said:


> Marvel canon is that Humans were taught magic by extra-dimensional powers and gods (Hecate, Cthon, Agamotto etc) so the first witches did have mentors available to teach/guide/manipulate/exploit them.
> 
> Those beings dont use spells, they are magical by nature - arguably the Scarlet Witch force which has come to Wanda is also at the level of those Magical-by-nature Powers which changes the question to what is the fundamental relationship between the entity called Wanda and the entity called PheonixScarlet Witch



I don’t think there is such an entity. Rather, there is a title, and a prophecy, and Wanda in her full power has that title and the look to go with it.


----------



## Retreater

Just popping in and not reading any comments to avoid potential spoilers. I haven't watched since the first episode, which I thought was meandering, pointless, and generally bad tv. Does it get better, and how many episodes do I have to watch before the concept actually starts to make sense? 
And if I don't like it, do you think this will be required viewing for future MCU movies?


----------



## Eric V

Retreater said:


> Just popping in and not reading any comments to avoid potential spoilers. I haven't watched since the first episode, which I thought was meandering, pointless, and generally bad tv. Does it get better, and how many episodes do I have to watch before the concept actually starts to make sense?
> And if I don't like it, do you think this will be required viewing for future MCU movies?



Well, it's Marvel, so they're always trying to sell you on the next thing, but you could probably read a wiki entry and be fine.


----------



## Tonguez

Retreater said:


> Just popping in and not reading any comments to avoid potential spoilers. I haven't watched since the first episode, which I thought was meandering, pointless, and generally bad tv. Does it get better, and how many episodes do I have to watch before the concept actually starts to make sense?
> And if I don't like it, do you think this will be required viewing for future MCU movies?



3 episodes seems to be a rule for Marvel shows - even back with the Defenders series, episode 3 was when the action started.


----------



## Eric V

doctorbadwolf said:


> She knows she can boot people, and control the bubble itself, ie the period, color, style, etc. She doesn’t seem to know she can make people act a certain way, and seem surprised or distressed when she sees direct evidence of that (usually from Agnes or Vision).
> 
> She definitely doesn’t know that she is causing the above to be the case, and even what I describe above she may not know at the start of episode 1.
> 
> She gains more understanding over the course of the show.
> 
> If you wanna complain that this is somehow unrealistic or unbelievable, go ahead, but it is what the show establishes as basically the major arc of the show.



Well, as early as episode 2, Wanda resets reality with the guy emerging from the sewer.  When Vision first questions what's going on, she resets that too.  That involves people.  But more importantly, if Wanda doesn't seem to think she's controlling people...shouldn't she wonder why they are acting like they are in the 50s?

It doesn't make sense to think that "I can control the period, style, colour, but the _people _are all just going along with it out of their free will."

Not asking the question is a problem. I know why she doesn't: nothing matters to her but her own grief. But if she doesn't know it's because she doesn't _want _to know.

I am certainly not saying the show is unrealistic or unbelievable in terms of magic, etc.  I am hardly the only one giving side-eye to the ending being her just going off with Monica delivering that ludicrous line, and everyone else is left with "Eh, I guess that's it then.  Hope she doesn't **** anyone else up."  I know people are saying she's incarcerated herself away to learn more about her power, but 1) If you can be "not incarcerated" whenever you just decide it, you're not really incarcerated; and 2) The Scarlet Witch power comes at the end, but her _initial_ problem, the one that caused all this trouble is her _grief_...and she's not getting help with that at all.


----------



## Maxperson

'WandaVision' Director Says a Couple Popular Fan Theories Were Correct Until Last-Minute Changes
					

With 'WandaVision' having concluded after an exciting nine-episode run on Disney+, director Matt Shakman spoke about two popular fan theories with Kevin Smith.




					www.yahoo.com
				




"Fans also theorized that big bad Agatha Harkness’ rabbit Señor Scratchy was actually a hint at an even bigger villain: Mephisto, who has been called both Nick and Jack Scratch in different stories. Others have also suggested the name was a reference to sorcerer Nicholas Scratch, who happens to be Harkness’ son in past comics storylines.

*While Shakman was hesistant to confirm whether Scratchy was, in fact, Mephisto, he did explain the rabbit appeared as a demon-like entity in a deleted scene*. The finale was set to have what Shakman described as a “_Goonies_ set-piece” following Wanda’s twins, Monica, Darcy, and Ralph Bohner (fake Pietro Maximoff) as they attempt to steal the Darkhold from Agatha’s basement. Scratchy was scripted to turn into a demon, who would go on to terrorize the group."


----------



## Rune

Eric V said:


> I am hardly the only one giving side-eye to the ending being her just going off with Monica delivering that ludicrous line, and everyone else is left with "Eh, I guess that's it then.  Hope she doesn't **** anyone else up."




That seems like a pretty weird thing to get hung up on to me. 

It _is_ important that Monica (as the only person present who might _remotely_ be able hold Wanda accountable for her actions) decides to let her off the hook, and does so because she empathizes with her. But Monica explicately tells Wanda (and us) that no one else (in West View, anyway) will feel that way. 

It is clear that we are supposed to view Monica’s decision as a morally good one. But the post-credits scene pretty strongly suggests that that morally good decision is likely to result in a world-threatening amount of harm in the future.*

This threat is explicit. Agatha lays out the stakes for Wanda (and us) and the last thing we see is that Wanda is following up on them. That is _bad_ news and we were shown it for a reason. 

That’s a _far_ cry from:



> everyone else is left with "Eh, I guess that's it then.  Hope she doesn't **** anyone else up."






* Although, in the longer-term future, may also turn out to be the seed needed to make redemption possible.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Maxperson said:


> 'WandaVision' Director Says a Couple Popular Fan Theories Were Correct Until Last-Minute Changes
> 
> 
> With 'WandaVision' having concluded after an exciting nine-episode run on Disney+, director Matt Shakman spoke about two popular fan theories with Kevin Smith.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Fans also theorized that big bad Agatha Harkness’ rabbit Señor Scratchy was actually a hint at an even bigger villain: Mephisto, who has been called both Nick and Jack Scratch in different stories. Others have also suggested the name was a reference to sorcerer Nicholas Scratch, who happens to be Harkness’ son in past comics storylines.
> 
> *While Shakman was hesistant to confirm whether Scratchy was, in fact, Mephisto, he did explain the rabbit appeared as a demon-like entity in a deleted scene*. The finale was set to have what Shakman described as a “_Goonies_ set-piece” following Wanda’s twins, Monica, Darcy, and Ralph Bohner (fake Pietro Maximoff) as they attempt to steal the Darkhold from Agatha’s basement. Scratchy was scripted to turn into a demon, who would go on to terrorize the group."



What's with everyone's obsession with making bunnies evil? I assume it's the creators making a Monty Python reference, but I seriously feel like I've seen this trope a ton of times recently.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

AcererakTriple6 said:


> What's with everyone's obsession with making bunnies evil? I assume it's the creators making a Monty Python reference, but I seriously feel like I've seen this trope a ton of times recently.




I was just going to post this and say it was awesome that the bunny was actually a demon in disguise who was guarding the book. Definitely adds more darkness to Agatha if she is making deals with demons. But now the question is, if a scene is filmed, but then cut for time restraints, not for story reasons, do we count it as canon or not?


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Eric V said:


> It doesn't make sense to think



What doesn’t make sense, is thinking that people’s perception of the world around them makes sense. People are primarily emotional, logic is learned behavior, and abandoned when emotions get strong enough.

And again, regardless of whether you think her believing that she isn’t controlling people is believable, it is a fact of the show.


----------



## Staffan

AcererakTriple6 said:


> What's with everyone's obsession with making bunnies evil? I assume it's the creators making a Monty Python reference, but I seriously feel like I've seen this trope a ton of times recently.



Dottie knows what's up.


----------



## Tonguez

AcererakTriple6 said:


> What's with everyone's obsession with making bunnies evil? I assume it's the creators making a Monty Python reference, but I seriously feel like I've seen this trope a ton of times recently.



So what other evil bunnies have you come across recently? The Monty Python Bunny was almost 50 years ago


----------



## Rabulias

I wonder if they are going back to the Chthon possessing Wanda storyline from Avengers back in 1979. The Wanda perusing the Darkhold in the post-credits scene had a bit of this look about her:






And that storyline involved the Darkhold.


----------



## trappedslider

Just a reminder but this is meant to tie into Doctor Strange 2 in some fashion


----------



## Umbran

Eric V said:


> She doesn't know she's controlling people...
> 
> ...so, what?  She thinks the' citizens are naturally stuck in a 50s type world?  And then quickly and of their own will a 60s world?




I think, in the state she's in at the start of the series, she very literally doesn't think about it.  Or if she does, she denies, rationalizes, shoves away (sometimes very forcefully) or conveniently forgets things that contradict the safety of the cocoon she's built around herself.  For a time, she loses grip on reality.  

No, this is not the action of a healthy mind.  That's what we've been trying to tell you.  Her psyche is pretty broken.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Tonguez said:


> So what other evil bunnies have you come across recently? The Monty Python Bunny was almost 50 years ago



Well, there's this one, Monty Python, Donnie Darko, Despicable Me 2 (don't judge, when there are kids in the house, you're exposed to kid stuff occasionally), and a few others that I can't seem to remember right now. I just googled "evil bunnies in movies/tv", and it came up with this article, so it seems like a few other people seem to have noticed this:








						Why Is Hollywood So Scared of Bunnies?
					

Kevin Hart’s rambunctious rabbit in The Secret Life of Pets is just the most recent example of a long-running trope.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Maxperson said:


> 'WandaVision' Director Says a Couple Popular Fan Theories Were Correct Until Last-Minute Changes
> 
> 
> With 'WandaVision' having concluded after an exciting nine-episode run on Disney+, director Matt Shakman spoke about two popular fan theories with Kevin Smith.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Fans also theorized that big bad Agatha Harkness’ rabbit Señor Scratchy was actually a hint at an even bigger villain: Mephisto, who has been called both Nick and Jack Scratch in different stories. Others have also suggested the name was a reference to sorcerer Nicholas Scratch, who happens to be Harkness’ son in past comics storylines.
> 
> *While Shakman was hesistant to confirm whether Scratchy was, in fact, Mephisto, he did explain the rabbit appeared as a demon-like entity in a deleted scene*. The finale was set to have what Shakman described as a “_Goonies_ set-piece” following Wanda’s twins, Monica, Darcy, and Ralph Bohner (fake Pietro Maximoff) as they attempt to steal the Darkhold from Agatha’s basement. Scratchy was scripted to turn into a demon, who would go on to terrorize the group."




See? They should have done one more episode and put THAT in!


----------



## trappedslider




----------



## Umbran

FitzTheRuke said:


> It's just something that Vision can do. It's not a "normal" property of Vibranium, but Vibranium can do a lot of things if you know how to make it do it. I don't think it's about "quantity" of the stuff, but about understanding it (or lucking out) enough in your use of it that you can make it do things. Amazing things.




Note, the original comics Vision isn't made of vibranium at all.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Umbran said:


> Note, the original comics Vision isn't made of vibranium at all.




Yes, that's true. Hey, speaking of which. I am pretty impressed with your comic knowledge. (I own a comic store coming up on 28 years, and I'm pretty good at comic trivia. You appear to have a solid working knowledge - better than most people in the comic industry. Way to go!)


----------



## billd91

Umbran said:


> Note, the original comics Vision isn't made of vibranium at all.



He isn’t even made of the original Human Torch like everyone once thought.


----------



## Tonguez

Umbran said:


> Note, the original comics Vision isn't made of vibranium at all.



Isnt the comics Vision made of Horton Cells, and arent they essentially synthetic nanobots that mimic human cells? 
I was under the impression that Visions phase abilities was due to his cells each being distinct and thus seperable


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Tonguez said:


> Isnt the comics Vision made of Horton Cells, and arent they essentially synthetic nanobots that mimic human cells?
> I was under the impression that Visions phase abilities was due to his cells each being distinct and thus seperable



That _was_ how it was. There have been many retcons and rebirths for him. Still, there is no reason why in the MCU they can't make intangibility some kind of rare effect that comes from the synthetic flesh that Doctor Cho fused with vibranium when she was printing a body for Ultron. It's probably a unique feature of the nearly-impossible-to-recreate conditions that caused Vision to exist in the MCU.


----------



## Rabulias

FitzTheRuke said:


> That _was_ how it was. There have been many retcons and rebirths for him. Still, there is no reason why in the MCU they can't make intangibility some kind of rare effect that comes from the synthetic flesh that Doctor Cho fused with vibranium when she was printing a body for Ultron. It's probably a unique feature of the nearly-impossible-to-recreate conditions that caused Vision to exist in the MCU.



It's…. quantum-vibranium!


----------



## Imaculata

Retreater said:


> I haven't watched since the first episode, which I thought was meandering, pointless, and generally bad tv. Does it get better, and how many episodes do I have to watch before the concept actually starts to make sense?
> And if I don't like it, do you think this will be required viewing for future MCU movies?




I don't think it is required viewing, as tv and cinema are two separate media. Wandavision is said to tie into the next Doctor Strange movie, but I'm sure that movie will catch everone up on what's going on. That said, there is a lot of important character development in regards to both Wanda and Vision in this show.

But the format of the show is a mystery disguised as a sitcom. If you dislike the concept of watching sitcoms from various eras while trying to pick up on subtle clues, then maybe this show is not for you. The show kind of demands that you're interested in figuring out its plot, rather than wanting to skip to the point where it all makes sense.

I do think that from episode 3, things become more clear, and episode 4 is basically a big exposition.


----------



## Erekose

As a slight tangent, the whole Wanda and Vision love story in the MCU always struck me as a little forced - probably due to the tiny amount of screen time available - and then BOOM in Infinitive War they are deeply in love with each other. How remarkable is it that Marvel has managed to produce an entire series that really gives depth to this relationship? I can‘t help but think that when I rewatch the films it will give their relationship the depth it was otherwise lacking.

(Don’t get me wrong - End Game still works to deliver the emotional punch it needs to with the scenes with Wanda and Vision [and Thanos!].)


----------



## Older Beholder

Erekose said:


> As a slight tangent, the whole Wanda and Vision love story in the MCU always struck me as a little forced - probably due to the tiny amount of screen time available - and then BOOM in Infinitive War they are deeply in love with each other. How remarkable is it that Marvel has managed to produce an entire series that really gives depth to this relationship? I can‘t help but think that when I rewatch the films it will give their relationship the depth it was otherwise lacking.



Totally, I just did a rewatch of Ultron/ Civil War/ Infinity War between eps 8 and 9
and yeah, a sub plot that always felt under written now holds much more weight. Which I guess is the point of the TV shows, fleshing out side characters.


----------



## Morrus

Finally managed to see the last episode.

I think I may have missed something. The SWORD director is a dick, but I didn’t understand why the FBI arrested him at the end? He was working to stop a threat which was mind controlling an entire town, which is his job, no? Did he do something illegal that I may have missed or forgotten?


----------



## Nikosandros

Morrus said:


> Finally managed to see the last episode.
> 
> I think I may have missed something. The SWORD director is a dick, but I didn’t understand why the FBI arrested him at the end? He was working to stop a threat which was mind controlling an entire town, which is his job, no? Did he do something illegal that I may have missed or forgotten?



Well, he tried to murder Wanda with a drone, he detained an FBI agent and I'm not clear if what he was doing with Vision corpse was sanctioned by the government.


----------



## Imaculata

Erekose said:


> As a slight tangent, the whole Wanda and Vision love story in the MCU always struck me as a little forced - probably due to the tiny amount of screen time available - and then BOOM in Infinitive War they are deeply in love with each other. How remarkable is it that Marvel has managed to produce an entire series that really gives depth to this relationship? I can‘t help but think that when I rewatch the films it will give their relationship the depth it was otherwise lacking.




Agreed. I loved the scene in episode 8 where Wanda just talks with Vision about her loss. The dialog here is powerful and so well written. Especially Vision putting into words a human emotion he is unfamiliar with (the feeling of loss and grief) in the most poetic and beautiful way. It is at this point that I believe their relationship and understand the comfort that Vision gives Wanda.


This show understands grief, and having gone through a lengthy period of grief myself recently, I appreciate the writing even more.


----------



## Morrus

Nikosandros said:


> Well, he tried to murder Wanda with a drone, he detained an FBI agent and I'm not clear if what he was doing with Vision corpse was sanctioned by the government.



Was he not allowed to do those things? I guess not, since he got arrested. I wasn't clear on what his powers were.


----------



## Imaculata

Morrus said:


> Was he not allowed to do those things? I guess not, since he got arrested. I wasn't clear on what his powers were.




I don't think they ever clarified how wide SWORD's power is. Are they above the FBI? Above the CIA? Do they operate on their own, or do they need approval by the government? I have no idea.


----------



## Nikosandros

Morrus said:


> Was he not allowed to do those things? I guess not, since he got arrested. I wasn't clear on what his powers were.



Actually, I'm not sure either. But, as you say, he got arrested, so they must have decided he couldn't.


----------



## Morrus

Imaculata said:


> I don't think they ever clarified how wide SWORD's power is. Are they above the FBI? Above the CIA? Do they operate on their own, or do they need approval by the government? I have no idea.



SHIELD was certainly allowed to use lethal force against supernatural threats. It seems odd that SWORD wouldn't be. But I guess they aren't. So he was basically going rogue then, I assume.


----------



## Nikosandros

Morrus said:


> SHIELD was certainly allowed to use lethal force against supernatural threats. It seems odd that SWORD wouldn't be. But I guess they aren't.



Perhaps, the drone attack might have been deemed excessive since the nature of the hex wasn't fully clear (and Wanda's role as an Avenger).


----------



## Wolfram stout

Morrus said:


> Finally managed to see the last episode.
> 
> I think I may have missed something. The SWORD director is a dick, but I didn’t understand why the FBI arrested him at the end? He was working to stop a threat which was mind controlling an entire town, which is his job, no? Did he do something illegal that I may have missed or forgotten?



 I think his whole rebuilding Vision project was unsanctioned.  Not that he kept it too secret, but that was the impression that I got as to why he was arrested.


----------



## Older Beholder

Morrus said:


> Finally managed to see the last episode.
> 
> I think I may have missed something. The SWORD director is a dick, but I didn’t understand why the FBI arrested him at the end? He was working to stop a threat which was mind controlling an entire town, which is his job, no? Did he do something illegal that I may have missed or forgotten?




I think he faked footage of Wanda stealing Visions body as an excuse to go in and  either capture or kill the hex Vision.


----------



## Umbran

Morrus said:


> Did he do something illegal that I may have missed or forgotten?




He falsified evidence against Wanda, and used that evidence to justify use of deadly force against her.


----------



## Morrus

Umbran said:


> He falsified evidence against Wanda, and used that evidence to justify use of deadly force against her.



Aha! Yes! The fake video of her stealing Vision's body! That was it!


----------



## Umbran

Wolfram stout said:


> I think his whole rebuilding Vision project was unsanctioned.




A thing they don't talk about - Vision was not a human being, so there's a huge question about his legal status.  If he had status as a person, then without concent of Vision or next-of-kin, what Heywood was doing was very illegal.


----------



## billd91

Morrus said:


> Aha! Yes! The fake video of her stealing Vision's body! That was it!



It would definitely provide evidence of premeditation in whatever other crime he was tagged with (presumably, attempted murder).


----------



## Janx

Umbran said:


> A thing they don't talk about - Vision was not a human being, so there's a huge question about his legal status.  If he had status as a person, then without concent of Vision or next-of-kin, what Heywood was doing was very illegal.



and if he wasn't a person, he was the property of Wanda and/or Tony Stark, and Heyward was stealing her property by holding it and vandalizing it by dismantling it. Either way, Crimey Heyward's going to jail.  

I would have hoped, however, Sir Patrick Stewart would have mounted a social media movement after Vision's death to recognize Vision's post-humous personhood.  Video clips and memes flooded the internet featuring his famous argument for Data.


----------



## BRayne

Wolfram stout said:


> I think his whole rebuilding Vision project was unsanctioned.  Not that he kept it too secret, but that was the impression that I got as to why he was arrested.




There was mention that "resurrecting" Vision was both a violation of his living will and the Sokovia Accords at one point


----------



## billd91

BRayne said:


> There was mention that "resurrecting" Vision was both a violation of his living will and the Sokovia Accords at one point



Yes, and if the latter isn't menacing in its own right, I don't know what is.


----------



## Janx

Also, upsetting a super-person so you can harvest their wingdings when they super-freak out ought to be a crime.  That's incitement.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Janx said:


> Also, upsetting a super-person so you can harvest their wingdings when they super-freak out ought to be a crime.  That's incitement.




Absolutely. Not to mention, the exact opposite of what his mandate was as SWORD's director. Aren't they supposed to _protect people_ from the threat of "sentient weapons", not create new SWs and antagonise extant SWs? How did this guy even get the job?


----------



## Umbran

Janx said:


> and if he wasn't a person, he was the property of Wanda and/or Tony Stark, and Heyward was stealing her property by holding it and vandalizing it by dismantling it. Either way, Crimey Heyward's going to jail.




