There has been a certain backlash to the whole premise of Marvel Studios’ Captain Marvel movie, mostly from “men’s rights activists” and other anti-PC types, including some people I’ve talked to on social media. (Yes, Jack, I do mean you.) Some of it is because of the character concept of Carol Danvers, the titular Captain, as a feminist hero, especially in the wake of her punked-up reboot in 2012. But some of it has to do with the character herself more than feminism per se. For one thing, in Marvel Comics, Carol was presented as having an alcohol problem at least on par with Tony Stark’s. She was also one of Stark’s more heavy-handed enforcers during the 2006 comic arc CIVIL WAR.
There’s also the point that Danvers was created as a feminist hero during the 1970s, ironically as a “Supergirl” counterpart to the existing Captain Marvel, named Ms. Marvel. And while DC’s Wonder Woman has always been presented as an Athenian “peaceful warrior” personality, Carol has always been much more in-your-face. So when Captain Marvel’s lead actress Brie Larson made a point of asking why most of the reporters in her press tours were male and white, it seemed that Larson was even better casting than previously thought.
The other issue is that the history of the character in Marvel Comics is such a broken kaleidoscope – even more so than other superheroes – that even though Marvel is generally not prone to “retcon” prior history, the best thing to do would have been to take the basic character premise and start over from scratch, which is basically what writer Kelly Sue DeConnick did when she had Carol officially become Captain Marvel in 2012. And re-starting established characters is basically what the Marvel Cinematic Universe is for.
So: in the movie, Carol Danvers is an Air Force test pilot in the years before women were allowed to do combat missions. Her “wingman” is Maria Rambeau, who is kind of the Black Best Friend of the movie but is also a nod to the point that there are multiple characters named Captain Marvel. The thing is, the narrative is not that linear. If it resembles the Marvel Comics character in any way, it’s that. In fact, the story is kind of the reverse of a superhero origin in that Carol starts off superpowered and has to discover the normal person she originally was.
Otherwise, in terms of retelling the Hero’s Journey, Captain Marvel is no more innovative than Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse. But that also means that there is not much unusual about a cocky, wisecracking protagonist discovering their full potential other than the fact that the protagonist is female. But that in turn means that there is really nothing to object to in this movie other than that fact. This also means that there doesn’t really need to be any other feminist subtext to the movie other than that very premise, and apart from deliberate placement of female artists on the soundtrack, there isn’t any. I mean guys, I’ve seen The Newsroom on HBO. I know what heavy-handed liberal propaganda looks like.
Besides that, the movie is worth watching for three points:
The presentation of the Kree-Skrull conflict, which is central to the Marvel Universe but was not depicted in the MCU before (even though Kree characters are in Guardians of the Galaxy);
The fact that this movie is sort of a “Year One” origin for Nick Fury, played as always by Samuel L. (‘The L Stands for ‘Motherfucker’) Jackson;
Overall, Captain Marvel is a movie with an active, heroic tone that deliberately stands in contrast to the shocking ending of Avengers: Infinity War and sets the stage for Avengers: Endgame, given that Captain Marvel is presented here as being the Marvel Universe’s equivalent to Superman. (The blue jumpsuit with red-and-gold trim doesn’t hurt.)
As an aside, this movie is set to make over $153 million in its opening weekend, and it was all my friends and I could do to get reserved tickets for a Saturday show. So I guess the MRA campaign isn’t working.
If nothing else, it’s worth seeing for the opening production crawl.