Even before RDJ was confirmed as Doom, I always got the feeling that main audiences never cared about Kang and that the character felt uninteresting for them. What went wrong with the adaptation of this villain?

Commentaires

repalec2025-11-27 02:25

They introduced him on a Disney+ show and his first appearance in a mainline MCU film showed him getting dunked on by ants.

EightBiscuit012025-11-27 02:28

There’s really nothing else to it. I’m amazed with how often people try to look further into it than that

GillGruntFan532025-11-27 02:37

Yep. You can’t sell a villain as an “Avenger level threat” when one of the weakest Avengers can beat him solo and you can’t sell the threat of many of him when every other variant is an SNL character.

T14422025-11-27 02:41

Given the end of that movie I am not sure if he beat Kang. It would have been better if Disney made it clear Kang actually won if that was the case.

gatsby3652025-11-27 02:52

I like the theory that Scott is in a different universe now.

midasgoldentouch2025-11-27 02:52

I had hoped for a twist where Scott Lang managing to “beat” Kang is actually the catalyst for a larger plot line. Like hey, this isn’t supposed to happen, and so the Kouncil takes a harder look at the MCU Earth/Timeline than expected. Maybe they decide to preemptively conquer the world or something that’s out of the ordinary for them.

Limited-Edition-Nerd2025-11-27 02:59

Thats giving the writers to much credit, not enough Marvel humor

27Rench272025-11-27 03:01

That would’ve been awesome actually, like an organism sensing a problem with the expected outcome and reacting

deadlyghost1232025-11-27 03:14

I think they were getting into something weird considering the movie’s ending. But after the allegations nothing came of it

GratefulDoom902025-11-27 03:52

After the conviction** nothing came of it. Also, it’s possible nothing was ever going to come of it until Avengers 5 either way and it’s still technically possible that ending still is setting something up.

AceofKnaves442025-11-27 03:20

I really feel like the original ending was supposed to be Scott and Hope trapped in the quantum realm but then Marvel were like “shit that’s basically just the ending to Ant-Man and the Wasp again” and then panicked and redid the ending. And then realized they basically neutered Kang and then redid the ending again so Scott didn’t really know if he actually beat Kang. Didn’t it come out that the movie underwent a bunch of script adjustments and rewrites?

minyhumancalc2025-11-27 03:43

What they needed to do was have Scott sacrifice himself to save Cassidy. I love Paul Rudd, but it would perfectly end his character; a father doing anything for his daughter. The film should've centered on the lost time from Endgame and how Paul wanted to be the father he never could be. Plus if the whole film was just about escaping an unkillable threat, it would've set Kang up better

Disney seems too scared to kill any characters post-endgame, but the villain (the only exception is Eternals, and even then, the theoretical sequel might've had the out of them being rebuilt).

AceofKnaves442025-11-27 03:55

Scott saying “I don’t have to win. We both just have to lose” was his Captain America moment. I think Scott is going to play an important part in Doomsday because while everyone is being told over and over “something is coming maybe” Scott is the only one who has been told specifics. I can see him being the one who assembles Sam’s team of Avengers and has them prepping for Kang coming from another universe. And the Avengers are all assembled and out comes Tony seemingly. He says Kang came to dimension and Tony took him out. Resolves the Kang dilemma.

BigBird47882025-11-27 03:26

I thought that Kang getting sucked into his ship engine would have created duplicates of him, and instead of working together like Scott did to escape, Kang would fight his variants and only the strongest version would escape. But they decided not to do anything with it.

N00b4512025-11-27 03:36

That's what it seems like was being set up by the ending.

CalmGiraffe13732025-11-27 03:39

That’s literally what the first post-credits scene sets up.

Wrong-Vermicelli47232025-11-27 03:03

It wouldn’t been better if he was the villain in a Thor movie and not a Antman movie. Him beating Antman also doesn’t do him any favors. It’s like a heavyweight beating a child

mortavius25252025-11-27 03:01

>one of the weakest Avengers can beat him solo

It was not solo at all.