So, this is a line of thinking I know they won't be using, but it might be entertaining.

The Jarvis AI (which is Stark technology), and the Mind Stone are used to produce the Ultron AI, by Stark and Banner.  Stark's legal claim on the Mind Stone is... highly questionable.  It is a natural resource, but recovered from Loki when he used it as a weapon.  Loki and the Mind Stone were in custody of SHIELD - a government agency.  But that was custody as evidence, and does not indicate ownership.  Let us leave ownership of the Mind Stone and its internal logic out of the discussion for the moment...

And now we hit an interesting hitch.  Was Ultron a person?  If not, then Stark Industries is on the hook for all the damage Ultron does, as their technology run amok.  That includes illegal acquisition of Vibranium, the death toll and property damage in Sokovia, goodness knows how many acts of cybercrime, etc.  Stark Industries was big and wealthy, but not that wealthy.  This should have destroyed Stark.

But, it didn't.  So either Ultron's origins were hidden from the world, and the whole thing covered up, or a legal out was found.  Calling Ultron a person makes his actions purely his (I think they use the masculine pronoun in the movie) own, and gets stark largely off the hook.

If Ultron was a person, then Vision, as Ultron's progeny, was also a person.  Then Heyward was defiling a corpse, which is generally illegal.

If Ultron's origins were hidden from the world (which may not have been all that difficult, as so few people actually _knew_ those origins), then it is very difficult for Stark to make a claim to legal ownership of Vision.

Vision's body was created from stolen Vibranium, the U-GIN regeneration chamber, and arguably Thor, who all then have potential claims on Vision's body.   The head of U-GIN died,however, so it may be they do not know what happened.  When all was said and done, Thor was probably not in any state of mind to exert his claim (which is kinda weak, but... he is a god, who would be able to stop him).  Wakanda, for whatever reason, did not take custody (possibly, nobody there actually _thought_ about it).  

But, lastly, Vision worked with the Avengers, which was a government funded project.  I suspect that once he is dead and unable to argue otherwise, it is easy to make the legal argument that Vision was an Avenger's Project asset, which was then transferred to SWORD.  This would mean that Heyward's work with the body wasn't exactly illegal (on basis of ownership) though it may have been unseemly or unsanctioned.

Heyward's arrest, then, is probably more about his tactics - his evidence tampering, questionably holding a federal officer and civilian (Woo and Darcy), use of force within a civilian population, and so on.


----------



## billd91

FitzTheRuke said:


> Absolutely. Not to mention, the exact opposite of what his mandate was as SWORD's director. Aren't they supposed to _protect people_ from the threat of "sentient weapons", not create new SWs and antagonise extant SWs? How did this guy even get the job?



He was apparently traumatized by the snap and the aftermath as one of the 50% left behind. He was clearly somewhat deranged by it.


----------



## ART!

Rabulias said:


> I wonder if they are going back to the Chthon possessing Wanda storyline from Avengers back in 1979. The Wanda perusing the Darkhold in the post-credits scene had a bit of this look about her:
> 
> View attachment 133896
> 
> And that storyline involved the Darkhold.



I mostly hope not, if only because _I_ - and I dare say _we_ - don't need another "female character can't handle her powers" story.


Umbran said:


> I think, in the state she's in at the start of the series, she very literally doesn't think about it.  Or if she does, she denies, rationalizes, shoves away (sometimes very forcefully) or conveniently forgets things that contradict the safety of the cocoon she's built around herself.  For a time, she loses grip on reality.
> 
> No, this is not the action of a healthy mind.  That's what we've been trying to tell you.  Her psyche is pretty broken.



This keeps reminding me of Elsa in _Frozen_, wherein she creates a climate crisis and either doesn't know it or doesn't care, and as such seems on her way to becoming a super-villain, if not already there.


----------



## Umbran

BRayne said:


> There was mention that "resurrecting" Vision was both a violation of his living will and the Sokovia Accords at one point




Oh, yes, I had forgotten that.  There we go.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Early on, Hayward himself mentions Vision's "living will". Now, my understanding of the law is that only persons can have a will. It seems to mean that Hayward himself, at least in public, acknowledges Vision to have been a person and not a machine or property.

That also means that, by reanimating his corpse, he is guilty of necromancy.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

billd91 said:


> He was apparently traumatized by the snap and the aftermath as one of the 50% left behind. He was clearly somewhat deranged by it.



Ah yes. That makes sense. I wish they'd delved a little deeper into that, because he was a pretty one-note cliche villain, but it sounds like his motivation was worked out and mentioned, just not portrayed very satisfyingly.


----------



## billd91

FitzTheRuke said:


> Ah yes. That makes sense. I wish they'd delved a little deeper into that, because he was a pretty one-note cliche villain, but it sounds like his motivation was worked out and mentioned, just not portrayed very satisfyingly.



I hope it foreshadows a bit more clash between people who experienced the 5 year post snap vs those who didn't. It could be fuel for some interactions in Falcon and Winter Soldier since both of them were snapped out.


----------



## Morrus

Umbran said:


> A thing they don't talk about - Vision was not a human being, so there's a huge question about his legal status.



I would assume in a universe where aliens and sentient robots and Thors and gods and stuff were common, there would be _some_ sort of legislation regarding their legal status. Maybe the Sokovia Accords cover it.


----------



## Staffan

Nikosandros said:


> Well, he tried to murder Wanda with a drone, he detained an FBI agent and I'm not clear if what he was doing with Vision corpse was sanctioned by the government.



He also tried to murder Wanda's children (such as they were), for no discernible reason.


----------



## Tonguez

Morrus said:


> Finally managed to see the last episode.
> 
> I think I may have missed something. The SWORD director is a dick, but I didn’t understand why the FBI arrested him at the end? He was working to stop a threat which was mind controlling an entire town, which is his job, no? Did he do something illegal that I may have missed or forgotten?



That was another gap in the shows writing, which is probably why the last episode made him a cartoonish villain who shoots children. 

The only real hint we get that he did anything wrong was that SWORD had gone beyond Observation of SWs to actually trying to Create one. That reading though means that White Vision is now an illegal sentient weapon on the loose too.

but in terms of attempting to stop Wanda from dominating the town, I couldnt see why he should be arrested either


----------



## Morrus

Tonguez said:


> but in terms of attempting to stop Wanda from dominating the town, I couldnt see why he should be arrested either



Heh. Yeah. Legalities of methods and faked evidence aside, it was a weird message, for sure, as Wanda, who had kidnapped and mind-controlled a whole town, walked freely past the handcuffed guy who was trying to stop her. I mean, she was doing evil stuff when we first met her in AoU, and she's still doing it.


----------



## Umbran

Paul Farquhar said:


> That also means that, by reanimating his corpse, he is guilty of necromancy.




I don't think there are any laws on the books about that...


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Umbran said:


> I don't think there are any laws on the books about that



I would not be surprised if it's on the books _somewhere_....


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> And now we hit an interesting hitch.  Was Ultron a person?  If not, then Stark Industries is on the hook for all the damage Ultron does, as their technology run amok.  That includes illegal acquisition of Vibranium, the death toll and property damage in Sokovia, goodness knows how many acts of cybercrime, etc.  Stark Industries was big and wealthy, but not that wealthy.  This should have destroyed Stark.



Ultron, aside from the Mind Stone, is ultimately derived from Iron Man technology, and Stark kept Iron Man off the books right from the start. Can Ultron be linked back to Stark Industries, or are Iron Man and its derivative technologies all projects entirely undertaken by Tony Stark as a private individual using his own resources?


Umbran said:


> But, it didn't.  So either Ultron's origins were hidden from the world, and the whole thing covered up, or a legal out was found.  Calling Ultron a person makes his actions purely his (I think they use the masculine pronoun in the movie) own, and gets stark largely off the hook.



Even that would be somewhat legally murky. Ultron undertook all those actions within the first few weeks or months of his existence, and did so in order to follow Stark's specific programmed instructions, albeit broadly interpreted.  Can he be considered an independent, responsible adult? A good case could be made for him to be considered a minor with Tony Stark as his de facto parent / guardian.

It's entirely possible that the only reason this didn't drive Stark Industries - or Tony Stark as an individual - into the ground by the time of Endgame is because the whole thing is still dragging out through an international court somewhere.


----------



## Tonguez

Umbran said:


> A thing they don't talk about - Vision was not a human being, so there's a huge question about his legal status.  If he had status as a person, then without concent of Vision or next-of-kin, what Heywood was doing was very illegal.



Hayward refers to Vision as SWORD property when he tells Wanda she cant take him

Also Hayward didnt detain Woo and Darcy, he was having them escorted off his base but they did a runner


----------



## Rabulias

ART! said:


> I mostly hope not, if only because _I_ - and I dare say _we_ - don't need another "female character can't handle her powers" story.



The Chthon story is not that... she is possessed and controlled by an evil entity.


----------



## MoonSong

AcererakTriple6 said:


> Marvel heroes/characters _generally* _are more relatable than DC ones.



That bit isn't really accurate anymore. Traditionally, that was the case, but given the overall refusal of Marvel to move on the status quo on any meaningful way, that is less and less a thing. Characters all started on a more relatable ground, but they are stuck on a perpetual loop. They don't evolve anymore. They have abrupt changes and go on those changes, but everything is eventually blown up and reset in the end. Very little growth is left after the dust settles, and even the matter of identity makes them harder to relate. I think it all started when Spiderman sold his marriage to the Devil. Or how Captain America keeps being resurrected/recreated by magical cosmic events. Certain characters have been flanderized to their vices and lows. Nothing advances, everything eventually resets. DC on the other hand, feels like a living world, with more characters evolving over time. Official mandates might prevent Batman from ever marrying, but the whole thing keeps moving, growing, evolving. We see characters who have grown, change, evolve, and that is way more relatable.    




AcererakTriple6 said:


> What's with everyone's obsession with making bunnies evil? I assume it's the creators making a Monty Python reference, but I seriously feel like I've seen this trope a ton of times recently.



Oh no, be certain bunnies are cute, but evil. Very evil, the only thing preventing a bunny take over is that evolution made bunnies helpless and delicious. But don't be mistaken, if a bunny gets the means and chance to do something evil, that bunny will do it...


----------



## BRayne

Umbran said:


> I don't think there are any laws on the books about that...




"Maximoff stormed our facility, stole the Vision's body, and resurrected him"
"But that's in direct violation of section 36B of the Sokovia Accords" (Ep5 11:51)


----------



## Rune

Tonguez said:


> That was another gap in the shows writing, which is probably why the last episode made him a cartoonish villain who shoots children.



The reason he was a cartoonish villain who shoots at children* is because he has been a cartoonishly obvious villain to begin with. And he needed to be, so that the Agnes’s insidious villainy could sneak up on any viewer who didn’t already assume she was Agatha Harkness (or thought she might not be so bad). 

* And keeps shooting the very real SWORD agent who stands in front to protect them – even if he doesn’t consider the kids real, that, alone, is arrest-worthy.


----------



## Umbran

BRayne said:


> "Maximoff stormed our facility, stole the Vision's body, and resurrected him"
> "But that's in direct violation of section 36B of the Sokovia Accords" (Ep5 11:51)




We don't know the content of the Sokovia Accords.  However, I will guess the issue there isn't "ressurection".  Use of Ultron-related technology, perhaps, or willful creation of super-powered entities would seem more likely.


----------



## Umbran

MoonSong said:


> Oh no, be certain bunnies are cute, but evil. Very evil, the only thing preventing a bunny take over is that evolution made bunnies helpless and delicious. But don't be mistaken, if a bunny gets the means and chance to do something evil, that bunny will do it...




So, _that's_ why thye cast Dottie the way they did!


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> Also Hayward didnt detain Woo and Darcy, he was having them escorted off his base but they did a runner




Fair.  However, we should note that if Hayward were engaged in illegal activity with "his base" that suddenly becomes interfering in the duties of a federal law enforcement officer, which is also not good for Heyward.


----------



## Umbran

Morrus said:


> I would assume in a universe where aliens and sentient robots and Thors and gods and stuff were common...




I am not sure they are "common".  The only one who has a questionable legal status is Vision.  All the others are people from political entities (world, nation, plane of existence, whatever) with whom the US and UN have no current formal relations - this is a status that's awkward, but understood by court systems.

By the time of WandaVision, the few remaining Asgardians have moved in on Earth, which probably means Thor and Loki have some recognizable citizenship, even.  Likely "permanent resident alien" status in Norway, or somesuch.


----------



## Umbran

Eric V said:


> Well, as early as episode 2, Wanda resets reality with the guy emerging from the sewer.  When Vision first questions what's going on, she resets that too.  That involves people.  But more importantly, if Wanda doesn't seem to think she's controlling people...shouldn't she wonder why they are acting like they are in the 50s?




You continue to speak of Wanda as an entirely rational person at that point.  She's not.  

Yes, she resets things - and then promptly completely ignores the fact that it happened.  No, she doesn't wonder why everyone else is acting like they are in the 50s, because she is immersed in the fantasy.  No, none of this is healthy.

And no, this kind of denial and rejection of reality isn't unknown in normal, real-world humans.  



Eric V said:


> It doesn't make sense to think that "I can control the period, style, colour, but the _people _are all just going along with it out of their free will."




Hint:  You are trying to make a mentally unhealthy person "make sense".  That's going to fail every time.

At the start of WandaVision, she's not sane. By the end of it, maybe she's back in a place where she's not a danger, maybe she isn't.  It is a distinct possibility that she becomes a major antagonist in Multiverse of Madness.

Let me try another approach for a second...

During the first few phases of the MCU, Tony Stark was the poster child for "what happens when you don't deal with trauma".  His arc of dealing with this issue resolved, and, RDJ isn't in the shows anymore. They have shifted that role to Wanda.  You can expect much of her remaining character arc to be the same - dealing with trauma.  Her arc isn't done.

The MCU (and the comics) have a problem, in that trauma-driven drama can be compelling and exciting and relatable.  It makes for good movies and TV.  Our entire real-world culture generally fails to deal with mental health issues constructively.  Why is it somehow strange to you that in our bigger-than-life fictions, they also have issues dealing with mental health?


----------



## Umbran

FitzTheRuke said:


> Yes, that's true. Hey, speaking of which. I am pretty impressed with your comic knowledge. (I own a comic store coming up on 28 years, and I'm pretty good at comic trivia. You appear to have a solid working knowledge - better than most people in the comic industry. Way to go!)




It helps that these storylines are rooted in the comics I read voraciously when I was young.  If they were movies about the current Krakowa X-Men storyline, or the King In Black stuff, I'd be much less knowledgeable.  

It also helps that I am not proud, and usually double-check myself before I write.


----------



## Umbran

AcererakTriple6 said:


> Despicable Me 2 (don't judge, when there are kids in the house, you're exposed to kid stuff occasionally)




The Despicable Me movies rest in the realm of "far better movies than they had any right to be".  No judgement shall be cast.


----------



## Umbran

MoonSong said:


> Nothing advances, everything eventually resets. DC on the other hand...




Crisis on Infinite Earths
Zero Hour: Crisis in Time!
Infinite Crisis
Final Crisis
Flashpoint
Convergence
Doomsday Clock
Dark Nights: Metal
Dark Nights: Death Metal.

All of these include resets of one form or another, and it is by far not an exhaustive list.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Umbran said:


> I am not sure they are "common".  The only one who has a questionable legal status is Vision.  All the others are people from political entities (world, nation, plane of existence, whatever) with whom the US and UN have no current formal relations - this is a status that's awkward, but understood by court systems.
> 
> By the time of WandaVision, the few remaining Asgardians have moved in on Earth, which probably means Thor and Loki have some recognizable citizenship, even.  Likely "permanent resident alien" status in Norway, or somesuch.



I'd imagine that New Asgard is some sort of bund or other semi-autonomous jurisdiction within the borders of a larger sovereign state.


----------



## Maxperson

doctorbadwolf said:


> I'd imagine that New Asgard is some sort of bund or other semi-autonomous jurisdiction within the borders of a larger sovereign state.



They're probably in the U.S., given Thor's connection to the Avengers.  Were I the U.S., I'd give them their own place with the understanding that in return they defend the U.S. against any and all invaders.


----------



## Staffan

Umbran said:


> I don't think there are any laws on the books about that...



I'm pretty sure most jurisdictions have laws against desecrating the dead (exhuming, eating, mutilation, other stuff) without special permissions. I don't know if most call out necromancy specifically, but that's generally what it would fall under.


----------



## Staffan

Maxperson said:


> They're probably in the U.S., given Thor's connection to the Avengers.  Were I the U.S., I'd give them their own place with the understanding that in return they defend the U.S. against any and all invaders.



No, Endgame specifies that they're in Norway, in a village named Tønsberg. This is also where Odin hid the Tesseract.


----------



## Tonguez

Umbran said:


> I don't think there are any laws on the books about that...



I got intrigued by this comment and thus googled and have discovered that  Article 17.1 of the San Francisco Municipal Code says the Chief of Police shall grant fortunetelling permits to practitioners and includes use of Necromancy.
There are also a couple of laws about the use of magic in general.

Also treatment of the dead is covered by a few acts and common law traditions


----------



## Maxperson

Staffan said:


> No, Endgame specifies that they're in Norway, in a village named Tønsberg. This is also where Odin hid the Tesseract.



I didn't remember that.  Seems the U.S. missed out on a prime opportunity.


----------



## Staffan

Maxperson said:


> I didn't remember that.  Seems the U.S. missed out on a prime opportunity.



I can't recall if it's specified, but it's strongly suggested that it is the same place where Odin died in Ragnarok. He did tell Thor and Loki "Remember this place. Home."


----------



## BRayne

Staffan said:


> I can't recall if it's specified, but it's strongly suggested that it is the same place where Odin died in Ragnarok. He did tell Thor and Loki "Remember this place. Home."




As well as "This could be Asgard"


----------



## MoonSong

Umbran said:


> Crisis on Infinite Earths
> Zero Hour: Crisis in Time!
> Infinite Crisis
> Final Crisis
> Flashpoint
> Convergence
> Doomsday Clock
> Dark Nights: Metal
> Dark Nights: Death Metal.
> 
> All of these include resets of one form or another, and it is by far not an exhaustive list.



Yes, these are cosmic resets, but the narratives of each character keep going forward despite the changes to the universe. We don't know which events remain in canon, but the character progression remains. Time keeps advancing in DC. Batman's sons are still around and their evolving relationship with each other is part of the charm, Superman remains a married father of a young super, Old Wally and his children are still out at large. People keep growing, maturing, finding love and getting married. While in Marvel, everybody is stagnant, getting reset to square one after each major shake up. The only recent development that stuck was Captain Marvel taking that mantle, though she herself keeps going back through her recurrent personal crises.  Marvel refuses to let their characters grow and change, and that has made them less relatable in the long run.


----------



## Umbran

Staffan said:


> I'm pretty sure most jurisdictions have laws against desecrating the dead (exhuming, eating, mutilation, other stuff) without special permissions. I don't know if most call out necromancy specifically, but that's generally what it would fall under.




If the supposedly deceased person is _standing there_, is cogent, and doesn't object?  Unlikely.


----------



## Umbran

MoonSong said:


> Marvel refuses to let their characters grow and change, and that has made them less relatable in the long run.



I am not sure I agree, since Peter Parker is no longer a high school kid with a side hustle of taking pictures for the Daily Bugles.  But there's a major point to be made here...

Broadly speaking, there's a span of time a person reads comics, and, last I read, it was 2-4 years.  The bulk of comics (also meaning - the bulk of DC/Marvel) readers pick them up somewhere in junior high or high school, and then stop in late high school or college, as their use of money changes.  Comics can be an expensive hobby, after all.

So, while there are some diehards that will read for decades, they aren't the majority of the market.  I think you'll find that the period of Marvel resets like that is... 2 to 4 years.  This, as I understand it, is intentional.  A typical reader will see only one or two such events for their favorite characters, and that's okay.  They don't see the longer-term pattern.  

I find DC heroes less relatable simply due to their sheer power.  They are, by and large, gods.  That's just hard to identify with.


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> I am not sure I agree, since Peter Parker is no longer a high school kid with a side hustle of taking pictures for the Daily Bugles.  But there's a major point to be made here...
> 
> Broadly speaking, there's a span of time a person reads comics, and, last I read, it was 2-4 years.  The bulk of comics (also meaning - the bulk of DC/Marvel) readers pick them up somewhere in junior high or high school, and then stop in late high school or college, as their use of money changes.  Comics can be an expensive hobby, after all.
> 
> So, while there are some diehards that will read for decades, they aren't the majority of the market.  I think you'll find that the period of Marvel resets like that is... 2 to 4 years.  This, as I understand it, is intentional.  A typical reader will see only one or two such events for their favorite characters, and that's okay.  They don't see the longer-term pattern.
> 
> I find DC heroes less relatable simply due to their sheer power.  They are, by and large, gods.  That's just hard to identify with.



I recall that it only took one such reset to turn me off from ever reading any more Spider-man, after having done so voraciously for a couple of years. That was the one at the end of the Clone saga.


