The actor was first dropped by Marvel Studios on December 18, 2023, not long after he was found guilty on two misdemeanor charges that followed after a March 2023 argument with his former girlfriend, Grace Jabbari. The legal situation shook the entertainment landscape and as a result, Majors lost several roles in addition to being dropped by Marvel. In April 2024, he was sentenced to serve 52 weeks at an in-person domestic violence intervention program.
According to our sources, Marvel Studios head Kevin Feige is considering bringing Jonathan Majors back into the MCU. The idea is for Majors to appear in a future Marvel project to wrap up some loose ends with Kang and close the characters story.
Marvel needs a continuous storyline. Majors was Kang.
If they want anything to be successful (starting with the new Captain America this month)they need him to play the villain.
Btw I don't support anything that guy did.
If they want anything to be successful (starting with the new Captain America this month)they need him to play the villain.
Imagine if Thanos was taken out by Hawkeye in Infinity War before he could even do anything. That's Kang now even if he did come back.
He can get a redemption story but it may be a bit soon
Marvel had their top new villain beaten by Ant Man.
Just give the role to Chukwudi Iwuji and retcon it so the High Evolutionary was a Kang variant. He captured the exact same energy and threat level in that role, and arguably better than Majors did.
Just give the role to Chukwudi Iwuji and retcon it so the High Evolutionary was a Kang variant. He captured the exact same energy and threat level in that role, and arguably better than Majors did.
It took ant man, and army of thousands, 3 other superheroes, one of the smartest men on the planet to beat him, and he still only oost because ant man got lucky. And this was a Kang without any of his main tech or resources working with scraps.
Why do yall keep peddling this lie like ant man soloed him? First off ant man is several leagues above Hawkeye in power level, and took down a chitauri cruiser.
Like it's so disingenuous of an argument. Like saying thanos got beat by an axe in IW.
Just give the role to Chukwudi Iwuji and retcon it so the High Evolutionary was a Kang variant. He captured the exact same energy and threat level in that role, and arguably better than Majors did.
He was great, would love to see him again
This really doesn't mater, tbqh."
Bad, bad, bad decision making and writing
High evolutionary is a scientist. Kang is a warlord.Literally every single line you just wrote is either wrong or insincere. I'm on mobile so can't break it down bit by bit, so I'll just start by stating that Kang is also a scientist, it's LITERALLY why and how he became a warlord in the first place. He also augments his own physical abilities using technology, exactly how HE did.
High evolutionary got thrashed by rocket raccoon. He has no fighting capabilities. High evolutionary is insane.
It took an army to beat a low end Kang. Not kangs army, Kang by himself. "Same threat level" my ass.
They arent the same. They arent even remotely the same.
Did yall even watch the movie yall are discussing, or read a summary on Wikipedia or soemthing.
Just say Kang died on the way back to his home planet and move on.
Literally every single line you just wrote is either wrong or insincere. I'm on mobile so can't break it down bit by bit, so I'll just start by stating that Kang is also a scientist,
No no no, it does tho. Me refuting the entire premise of your argument, yes that matters.
Except it doesn't matter. It's already been firmly established that not every variant of Kang is interested in being a warlord and Loki establishes that Kang is literally a scientist.
Did I say Kang wasn't a scientist?Compare Kang to He Who Remains and Victor Timely.
High Evolutionary is JUST a scientist. Kang is not.
Nothing I said was wrong, or insincere. The argument that Kang and HE are in any way similar is the insincere argument. Its the same "black panther is basically batman" BS
What does that change about the fact that THE Kang we saw in ant man is absorbed an avengers level threat, which is what I was taking about?
Compare Kang to He Who Remains and Victor
I'm pretty sure that guy was arguing that High Evo should be a variant of Kang, and not literally the variant from Quantumania
Their source is they made it the fuck up.
Very important to note that this has no real actual sources.
Who am I to doubt the sources at ScreenGeek?
He who remains itself refures this entire silly argument lmao.
He who remains is proof that Kang already *won* at the end of time. That was before Ant man 3 even came out that we knew this.
"Ant man beat him" nah; he beat everyone already. He won. You guys weren't paying attention. He was sitting there writing the script for the universe, shaping it to his design.
These. C'mon, guys.
He Who Remains and Kang the Conqueror are clearly very different variants. One was a well-intentioned extremist who saw what he did as a necessity, and the other was just a genocidal warlord who sought to conquer the multiverse.
In fact, their goals are diametrically opposed.
He who remains itself refures this entire silly argument lmao.Holy shit, have you been arguing in this entire topic without even understanding the core concept of the character?!
He who remains is proof that Kang already *won* at the end of time. That was before Ant man 3 even came out that we knew this.
"Ant man beat him" nah; he beat everyone already. He won. You guys weren't paying attention. He was sitting there writing the script for the universe, shaping it to his design.
Youre responding to the wrong comment. I was responding to lightsnake, who like several others is pretending that Kang was weak in ant man 3 because they didn't care for the movie.
Going to bat for the MCU Kang
Its almost like it was established that the Kang variants are in a war amongst themselves because their goals conflict....
None of that changes that he who remains is "a" kang variant that won, by controlling the flow of time itself.
He was weak
. The problem with Kang in Ant-Man 3 is that a lot of his threat was told to us instead of adequately demonstrated to us.
That does not look good for a villain who we're expected to treat as though they're the next Thanos. And I don't even hate Ant-Man 3.
Except you're missing one small detail: He Who Remains won precisely by defeating the other variants
Youre not supposed to treat him like thanos. They never said to treat him like Thanos. They said he's a major threat to the timeline and the avengers, and yes fhat was adequately explained AND shown multiple times.
Its almost like it was established that the Kang variants are in a war amongst themselves because their goals conflict....So let's summarize.
None of that changes that he who remains is "a" kang variant that won, by controlling the flow of time itself.
Narrator: "It was not adequately shown at any point."
It took ant man, and army of thousands, 3 other superheroes, one of the smartest men on the planet to beat him, and he still only oost because ant man got lucky. And this was a Kang without any of his main tech or resources working with scraps.It doesn't matter how strong you want him to be. It doesn't matter that it took Antman, Girl Antman, kid Antman, and cgi fodder Antmen. To the casual audience, the next Thanos lost to Ant man in his solo movie. And that's what matters. Thanos lost to the entire MCU slate and even barely. Thanos is an arc villain. Kang is a movie villain. Nobody gives a shit about that Dark elf boss in Thor 2.
Why do yall keep peddling this lie like ant man soloed him? First off ant man is several leagues above Hawkeye in power level, and took down a chitauri cruiser.
Like it's so disingenuous of an argument. Like saying thanos got beat by an axe in IW.