Mambo_Poa092025-11-27 03:03

I don't know if people forget things like this or just lie to make their point

mortavius25252025-11-27 03:05

I find this movie gets dunked on a lot. I've watched it multiple times and it's a fine popcorn flick. I don't put it up there with the best MCU movies, but I really don't think it's as bad as some folks say.

LabRatsAteMyHomework2025-11-27 03:44

It was the worst of the 3 ant man movies and was meant to set up a whole new phase, so they should have made it something special. It was just such a huge let down and the characters were all so insufferable.

TheGreendaleGrappler2025-11-27 03:08

Solo as in without any other main heroes. Every hero has their own supporting group behind them. The fact that Ant-Man and his support cast could beat the villain makes Kang look weak. Even pushing him back (if that’s your theory) is beating him considering it’s supposed to be *the* villain of an entire saga.

icorrectpettydetails2025-11-27 03:25

Ant-Man is also in no way one of the weakest Avengers. The entire plot of the first *Ant-Man* movie revolves around the fact Ant-Man's technology is insanely overpowered.

kayyxelle2025-11-27 03:59

Put some respect on my man Scott Lang, he single-handedly took down the new Captain America too 😤

PoweredByCarbs2025-11-27 04:20

I wasn’t into the comics very much, but someone explained that his real threat is that he can groundhog’s day every situation. Is that roughly accurate? Because they never present it that way on screen other than a couple lines in one episode on D+

Canvaverbalist2025-11-27 04:41

I understand it in context of OP's question, but to me this whole thing was the point in context of the movies.

Kang had the potential of being the MCU representation of "pursuit predation," like this idea of of a gazelle outrunning a bipedal ape super easily, laughing at them and taking a nap - only for the bipedal ape to slowly reappear over the horizon, the gazelle running away and laughing at how easy it was once again... only for the ape to reappear over the horizon yet once again, and the gazelle finally starting to panic.

I wanted that representation of "ahah silly" that slowly transforms into "okay we might have a problem here" that can only happens if he's easily disposed off, it has to slowly build up.

I know that's a weird way of doing a villain but I think that's more interesting than rehashing the same 2-3 villain archetypes all the time.

SnakeOilChampagne2025-11-27 06:05

Kang should’ve basically been the “Dormammu, I’ve come to bargain” scene upped to the 11th degree

Owain6602025-11-27 02:41

I honestly think it should have ended with Antman losing, and having to escape. Leaving Kang behind and in control.

Any-Transition952025-11-27 02:46

and since Evangeline Lily and Michael Douglas were retiring, they could have used that perfect opportunity to let Kang kill their characters as well.

Apyan2025-11-27 02:50

I was 100% sure they'd kill Michael Douglas. He won't be able to portray the character for much longer and killing an important character would automatically make Kang a menace in the eyes of the audience.

LabRatsAteMyHomework2025-11-27 03:45

Well, pretty sure the audience knows Kang is a total menace off screen at least

Dunge0nMast0r2025-11-27 04:31

A more compelling villain off screen!

Spicy_Weissy2025-11-27 05:27

The general audience? No, not at all.

labbla2025-11-27 05:35

Nobody knows who Kang is.

smcl2k2025-11-27 04:43

Michael Douglas *asked* them to kill Hank.

Zaphoid4112025-11-27 06:55

This is ture

Edit: i misspelled true. Lord have mercy haha

Alibotify2025-11-27 07:13

So ture

GarbanzoMcGillicuddy2025-11-27 07:52

Are you srue?

Venetii_2025-11-27 08:03

I actually prefer Sruzanne, thank you.

peteadam2025-11-27 08:19

Don’t call me sruely.

mdoddr2025-11-27 13:42

fer ture

TheWrongOwl2025-11-27 11:30

you failed the ture-ing test.

dcab872025-11-27 04:44

I'm pretty sure that's murder. Disney can't just brush off killing a famous actor.

OkMarsupial2025-11-27 05:15

Actually, the Disney+ terms of service say they can.

monsieur_cacahuete2025-11-27 05:29

Wait it also says I can't sue if they "forcibly remove my toe(s)?"