----------



## Tonguez

Maxperson said:


> I didn't remember that.  Seems the U.S. missed out on a prime opportunity.



Just to note that although their main office seemed to be in NYC, SHIELD (and thus the Avengers Initiative) was under the jurisdiction of the World Security Council and is an international organisation.  

Also although the movies seem to be US focussed a good amount of Avengers activity has been based elsewhere eg

in Europe: recovery of Captain American in Greenland, the raid on Hydra Base, the battle in Sokovia. Peggy Carter was also a UK citizen
Africa: The Lagos incident, battle of Johannesburg, invasion of Wakanda
Asia: Doctor Strange training, Battle of Seoul (where Vision was recovered), Starks kidnapping in Afghanistan, the Busan mission (arrest of Klaue)

Theres very little reason to think that Thor would be more interested in moving Asgard to the US rather than Norway (where the Asgardians already have long history)


----------



## Maxperson

MarkB said:


> I recall that it only took one such reset to turn me off from ever reading any more Spider-man, after having done so voraciously for a couple of years. That was the one at the end of the Clone saga.



I got turned off by all the huge storylines that spanned 8 different books and had to be read in a certain order.  Sometimes I would miss one and it threw me off.  I got frustrated and walked away from comics.  Years later I walked in and took a peek and there were like 12 Spidermen, which I think is that Clone Saga you are mentioning.  I walked back out. lol


----------



## Maxperson

Tonguez said:


> Just to note that although their main office seemed to be in NYC, SHIELD (and thus the Avengers Initiative) was under the jurisdiction of the World Security Council and is an international organisation.
> 
> Also although the movies seem to be US focussed a good amount of Avengers activity has been based elsewhere eg
> 
> in Europe: recovery of Captain American in Greenland, the raid on Hydra Base, the battle in Sokovia. Peggy Carter was also a UK citizen
> Africa: The Lagos incident, battle of Johannesburg, invasion of Wakanda
> Asia: Doctor Strange training, Battle of Seoul (where Vision was recovered), Starks kidnapping in Afghanistan, the Busan mission (arrest of Klaue)
> 
> Theres very little reason to think that Thor would be more interested in moving Asgard to the US rather than Norway (where the Asgardians already have long history)



It's apparently both.  The Marvel Cinematic Universe Fandom site lists it as an American extragovernmental organization overseen by the World Security Council. SHIELD does seen very America focused, even though it does do world affairs.


----------



## MoonSong

Umbran said:


> I am not sure I agree, since Peter Parker is no longer a high school kid with a side hustle of taking pictures for the Daily Bugles. But there's a major point to be made here...



That's the past, like forty years ago. I'm talking more about recent developments (like ten/twenty years ago) They have stalled with their characters. Even if they follow the five year rule, DC also follows it, yet their characters aren't as stuck in time. This honestly makes Marvel feel artificial, and their stories to feel like a play on paper more than a story you can relate to.


----------



## MarkB

Maxperson said:


> I got turned off by all the huge storylines that spanned 8 different books and had to be read in a certain order.  Sometimes I would miss one and it threw me off.  I got frustrated and walked away from comics.  Years later I walked in and took a peek and there were like 12 Spidermen, which I think is that Clone Saga you are mentioning.  I walked back out. lol



Possibly, but the one I'm thinking of only had two of them, Peter Parker and Ben Reilly. And went back and forth for ages as to which one was the original and which was the clone, while in the background Mary Jane got pregnant, quit modelling and started going to college, and Aunt May grew I'll and eventually died, not before revealing that she'd known Peter was Spider-Man almost from the start.

And then eventually Peter and MJ's newborn baby was kidnapped, MJ quit college and went back to modelling, the Ben Reilly Spider-Man who had been established as the real one dissolved into a puddle of clone goo, and in a truly ludicrous twist Aunt May was found alive and well with the revelation that the Aunt May who'd died was actually an actress engaged to unwittingly give the performance of her life.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Tonguez said:


> in Europe: recovery of Captain American in Greenland, the raid on Hydra Base, the battle in Sokovia. Peggy Carter was also a UK citizen




So, even though Greenland is owned/run by Denmark, you do know it is physically part of North America, right?   So no one would say you are in Europe, if you are in Greenland.


----------



## Rune

Tonguez said:


> I got intrigued by this comment and thus googled and have discovered that  Article 17.1 of the San Francisco Municipal Code says the Chief of Police shall grant fortunetelling permits to practitioners and includes use of Necromancy.
> There are also a couple of laws about the use of magic in general.
> 
> Also treatment of the dead is covered by a few acts and common law traditions



Worth keeping in mind that they undoubtedly are referring to the historical definition of “necromancy” (as opposed to the modern fantasy definition). That being, communicating with the dead (probably through seances, which were very popular in the 19th and early 20th centuries). In D&D, that would be divination.


----------



## Tonguez

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> So, even though Greenland is owned/run by Denmark, you do know it is physically part of North America, right?   So no one would say you are in Europe, if you are in Greenland.



Err, everyone except us geeks, would say that Greenland is European - its been associated with Scandinavia for more than a millennium


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Tonguez said:


> Err, everyone except us geeks, would say that Greenland is European - its been associated with Scandinavia for more than a millennium




Political ownership does not matter when it comes to physical location. Are you also going to say all the former British colonies were also European when they were not yet independent? Is Canada also European because they are still technically part of the British Empire?

Besides, go back and read the part of your post that I quoted. You did not say Greenland was European, you said it was in Europe. I do not see that when I look at a map.


----------



## Umbran

MarkB said:


> That was the one at the end of the Clone saga.




The Clone saga was just bad, though.


----------



## Umbran

Maxperson said:


> Years later I walked in and took a peek and there were like 12 Spidermen, which I think is that Clone Saga you are mentioning.




Were they _variations_ on Spider-Man?  Then it was the Spider-Verse stuff.


----------



## Umbran

Maxperson said:


> It's apparently both.  The Marvel Cinematic Universe Fandom site lists it as an American extragovernmental organization overseen by the World Security Council. SHIELD does seen very America focused, even though it does do world affairs.




Note that the "World Security Council" is not associated with the UN, or anything official like that.  It is a handful of politicians from various powerful countries.


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> Err, everyone except us geeks, would say that Greenland is European - its been associated with Scandinavia for more than a millennium






Spoiler: Maps of North America












Spoiler: Maps of Europe









I am sorry.  You're just wrong on this one.


----------



## Eric V

Umbran said:


> No, this is not the action of a healthy mind.  That's what we've been trying to tell you.  Her psyche is pretty broken.



I understand this.  Did she get all better by the end?


----------



## BRayne

Eric V said:


> I understand this.  Did she get all better by the end?




Presumably that will be covered when she next appears in an episode of the MCU


----------



## Eric V

Umbran said:


> The MCU (and the comics) have a problem, in that trauma-driven drama can be compelling and exciting and relatable.  It makes for good movies and TV.  Our entire real-world culture generally fails to deal with mental health issues constructively.  Why is it somehow strange to you that in our bigger-than-life fictions, they also have issues dealing with mental health?



My issue is they don't _address mental health in a responsible way_.  If I am supposed to believe that Wanda is loopy-loop and therefore not morally responsible (not sure about that last, but whatever) then it's terrible that she just goes on her way, no treatment, and no mental health issues _even being addressed_. "Wait, I'm all better now," by the show's last five minutes is just lame, and kind of infantalizes the character, because if the writers are trying to make the case that she's got a handle on her grief now, after all that she's done, then it makes what she did seem more like a tantrum than a real issue needing therapy.


----------



## Eric V

BRayne said:


> Presumably that will be covered when she next appears in an episode of the MCU



I sort of doubt it.  Tony never did, did he?  It's not the Marvel way, it seems.


----------



## Tonguez

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Political ownership does not matter when it comes to physical location. Are you also going to say all the former British colonies were also European when they were not yet independent? Is Canada also European because they are still technically part of the British Empire?
> 
> Besides, go back and read the part of your post that I quoted. You did not say Greenland was European, you said it was in Europe. I do not see that when I look at a map.



Yes and we were referring to the _jurisdiction_ of SHIELD/Avengers to operate outside of the USA. Jurisdiction is an entirely political concept not geographic, for the sake of Avengers authority to act in Greenland, Greenland is a self governing country under the sovereignty of a European state, 

but this indeed is why I love geek pedantry


----------



## trappedslider

Eric V said:


> My issue is they don't _address mental health in a responsible way_.



Name one super hero movie/show that does this and i'll be impressed....


----------



## Rune

trappedslider said:


> Name one super hero movie/show that does this and i'll be impressed....



Jessica Jones season 1?


----------



## Maxperson

Umbran said:


> Were they _variations_ on Spider-Man?  Then it was the Spider-Verse stuff.



No.  They were all Peter Parker I believe.  Here it is.  The Maximum Clonage is what I think I saw.  It was a long time ago.









						Every Spider-Man Clone, Ranked
					

Scarlet Spider, Kaine, Spider-Woman are only the beginning. Check out all the clones Peter Parker's Spider-Man has encountered over the years.




					screenrant.com


----------



## pming

Hiya!


Eric V said:


> My issue is they don't _address mental health in a responsible way_.




Long story short..., uh, yeah. That's it, actually. 

Confused? Let me 'splain. No, that'd take to long; let me sum up:

It's a show based on Marvel COMIC BOOK CHARACTERS. Because of that, we don't have 8 years to delve into a characters deepest and darkest desires or anything even approaching that. It's action, simple drama, and "selective-consequences of action". For example, "Oh, sorry, I got startled and blasted your phone when it rang"...but that same character doesn't bat an eye when they destroy an entire persons house or business.

POW! BIFF! KA-BOOM! ...that's a Comic Book Story. ... "So, Wanda, tell me about your monther..." ...that isn't.

^_^

Paul L. Ming


----------



## Imaculata

Eric V said:


> My issue is they don't _address mental health in a responsible way_.  If I am supposed to believe that Wanda is loopy-loop and therefore not morally responsible (not sure about that last, but whatever) then it's terrible that she just goes on her way, no treatment, and no mental health issues _even being addressed_. "Wait, I'm all better now," by the show's last five minutes is just lame, and kind of infantalizes the character, because if the writers are trying to make the case that she's got a handle on her grief now, after all that she's done, then it makes what she did seem more like a tantrum than a real issue needing therapy.




That all seems a bit cynical. Of course the tv show ends with a some what happy ending, where the main character comes to deal with her grief. But to say that this all happens in the last 5 minutes is just not true. The show dissects Wanda's grief across 9 episodes, and that is how she comes to understand her grief and deal with it. The final shots of the show don't show a Wanda that is 'all better' in my opinion. Just one who has gotten a better handle on her emotions and has changed for the better.

You also seem to suggest that people cannot overcome their mental health issues without treatment, which is also not true. Sure, Wanda 'could' have gotten treatment for her mental health issues, had she understood that she had any. All Wanda felt, in my understanding, is a terrible feeling of grief that kept washing over her in waves. She didn't understand her own issues, which is the central conflict of the show. Without it you wouldn't have a West View.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Eric V said:


> I sort of doubt it.  Tony never did, did he?  It's not the Marvel way, it seems.



He never went to therapy, on screen, but...literally every Iron Man movie and half the Avengers movies are about him dealing with his trauma, or not, andthe consequences of him not doing so.


----------



## Tonguez

Disneys true power

Advertising!


----------



## Imaculata

doctorbadwolf said:


> He never went to therapy, on screen, but...literally every Iron Man movie and half the Avengers movies are about him dealing with his trauma, or not, and the consequences of him not doing so.




Indeed, especially Ironman 3, which is all about his PTSD and coming to grips with it. I think Robert Downey J. portrays it quite well too. With his sudden moments of gasping for air and it all becoming too much. His late night projects and unstable attitude.

We don't know exactly how much time passes between each movie (I think), and how long it takes for Tony to deal with his traumas. So perhaps given the release speed of these movies, you may get the impression that he overcomes his traumas really fast. But I think it is implied that it takes quite some time.


----------



## MarkB

doctorbadwolf said:


> He never went to therapy, on screen, but...literally every Iron Man movie and half the Avengers movies are about him dealing with his trauma, or not, andthe consequences of him not doing so.



Plus the Civil War movie, where he starts out by trying to use high-tech self-therapy to try to address his issues with his parents, only to be blindsided by a grieving mother poking right at his guilt over Ultron and Sokovia, and ultimately those traumas drive him through every bad decision he makes through the movie until Zemo finally uses them to push his buttons into fighting against one of his best friends.


----------



## Eric V

pming said:


> Hiya!
> 
> 
> Long story short..., uh, yeah. That's it, actually.
> 
> Confused? Let me 'splain. No, that'd take to long; let me sum up:
> 
> It's a show based on Marvel COMIC BOOK CHARACTERS. Because of that, we don't have 8 years to delve into a characters deepest and darkest desires or anything even approaching that. It's action, simple drama, and "selective-consequences of action". For example, "Oh, sorry, I got startled and blasted your phone when it rang"...but that same character doesn't bat an eye when they destroy an entire persons house or business.
> 
> POW! BIFF! KA-BOOM! ...that's a Comic Book Story. ... "So, Wanda, tell me about your monther..." ...that isn't.
> 
> ^_^
> 
> Paul L. Ming



Fair enough.  It looked like they were going for something with more nuance, etc.  In the end though, if it's just going to be "comic book logic" where things like getting help aren't even mentioned...ok.  I had started hoping differently, but, fine.

It sucks, because it's a big issue in the real world, and I guess I just wish writers handled it more responsibly.  Sure, we've seen Stark have panic attacks, but not one mention of how it's not longer an issue.  In the meantime, as someone posted up above, Avengers movies are about dealing with his unaddressed issues.  So, they'll show one aspect of it, the destructive part (especially Wanda) then ignore it afterwards (Later Westview, I'm off to study the Necronomicon; hope you all get the therapy I never consider).

It'd be nice if, when writers address these issues, they show the other side.  It worked well for Jessica Jones.  Even Matt Murdock is constantly going to his priest for guidance.

I'm not saying I want to see full sessions or anything, but apparently, it's not even on their radar.  So, at the end, my kids look at me as Wanda flies off with a WTH look on their faces and the only answer is...I guess everyone has to be ok with it.  It's Marvel.

I think it was a disservice to the Wanda character, which is especially too bad because Olsen was really quite good.


----------



## ART!

MoonSong said:


> Marvel refuses to let their characters grow and change, and that has made them less relatable in the long run.






Umbran said:


> I find DC heroes less relatable simply due to their sheer power.  They are, by and large, gods.  That's just hard to identify with.



This really comes down to personal tastes, nostalgia, and the like. Saying one is more relatable than the other is really just an expression of personal preference, which is fine of course. 

I've always preferred Marvel _in general_, despite having started out with DC. It's just that a couple characters and stories at Marvel hit me at just the right time, and I was locked in from then on with some of those ideas. Still am. I read plenty of DC, too, but if I somehow had to choose between one or the other, it'd be Marvel.

Marvel characters were probably more relatable than DC characters in the '60s and maybe '70s, when that was one of Marvel's big goals. DC characters were your dad's and grand-dad's superheroes. 

The two real, quantifiable differences I see between the two are that DC does reboots and Marvel doesn't, and that the Marvel universe was _designed_ to be interconnected from the get-go, with just a small handful of people creating all those characters in the first few years of Marvel. DC's core characters were created by people working on their own, with no sense of a connected universe. That came later. I think that difference still stands out, but I don't think it makes one better than the other. 



Maxperson said:


> I got turned off by all the huge storylines that spanned 8 different books and had to be read in a certain order.  Sometimes I would miss one and it threw me off.  I got frustrated and walked away from comics.  Years later I walked in and took a peek and there were like 12 Spidermen, which I think is that Clone Saga you are mentioning.  I walked back out. lol



I used to love the Legion of Super-Heroes, but after a few reboots I just couldn't relate anymore. I still check out every new series, though, to see if it grabs me.


----------



## Umbran

ART! said:


> This really comes down to personal tastes, nostalgia, and the like. Saying one is more relatable than the other is really just an expression of personal preference, which is fine of course.




Yeah.  I kind of thought starting with "I find that...," should have made it obvious that it was my preference, not something anyone else needed to agree with.


----------



## Umbran

Eric V said:


> My issue is they don't _address mental health in a responsible way_.




Ah.  I kind of think of that _as the point_.  Because, honestly, our reality doesn't address mental health in a responsible way, either.  

Remember that superhero comics books don't generally _lead_ the times by very much, and movies even less so.  They are modern mythology, and express the times in which they are written.  They are stories about now, not about where the future could be.  These are times in which we are recognizing that we don't do well with mental health - so our comics give us examples, writ large because that's the style of superhero comics.

Tony Stark gets his issues largely managed off camera, during the five years of The Blip, by actually getting himself a personal support structure.  Hulk, similarly, gets himself under control in that period.  Note that, once this happens, their stories are pretty much done.  

Wanda's story isn't done yet.  So, yeah, she's still in the woods.


----------



## Arilyn

Wanda is not ready to get help and when she flies off, who in their right mind would attempt to stop her?

The second post credit scene clearly shows us that her trauma isn't over yet, and there is definitely going to be more trouble. Wanda turning herself in and getting help does not further the story.


----------



## Rune

Arilyn said:


> Wanda is not ready to get help and when she flies off, who in their right mind would attempt to stop her?
> 
> The second post credit scene clearly shows us that her trauma isn't over yet, and there is definitely going to be more trouble. Wanda turning herself in and getting help does not further the story.



Well, kind of. As the director explicitly said in that Kevin Smith/Marc Bernardin podcast (and, in retrospect, I can’t believe I missed it while viewing), Wanda progresses through the five stages of grief during the show – meaning she _had_ to end up at acceptance.

But that’s grief over The Vision’s death. Her kids are another matter, which she can (or at least believes she can) actually do something about.


----------



## tomBitonti

I have to admit ... there is a bit of a disconnect at the end.  There should be other Avengers on-hand to assist.  And the initial issue was the town being put into a reality bubble.  That should be seen as at least kidnapping, and definitely as causing emotional distress to a few thousand people.

Hmm, maybe the knowledge filter was preventing word of the bubble from reaching the world at large?  That would explain the low-key, specific, interest which was had to the entire event.

TomB


----------



## Umbran

Rune said:


> Wanda progresses through the five stages of grief during the show – meaning she _had_ to end up at acceptance.




Note, the "stages of grief" (the Kübler-Ross model) as typically portrayed is not what the person originating the model intended.  Nor is even the original model solidly backed by tested and measured empirical evidence.  

In this context, it is at best a narrative trope, like hearing an explosion in space.  It is not an accurate depiction of what happens, but it is recognizable to the audience, and signals what the author intends to get across.

See what I mean by how we don't work well with mental health?


----------



## Tonguez

tomBitonti said:


> I have to admit ... there is a bit of a disconnect at the end.  There should be other Avengers on-hand to assist.  And the initial issue was the town being put into a reality bubble.  That should be seen as at least kidnapping, and definitely as causing emotional distress to a few thousand people.
> 
> Hmm, maybe the knowledge filter was preventing word of the bubble from reaching the world at large?  That would explain the low-key, specific, interest which was had to the entire event.
> 
> TomB



Yeah thats apparently the stated reason - the Westview Anamoly occurs only 3 weeks after Endgame, so most of the other Avengers are plausibly busy with their own recovery. Wanda also puts a filter on so that most people forget that Westview was ever there (until Jimmy Woo comes looking for his missing witness)


----------



## ART!

How much time do we think passes, from Wanda standing in that plot of land with the deed in her hand and then transforming Westview, to flying off at the end of episode 9?


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

ART! said:


> How much time do we think passes, from Wanda standing in that plot of land with the deed in her hand and then transforming Westview, to flying off at the end of episode 9?




It was specifically stated that Wanda's attack on the SWORD lab was 9 days before Jimmy called for help about his Witness Protection person. Assuming there was no time differential inside vs outside, the Hex was up for maybe 2 weeks? Wanda came back from the Snap, spent about a week and a half doing who knows what, ends up at the lab, drives straight to Westview to look at the building lot, breaks down, and her magic takes over.


----------



## ART!

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> It was specifically stated that Wanda's attack on the SWORD lab was 9 days before Jimmy called for help about his Witness Protection person. Assuming there was no time differential inside vs outside, the Hex was up for maybe 2 weeks? Wanda came back from the Snap, spent about a week and a half doing who knows what, ends up at the lab, drives straight to Westview to look at the building lot, breaks down, and her magic takes over.



Cool. Thanks.

Regarding the lack of involvement of other MCU characters in this crisis in New Jersey: the MCU has been pretty good at eventually letting us know why they didn't call in the Avengers or whatever, even if the explanation is pretty hand-wavey. (How did the Hulk get to the Grandmaster's planet? Hey just flew off in that quinjet at the end of AoU...into space?...and came across a wormhole? Okay cool.)


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> Yeah thats apparently the stated reason - the Westview Anamoly occurs only 3 weeks after Endgame, so most of the other Avengers are plausibly busy with their own recovery.




