Tag: asks

I love the post you made recently in the differences between how the directors see vision! I personally prefer the former than the lager portrayal of Vision as well. It felt like a Superman esque parallel.

Right? It makes me think about how there were soooo many “android Jesus” and “robot Marvel Superman” references after Age of Ultron came out, and those all drop off come Civil War.

image

While I think in the long run I would have been happier with the Russos portrayal of Wanda and Wanda and Vision’s romance, I do think that Whedon did a great job of modernizing Silver Age Vision. Silver Age was very unique in being a sympathetic android, and a lot of his character beats might seem a bit trite and overdone now, but were then novel. The idea “even an android can cry” was necessary to show that Vision is equal in his humanity in an era where most robots were like this:

image

But we have lots of stories like that now (even if some people are still unable to accept non-human personhood like they just walked straight out of the Westworld remake), so the novelty is lost. By making an android who is more than human, though, I think Whedon could capture some of that freshness while staying true to the sentiment.

So I was thinking a little bit and realised that people being upset about Wanda destroyed the Mind Stone (thus killing Vision) so late is totally irrelevant. At that point when Dr. Strange gave the Time Stone to Thanos, he could just go back in time and get the Mind Stone (if destroyed sooner berore he arrived on Earth) just as we saw. And also people don’t mind Dr. Strange willingly handing over the Stone, but bitching about Wanda (and a whole lot of other people) not wanting to kill someone.

Absolutely. This movie has people all over the place pointing fingers, and this is no different. The Time Stone is even able to manipulate time in an isolated instance–that is, it’s not like Thanos even had to reverse an entire timeline. He could localize the effect to just Vision.

I will say, though, Strange definitely has a greater plan in mind, so it’s not quite the same kind of decision.

Are you on any other websites? Also are you okay with people reposting your art (you’ve probably answered that at some point, sorry)?

In terms of OC presence, I only post to Tumblr. So reposts are a-okay outside of Tumblr, so long as there’s credit. Linking back to my original is nice, if that’s doable. PMing me a link to where you shared it to so I can feast on any comments would be terrific, but optional.

Thank you for asking!

“Dark Eyes” is a much lovelier nickname then “Toaster”. Really wish we could get a new writer who not only thinks these two deserve another shot but brings back that nickname with a cute flashback to go with.

Yes! Comic book nicknames can be a bit awkward sometimes (for instance, take Vision’s nickname for Wanda, “curly top”, which sounds like the unfortunate combination of Curly Sue and Carrot Top), but dark eyes is sort of romantic and dramatic, which fits them both.

It doesn’t really apply now though, since Vision is currently more often portrayed with yellow or white eyes instead of pitch black or shadowed. And we see Paul Bettany’s baby blues in the MCU.

image

As far as having another shot in the comics… I’m much more ambivalent on that. If nothing else, I’d love to see some modern art of the two, but even if they got together I guarantee they would not last. And since writers don’t want to spend months or years breaking up a couple by slowly introducing dilemmas and relationship troubles, so they go scorched earth.

image

The fact that John Byrne didn’t want Wanda and Vision to be together anymore (among other things) resulted in their children being erased from existence, Vision losing his humanity, and Wanda losing her mind. The ramifications of all of this were never repaired–even Vision getting his emotions back came at the expense of the majority of readers and writers now seeing Vision as a machine instead of as a person. So I can’t help but be very cautious of what Wanda and Vision getting back together might ultimately cost them.

But in spite of that, I can also guarantee you we will see them together again. At the very least, 10 or so years from now you’re going to have kids who grew up with the MCU entering the comic book industry and becoming the voice of the reading audience, and they’re going to believe firmly that Wanda and Vision belong together.

it shows cap’s office in civil war? When?

Yes, very very briefly when Cap is listening to news reports right after they get back from Lagos (and right before he visits Wanda’s room). Here’s the scene, and here’s the pictures of the entire office:

Some of the office got rearranged a bit for the final movie, but still–that’s a lot of detail and effort being put into something that was in the movie for literally around 10 seconds.

What do you think of the whole toaster thing?

The term is very tainted for me, but I understand why it’s not for many other fans. IIRC Vision #7, the flashback book in King’s series, was released in the same month as Civil War. It’s the only issue that’s solidly dealt with their relationship in modern history, and it’s a bite sized version of their relationship in some aspects. I do understand why a lot of people think of that issue when they think of comics Vision/Wanda.

image

But… when I think of the term ‘toaster’, I think of John Byrne. In his own words:

image

He felt very strongly Vision was not a person, and that something was wrong with Wanda for marrying him. John Byrne is the writer responsible for retconning the children as delusions, making Vision purely a robot and getting rid of his emotions, turning Simon a homewrecking chode and Wanda a mad hysterical woman.

The term, to me, is forever tied to those events. Besides that, Vision has been referred to as various household appliances as a way to insult him and the notion of his personhood for decades, including in-universe:

image

Even within the context of that single issue the last time Wanda uses it in Vision #7 is to hurl it at him as in insult in her darkest moment. King put the term in there so he could ultimately have Wanda use it against him.

image

So I can’t think of it as cute and I don’t generally reblog stuff that uses it in as a term of affection… but I also don’t have a problem with that stuff existing. The fans who use it aren’t doing it maliciously, they’re just seeing something kind of unique about their OTP to latch onto. It becomes part of the fandom vocabulary. I definitely get it, and those little details are some of my favorite parts in any couple fandom I’m a part of.

Although if I may suggest an alternative… if you’re looking for another term for comics Wanda to call comics Vision, my personal favorite is “dark eyes”.

image