OkMarsupial2025-11-27 05:41

Gotta read the fine print.

whatWHYok2025-11-27 06:03

Nonono, they refined the ToS. You can sue, but you have to agree to arbitration first. Arbiters paid for and always on the side of the mouse.

You’ll probably get a free churro at California Adventure as compensation.

MikeAWBD2025-11-27 06:02

You underestimate the power of the mouse.

SeekerVash2025-11-27 06:55

They retired after Quantumania flopped and Disney decided they weren't going to use the characters again, releasing them from their contracts.

Neither one could retire so long as Disney's contracts were still in force. Hollywood contracts don't allow for a retirement clause, otherwise actors/actresses could just "retire" for a year to get out of contracts and then "come back".

Tcamis012025-11-27 08:30

I still get angry thinking about this. It was such an obvious move and would have actually made the movie good.

MyPenisIsTooSmall2025-11-27 08:42

Big problem with most movies these days, they are too afraid to kill off characters for stakes.

The plot armour is unparalleled in strength

BluegrassGeek2025-11-27 02:47

Yeah, having Scott barely get out, and we get an ominous shot of Kang in the ruined city but with some new knowledge of how to escape would've been a much more satisfying ending.

AccomplishedLayer8842025-11-27 02:51

If they killed Wasp then the shot could’ve been Kang taking the Pym particles from her suit

No-Operation-65542025-11-27 02:48

apparently the leaks were like that, Scott was supposed to stall enough for them to get off quantomverse idk why it got changed

Aspenwood832025-11-27 03:13

IIRC, it was leaked that the original script had Scott and Hope stranded in the quantum realm, but they felt it was too similar to the ending of the previous film.

Azelrazel2025-11-27 03:24

Or perhaps having ant man "lose" the fight but manage to send Kang away. Like how Thor didn't beat hela, he used an alternative method to "win" the fight. Have ant man win by surviving rather than physically beating him.

Yeseylon2025-11-27 04:33

Honestly, I liked that approach. That was one Kang that had been stripped of his power by other Kangs. He was the warmup act, the real danger was still on the way.

KeyClacksNSnacks2025-11-27 06:06

My best fan fiction was an idea I had that they think they won, but it turns out they beat an android clone of Kang who was only 25% as strong. And in the final seconds they escaped the Quantum Realm, they get out and realize it’s not Ant-Man that’s with them but Kang. Their “escape” was freeing him and Ant-Man is stuck behind.

joseph4th2025-11-27 06:11

Ant-man should’ve died. His line, “I don’t have to win, you just have to lose” was perfect. Ant-man sacrificing himself so the others could escape, would have put a whole different spin on Kane.

The mic on these last generation Shokz sucks, combined with voice to text and maybe my past involvement with C&C messed that up. Sorry. I obviously meant Kang.

Apinanraivo2025-11-27 08:56

![gif](giphy|1fY9J8xXR5oj5EHO8t)

ych16865732025-11-27 10:00

That's gotta be... that's gotta be Kane!

crispyg2025-11-27 02:56

I think there is one more bit that he wasn't as captivating as Thanos and he had to follow Thanos.

billytheskidd2025-11-27 03:28

I disagree, but mostly because of antman.

His introduction in Loki S1 is phenomenal. Like, he’s glib but terrifying. He knows what they’re going to do and actively just teleports out of the way any time they try to attack him. He shows is this menace that created an army that uses infinity stones as paperweights and he is in control of the flow of time— he’s essentially omnipotent and omnipresent, he is an actual god.

But the problem was that if you didn’t watch Loki, you’d have no idea who he was; his mainstream MCU debut was a disgraced, exiled failure who lost to ants.

TheNicholasRage2025-11-27 03:02

Like, he didn't have to win, but the one thing he couldn't do was ***lose***. Even a phyrric victory would have been enough. Show how ruthless he's willing to be to win.