Note: 
Captain America is ancient.
Iron Man is dead.
Black Widow is dead.
Falcon and Winter Soldier are off in their own show.
Thor is in space.
Captain Marvel is in space.
Guardians of the Galaxy are in space.
Spider-Man is a kid, off in his own movie.
Black Panther is... well, Shuri is in Wakanda.
Valkyrie doesn't really know these people, and is presumably in Norway.
Ant-Man is on the West Coast, typically.

I think the only plausible ones who might intervene are... War Machine, Hulk, and Doctor Strange?

The only one who'd be of any use would be Doctor Strange.  Or... well, I could see a big green Professor Hulk sitting down with Wanda for a heart-to-heart.  That would be amusing.


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> Or... well, I could see a big green Professor Hulk sitting down with Wanda for a heart-to-heart.  That would be amusing.



I dunno, he zoned out pretty fast when Tony tried that in Iron Man 3.


----------



## Morrus

ART! said:


> Cool. Thanks.
> 
> Regarding the lack of involvement of other MCU characters in this crisis in New Jersey: the MCU has been pretty good at eventually letting us know why they didn't call in the Avengers or whatever, even if the explanation is pretty hand-wavey. (How did the Hulk get to the Grandmaster's planet? Hey just flew off in that quinjet at the end of AoU...into space?...and came across a wormhole? Okay cool.)



The Winter Soldier was the one which really struck me -- giant flying aircraft carriers attacking Washington DC and Iron Man etc. are nowhere to be seen.


----------



## Tonguez

Morrus said:


> The Winter Soldier was the one which really struck me -- giant flying aircraft carriers attacking Washington DC and Iron Man etc. are nowhere to be seen.



After Iron man 3 Tony Stark had surgery in China to remove the shrapnel in his heart, I assume he then goes to Malibu to recover. So when the events of Winter Soldier happen Stark might still be in recovery and unable to respond?


----------



## billd91

Morrus said:


> The Winter Soldier was the one which really struck me -- giant flying aircraft carriers attacking Washington DC and Iron Man etc. are nowhere to be seen.



It *is* over fairly quickly. It's not like they're everywhere at once.


----------



## Rune

billd91 said:


> It *is* over fairly quickly. It's not like they're everywhere at once.



Also, the new helicarriers have integrated Stark technology in them. Tony knows about their development. What he doesn’t know is that they are a threat.

By the time he finds out HYDRA has taken over, Cap, Black Widow, and Falcon have probably already dealt with the problem.


----------



## Umbran

MarkB said:


> I dunno, he zoned out pretty fast when Tony tried that in Iron Man 3.




Professor Hulk is a slightly older, much wiser Hulk.  Plus... Tony's a narcissistic jerk most of the time.  Wanda's not.  



Morrus said:


> The Winter Soldier was the one which really struck me -- giant flying aircraft carriers attacking Washington DC and Iron Man etc. are nowhere to be seen.




Most of the heroes do not spend time in D.C.

Assume Tony Stark is in Avengers Tower in NYC.  To start with, there's nothing outwardly hinkey about the launch of the helicarriers.  SHIELD probably launches new hardware all the time.  Say it is five minutes before someone actually thinks there's something wrong, and calls Tony, or Friday informs him of the weirdness.  The distance between NYC and Washington DC is over 200 miles.  At Mach 1, it would take about 15+ minutes to get from one to the other, so total of 20 minutes before Iron Man can intervene.

If we discount the cuts between concurrent actions in that part of the movie, the helicarriers probably aren't in the air for 20 minutes.  Iron Man arrives after it is all said and done, and can use his repulsors to cut people out of debris.

Technically, Doctor Strange could sling-ring there faster, but he hasn't had his movie yet.  Plus, this is a military issue, not a magical threat.  Nobody's going to call him about it.


----------



## pming

Hiya!


Eric V said:


> Fair enough.  It looked like they were going for something with more nuance, etc.  In the end though, if it's just going to be "comic book logic" where things like getting help aren't even mentioned...ok.  I had started hoping differently, but, fine.
> 
> It sucks, because it's a big issue in the real world, and I guess I just wish writers handled it more responsibly.  Sure, we've seen Stark have panic attacks, but not one mention of how it's not longer an issue.  In the meantime, as someone posted up above, Avengers movies are about dealing with his unaddressed issues.



But therein lies the rub. You are placing your own expectation of what "mental health issues and help" entail. I don't know your background, however. Sorry if this sounds condescending or obvious, I don't mean it too! 

Different people handle stuff differently, 'natch. For example, I was suicidal in my youth (16/17 years old. I attempted twice. First time I woke up in the hospital although I do vaguely remember a couple points leading up to it before passing out due to blood loss. Anyway, two shrinks later and some drugs for a year... didn't help much. Attempted again; woke up where I attempted, got to school, got help, hospital again. Shrink for a few months, and drugs. Didn't do much. But, I managed to figure some stuff out on my own after reading the Satanic bible (yes, I'm a Satanist, have been ever since). I'm sure the shrink helped a bit, but only insofar as he made me realize... "naaa... this isn't going to do it for me...gotta figure stuff out on my own". So I just decided "Ok. I'm done with the suicide thing". Problem solved.

I had minor Claustrophobia as a kid. Up until about 14? I think? Then I just kinda started 'ignoring it'. So, now I can go into elevators without hyperventilating and panicking; although it was never 'severe', it was... annoying and embarrassing. I KNEW it was irrational and so just learned to compartmentalize the feelings and look at them from an "outside  view".  To understand what my body was doing and why. Although, to be honest, wearing a mask with the hole Covid thing is causing... "issues"; so I do remove it and take a couple of deep breaths every now and then when I have to wear one (in a store, etc; oh, I'm in Canada). Makes me feel better. Again, problem solved.

Triskaidekaphobia. Had this from about 13 (lol!) up until 4 years ago when my wife died. After seeing her dead in the hospital bed I walked outside to go home. Saw a license plate that totaled 13. Thought "F you!" (always saw 13 as some 'malevolent force', so to say, even though I knew it was all in my head). Then got into the car and saw the time; again, "13". "Ok. Fine. You win". Ever since then, no problem with 13. See it, say it, write it, count it, buy 13 things, pay $13, sit in the 13th seat from the left...like water off a ducks back. Problem solved.

So, yeah. Sometimes all it takes is for the person to just talk to themselves, think about what's going on in their brain, and then just decide "Naaa. I'm done". Now, as we ARE talking about super heroes here in a completely fictional world... I have zero problem with Tony Stark having some PTSD for a while and then "getting over it". He talked to himself, Jarvis, and presumably Pepper....I'd also say he bounced things off of Bruce. He figured it out and, "problem solved". 

Just saying... people are complicated and sometimes a person is fully capable of just 'fixing themselves' with the wave of a hand or two. They don't always need years of therapy and thousands of dollars in drugs and whatnot.

^_^

Paul L. Ming


----------



## Umbran

pming said:


> Just saying... people are complicated and sometimes a person is fully capable of just 'fixing themselves' with the wave of a hand or two. They don't always need years of therapy and thousands of dollars in drugs and whatnot.




I'm glad things worked out for you.

But I am pretty sure that's not the message they are sending.  Because, it would be terribly irresponsible to make that the message to people who do need help.


----------



## pming

Hiya!


Umbran said:


> I'm glad things worked out for you.
> 
> But I am pretty sure that's not the message they are sending.  Because, it would be terribly irresponsible to make that the message to people who do need help.



Thanks! 

I don't think they are trying to 'send a message'. They are just trying to make an entertaining show that can help a person relax and disengage from all the stuff going on in their life. Nothing more, nothing less. If someone is looking for a movie with "a message about personal growth, emotional relationships and finding out who you are", then looking at a Marvel movie is a REALLY bad choice. 

As the saying goes... sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. 

^_^

Paul L. Ming


----------



## Tonguez

pming said:


> Hiya!
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> I don't think they are trying to 'send a message'. They are just trying to make an entertaining show that can help a person relax and disengage from all the stuff going on in their life. Nothing more, nothing less. If someone is looking for a movie with "a message about personal growth, emotional relationships and finding out who you are", then looking at a Marvel movie is a REALLY bad choice.
> 
> As the saying goes... sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
> 
> ^_^
> 
> Paul L. Ming




No, Marvel stories have always made a point of working in a bit of social complexity and the movies have had their various dramatic nods to PTSD and other traumas. The WandaVision writers explicitly included overwhelming grief as a motif in the story ...

sometimes a cigar does burn with hot, scarlet significance


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> sometimes a cigar does burn with hot, scarlet significance




This is an excellent phrase.

And, I agree, Marvel has, traditionally, not kept itself to "just" adventure stories with no further context or socially relevant elements.  While you can turn your brain off and just be entertained, that doesn't mean the authors are not including thoughtful material.


----------



## reelo

I loved the Vision vs Vision "battle".


----------



## tomBitonti

Umbran said:


> Note:
> Captain America is ancient.
> Iron Man is dead.
> Black Widow is dead.
> Falcon and Winter Soldier are off in their own show.
> Thor is in space.
> Captain Marvel is in space.
> Guardians of the Galaxy are in space.
> Spider-Man is a kid, off in his own movie.
> Black Panther is... well, Shuri is in Wakanda.
> Valkyrie doesn't really know these people, and is presumably in Norway.
> Ant-Man is on the West Coast, typically.
> 
> I think the only plausible ones who might intervene are... War Machine, Hulk, and Doctor Strange?
> 
> The only one who'd be of any use would be Doctor Strange.  Or... well, I could see a big green Professor Hulk sitting down with Wanda for a heart-to-heart.  That would be amusing.




Yeah, but, wouldn't there be one if not several organizations actively tracking all high level supers?  Both as support staff and as external monitors.  I just can't see any of these folks not having a constant halo of "observers".  And even with the paucity of true Avengers, would there be no-one alert to Wanda's loss and wanting to provide support?  Looking at all of the folks who were at Iron Man's funeral, it seems odd that Vision would be so neglected.

(Maybe that is one of the points of the series.  With Vision's death five years past, maybe folks weren't twigged in that the loss was very recent for Wanda.  That fits with Wanda's statement that Vision deserved a proper burial.  Of course, there were a lot of folks who were unsnapped who _would_ also see Vision's death as a recent thing.)

TomB


----------



## MarkB

tomBitonti said:


> Yeah, but, wouldn't there be one if not several organizations actively tracking all high level supers?  Both as support staff and as external monitors.  I just can't see any of these folks not having a constant halo of "observers".  And even with the paucity of true Avengers, would there be no-one alert to Wanda's loss and wanting to provide support?  Looking at all of the folks who were at Iron Man's funeral, it seems odd that Vision would be so neglected.



You have to bear in mind that this is just a couple of weeks after the end of the Blip. The entire world had been in disarray for years, and Wanda didn't even exist until after the Unsnap. Whatever official organisations that were in place to track potential threats would have been overwhelmed by the sudden re-appearance of 50% of the human race.


----------



## billd91

Tonguez said:


> No, Marvel stories have always made a point of working in a bit of social complexity and the movies have had their various dramatic nods to PTSD and other traumas. The WandaVision writers explicitly included overwhelming grief as a motif in the story ...
> 
> sometimes a cigar does burn with hot, scarlet significance



There's a *big* difference between incorporating social complexity, and *modeling appropriately constructive behavior as a blueprint for the viewers*. Captain America punches Nazis - but that doesn't mean they're trying to normalize it as appropriate social behavior. After all, punches in the comic books are not the same as punches in real life. Marvel incorporating grief and PTSD into a character's behavior doesn't mean we should use their behavior as a model to handle our own, nor should it be seen as such.
And as close as pming's point gets to that, he's right.


----------



## Umbran

tomBitonti said:


> Yeah, but, wouldn't there be one if not several organizations actively tracking all high level supers?  Both as support staff and as external monitors.  I just can't see any of these folks not having a constant halo of "observers".




Superheroes have a knack for dodging all but the most diligent and well-funded scrutiny.  Cap and Black Widow disappeared, for example, while clearly still active fighting the the good fight.



tomBitonti said:


> And even with the paucity of true Avengers, would there be no-one alert to Wanda's loss and wanting to provide support?




It has always seemed to me that Wanda was socially isolated.  Most of the Avengers are, in fact.  Their teamwork did not seem to extend to a shared emotional support network.  And the one time we saw them gather socially... Ultron crashed the party.  

That was part of the point of her relationship with Vision - he actively cared and sought her out.  When he was killed, she lost meaningful connection with others in the world... and that spells trouble for grief.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

billd91 said:


> There's a *big* difference between incorporating social complexity, and *modeling appropriately constructive behavior as a blueprint for the viewers*. Captain America punches Nazis - but that doesn't mean they're trying to normalize it as appropriate social behavior.




Why not? Everyone should punch a Nazi in the face at least once in their life. It would make the world a better place.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Why not? Everyone should punch a Nazi in the face at least once in their life. It would make the world a better place.



'Member when that _wasn't_ considered a controversial statement? Good ol'days.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

FitzTheRuke said:


> 'Member when that _wasn't_ considered a controversial statement? Good ol'days.




On an inclusive and safe site like this, it still should not be controversial. As for the shows, plenty of HYDRA got punched and worse in the MCU, though we may not see HYDRA/Nazis as enemies again as the big bads.


----------



## Tonguez

tomBitonti said:


> Yeah, but, wouldn't there be one if not several organizations actively tracking all high level supers?  Both as support staff and as external monitors.  I just can't see any of these folks not having a constant halo of "observers".  And even with the paucity of true Avengers, would there be no-one alert to Wanda's loss and wanting to provide support?  Looking at all of the folks who were at Iron Man's funeral, it seems odd that Vision would be so neglected.



I’m guessing that SWORD is that organisation (all superheroes are essentially sentient weapons) but as stated its only 3 weeks since the Blip, the worlds chaotic


----------



## ART!

Umbran said:


> It has always seemed to me that Wanda was socially isolated.  Most of the Avengers are, in fact.  Their teamwork did not seem to extend to a shared emotional support network.  And the one time we saw them gather socially... Ultron crashed the party.
> 
> That was part of the point of her relationship with Vision - he actively cared and sought her out.  When he was killed, she lost meaningful connection with others in the world... and that spells trouble for grief.



Reading this made me suddenly realize that the most pure-of-heart MCU hero with the most ordered mind was attracted to the MCU hero with the most chaotic, troubled mind - and vice versa. That's pretty awesome.


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> I’m guessing that SWORD is that organisation (all superheroes are essentially sentient weapons) but as stated its only 3 weeks since the Blip, the worlds chaotic




Think about that.  One day, half the world population vanishes.  The remainder go on.

Years later, they come back.  Think, for a moment, about basic things.  Like... food supply.  The world population doubles in an instant - how do you feed everybody?


----------



## ART!

Umbran said:


> Think about that.  One day, half the world population vanishes.  The remainder go on.
> 
> Years later, they come back.  Think, for a moment, about basic things.  Like... food supply.  The world population doubles in an instant - how do you feed everybody?



The movies will probably touch on this in the next couple years, but being movies that need to tell big sweeping stories won't be able to dwell on it. I suspect (and hope) that the D+ shows will dig into this at least a bit more. It seems like there's a lot you can explore there without making the show all about that. F&WS and Hawkeye seem well-positioned to do so, but we'll see soon enough.


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> Think about that.  One day, half the world population vanishes.  The remainder go on.
> 
> Years later, they come back.  Think, for a moment, about basic things.  Like... food supply.  The world population doubles in an instant - how do you feed everybody?



Not just disappeared, but mostly known to have died. Everything they had - possessions, jobs, houses - now belong to other people. It's only a courtesy to a PG rating that they even have the clothes on their backs.

Just IDing everyone would be a nightmare, and that's once you've established that they're not all impostors in the first place.


----------



## Umbran

MarkB said:


> Just IDing everyone would be a nightmare, and that's once you've established that they're not all impostors in the first place.




People disappeared, largely along with the things on their person.  I don't expect the snap left a bunch of wallets lying around on the ground.  Those with driver's licenses would have come back with them, at least.

And, if someone can manage to put, what, _three and a half billion_ imposters in place, all at the same moment, and loads of them are infants and children (so, of no value as impostors for years)? Like you could stop them from taking over the planet anyway?


----------



## Marc_C

Watched 1.5 episodes. I couldn't continue. I'll get back to it later only because I saw the coloured helicopter toy. Intriguing.


----------



## ART!

Marc_C said:


> Watched 1.5 episodes. I couldn't continue. I'll get back to it later only because I saw the coloured helicopter toy. Intriguing.



Many people found the first two episodes hard to get through. Episode 2 ends with a couple really intriguing things, and episode 3 starts to really pull back the curtain.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

ART! said:


> The movies will probably touch on this in the next couple years, but being movies that need to tell big sweeping stories won't be able to dwell on it. I suspect (and hope) that the D+ shows will dig into this at least a bit more. It seems like there's a lot you can explore there without making the show all about that. F&WS and Hawkeye seem well-positioned to do so, but we'll see soon enough.




I need to look up a list of all the heroes who were Snapped besides Wanda, to see where other shows may deal with this. Obviously, Black Panther 2 and the Wakanda series both should, but beyond that, I am not sure.


----------



## trappedslider

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> I need to look up a list of all the heroes who were Snapped besides Wanda, to see where other shows may deal with this. Obviously, Black Panther 2 and the Wakanda series both should, but beyond that, I am not sure.



The wiki has you covered Snap


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Also, I was looking at the MCU timeline a bit and it is definitely screwy as they account for the time jump after the Snap and return Snap. I did not even realize that the 2nd Spiderman film takes place several months after everyone returned, making is Summer of 2024 for that school trip. That means the events in the 3rd Spiderman film will still be at least a year or two in the future, when compared to the real world year.

One other thing I did see was the official date of Tony Stark's funeral, on Oct 29, 2023, and Wanda was there. The return Snap happened on Oct 17, 2023. Episode 3 of Wandavision is about three weeks after the return, when Monica reports back to SWORD, around Nov 7. Wanda entered the SWORD labs about 9 days before that, so either the same day as the funeral or a day or two later, meaning someone there probably told her where Vision's body was being kept. Now, the website I am looking at has as much official dating as possible and their entries for 2023 have Wanda visiting SWORD on Oct 31 and then creating the Hex on Nov 4, so anywhere between Oct 29 and Nov 4 is when Westview was taken over by Wanda.









						2023
					

This is a timeline of events that occurred during 2023. The Tesla Cybertruck begins production. Waipo Chen puts a bottle of whiskey on her husband's gravestone. Waipo Chen wakes up to find the bottle of whiskey left on her husband's gravestone to be gone. A new subway schedule goes into effect...




					marvelcinematicuniverse.fandom.com


----------



## tomBitonti

Umbran said:


> Think about that.  One day, half the world population vanishes.  The remainder go on.
> 
> Years later, they come back.  Think, for a moment, about basic things.  Like... food supply.  The world population doubles in an instant - how do you feed everybody?



Yeah.  It was interesting the mentions of both the snap and the unsnap, and the ramifications of each.  In reality, the unsnap would be an unmitigated disaster, with five years of decay of infrastructure.  Delivery pipelines would be structured for half as many people.  Half as much production would be running.  Half as much food planted.  Possessions would have been taken over by the unsnapped, or discarded by the same.  The snapped who had better than average accommodations suddenly becoming the new displaced.  The unsnapped who had worse accommodations returning to five years of neglect.
TomB


----------



## Janx

Umbran said:


> Think about that.  One day, half the world population vanishes.  The remainder go on.
> 
> Years later, they come back.  Think, for a moment, about basic things.  Like... food supply.  The world population doubles in an instant - how do you feed everybody?



That, too.

One problem I've pondered is where did snapped people who were in bad places return to.  Remember the end credits of Infinity War.  Fury is stopped in traffic and a helicopter crashes.  The pilot must have snapped.  Where does he return to?  In mid-air?  What about flights.  Is it raining people who came back to where they were 5 years earlier in a plane?

What about that guy at Steve's meeting who went on that date and they both cried a lot.  What happens when his husband returns home?

Speaking of moving on, a new family lives in your apartment from 5 years ago and you just materialized in the middle of their dining table.  Ouch.

Oh yeah, one more.  Remember those planes?  You know how sad we all were after 9/11.  Probably a quarter to half the flights should have gone down because both pilots snapped.  So not only do we worry about half the in-flight passengers returning, the other half of those crashes do not return.  Try adding anger to the mix for the families whose loved ones didn't return in the unsnap.

There are macro and micro scale questions to the impact of the unsnap.


----------



## Morrus

Umbran said:


> Think about that.  One day, half the world population vanishes.  The remainder go on.
> 
> Years later, they come back.  Think, for a moment, about basic things.  Like... food supply.  The world population doubles in an instant - how do you feed everybody?



I don’t know whether I got this. But somewhere I heard or read than the unsnap was more nuanced than that. It’s basically magic, and when unsnapping Hulk altered reality to fix a lot of that stuff. I think I heard it in context of plane pilots and stuff. But it’s very handwavey.


----------



## Janx

Morrus said:


> I don’t know whether I got this. But somewhere I heard or read than the unsnap was more nuanced than that. It’s basically magic, and when unsnapping Hulk altered reality to fix a lot of that stuff. I think I heard it in context of plane pilots and stuff. But it’s very handwavey.



which would cover the terrible things I've been wondering.


----------



## Umbran

Janx said:


> That, too.
> 
> One problem I've pondered is where did snapped people who were in bad places return to.  Remember the end credits of Infinity War.  Fury is stopped in traffic and a helicopter crashes.  The pilot must have snapped.  Where does he return to?  In mid-air?  What about flights.  Is it raining people who came back to where they were 5 years earlier in a plane?




My recollection is that there's a quick line to Hulk before he snaps people back, that stipulates that they all come back _safely_.  Stark and Banner are not dumb, thankfully.



Janx said:


> Oh yeah, one more.  Remember those planes?  You know how sad we all were after 9/11.  Probably a quarter to half the flights should have gone down because both pilots snapped.




Assuming a pilot and co-pilot, the chance of losing both should be one-quarter.

More of issue, I expect, are all the cars on the road, because there's no co-pilot there.  It is daytime in Wakanda when the snap occurs, that means a lot of traffic accidents in Europe and Africa.  Less in the Americas and Asia.


----------



## Umbran

Morrus said:


> I don’t know whether I got this. But somewhere I heard or read than the unsnap was more nuanced than that. It’s basically magic, and when unsnapping Hulk altered reality to fix a lot of that stuff. I think I heard it in context of plane pilots and stuff. But it’s very handwavey.




I am good with it in terms of plane pilots.  Doubling the food supply so that folks don't starve to death is a bit of a longer stretch.  But, clearly, it worked out somehow.


----------



## Morrus

Umbran said:


> I am good with it in terms of plane pilots.  Doubling the food supply so that folks don't starve to death is a bit of a longer stretch.  But, clearly, it worked out somehow.



I mean, is doubling the food on earth more of a stretch than simultaneously disintegrating exactly 50% of all the sentient beings in the entire universe... and then bringing them back again? Or any of the other weirrd stuff Thanos does with the gauntlet? It's just magic. I don't think it bears too much thought.


----------



## tomBitonti

Morrus said:


> I mean, is doubling the food on earth more of a stretch than simultaneously disintegrating exactly 50% of all the sentient beings in the entire universe... and then bringing them back again? Or any of the other weirrd stuff Thanos does with the gauntlet? It's just magic. I don't think it bears too much thought.



Except, there was that scene in the hospital, which was chaotic, and there were complaints that there were too many patients.  Was that was just the chaos of the moment?
(Comics and all, this doesn’t really need to work.  I’m not stuck on the point.)
TomB


----------



## FitzTheRuke

tomBitonti said:


> Except, there was that scene in the hospital, which was chaotic, and there were complaints that there were too many patients.  Was that was just the chaos of the moment?
> (Comics and all, this doesn’t really need to work.  I’m not stuck on the point.)
> TomB




I think that was the point - she wasn't the first to come back. The hospital was being overwhelmed with sudden returns of both staff and patients. 

I suspect that it would be likely that some hospitals closed during the blip - rather than running all hospitals at half capacity, they probably ran two-thirds  of the hospitals at three-quarters capacity.


----------



## Umbran

Morrus said:


> I don't think it bears too much thought.




You do you, I'll do me.


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> My recollection is that there's a quick line to Hulk before he snaps people back, that stipulates that they all come back _safely_.  Stark and Banner are not dumb, thankfully.
> 
> 
> 
> Assuming a pilot and co-pilot, the chance of losing both should be one-quarter.
> 
> More of issue, I expect, are all the cars on the road, because there's no co-pilot there.  It is daytime in Wakanda when the snap occurs, that means a lot of traffic accidents in Europe and Africa.  Less in the Americas and Asia.



How safely is "safely", I wonder. If people who were in a plane instead re-appear at ground level they're not in _immediate_ danger, but a lot of them will be stranded way out in the wilderness.

And that's just on Earth. Out in the galaxy, you've got to solve that at a few million times the scale, for everyone who was in a spaceship in interstellar space when they got Snapped.

Imagine all the people who were asleep when they got Snapped, and wake up in what is now someone else's bed.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

The people who got snapped out of planes that went on to crash are a lot luckier than the people who stayed behind - only to crash.

I suspect that the She-Hulk show will deal with some of the legal fallout - which hopefully will be both poignant and hilarious.


----------



## Umbran

MarkB said:


> And that's just on Earth. Out in the galaxy, you've got to solve that at a few million times the scale, for everyone who was in a spaceship in interstellar space when they got Snapped.




For the whole, infinite universe, the scale is infinitely larger.


----------



## Tonguez

Umbran said:


> I am good with it in terms of plane pilots.  Doubling the food supply so that folks don't starve to death is a bit of a longer stretch.  But, clearly, it worked out somehow.




I think 2020 might have given us some hints in as much as food supply was considered as essential work and a number of unemployed were encouraged/diverted to harvest work.

Most estimates state that the World currently produces 1.5 x the global population (ie more than society actually need) and that a good lot of it gets wasted or stored. 
So a sudden drop in population would mean that there would be a lot of initial over supply of food in storage, lets say with some rationing that lasts the first 2 years of the snap. After that the various government declare crisis and emphasise food security as a priority - leading to increase diversion of resources and people to food production and storage. 
After the Blip the returned population will be eating in to the stored supply, but not to the extent that there would be worldwide starvation.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Tonguez said:


> I think 2020 might have given us some hints in as much as food supply was considered as essential work and a number of unemployed were encouraged/diverted to harvest work.
> 
> Most estimates state that the World currently produces 1.5 x the global population (ie more than society actually need) and that a good lot of it gets wasted or stored.
> So a sudden drop in population would mean that there would be a lot of initial over supply of food in storage, lets say with some rationing that lasts the first 2 years of the snap. After that the various government declare crisis and emphasise food security as a priority - leading to increase diversion of resources and people to food production and storage.
> After the Blip the returned population will be eating in to the stored supply, but not to the extent that there would be worldwide starvation.



That's how I see it. There would be some rationing in the first year or two after the unsnap and then the increase in labour force would put things right. You'd think that the decrease over the five years would teach us how to do it more sustainably the second time around, too.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

FitzTheRuke said:


> That's how I see it. There would be some rationing in the first year or two after the unsnap and then the increase in labour force would put things right. You'd think that the decrease over the five years would teach us how to do it more sustainably the second time around, too.



assuming the wackos don't seriously surge and take over governments and turn the world into a reactionary crapshow, obviously.


----------



## Umbran

doctorbadwolf said:


> assuming the wackos don't seriously surge and take over governments and turn the world into a reactionary crapshow, obviously.




Well note, in that time the heroes weren't inactive.  Clint Barton was off on a killing spree in Japan as Ronin, presumably to keep organized crime under some vague limits.  We see Black Widow and others on a conference call, coordinating.  So, there's someone around keeping matters from going completely bonkers.


----------



## Umbran

Mentioning Ronin reminded me of something...

Wanda gets let off the hook?  Yeah.  

But Ronin is off the hook for goodness knows how many people he killed in Japan.  

Through the whole thing, Black Widow is telling us how horrible a person she was killing goodness knows how many people.

How much damage to property and life does Hulk inflict?  But Professor Hulk is walkin' around a free man...

And Tony Stark.  The dude _was a weapons manufacturer_.  Ultron is _his fault_.  So, Sokovia?  His fault.  The Sokovia Accords, and thus the Civil War?  By continuing trail of cause and effect, Tony's fault.  

I mean, It was a Stark weapon that killed Wanda's parents.  If she had grown up with them, maybe she'd not be such a wreck...

The problem with real-world-style consequences is that they tend to end stories.  Tony and Natasha finally pay for their acts with their lives... so their stories are done.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Umbran said:


> Well note, in that time the heroes weren't inactive.  Clint Barton was off on a killing spree in Japan as Ronin, presumably to keep organized crime under some vague limits.  We see Black Widow and others on a conference call, coordinating.  So, there's someone around keeping matters from going completely bonkers.



Very true. And I prefer the optimism that such a fate can be avoided, anyway.


----------



## Bawylie

I thought it was brave to make Wanda the villain of the piece. But they really tucked their tails between their legs with the denouement. Really really backed away from confronting the moral crisis at the center of the climax.

A- 

Would’ve gotten full marks but for the end.


----------



## Tonguez

Umbran said:


> Mentioning Ronin reminded me of something...
> 
> Wanda gets let off the hook?  Yeah.
> 
> But Ronin is off the hook for goodness knows how many people he killed in Japan.
> 
> Through the whole thing, Black Widow is telling us how horrible a person she was killing goodness knows how many people.
> 
> How much damage to property and life does Hulk inflict?  But Professor Hulk is walkin' around a free man...
> 
> And Tony Stark.  The dude _was a weapons manufacturer_.  Ultron is _his fault_.  So, Sokovia?  His fault.  The Sokovia Accords, and thus the Civil War?  By continuing trail of cause and effect, Tony's fault.
> 
> I mean, It was a Stark weapon that killed Wanda's parents.  If she had grown up with them, maybe she'd not be such a wreck...
> 
> The problem with real-world-style consequences is that they tend to end stories.  Tony and Natasha finally pay for their acts with their lives... so their stories are done.




Barton and Black Widow were both SHIELD/KGB agents and thus their actions were sanctioned by their respective Governments. I’m assuming the Sokovia Accords meant that the Avengers Initiative also extended a degree of government sanction to the Hulk etc (not than General Ross is happy about that, but sending him off planet didnt work).

The Ronin mantle was a secret identity which Black Widow and War Machine covered up. I’d be happy to bet that Stark also had enough contacts and pulled enough strings so that his responsibility for Ultron was also conviniently shelved.
But Stark wasnt let off the hook, Civil War is party about Stark taking some responsibility for his past actions


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Tonguez said:


> I think 2020 might have given us some hints in as much as food supply was considered as essential work and a number of unemployed were encouraged/diverted to harvest work.
> 
> Most estimates state that the World currently produces 1.5 x the global population (ie more than society actually need) and that a good lot of it gets wasted or stored.
> So a sudden drop in population would mean that there would be a lot of initial over supply of food in storage, lets say with some rationing that lasts the first 2 years of the snap. After that the various government declare crisis and emphasise food security as a priority - leading to increase diversion of resources and people to food production and storage.
> After the Blip the returned population will be eating in to the stored supply, but not to the extent that there would be worldwide starvation.




Just to point out that Kevin Feige confirmed in an interview that the Snap erased half of all life, not just sentient life. So half of all the plants and  bugs and animals and humans and aliens, and so on, simply disappeared. Now the question I have not seen answered, was the return Snap by Hulk only for all sentient life? If all those people returned to a planet still trying to recover from half of all crops and food animals disappearing, imagine the strain that would make on food supply.


----------



## Tonguez

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Just to point out that Kevin Feige confirmed in an interview that the Snap erased half of all life, not just sentient life. So half of all the plants and  bugs and animals and humans and aliens, and so on, simply disappeared. Now the question I have not seen answered, was the return Snap by Hulk only for all sentient life? If all those people returned to a planet still trying to recover from half of all crops and food animals disappearing, imagine the strain that would make on food supply.



Ok, that does change things somewhat - losing half the worlds crops probaby isnt a good thing. And what does that imply for global oxygen supply? 

obviously Quantum


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Surely he meant half of all ANIMAL life?

Either way, it occurs to me that there probably was a baby boom during those five years. (And there are some species that probably wouldn't survive without half of them!). So the world when the other half comes back, is probably MORE crowded than it otherwise would have been. (Though on the other hand, the missing half didn't procreate during that time, so maybe not...)

What a mess the world would be!


----------



## Bawylie

FitzTheRuke said:


> Surely he meant half of all ANIMAL life?
> 
> Either way, it occurs to me that there probably was a baby boom during those five years. (And there are some species that probably wouldn't survive without half of them!). So the world when the other half comes back, is probably MORE crowded than it otherwise would have been. (Though on the other hand, the missing half didn't procreate during that time, so maybe not...)
> 
> What a mess the world would be!



We haven’t even contemplated gut bacteria.


----------



## Rune

Tonguez said:


> Barton and Black Widow were both SHIELD/KGB agents and thus their actions were sanctioned by their respective Governments. I’m assuming the Sokovia Accords meant that the Avengers Initiative also extended a degree of government sanction to the Hulk etc (not than General Ross is happy about that, but sending him off planet didnt work).
> 
> The Ronin mantle was a secret identity which Black Widow and War Machine covered up. I’d be happy to bet that Stark also had enough contacts and pulled enough strings so that his responsibility for Ultron was also conviniently shelved.
> But Stark wasnt let off the hook, Civil War is party about Stark taking some responsibility for his past actions



Black Widow stopped serving in the KGB when she was recruited into SHIELD (presumably). Neither she nor Hawkeye are in SHIELD anymore, because there is no SHIELD anymore (assuming Agents of SHIELD is not canon). 

Additionally, both are in violation of the Sokovia Accords by the end of Civil War. Ronin is a fugitive. Who serves no master, like...you know, a ronin.


----------



## Tonguez

Rune said:


> Black Widow stopped serving in the KGB when she was recruited into SHIELD (presumably). Neither she nor Hawkeye are in SHIELD anymore, because there is no SHIELD anymore (assuming Agents of SHIELD is not canon).
> 
> Additionally, both are in violation of the Sokovia Accords by the end of Civil War. Ronin is a fugitive. Who serves no master, like...you know, a ronin.



Yeah the KGB reference was just indicating that Romonoff was sanctioned by a government throughout her career (before and after Barton got her to defect)

During End Game we get the scene where Black Widow is continuing to coordinate Avengers operations with both War Machine and Okoye reporting to her. War Machine (Colonel Rhodes) and General Okoye are both ranking officers in their respective nations military, which I take as a sign of official mandate

Its in that scene that War Machine is tasked with bringing Ronin in (because they both suspect that Ronin is Barton), Barton is brough back by the time of the final battle.


----------



## Janx

Umbran said:


> Mentioning Ronin reminded me of something...
> 
> Wanda gets let off the hook?  Yeah.
> 
> But Ronin is off the hook for goodness knows how many people he killed in Japan.
> 
> Through the whole thing, Black Widow is telling us how horrible a person she was killing goodness knows how many people.
> 
> How much damage to property and life does Hulk inflict?  But Professor Hulk is walkin' around a free man...
> 
> And Tony Stark.  The dude _was a weapons manufacturer_.  Ultron is _his fault_.  So, Sokovia?  His fault.  The Sokovia Accords, and thus the Civil War?  By continuing trail of cause and effect, Tony's fault.
> 
> I mean, It was a Stark weapon that killed Wanda's parents.  If she had grown up with them, maybe she'd not be such a wreck...
> 
> The problem with real-world-style consequences is that they tend to end stories.  Tony and Natasha finally pay for their acts with their lives... so their stories are done.



Yeah, this.

I'm struggling with this in my book project.  Because it sure seems fishy if the hero gets away with all the things he needs to so he can keep heroing.


----------



## Umbran

Tonguez said:


> Barton and Black Widow were both SHIELD/KGB agents and thus their actions were sanctioned by their respective Governments.




So, you may have missed the point slightly.  The isn't about the legal justifications why these people aren't in jail.  

Folks are _annoyed_ that Wanda "gets away with it".  I didn't see a lot of talk about how any of these others "got away with it".  We just accepted that yeah, Tony Stark has the blood of thousands on his hands.  We just bypass that, 'cuz he's the hero.

But for Wanda, little quarter is given.  Even when Stark is significantly responsible for Wanda!



Tonguez said:


> I’m assuming the Sokovia Accords meant that the Avengers Initiative also extended a degree of government sanction to the Hulk etc (not than General Ross is happy about that, but sending him off planet didnt work).




And if there's one thing we have learned from the MCU, it is that governments are on the right side of moral/ethical arguments on a frequent basis?




Tonguez said:


> But Stark wasnt let off the hook, Civil War is party about Stark taking some responsibility for his past actions




Except Stark wasn't the one facing most of the consequences, now was he?  _Captain America_ and crew were being chased around, while TOny got to be comfortable... except when Cap was punching him.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Janx said:


> I'm struggling with this in my book project.  Because it sure seems fishy if the hero gets away with all the things he needs to so he can keep heroing.




That is just the way it has always been with the mainstream comic book companies. Sure, some smaller companies, who tell grittier stories, are more realistic on this stuff, but not the big boys. How many times in his career should Batman have been locked up for all his law bending and breaking. Vigilantism is generally against the law, after all. But comics say the greater good is more important than punishing the heroes. Plus, how many of them would continue to be heroes and protect the world if they thought there was a real chance of jail time? And as for the MCU, I think that if the Sokovia Accords were not needed to advance the plot and story for all the future films, it probably would not have been in the movies at all.


----------



## Eric V

Umbran said:


> So, you may have missed the point slightly.  The isn't about the legal justifications why these people aren't in jail.
> 
> Folks are _annoyed_ that Wanda "gets away with it".  I didn't see a lot of talk about how any of these others "got away with it".  We just accepted that yeah, Tony Stark has the blood of thousands on his hands.  We just bypass that, 'cuz he's the hero.
> 
> But for Wanda, little quarter is given.  Even when Stark is significantly responsible for Wanda!
> 
> 
> 
> And if there's one thing we have learned from the MCU, it is that governments are on the right side of moral/ethical arguments on a frequent basis?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except Stark wasn't the one facing most of the consequences, now was he?  _Captain America_ and crew were being chased around, while TOny got to be comfortable... except when Cap was punching him.



I have always thought (and said in a few quarters) that Stark should have been tried in court in Hague.


----------



## Eric V

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> That is just the way it has always been with the mainstream comic book companies. Sure, some smaller companies, who tell grittier stories, are more realistic on this stuff, but not the big boys. How many times in his career should Batman have been locked up for all his law bending and breaking. Vigilantism is generally against the law, after all. But comics say the greater good is more important than punishing the heroes. Plus, how many of them would continue to be heroes and protect the world if they thought there was a real chance of jail time? And as for the MCU, I think that if the Sokovia Accords were not needed to advance the plot and story for all the future films, it probably would not have been in the movies at all.



The Nolan films bring this up, from Dent, specifically.


----------



## tomBitonti

Umbran said:


> Mentioning Ronin reminded me of something...
> 
> Wanda gets let off the hook?  Yeah.
> 
> But Ronin is off the hook for goodness knows how many people he killed in Japan.
> 
> Through the whole thing, Black Widow is telling us how horrible a person she was killing goodness knows how many people.
> 
> How much damage to property and life does Hulk inflict?  But Professor Hulk is walkin' around a free man...
> 
> And Tony Stark.  The dude _was a weapons manufacturer_.  Ultron is _his fault_.  So, Sokovia?  His fault.  The Sokovia Accords, and thus the Civil War?  By continuing trail of cause and effect, Tony's fault.
> 
> I mean, It was a Stark weapon that killed Wanda's parents.  If she had grown up with them, maybe she'd not be such a wreck...
> 
> The problem with real-world-style consequences is that they tend to end stories.  Tony and Natasha finally pay for their acts with their lives... so their stories are done.



To be fair ... Tony had been zapped by Wanda when he made Ultron.  Hulk‘s one recent rampage was also inflicted.  Ronin’s victims were presumably vicious killers themselves.  Black widow wasn’t given a choice at first, and was probably mentally conditioned since she was a child.
TomB


----------



## Umbran

tomBitonti said:


> To be fair ... Tony had been zapped by Wanda when he made Ultron.




He was given a fear-inducing vision, by a person who was radicalized by loss of her parents... to weapons his company built!  He was not actively under her control when he started working with the Mind Stone.  And, the Ultron project had been in development _before_ the movie started.  The project is his reaction to his own untreated PTSD...

So, if we are giving him a pass, then we should give her one, is all I'm saying.




tomBitonti said:


> Hulk‘s one recent rampage was also inflicted.




He had _two entire movies_ of rampages before Age of Ultron.



tomBitonti said:


> Ronin’s victims were presumably vicious killers themselves.




Because Clint Barton is perfect, even in his period of mourning the loss of his entire family, and should be allowed to act as judge, jury, and executioner?



tomBitonti said:


> Black widow wasn’t given a choice at first, and was probably mentally conditioned since she was a child.




So, mental conditioning relieves one of moral and ethical responsibility, but grief doesn't?

Seems a bit cherry-picking on what psychological situations give people a pass...


----------



## Tonguez

Umbran said:


> And if there's one thing we have learned from the MCU, it is that governments are on the right side of moral/ethical arguments on a frequent basis?




Well yes, its the same argument about the right of Soldiers to kill in War or Police to conduct car chases, Governments have special authority and things like the World Security Councils and the Sokovia Accords exist to provide oversight to legitimise their actions. 

Stark despite his many flaws and stretching of the boundaries has always played within the system. Cap started as US Military and then a SHIELD asset (the same for Black Widow and Hawkeye). Thor and Black Panther are Royalty with diplomatic immunity and Nortons Hulk was bad when being chased by the military but got legitimised (and a new face) when he was brought in to the Avengers.

Wanda was acting without that oversight and thus had no legitimacy. 

It is all about the System, and as much as it may be fragile and illusionary, its the System that gives order and stability to the world.

Thats the MCU framework and the set up of the Sokovia Accords that had Thaddeus Ross questioning whether the Avengers should be considered Heroes or Vigilantes


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Tonguez said:


> Thats the MCU framework and the set up of the Sokovia Accords that had Thaddeus Ross questioning whether the Avengers should be considered Heroes or Vigilantes




The historical difference between pirates and privateers can be applied to superheroes too.


----------



## MarkB

Tonguez said:


> But Stark wasnt let off the hook, Civil War is party about Stark taking some responsibility for his past actions



That's a novel interpretation. To me, it was all about Stark absolving himself of responsibility, by putting the decision-making in someone else's hands.


----------



## Morrus

Umbran said:


> For the whole, infinite universe, the scale is infinitely larger.



Luckily they are _infinity_ stones!


----------



## moriantumr

It is interesting that the character that is catching flak for not seeing consequences for their actions is the Scarlet Witch. Perhaps centuries of bias against women feared for their “powers” persists even today.


----------



## Tonguez

MarkB said:


> That's a novel interpretation. To me, it was all about Stark absolving himself of responsibility, by putting the decision-making in someone else's hands.




Tony Stark, Billionaire Playboy, Weapon Manufacturer, Captain of Industry beleived he was untouchable and able to do anything he wanted. 
During the arc of the MCU he went from Warmonger to Peacekeeper, he refused to hand his Suit technology over to the US military (until War Machine took it) and he was accused of running a private paramilitary force. 
When finally confronted directly with the consequences of his bad decisions he was forced to realise that he had to make himself answerable to someone else not to absolve his responsibility but to moderate it - the World Security Council became the body that Tony Stark finally submitted to


----------



## tomBitonti

Umbran said:


> He was given a fear-inducing vision, by a person who was radicalized by loss of her parents... to weapons his company built!  He was not actively under her control when he started working with the Mind Stone.  And, the Ultron project had been in development _before_ the movie started.  The project is his reaction to his own untreated PTSD...
> 
> So, if we are giving him a pass, then we should give her one, is all I'm saying.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He had _two entire movies_ of rampages before Age of Ultron.
> 
> 
> 
> Because Clint Barton is perfect, even in his period of mourning the loss of his entire family, and should be allowed to act as judge, jury, and executioner?
> 
> 
> 
> So, mental conditioning relieves one of moral and ethical responsibility, but grief doesn't?
> 
> Seems a bit cherry-picking on what psychological situations give people a pass...



Uh, I don’t think that I relieved any of the supers of moral or ethical responsibility.  To add a mitigating statement for Wanda, she was attempting and failing to handle her grief, and her actions were more or less a psychological breakdown, with additional consequences due to her psychic powers.  Her emotional outburst seems normal for intense grief.  It just had unusual and very possibly unintended consequences.  To say, mitigation is not absolution.  It’s just that the circumstances are complex.
* Hulk’s rage on the carrier was also instigated.   Plus, Banner specifically thought going to the carrier was a bad idea.  He was very deliberately placing himself away from triggers when he was brought in, against his better advice.
TomB


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

moriantumr said:


> It is interesting that the character that is catching flak for not seeing consequences for their actions is the Scarlet Witch. Perhaps centuries of bias against women feared for their “powers” persists even today.




Don't you know that is Man-rule #1, or maybe #2? What in doubt, blame the woman. It has been getting men out of trouble for millennia.


----------



## Imaculata

Disney just released the Wandavision 'Making of'. It was pretty interesting to see, and I never even considered that they digitally replaced Vision's head in every shot! I thought it was just makeup and some prostetics. The best use of CGI, is when you don't even realize it's there. They also added a digital cape for any time Vision flies, and all of the flying was wire work on location, with the wires digitally removed. A surprising lack of green screen use.


----------



## hopeless

From what I've been hearing and reading it sounds like 



Spoiler



SWORD arranged that getaway to help her get over the trauma, but the idiot in charge instead triggered her by showing what they had done with Vision's remains.
Discovering the site Vision had bought planning to build their dream home there is what caused her to finally lose it.
Her breakdown caused her powers to fluctuate creating a place for her to recover which drew Agnes as she was the sorceror assigned to investigate and she chose to take advantage.
That way we have a reason for the actual breakdown and the side effect with the reason Dr Strange didn't turn up as they sent Agnes instead.


----------



## MarkB

hopeless said:


> From what I've been hearing and reading it sounds like
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> SWORD arranged that getaway to help her get over the trauma, but the idiot in charge instead triggered her by showing what they had done with Vision's remains.
> Discovering the site Vision had bought planning to build their dream home there is what caused her to finally lose it.
> Her breakdown caused her powers to fluctuate creating a place for her to recover which drew Agnes as she was the sorceror assigned to investigate and she chose to take advantage.
> That way we have a reason for the actual breakdown and the side effect with the reason Dr Strange didn't turn up as they sent Agnes instead.



I don't know where you're getting the idea that Agnes was part of any larger organisation. It seems far more likely that she was independent, and just happened to be the only magically-sensitive person close enough to sense it when Wanda built the Hex. And I think you're giving SWORD too much credit in suggesting that they had any nobler motivation than just "see whether we can push Wanda into fixing our new toy for us."


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Also, Agnes is _not_ a sorcerer.


----------



## hopeless

Paul Farquhar said:


> Also, Agnes is _not_ a sorcerer.



THAT'S the point!


Spoiler



Her being a Sorceror would explain the absence of Dr Strange or any of his people who are supposed to respond to situations like this!
Agnes witnesses the event and takes advantage using it to cloak her summoning the Darkhold.
She begins to become overconfident thinking she can resolve the situation absorb Wanda's power and come back to the others with legitimate excuse that she was doing her job.
Gets caught by surprise when Wanda uses those sigils, which frankly shouldn't have worked but Agnes was caught by surprise and overwhelmed before she could recover.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Paul Farquhar said:


> Also, Agnes is _not_ a sorcerer.



Sure she is. It doesn’t mean the same thing in Marvel as it does in D&D .


----------



## Paul Farquhar

doctorbadwolf said:


> Sure she is. It doesn’t mean the same thing in Marvel as it does in D&D .



No, she is an MCU witch, which is more like a D&D sorcerer. Her magic is inherent. Doctor Strange is a D&D wizard - his magic is learned and completely different.


----------



## trappedslider

Ahem 
"A sorcerer is a wizard without a hat."- Falcon


----------



## Tonguez

Paul Farquhar said:


> No, she is an MCU witch, which is more like a D&D sorcerer. Her magic is inherent. Doctor Strange is a D&D wizard - his magic is learned and completely different.




I dont think its been stated outright but Runaways indicates that Witch is a title used by Scorcerers. The Doctor Strange prelude comic, shows Tina Minoru (who is a Witch) being trained by the Ancient One. Indeed the villain of that comic is a scorcerer known as The Witch.


----------



## MarkB

hopeless said:


> THAT'S the point!
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Her being a Sorceror would explain the absence of Dr Strange or any of his people who are supposed to respond to situations like this!
> Agnes witnesses the event and takes advantage using it to cloak her summoning the Darkhold.
> She begins to become overconfident thinking she can resolve the situation absorb Wanda's power and come back to the others with legitimate excuse that she was doing her job.
> Gets caught by surprise when Wanda uses those sigils, which frankly shouldn't have worked but Agnes was caught by surprise and overwhelmed before she could recover.



Dr Strange and his compatriots are not omniscient, nor are they necessarily without issues of their own at this point in continuity. There are any number of reasons why they might not be aware of this situation, or able to respond. You're looking for solutions to problems that don't need to be addressed.

And incidentally, why are you using spoiler tags for this? None of your speculation is a spoiler for anyone who's seen the show and read this far through the thread.


----------



## Janx

Eric V said:


> I have always thought (and said in a few quarters) that Stark should have been tried in court in Hague.



Americans don't get tried for war crimes or what have you. Another kind of privilege.


----------



## hopeless

Trying to not spoil this.


----------



## Rabulias

ART! said:


> Reading this made me suddenly realize that the most pure-of-heart MCU hero with the most ordered mind was attracted to the MCU hero with the most chaotic, troubled mind - and vice versa. That's pretty awesome.



To me, a fascinating aspect of Wanda and Vision's relationship in the MCU is how Vision's personality is a combination of the Mind Stone and Stark Technology, two dramatic influences on her life. And while she hated Stark for the devices he produced, she ends up falling in love with one of his creations (well, partially his creation).


----------



## Paul Farquhar

trappedslider said:


> Ahem
> "A sorcerer is a wizard without a hat."- Falcon



He is talking about D&D. An MCU sorcerer is a D&D wizard.

But Agnes and Wanda are witches, which are different.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

hopeless said:


> Her being a Sorceror would explain the absence of Dr Strange or any of his people who are supposed to respond to situations like this!/



No explanation is needed. Doctor's Strange's job is to protect _the world_ from magical threats. The world was never threatened in WandaVision, and the situation resolved itself in a little over a week (official sources). There was no reason for Doctor Strange to get involved.


----------



## Imaculata

I would not be surprised if there was at least a passing mention of the Hex in the new Doctor Strange movie.


----------



## hopeless

Paul Farquhar said:


> No explanation is needed. Doctor's Strange's job is to protect _the world_ from magical threats. The world was never threatened in WandaVision, and the situation resolved itself in a little over a week (official sources). There was no reason for Doctor Strange to get involved.



And gain you missed the point I made.
Had they had revealed Agnes as a member of that order it would explain the absence and yes given what happened that is a threat they would notice.
Which is why her being sent there would explain they did do something.
And help lead into the Dr Strange sequel.
But since you aren't interested why post so many replies over something irrelevant to you?


----------



## trappedslider

Paul Farquhar said:


> He is talking about D&D. An MCU sorcerer is a D&D wizard.



Ummm Neither Bucky nor Falcon mention D&D when discussing it in the clip over in the winter solider thread. For the purposes of the MCU, we have sorcerers and witches, no wizards.

Clip for reference:


----------



## Paul Farquhar

trappedslider said:


> Ummm Neither Bucky nor Falcon mention D&D when discussing it in the clip over in the winter solider thread. For the purposes of the MCU, we have sorcerers and witches, no wizards.



Unless stated otherwise, fiction in the MCU is the same as in our world: The Dick van Dyke Show, Bewitched, The Hobbit _and D&D_. It stands to reason that Falcon, like most Americans of his generation, would use D&D as a point of reference for understanding "real world" magic.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

hopeless said:


> Had they had revealed Agnes as a member of that order



They have revealed that Agnes works for no-one but Agnes.


----------



## trappedslider

Paul Farquhar said:


> Unless stated otherwise, fiction in the MCU is the same as in our world: The Dick van Dyke Show, Bewitched, The Hobbit _and D&D_. It stands to reason that Falcon, like most Americans of his generation, would use D&D as a point of reference for understanding "real world" magic.



assuming he played/knows about D&D, is there any indication that he's had any interaction with D&D or other RPGS?  Has anyone actually identified themselves as a wizard as opposed to a sorcerer? All we have so far are Witches and Sorcerers.
Thus until someone self-identifies as a wizard, all we have are Sorcerers and Witches at least IMO.


----------



## Imaculata

I think the destinction between sorcerers and wizards exists only in D&D. To the rest of the world, they are one and the same.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Imaculata said:


> I think the destinction between sorcerers and wizards exists only in D&D. To the rest of the world, they are one and the same.



Indeed. Apart from the hats.

But in the MCU there is a distinction between sorcerers and witches (and who knows how many other magic wielders?).


----------



## MarkB

Paul Farquhar said:


> Indeed. Apart from the hats.
> 
> But in the MCU there is a distinction between sorcerers and witches (and who knows how many other magic wielders?).



I don't think there's a particular distinction in terms of capabilities and power source. I expect Doctor Strange could learn and cast the same spells Agatha does, and vice versa, for instance.

The only real distinction is which group originally trained them, and what they choose to call themselves.


----------



## ART!

Imaculata said:


> I think the destinction between sorcerers and wizards exists only in D&D. To the rest of the world, they are one and the same.



I think "sorceror" has a more negative connotation than "wizard", broadly speaking. I'd wager that most people hear "sorceror" and think they're probably up to no good - moreso than when they hear "wizard".


----------



## MarkB

ART! said:


> I think "sorceror" has a more negative connotation than "wizard", broadly speaking. I'd wager that most people hear "sorceror" and think they're probably up to no good - moreso than when they hear "wizard".



Look at Star Wars, for example. Ben Kenobi is introduced as "that wizard is just a crazy old man", whereas Vader is challenged by an Imperial officer who's foolish enough not to be intimidated by his "sorcerous ways".


----------



## billd91

Paul Farquhar said:


> Unless stated otherwise, fiction in the MCU is the same as in our world: The Dick van Dyke Show, Bewitched, The Hobbit _and D&D_. It stands to reason that Falcon, like most Americans of his generation, would use D&D as a point of reference for understanding "real world" magic.



I think there are much stronger alternative possibilities:
The Lord of the Rings movies. Gandalf was a wizard, he wore a hat.
People mostly know what a wizard's hat is - but anyone ever heard of a sorcerer's hat outside of Disney's Fantasia (1940)?

Without an explicit reference to D&D or a lot more evidence, I don't think it stands to reason that Falcon or even most Americans of his generation would use D&D as a point of reference for understanding real world magic.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> I don't think there's a particular distinction



There is a very strong visual distinction:


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Paul Farquhar said:


> There is a very strong visual distinction:
> View attachment 134232View attachment 134233



Very very bad comparison, but also a very different type of magic being employed. Strange could definitely use chaos magic, and there is no reason to think Wanda couldn’t learn the magic Strange uses, they just learned magic from very different sources, but it’s all learnable. 

But more importantly, in marvel they’re all sorcerers. Strange is the Sorcerer Supreme, Wizard isn’t really a term used in the MCU, and witch seems to mean a cultural difference and a difference of approach, but it isn’t super clear yet because they haven’t dove into exposition on the subject yet.


----------



## tomBitonti

It seemed to me that Falcon was brushing aside the differences.  To him, both Wizards and Sorcerers are both just folks who use magic, with minor differences in presentation.  Bucky was having a nerd moment and Falcon was saying, ”Dude, I don’t care”.
TomB


----------



## Paul Farquhar

doctorbadwolf said:


> Very very bad comparison,



Best pics I could find. Couldn't find anything of Agatha slinging spells, but it's pretty much the same as Wanda but purple. No drawing runic circles in the air.


doctorbadwolf said:


> but also a very different type of magic being employed. Strange could definitely use chaos magic



I'm pretty sure only a scarlet witch, or someone who steals the powers of a scarlet witch, can use chaos magic. If anyone could use it Wanda wouldn't be important. That's kinda the point.


doctorbadwolf said:


> , and there is no reason to think Wanda couldn’t learn the magic Strange uses



Sorcery is learnable by anyone.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Paul Farquhar said:


> Best pics I could find. Couldn't find anything of Agatha slinging spells, but it's pretty much the same as Wanda but purple. No drawing runic circles in the air.
> 
> I'm pretty sure only a scarlet witch, or someone who steals the powers of a scarlet witch, can use chaos magic. If anyone could use it Wanda wouldn't be important. That's kinda the point.



No, it isn’t. At all. On any level. The idea with her magic is that she does it naturally, without any knowledge, not that only she can do that type of magic. Agatha wants her _power, _not her...access to a dangerous type of magic.


Paul Farquhar said:


> Sorcery is learnable by anyone.



And multiple witches have been shown learning magic, including from the tradition of magic Strange practices. 

The terms are not as distinct in the MCU as they are in D&D .


----------



## Paul Farquhar

doctorbadwolf said:


> No, it isn’t. At all. On any level. The idea with her magic is that she does it naturally, without any knowledge, not that only she can do that type of magic. Agatha wants her _power, _not her...access to a dangerous type of magic.



I take it you didn't watch WandaVision....


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Paul Farquhar said:


> I take it you didn't watch WandaVision....



I did. Did you? She wants Wanda’s raw power, just like what she drained from her coven.


----------



## ART!

doctorbadwolf said:


> I did. Did you? She wants Wanda’s raw power, just like what she drained from her coven.



Right. We're not given any reason to think Agnes' plan is flawed, so the power she was sucking out of Wanda was her innate chaos magic power. Agnes' figured that power combined with her skill and experience would make her incredibly powerful.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

ART! said:


> Right. We're not given any reason to think Agnes' plan is flawed, so the power she was sucking out of Wanda was her innate chaos magic power. Agnes' figured that power combined with her skill and experience would make her incredibly powerful.



Yep. Draining Wanda's power would have made her unimaginably powerful, on top of her hundreds of years of experience and knowledge.


----------



## Tonguez

Paul Farquhar said:


> There is a very strong visual distinction:




The magic used by the Masters of the Mystic Arts is very distinctive in as much as it uses particular Tao Mandala to defend and contain spells. That does not however mean that all Scorcerers in the MCU use mandala.

Of the other spell users we’ve seen Loki, Hela and Ghost Rider* (AoSHEILD) they do not use Mandala, The known witches including Wanda, Agnes, Agnes’ Mother/Coven, Thors mother, Morgana Le Fay and Tina and Nico Minoru also do not use Mandala. 

That just tells us we dont have enough data to identify exactly what a Scorcerer is in the MCU


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Tonguez said:


> The magic used by the Masters of the Mystic Arts is very distinctive in as much as it uses particular Tao Mandala to defend and contain spells. That does not however mean that all Scorcerers in the MCU use mandala.
> 
> Of the other spell users we’ve seen Loki, Hela and Ghost Rider* (AoSHEILD) they do not use Mandala, The known witches including Wanda, Agnes, Agnes’ Mother/Coven, Thors mother, Morgana Le Fay and Tina and Nico Minoru also do not use Mandala.
> 
> That just tells us we dont have enough data to identify exactly what a Scorcerer is in the MCU




Some of those are not canon, though, specifically all the ones from a TV series that is not Disney+ and from movies not co-produced by Marvel.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

doctorbadwolf said:


> I did. Did you? She wants Wanda’s raw power, just like what she drained from her coven.



Sure she does. But that is a side thing. She also identifies Wanda a Scarlet Witch - the name for those very rare beings that can use Chaos Magic and hence defeat the Sorcerer Supreme. If the Sorcerer Supreme could use Chaos Magic himself he could hardly be trumped by someone who can use Chaos Magic could he!?

Wanda is also identified as a Nexus - look it up.


----------



## Imaculata

Paul Farquhar said:


> Wanda is also identified as a Nexus - look it up.




As is Kang the Conquerer. 

Nexus beings may become an important plot point in the next phase of the MCU.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Imaculata said:


> As is Kang the Conquerer.
> 
> Nexus beings may become an important plot point in the next phase of the MCU.



I doubt the would have put it in if this wasn't the case. I take that commercial as representing the future.


----------



## MarkB

Paul Farquhar said:


> Sure she does. But that is a side thing. She also identifies Wanda a Scarlet Witch - the name for those very rare beings that can use Chaos Magic and hence defeat the Sorcerer Supreme. If the Sorcerer Supreme could use Chaos Magic himself he could hardly be trumped by someone who can use Chaos Magic could he!?
> 
> Wanda is also identified as a Nexus - look it up.



You're missing the point. If only Wanda could use chaos magic, Agnes wouldn't be able to suck out that magic and use it herself.

Therefore, the unique thing about the Scarlet Witch isn't her power source, it's her power level. She is simply stronger than the Sorcerer Supreme.


----------



## Tonguez

MarkB said:


> You're missing the point. If only Wanda could use chaos magic, Agnes wouldn't be able to suck out that magic and use it herself.
> 
> Therefore, the unique thing about the Scarlet Witch isn't her power source, it's her power level. She is simply stronger than the Sorcerer Supreme.



Looking to the actual dialogue of the show, Agatha was amazed that Wanda had spells miles away on the edge of town operating on “autopilot” - ie Wanda was so powerful that she could subconciously cast and maintain multiple spells without having to concentrate

Thats something not even the Scorcerer Supreme can do


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> You're missing the point. If only Wanda could use chaos magic, Agnes wouldn't be able to suck out that magic and use it herself.



No. Type of magic is different to power of magic.


MarkB said:


> Therefore, the unique thing about the Scarlet Witch isn't her power source, it's her power level. She is simply stronger than the Sorcerer Supreme.



The dialogue in episode 8 is very clear. She is a Scarlet Witch because Chaos Magic, not because Very Powerful.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Keeping it in the family. Pointed out by my wife whilst watching our own 1970s reruns. This is Doctor Strange's mum:


----------



## Imaculata

As a side note, Elizabeth Olsen has stated that she is already filming the new Doctor Strange movie right now. I can't wait!


----------



## MoonSong

Imaculata said:


> As a side note, Elizabeth Olsen has stated that she is already filming the new Doctor Strange movie right now. I can't wait!



I hope there are theaters left near me by that point. I really want to see that movie. And Black Widow...


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Paul Farquhar said:


> Sure she does. But that is a side thing. She also identifies Wanda a Scarlet Witch - the name for those very rare beings that can use Chaos Magic and hence defeat the Sorcerer Supreme. If the Sorcerer Supreme could use Chaos Magic himself he could hardly be trumped by someone who can use Chaos Magic could he!?
> 
> Wanda is also identified as a Nexus - look it up.



I think you’re reading into what was said soemthing that isn’t necessarily there.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

MarkB said:


> You're missing the point. If only Wanda could use chaos magic, Agnes wouldn't be able to suck out that magic and use it herself.
> 
> Therefore, the unique thing about the Scarlet Witch isn't her power source, it's her power level. She is simply stronger than the Sorcerer Supreme.



Exactly. 


Tonguez said:


> Looking to the actual dialogue of the show, Agatha was amazed that Wanda had spells miles away on the edge of town operating on “autopilot” - ie Wanda was so powerful that she could subconciously cast and maintain multiple spells without having to concentrate
> 
> Thats something not even the Scorcerer Supreme can do



Yep, she is on a tier or power that no one else on earth can match.


----------



## trappedslider




----------



## MarkB

trappedslider said:


> View attachment 134363



A sorcerer is a wizard without a degree.


----------



## trappedslider




----------



## Deset Gled

I've been avoiding this thread so far because I was late in watching the show, but I just finished it last night.  Overall, I liked it, but a couple of things bugged me.

How did Agatha end up in Westview?  It's implied she was a citizen of the town when Wanda went there.  Coincidence, stalking Wanda, or did she just magically insert herself there somehow?  Did she arrive in Westview before or after Wanda's mental break?

Hayward's character was very disappointing.  Oh, the leader of the powerful organization who originally acts like he's helping is actually an antagonist?  Yawn.  Done to death in the MCU.  Not to mention, his role as antagonist only serves to take time and drama away from conflict with Agatha.

Also, I think this was mentioned earlier in the thread, but I don't think Hayward should have been arrested at the end.  He's the leader of SWORD.  Everything he did seems within the power of that organization, and the US government clearly let SWORD take over the operation.  He may not have been moral, but I don't think he did anything prosecutable.  

On the other hand, Darcy Lewis should obviously be arrested for assaulting Hayward.  He was retreating/fleeing when she came from nowhere and rammed him with a truck.  That was clearly attempted murder for revenge, zero chance for a self defense claim.

And, dang, those were some long credits for a TV show.


----------



## BRayne

Deset Gled said:


> I've been avoiding this thread so far because I was late in watching the show, but I just finished it last night.  Overall, I liked it, but a couple of things bugged me.
> 
> How did Agatha end up in Westview?  It's implied she was a citizen of the town when Wanda went there.  Coincidence, stalking Wanda, or did she just magically insert herself there somehow?  Did she arrive in Westview before or after Wanda's mental break?
> 
> Hayward's character was very disappointing.  Oh, the leader of the powerful organization who originally acts like he's helping is actually an antagonist?  Yawn.  Done to death in the MCU.  Not to mention, his role as antagonist only serves to take time and drama away from conflict with Agatha.
> 
> Also, I think this was mentioned earlier in the thread, but I don't think Hayward should have been arrested at the end.  He's the leader of SWORD.  Everything he did seems within the power of that organization, and the US government clearly let SWORD take over the operation.  He may not have been moral, but I don't think he did anything prosecutable.
> 
> On the other hand, Darcy Lewis should obviously be arrested for assaulting Hayward.  He was retreating/fleeing when she came from nowhere and rammed him with a truck.  That was clearly attempted murder for revenge, zero chance for a self defense claim.
> 
> And, dang, those were some long credits for a TV show.




Agatha said she detected the energy of Wanda's spellcasting and came to investigate. Hayward violated some article of the Sokovia Accords in creating White Vision which therefore means he interfered with a Federal Agent's investigation in handcuffing Jimmy.


----------



## Deset Gled

BRayne said:


> Hayward violated some article of the Sokovia Accords in creating White Vision which therefore means he interfered with a Federal Agent's investigation in handcuffing Jimmy.



Did he violate the Sokovia Accords?  I'm not being facetious here, I'm legitimately asking.  The Accords prohibit creating AI.  He didn't create AI, he just turned it on.  Does that violate the Accords?  And, lets be fair here, if Hayward violated the Accords activating the dead Vision, then Wanda clearly did as well by creating the new Vision in Westview.  No one from the FBI seems to care about that.

Also, he kicked Jimmy off the SWORD base, which he clearly had government authority to do (if he didn't, the arrest would have happened 3-4 episodes earlier).  After that, Jimmy was clearly trespassing and Hayward had all the authority he needed to handcuff him.

Furthermore, can the FBI actually arrest you for violating the Accords?  I don't think so.  It's an international agreement.  There would be no handcuffing or being taken into custody without intervention from the US State Department.  Certainly not the on-site arrest that we see.

And, most notably, did anyone actually know that Hayward turned Vision back on?  We know, because we saw it (and SWORD people would).  But none of the characters in the show actually know that.  For all they know, White Vision could have been created by Agatha or Wanda, or simply accidentally.  There's no witnesses and zero evidence.

Hayward is just a shoehorned designated villain.  He just gets arrested because he's not friends with the protagonists.


----------



## hopeless

From what I've read and heard that's just one of the problems with this series.

Another is the fact Wanda is the villain and instead of using Agnes to reveal she was responsible for Wanda's meltdown using her as the focus of the hex she planned but lacked the raw power for.
I still think they should have revealed Agatha kept the sorceror supreme and co from turning up as she was dealing with the situation.
Thus when she doesn't report back and they go looking for her that would be the reason Dr Strange gets involved.

It sounded like a good series just needed better writing and someone who understood they're setting Wanda up as the new Thanos and as it stands there's no reason to arrest that idiot unless he was actually disobeying orders when he unleashed White Vision.


----------



## BRayne

Deset Gled said:


> Did he violate the Sokovia Accords?  I'm not being facetious here, I'm legitimately asking.  The Accords prohibit creating AI.  He didn't create AI, he just turned it on.  Does that violate the Accords?  And, lets be fair here, if Hayward violated the Accords activating the dead Vision, then Wanda clearly did as well by creating the new Vision in Westview.  No one from the FBI seems to care about that.
> 
> Also, he kicked Jimmy off the SWORD base, which he clearly had government authority to do (if he didn't, the arrest would have happened 3-4 episodes earlier).  After that, Jimmy was clearly trespassing and Hayward had all the authority he needed to handcuff him.
> 
> Furthermore, can the FBI actually arrest you for violating the Accords?  I don't think so.  It's an international agreement.  There would be no handcuffing or being taken into custody without intervention from the US State Department.  Certainly not the on-site arrest that we see.
> 
> And, most notably, did anyone actually know that Hayward turned Vision back on?  We know, because we saw it (and SWORD people would).  But none of the characters in the show actually know that.  For all they know, White Vision could have been created by Agatha or Wanda, or simply accidentally.  There's no witnesses and zero evidence.
> 
> Hayward is just a shoehorned designated villain.  He just gets arrested because he's not friends with the protagonists.




The specific thing violating the Sokovia Accords was "resurrecting Vision" per Jimmy in an earlier episode. Since the US signed and presumably ratified the Accords it is in fact US Federal law which means the FBI has jurisdiction plus Hayward admitted to Jimmy that he did it.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Deset Gled said:


> Did he violate the Sokovia Accords?  I'm not being facetious here, I'm legitimately asking.  The Accords prohibit creating AI.  He didn't create AI, he just turned it on.  Does that violate the Accords?  And, lets be fair here, if Hayward violated the Accords activating the dead Vision, then Wanda clearly did as well by creating the new Vision in Westview.  No one from the FBI seems to care about that.
> 
> Also, he kicked Jimmy off the SWORD base, which he clearly had government authority to do (if he didn't, the arrest would have happened 3-4 episodes earlier).  After that, Jimmy was clearly trespassing and Hayward had all the authority he needed to handcuff him.
> 
> Furthermore, can the FBI actually arrest you for violating the Accords?  I don't think so.  It's an international agreement.  There would be no handcuffing or being taken into custody without intervention from the US State Department.  Certainly not the on-site arrest that we see.
> 
> And, most notably, did anyone actually know that Hayward turned Vision back on?  We know, because we saw it (and SWORD people would).  But none of the characters in the show actually know that.  For all they know, White Vision could have been created by Agatha or Wanda, or simply accidentally.  There's no witnesses and zero evidence.
> 
> Hayward is just a shoehorned designated villain.  He just gets arrested because he's not friends with the protagonists.




He violated Vision's Will. He did the whole White Vision thing as his personal side project, breaking who knows how many laws and government protocols and rules to do so. Using government resources for a private project means embezzling or stealing those resources to rebuild Vision. All this was in those files that Darcy "illegally" hacked from Hayward's computer and emailed to Jimmy. So there is proof of all this for an arrest and trial.


----------



## hopeless

Could also throw in Wanda's reaction to his project, which wouldn't be hard to explain her subsequent breakdown.
That could also make it appear he sent White Vision to kill her to prevent what he did coming out as that would bite him in the backside as I understand the footage of her entering that facility was deliberately doctored?


----------



## ART!

hopeless said:


> From what I've read and heard that's just one of the problems with this series.
> 
> Another is the fact Wanda is the villain and instead of using Agnes to reveal she was responsible for Wanda's meltdown using her as the focus of the hex she planned but lacked the raw power for.
> I still think they should have revealed Agatha kept the sorceror supreme and co from turning up as she was dealing with the situation.
> Thus when she doesn't report back and they go looking for her that would be the reason Dr Strange gets involved.
> 
> It sounded like a good series just needed better writing and someone who understood they're setting Wanda up as the new Thanos and as it stands there's no reason to arrest that idiot unless he was actually disobeying orders when he unleashed White Vision.



Saying Wanda is the villain is a very coarse way of looking at it, when the portrayal itself is very nuanced. She's the protagonist, but not the hero. (If anyone is the hero of the piece, I'd say it's Vision.)

I think all the stuff with Wanda and Vision is _excellent_, Kathryn Hahn is great as Agnes but dull as Agatha, and most of the expository stuff is clunky.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

hopeless said:


> Could also throw in Wanda's reaction to his project, which wouldn't be hard to explain her subsequent breakdown.
> That could also make it appear he sent White Vision to kill her to prevent what he did coming out as that would bite him in the backside as I understand the footage of her entering that facility was deliberately doctored?




Yep, he faked the footage to make it look like Wanda took Vision's body, so he could cover his own theft of the body.


----------



## Rune

Deset Gled said:


> How did Agatha end up in Westview?  It's implied she was a citizen of the town when Wanda went there.  Coincidence, stalking Wanda, or did she just magically insert herself there somehow?  Did she arrive in Westview before or after Wanda's mental break?



She said she wanted to find out who was using so much power. Also, we see from Ralph’s utility bill (in his name) that he had been living in her house for months. Conclussion: Agatha took over the residence when she moved in and magicked Ralph into her servant (eyes and ears, she calls him). 


Deset Gled said:


> Hayward's character was very disappointing.  Oh, the leader of the powerful organization who originally acts like he's helping is actually an antagonist?  Yawn.  Done to death in the MCU.  Not to mention, his role as antagonist only serves to take time and drama away from conflict with Agatha.



Gotta disagree here. The show presents Hayward as an obvious villain to misdirect us from the other (insidious) villain of the show, Agatha. It’s a kind of magic trick, you see. 


Deset Gled said:


> Also, I think this was mentioned earlier in the thread, but I don't think Hayward should have been arrested at the end.  He's the leader of SWORD.  Everything he did seems within the power of that organization, and the US government clearly let SWORD take over the operation.  He may not have been moral, but I don't think he did anything prosecutable.
> 
> On the other hand, Darcy Lewis should obviously be arrested for assaulting Hayward.  He was retreating/fleeing when she came from nowhere and rammed him with a truck.  That was clearly attempted murder for revenge, zero chance for a self defense claim.



By the point at which Hayward was arrested (and also by the point he got rammed by Darcy), he had already attempted to murder two children (whom he may defensibly believe to be less than real) and then _continued_ to attempt to murder one very real SWORD agent who had positioned herself to defend them. He did not stop firing. That’s illegal. 

Add to that the fact that Darcy had already emailed Woo with evidence of what he’s been up to with Operation Cataract (specifically, the files he had hidden behind a firewall), if anything he had been doing was illegal or in violation of the Sokovia Accords (likely?), Woo, and, hence, the FBI, knows it by the time Woo gets detained.


----------



## Deset Gled

BRayne said:


> The specific thing violating the Sokovia Accords was "resurrecting Vision" per Jimmy in an earlier episode. Since the US signed and presumably ratified the Accords it is in fact US Federal law which means the FBI has jurisdiction plus Hayward admitted to Jimmy that he did it.





Enevhar Aldarion said:


> He violated Vision's Will. He did the whole White Vision thing as his personal side project, breaking who knows how many laws and government protocols and rules to do so. Using government resources for a private project means embezzling or stealing those resources to rebuild Vision. All this was in those files that Darcy "illegally" hacked from Hayward's computer and emailed to Jimmy. So there is proof of all this for an arrest and trial.



I can accept this, but I have to admit I got none of it while watching the show.  A lot of these things sound sound like long court battles to decide, where prematurely arresting him would actually hurt the case.  On a related note, if the evidence against him is just from Darcy's illegally hacked computer and the testimony of someone who was arrested for trespassing, they're going to have a tough time taking him out in court.  Unless they get some underlings to flip on him, I guess.

Also, is SWORD private, government, or government funded?  They seem to have authority above the FBI to take over the site.  What's the difference between something being Hayward's "personal side project" and it being, y'know, a thing that the organization is just doing?  I understand nothing about how that organization works from the show. That's part of what makes it hard to understand what he's being arrested for.



Rune said:


> By the point at which Hayward was arrested (and also by the point he got rammed by Darcy), he had already attempted to murder two children (whom he may defensibly believe to be less than real) and then _continued_ to attempt to murder one very real SWORD agent who had positioned herself to defend them. He did not stop firing. That’s illegal.




For starters, I'm not sure it's illegal.  They weren't real kids, and he could argue that he was acting either in self defense (or that they were acting against the Sokovia Accords, maybe?).  And he only shot Rambeau because she ran in front of the bullets (with super human speed).  Furthermore, Darcy wasn't actually present to see any of that.

But none of that discussion actually matters.  Darcy still had absolutely no right to attack Hayward when she did.  At the time she rammed him, he was clearly retreating.  There was absolutely no threat to herself or anyone else.  She was not acting in defense of herself or others.  She made a premeditated attack with a deadly weapon against someone who had removed themselves from combat.  There is no place in the US where you are allowed to hunt down and murder someone just because they did something wrong to your friends a little while ago.


----------



## ART!

Deset Gled said:


> I can accept this, but I have to admit I got none of it while watching the show.  A lot of these things sound sound like long court battles to decide, where prematurely arresting him would actually hurt the case.  On a related note, if the evidence against him is just from Darcy's illegally hacked computer and the testimony of someone who was arrested for trespassing, they're going to have a tough time taking him out in court.  Unless they get some underlings to flip on him, I guess.
> 
> Also, is SWORD private, government, or government funded?  They seem to have authority above the FBI to take over the site.  What's the difference between something being Hayward's "personal side project" and it being, y'know, a thing that the organization is just doing?  I understand nothing about how that organization works from the show. That's part of what makes it hard to understand what he's being arrested for.
> 
> 
> 
> For starters, I'm not sure it's illegal.  They weren't real kids, and he could argue that he was acting either in self defense (or that they were acting against the Sokovia Accords, maybe?).  And he only shot Rambeau because she ran in front of the bullets (with super human speed).  Furthermore, Darcy wasn't actually present to see any of that.
> 
> But none of that discussion actually matters.  Darcy still had absolutely no right to attack Hayward when she did.  At the time she rammed him, he was clearly retreating.  There was absolutely no threat to herself or anyone else.  She was not acting in defense of herself or others.  She made a premeditated attack with a deadly weapon against someone who had removed themselves from combat.  There is no place in the US where you are allowed to hunt down and murder someone just because they did something wrong to your friends a little while ago.



The law in movies and tv shows is ruled by _drama_, whereas law in reality is ruled by very detailed laws and statutes and whatever else. WandaVision operates very firmly in the former, not the latter.


----------



## Rune

Deset Gled said:


> I can accept this, but I have to admit I got none of it while watching the show.  A lot of these things sound sound like long court battles to decide, where prematurely arresting him would actually hurt the case.  On a related note, if the evidence against him is just from Darcy's illegally hacked computer and the testimony of someone who was arrested for trespassing, they're going to have a tough time taking him out in court.  Unless they get some underlings to flip on him, I guess.
> 
> Also, is SWORD private, government, or government funded?  They seem to have authority above the FBI to take over the site.  What's the difference between something being Hayward's "personal side project" and it being, y'know, a thing that the organization is just doing?  I understand nothing about how that organization works from the show. That's part of what makes it hard to understand what he's being arrested for.
> 
> 
> 
> For starters, I'm not sure it's illegal.  They weren't real kids, and he could argue that he was acting either in self defense (or that they were acting against the Sokovia Accords, maybe?).  And he only shot Rambeau because she ran in front of the bullets (with super human speed).



The kids are irrelevant. Hayward continued to shoot at (an unarmed) Monica _after_ she had moved to protect them. He had time to stop shooting. He chose not to.

He only stops because his gun is empty. Which we know because he pulls the trigger twice more while aiming at Monica. In real-time.

That’s attempted murder. Although, I’m sure he’d argue otherwise in court. 


Deset Gled said:


> Furthermore, Darcy wasn't actually present to see any of that.



We don’t know that. All we know is that _we_ didn’t see _her_. 


Deset Gled said:


> But none of that discussion actually matters.  Darcy still had absolutely no right to attack Hayward when she did.  At the time she rammed him, he was clearly retreating.  There was absolutely no threat to herself or anyone else.  She was not acting in defense of herself or others.  She made a premeditated attack with a deadly weapon against someone who had removed themselves from combat.  There is no place in the US where you are allowed to hunt down and murder someone just because they did something wrong to your friends a little while ago.



Maybe. He’s in an armored vehicle and obviously unhurt (unless pain merely annoys him). 

But also, ya know? Comic books. Characters deal out all kinds of physical punishment that would cause injury or death in the real world. Generally without consequence. This has been true in pretty much every MCU thing so far. Why hold this one to a different standard?


----------



## Arilyn

ART! said:


> The law in movies and tv shows is ruled by _drama_, whereas law in reality is ruled by very detailed laws and statutes and whatever else. WandaVision operates very firmly in the former, not the latter.



Yep. Law and police dramas don't follow real world procedures, let alone a comic mini series.


----------



## Deset Gled

ART! said:


> The law in movies and tv shows is ruled by _drama_, whereas law in reality is ruled by very detailed laws and statutes and whatever else. WandaVision operates very firmly in the former, not the latter.




WandaVision also operates within the jurisdiction of nerd law, which is ruled by annoying details and arguments on the internet.



Rune said:


> Maybe. He’s in an armored vehicle and obviously unhurt (unless pain merely annoys him).




This is the type of thing that destroys self defense claims in court.  The risk of death is inherent in any high speed collision.  If Darcy claims to have taken time to consider the armor level of his vehicle vs the mass of her truck, it's only proof that her actions were premeditated against an unarmed opponent, not that she didn't mean to kill him.



Rune said:


> But also, ya know? Comic books. Characters deal out all kinds of physical punishment that would cause injury or death in the real world. Generally without consequence. This has been true in pretty much every MCU thing so far. Why hold this one to a different standard?




First, see above nerd law jurisdictional claim.

Second, for me it's about proximity to other plot points.  Say your vampires get set on fire by sunlight.  You can bend the rules and have a vampire get singed by indirect sunlight in one episode, but catch on flames from nearly the same amount of light in the next.  It's not ideal, but you can use your literary license when needed.  But you can't have two identical vampires standing next to each other, get exposed to the same sunlight, and have one just cover his eyes while the other bursts into flame.  That's bad writing.

There is a significant amount of plot in the MCU dedicated to the legalities of superheroes.  There's hours of screentime dedicated to the Sokovia Accords, and morality and consequences for actions.  In the scene we're discussing, one character is villianized for breaking an imaginary law, and shown on screen being arrested for it.  Yet right next to him is another character that purposefully broke a very major real life law, and there are literally no consequences.

On a personal level, it really drove home to me how the writers had blatantly designated heroes and villians in the story.  These guys are good, so they things they do must be good.  These guys are bad, so the things they do must be bad.  To me, that's just bad writing.


----------



## Older Beholder

Deset Gled said:


> In the scene we're discussing, one character is villianized for breaking an imaginary law, and shown on screen being arrested for it.  Yet right next to him is another character that purposefully broke a very major real life law, and there are literally no consequences.
> 
> On a personal level, it really drove home to me how the writers had blatantly designated heroes and villians in the story.  These guys are good, so they things they do must be good.  These guys are bad, so the things they do must be bad.  To me, that's just bad writing.




The guy doctored footage in order to steal a multi- billion dollar war machine while framing Wanda for it.
I thought it was pretty grey whether Wanda was the hero or the villain throughout the show.


----------



## Tonguez

ModestModernist said:


> The guy doctored footage in order to steal a multi- billion dollar war machine while framing Wanda for it.
> I thought it was pretty grey whether Wanda was the hero or the villain throughout the show.




um, why would Haywood need to steal the Vision when he already had him in SWORD possession - and apparently ownership?


----------



## Older Beholder

Tonguez said:


> um, why would Haywood need to steal the Vision when he already had him in SWORD possession - and apparently ownership?




 When he first arrives and takes over the operation outside of Westview he shows them footage of Wanda breaking in and stealing Vision. Later we're shown in the flashback it didn't happen like that. 
His whole reason for being there was based on fraud. 

As for his motives, I don't remember exactly but I thought he wanted to build a weapon he wasn't authorised to under SWORD.


----------



## Marc_C

5 episodes watched so far. It definitely gets better. My mom used to watch black & white situation comedies all the time. I developed an allergy (same for musicals). It was hard for me to get past the first two episodes.


----------



## Marc_C

Will we see the new Vision in Falcon+Winter Soldier?


----------



## Omand

Marc_C said:


> Will we see the new Vision in Falcon+Winter Soldier?



An open question.

I personally doubt it, but ...


----------



## Nikosandros

I seem to remember that Wandavision was originally scheduled to be shown later that F&WS, so it's unlikely but I guess not impossible.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

WandaVision is three weeks after the return Snap. Falcon is six months after. But Falcon was planned to be aired first, and I am sure the scripts and everything but the filming that was delayed by covid was done, so I doubt anyone from WandaVison will appear. White Vision is probably not planned to appear again until the movies, as I don't think I ever heard anything about crossovers between the Disney+ shows. Netflix had their shows meet up in The Defenders, and Lucasfilm has said in advance that Ahsoka, Mandalorian, and the Rangers show would cross over into some big finale of their stories., but those were both announced in advance. I would have to dig up the Feige quote, but he did say crossover between Disney+ shows and movies is for sure.


----------



## Marc_C

I felt ancient when I saw child Wanda watch classic tv shows in DVDs. At that age I had to watch my favourite  show live or miss them.


----------



## MarkB

Some of the other streaming services seem to be trying to capitalise on WandaVision's highlighting of various sitcoms. I've had the Dick Van Dyke Show appear on Amazon Prime, and The Office and Modern Family on Netflix.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> Some of the other streaming services seem to be trying to capitalise on WandaVision's highlighting of various sitcoms. I've had the Dick Van Dyke Show appear on Amazon Prime, and The Office and Modern Family on Netflix.



The Dick Van Dyke show actually appeared on Amazon a couple of weeks _before_ WandaVision aired. So either coincidence or good intelligence.

Or magic.


----------



## Omand

Paul Farquhar said:


> The Dick Van Dyke show actually appeared on Amazon a couple of weeks _before_ WandaVision aired. So either coincidence or good intelligence.
> 
> Or magic.



Aliens, Androids and Wizards?

Cheers


----------



## trappedslider




----------



## trappedslider

WANDAVISION Finale's Post-Credits Scene Seemingly Altered To Include A Very Strange Silhouette
					

We thought this must be a clever fan-edit at first, but it looks like Disney+ really has added a slightly different post-credits sequence to the "Series Finale" of Marvel's WandaVision. Take a look...




					www.comicbookmovie.com
				




time to go back and watch


----------



## pukunui

trappedslider said:


> WANDAVISION Finale's Post-Credits Scene Seemingly Altered To Include A Very Strange Silhouette
> 
> 
> We thought this must be a clever fan-edit at first, but it looks like Disney+ really has added a slightly different post-credits sequence to the "Series Finale" of Marvel's WandaVision. Take a look...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.comicbookmovie.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> time to go back and watch



EDIT: I see it! It’s like a man-shaped discoloration descending along the side of the mountain towards the back of Wanda’s cabin!


----------



## trappedslider

pukunui said:


> EDIT: I see it! It’s like a man-shaped discoloration descending along the side of the mountain towards the back of Wanda’s cabin!



And in case you wondering what went into making the pilot Marvel's WandaVision Pilot Script Is Now Available To Read Online - IGN


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

pukunui said:


> EDIT: I see it! It’s like a man-shaped discoloration descending along the side of the mountain towards the back of Wanda’s cabin!




Maybe so many people were upset that Doctor Strange did not get to make an appearance in the show, that this is supposed to be him arriving at the cabin to visit her?


----------



## Older Beholder

Agatha is getting her own show...

‘WandaVision’ Spinoff Starring Kathryn Hahn in the Works at Disney Plus (EXCLUSIVE)


----------



## MarkB

The Lizard Wizard said:


> Agatha is getting her own show...
> 
> ‘WandaVision’ Spinoff Starring Kathryn Hahn in the Works at Disney Plus (EXCLUSIVE)



If it isn't called "Agatha All Along" I'll be very disappointed.


----------



## Lidgar

"Agatha and the Dude at the End of the Universe"


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Yep, but no word yet, of course, if it will be a prequel or sequel to WandaVision. A prequel would definitely be darker than a sequel, maybe too dark for D+?


----------



## Older Beholder

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Yep, but no word yet, of course, if it will be a prequel or sequel to WandaVision. A prequel would definitely be darker than a sequel, maybe too dark for D+?




My guess is that it'll continue on from WandaVision with Agatha trapped in Westview. There was still plenty of threads left open in that story.


----------



## Tonguez

The Lizard Wizard said:


> My guess is that it'll continue on from WandaVision with Agatha trapped in Westview. There was still plenty of threads left open in that story.



Isnt the 'real' town released at the end of Wandavision? - and Agatha locked in her nosy neighbour non witch persona?

Its been pitched as a dark comedy though so perhaps being a clueless busybody in a town where SWORD is trying to deprogramme the victims of Wanda's sitcom-universe might be amusing to some?

Maybe something like Bewitched meets The Prisoner?

personally I'd prefer a prequel maybe set it in the 1950s as a post war Department of the Uncanny, as asit-com


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

The Lizard Wizard said:


> Agatha is getting her own show...
> 
> ‘WandaVision’ Spinoff Starring Kathryn Hahn in the Works at Disney Plus (EXCLUSIVE)



I mean, who isn't at this point? Not that I'm complaining, I definitely love having all of the new Marvel content, but it does feel like everyone and his cousin is getting a Disney+ show.


----------



## Older Beholder

Tonguez said:


> Isnt the 'real' town released at the end of Wandavision? - and Agatha locked in her nosy neighbour non witch persona?




Yeah, maybe 'trapped inside her character in the town' would have been more accurate.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Tonguez said:


> Maybe something like Bewitched meets The Prisoner?



You can't say that idea isn't a winner. I can't believe no one has done it before.


Tonguez said:


> personally I'd prefer a prequel maybe set it in the 1950s as a post war Department of the Uncanny, as asit-com



Flashback episodes. They have over 300 years of history for Agatha to muck around with.


----------



## Imaculata

I wonder if that means we'll see Agatha in one of the big phase 4 movies at some point. I mean they already have her walking around as a meet and greet character at some of the Disney parks.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Imaculata said:


> I wonder if that means we'll see Agatha is one of the big phase 4 movies at some point. I mean they already have her walking around as a meet and greet character at some of the Disney parks.



I'm guessing that if that happens, she'll first appear in a post or mid-credit scene of Doctor Strange into the Multiverse of Madness.


----------



## Tonguez

Imaculata said:


> I wonder if that means we'll see Agatha is one of the big phase 4 movies at some point. I mean they already have her walking around as a meet and greet character at some of the Disney parks.



Really? Wow that does bode well for her return …


----------



## Janx

AcererakTriple6 said:


> I mean, who isn't at this point? Not that I'm complaining, I definitely love having all of the new Marvel content, but it does feel like everyone and his cousin is getting a Disney+ show.



I don't have a Disney+ show.


----------



## Nellisir

The Lizard Wizard said:


> I thought it was pretty grey whether Wanda was the hero or the villain throughout the show.




It's a hero broken/hero redeemed arc, and basically returns her to neutral. Hero goes bad for <reasons>; hero does <bad things>; hero realizes what they have done; deeper hidden villain is revealed to have orchestrated or taken advantage of <bad things>; hero undoes <bad things> at a personal cost to themselves that evokes or repeats <reasons>; hero retires from public eye to grieve and heal in a healthier manner.

The direct follow-up is: hero learns to deal with expanded <awareness &/or abilities>; hero may or may not take mentor; hero is called to battle once again, possibly to replace or repair mentor's actions; hero becomes peer of mentor or acknowledged "sage" or "experienced/older & wiser" character. At this point we've finished and returned to a stable status quo.


----------



## Rune

Nellisir said:


> It's a hero broken/hero redeemed arc, and basically returns her to neutral. Hero goes bad for <reasons>; hero does <bad things>; hero realizes what they have done; deeper hidden villain is revealed to have orchestrated or taken advantage of <bad things>; hero undoes <bad things> at a personal cost to themselves that evokes or repeats <reasons>; hero retires from public eye to grieve and heal in a healthier manner.
> 
> The direct follow-up is: hero learns to deal with expanded <awareness &/or abilities>; hero may or may not take mentor; hero is called to battle once again, possibly to replace or repair mentor's actions; hero becomes peer of mentor or acknowledged "sage" or "experienced/older & wiser" character. At this point we've finished and returned to a stable status quo.



I don’t think Wanda has retired to heal at the end of WandaVision. I’m pretty sure she’s searching for a way to undo the undoing of her hex. 

Fortunately, the remote location removes the morally problematic element from her first hex. 

Unfortunately, there are plenty of _other_ things that can go catastrophically wrong.


----------



## MarkB

Nellisir said:


> It's a hero broken/hero redeemed arc, and basically returns her to neutral. Hero goes bad for <reasons>; hero does <bad things>; hero realizes what they have done; deeper hidden villain is revealed to have orchestrated or taken advantage of <bad things>; hero undoes <bad things> at a personal cost to themselves that evokes or repeats <reasons>; hero retires from public eye to grieve and heal in a healthier manner.
> 
> The direct follow-up is: hero learns to deal with expanded <awareness &/or abilities>; hero may or may not take mentor; hero is called to battle once again, possibly to replace or repair mentor's actions; hero becomes peer of mentor or acknowledged "sage" or "experienced/older & wiser" character. At this point we've finished and returned to a stable status quo.



Whereas more realistically the direct follow-up would be "Hero is hit with multiple arrest warrants for kidnapping, reckless endangerment and a long list of other crimes, plus class action civil suits for mental trauma by an entire town's population".

Maybe that's how they bring in She-Hulk.


----------



## Rabulias

Janx said:


> I don't have a Disney+ show.



Yet.


----------



## Rune

MarkB said:


> Whereas more realistically the direct follow-up would be "Hero is hit with multiple arrest warrants for kidnapping, reckless endangerment and a long list of other crimes, plus class action civil suits for mental trauma by an entire town's population".
> 
> Maybe that's how they bring in She-Hulk.



Those warrants might exist, but I don’t think the relevant governmental agencies (SWORD or the FBI, probably?) currently have the means to enforce them. They probably _are_ keeping an eye on her, though.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Janx said:


> I don't have a Disney+ show.



Does your cousin? Because that may be a sign that you're getting one shortly! 

(She-Hulk is Bruce Banner's cousin, after all, and she is getting a Disney+ show!)


----------



## Nellisir

Rune said:


> I don’t think Wanda has retired to heal at the end of WandaVision. I’m pretty sure she’s searching for a way to undo the undoing of her hex.
> 
> Fortunately, the remote location removes the morally problematic element from her first hex.
> 
> Unfortunately, there are plenty of _other_ things that can go catastrophically wrong.



She's moving on from Vision's death, and "learning to deal with expanded abilities". Obviously the rationale changes with every story, but the arc is fundamentally unchanged.


----------



## Rune

Nellisir said:


> She's moving on from Vision's death, and "learning to deal with expanded abilities". Obviously the rationale changes with every story, but the arc is fundamentally unchanged.



Is she, though? I don’t think we’ve been presented with any evidence that she intends to leave Vision dead. She already knows she can recreate a version of him. And there’s no innocent bystanders to get caught up in her hex the next time. 

I do think bringing the kids back is a higher priority for Wanda, but I don’t see any reason to assume she’s moving on from Vision.


----------



## Staffan

Rune said:


> Is she, though? I don’t think we’ve been presented with any evidence that she intends to leave Vision dead. She already knows she can recreate a version of him. And there’s no innocent bystanders to get caught up in her hex the next time.
> 
> I do think bringing the kids back is a higher priority for Wanda, but I don’t see any reason to assume she’s moving on from Vision.



The Vision is sort of already back. HexVision basically downloaded himself into WhiteVision, who was part of non-Hex reality. We don't know exactly what the merged being will be like, but I'm sure he'll have more interaction with Wanda where we learn that.


----------



## Rune

Staffan said:


> The Vision is sort of already back. HexVision basically downloaded himself into WhiteVision, who was part of non-Hex reality. We don't know exactly what the merged being will be like, but I'm sure he'll have more interaction with Wanda where we learn that.



Wanda doesn’t know any of that. As far as we know, HexVision never even told her that WhiteVision is still alive.


----------



## Staffan

Rune said:


> Wanda doesn’t know any of that. As far as we know, HexVision never even told her that WhiteVision is still alive.



Good point. That seems like a great setup for a Misunderstanding-based Fight (tm).


----------



## Cadence

A bit behind in my watching (just got Disney+ last week).  Liked everything but the first 10 minutes of episode 1 and the reveal of the name Scarlet Witch.

One of my favorite parts was the Walnut episode of the Dick Van Dyke show being spotlighted.  I first saw the episode around 1980 on my hometown's first re-run station, and picked up a DVD copy years later.  Definitely worth watching if you haven't seen it


----------



## Maxperson

Cadence said:


> A bit behind in my watching* (just got Disney+ last week*).



That puts you more than a "little" behind.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

AcererakTriple6 said:


> Wanda wasn't the villain of this series. If you watched it and came to that conclusion, you watched it incorrectly. Hayward was a villain. He wanted to kill a grieving woman who was unconsciously acting out in her highly traumatic past, _and her innocent family,_ because he wanted a super-bot that could give him whatever he wanted. Agatha Harkness was a villain. She was exploiting and gaslighting a grieving woman for her own selfish desire to have Wanda's power, and was willing to kill Wanda and her family in order to get what she wanted.
> 
> In this show, the real villains are the ones that want to harm/exploit Wanda. Wanda did mess up and caused a lot of trauma in her own grief, however, she did not try to or mean to do what she did. She doesn't need anyone else to try and force more punishments onto her for her actions, she has already received them. She lost her family. She gave up everything she ever wanted in exchange for the wellbeing of everyone she was imprisoning in the Hex. It doesn't matter that her family was created by her, they were real. They were conscious, independent entities that could feel all the emotions that any normal person could. They were real, and chose to give up their lives in exchange for the freedom of the people of Westview. That was heroic. What Wanda chose to do was heroic.
> 
> Furthermore, there really isn't anyone with the power to punish her, and trying to punish her for her actions would likely result in dire consequences for the rest of the world. That is not to say what she did was okay. It wasn't. She knows that, and doesn't need to have a "lesson" forced upon her. She knows what she did was wrong, forced herself into isolation in order to discover herself (in a way) and protect others from her powers, and based on what we saw in the show, she is not going to repeat the same mistake again.
> 
> As @Umbran said upthread, the justice system is intended to stop bad behavior from being repeated. Wanda won't repeat her bad behavior. She stopped the person that was trying to take control of her power and intentionally use it to do even more harm than Wanda did. As far as we know, no one else in the current MCU has the power to do what she did, so trying to "set an example" by punishing her would do no good (and as I mentioned above, it would likely do much more harm).
> 
> I'm certain some other superheroes are going to try and seek out Wanda. The most likely one (and probably the most qualified one) seems to be Doctor Strange, as we know that Wanda will appear in some capacity in Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness. He could become a sort of mentor to her, helping her control her powers and make sure she doesn't do something drastic with her powers, like, you know, destroy the world.



Wow. I normally don't quote myself, but this post _really_ did not age well. I stand by my statement that Wanda wasn't a villain in WandaVision . . . but practically everything else about this post is wrong in hindsight.


----------



## Parmandur

AcererakTriple6 said:


> Wow. I normally don't quote myself, but this post _really_ did not age well. I stand by my statement that Wanda wasn't a villain in WandaVision . . . but practically everything else about this post is wrong in hindsight.



It's complicated.


----------



## Arilyn

AcererakTriple6 said:


> Wow. I normally don't quote myself, but this post _really_ did not age well. I stand by my statement that Wanda wasn't a villain in WandaVision . . . but practically everything else about this post is wrong in hindsight.



Yes, but I like your ideas better! 
I mostly enjoyed the new Dr. Strange movie but Wanda has never had a chance to stand on her own two feet. She has been manipulated, used and undergone serious loss. They could have done more with the character. And after seeing her mini series, I'm not fond of her ultimate fate.


----------



## Tonguez

Arilyn said:


> Yes, but I like your ideas better!
> I mostly enjoyed the new Dr. Strange movie but Wanda has never had a chance to stand on her own two feet. She has been manipulated, used and undergone serious loss. They could have done more with the character. And after seeing her mini series, I'm not fond of her ultimate fate.



I kind of like that the MCU was willing to take a character with a traumatic past, show how it affected her mental health, show how she was not coping and then give her a tragic/traumatic fate. Sometimes bad things happen to good people and even superheroes might not be able to fix it


----------



## Arilyn

Tonguez said:


> I kind of like that the MCU was willing to take a character with a traumatic past, show how it affected her mental health, show how she was not coping and then give her a tragic/traumatic fate. Sometimes bad things happen to good people and even superheroes might not be able to fix it



Yes, this can be done to good effect. I just feel that in the movie she was conveniently cast into "evil witch" role, almost like the MCU wanted to get her out of the way? I'm not sure I'm explaining myself very well.  I just feel the Scarlet Witch was cheated a bit.


----------



## Dire Bare

AcererakTriple6 said:


> Wow. I normally don't quote myself, but this post _really_ did not age well. I stand by my statement that Wanda wasn't a villain in WandaVision . . . but practically everything else about this post is wrong in hindsight.



Within the context of WandaVision, your post was spot on. Unfortunately, while the writers had Wanda overcome her grief enough to do the right thing in Westview, they then have her almost immediately turn to the Darkhold and go even darker in Multiverse of Madness, only to repeat her "coming to her senses" and ending her abuse of power and of others.

I loved Multiverse of Madness on its own, but did not like how Wanda was characterized after the finale of WandaVision.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

Dire Bare said:


> Within the context of WandaVision, your post was spot on. Unfortunately, while the writers had Wanda overcome her grief enough to do the right thing in Westview, they then have her almost immediately turn to the Darkhold and go even darker in Multiverse of Madness, only to repeat her "coming to her senses" and ending her abuse of power and of others.
> 
> I loved Multiverse of Madness on its own, but did not like how Wanda was characterized after the finale of WandaVision.



Fully agreed. I was just remarking on how different my interpretation of the events in WandaVision was from the writers (and maybe directors) of Multiverse of Madness.


----------



## pukunui

AcererakTriple6 said:


> Fully agreed. I was just remarking on how different my interpretation of the events in WandaVision was from the writers (and maybe directors) of Multiverse of Madness.



Well, Sam Raimi has admitted to not having watched all of _WandaVision_, so it's not surprising really. 

I would love to know what Elizabeth Olsen thinks about her character's development between the show and the movie (like what she actually thinks, not just what she's allowed to say).


----------



## Lidgar

pukunui said:


> Well, Sam Raimi has admitted to not having watched all of _WandaVision_, so it's not surprising ... I would love to know what Elizabeth Olsen thinks (like what she actually thinks, not just what she's allowed to say).



I heard that as well. I don’t really get it if true. It’s like he skipped the homework assignment and said “No worries, I got this.” I too was a little disappointed in how Wanda was treated.


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan

pukunui said:


> Well, Sam Raimi has admitted to not having watched all of _WandaVision_, so it's not surprising really.



Yeah, but I'm pretty sure he didn't write the script of the movie. He just directed it.


----------



## Lidgar

AcererakTriple6 said:


> Yeah, but I'm pretty sure he didn't write the script of the movie. He just directed it.



Good point.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

The original director and script writer for Multiverse of Madness both left the project in Feb 2020, so the movie was already being worked on before WandaVision even happened. Michael Waldron and Sam Raimi took over almost right away. And yes, that is the same Michael Waldron responsible for Loki season 1. I guess they did not adjust the movie script enough to account for the show and I wonder if Wanda was meant to be part of the movie the whole time or if she was added in after how well WandaVision did?


----------