TheRandomSong2025-11-27 05:02

They should've included a post credit scene of him arriving in some other dimension where it's his things ready for him to start the take over. Like He Who Remains had it all set for him knowing this would happen. And then the foreboding Scott had would make sense. But I feel that by then Feige had set his mind on disappearing Kang so yeah

DJettster2372025-11-27 02:35

He was a great character in Loki. The problem was it was a TV show

Sickpup8312025-11-27 02:38

The main takeaway of him being in Loki is that they previewed the potential of how terrifying was going to be. And then completely dropped the ball on living up to that threat.

Narad6262025-11-27 02:54

I think this is the key to the whole thing.

Our first introduction to him is this perfectly calculated calm villain at the end of *time*. And his warning to the heroes was something along the lines of "I'm the one who stopped the war, but if you kill me then you have to deal with *worse* ones." (I'm heavily paraphrasing)

Then we see him in Antman and he loses. To an army of ants.

You can grant or argue that *this* Kang wasn't worse than He Who Remains, but the fact remains, we were sold Kangs that would be far worse than someone with technology that made Tony Stark look like a guy in a cave *without scraps*.

Essentially we were primed for a far bigger threat than what was given.

Oldtomsawyer12025-11-27 03:25

Yup! Loved his reveal, little bit theatre kid monologuey, but we’ll allow it for the sake of comic books and honestly was kind of delightful. But you understood there was no “winning” with him, you’re only allowed to even play because he allows it and is bored.

And the reveal at the end of Antman was… already done to death by Rick and Morty and was silly because of all the costumes. Would’ve been better to be an unbridled war between the Council of Ri…. Kangs like was teased and our heroes have to somehow bring the “sane” one back or install a replacement.

Cypher_862025-11-27 02:43

I do feel that at least part of that - and it was an amazing character - was the awareness as the audience of who Kang was and what his appearance there meant for the larger story.

It was likely far less impactful to the casual fans who had no idea who Kang was. And then Ant Man happened...

dmorley212025-11-27 03:03

I had no idea who Kang was and was hooked after his episode in Loki. Then Ant-Man killed it.

Ansee2025-11-27 02:43

It was not a problem for him to be in a TV show. The problem was that they hyped it up so much and under delivered by not writing other stories to make him work. His other outing was Antman and he was weak in that movie.

They should've not said anything. So they can try and plant a few seeds. See what works and what the audience is responding to, then make the move.

Announcing Doom is honestly an eye roll from me as well. Again, creating hype. But it's meaningless because they've done nothing for me to be interested at all at this point.

redsandsfort2025-11-27 02:52

The never even called him Kang in that show

MadferitCmon2025-11-27 02:57

He looked like a buffon

RAK-472025-11-27 02:36

Came here to say this. I loved Loki and was stoked to see his various incarnations. Loki was absolutely epic but pretty high concept, and obviously requires you to have the 8 or so hours to watch it.

InnocentTailor2025-11-27 02:37

Man…that pretty much sums up my views on the character too.

OliviaElevenDunham2025-11-27 02:44

That sums it up perfectly.

Key-Map-36842025-11-27 02:45

Because there are a lot of Kangs, this was a scientist, which was one of the weaker (or weakest) version of Kang

Holovoid2025-11-27 02:49

I mean you're not wrong, but having your big world-ending, multiverse-ending Avengers threat show up as a loser who gets beaten by a guy who's superpower is "petty larceny" is just...not a good look.

Jackson5302025-11-27 02:47

This.

I also feel like Loki season 2 should have been the start of the character. Viktor Timely.

And then it should have built up to he who remains, and NOT being the main villain in a mediocre movie.

The thing that made Thanos, Thanos, was the build up. We didn’t watch Josh Brolin get his ass kicked in Avengers 2

It was the build up of the character, that was the hook the audience needed.

ich-bin-on-that-shit2025-11-27 02:48

Thanos sat in a chair for like 2.5 phases

ihateartists2025-11-27 03:10

Thanos worked because he was fighting a main event team people cared about and had grown with for years through their entire arcs. Thanos wasn't the draw; the team was.

Kang was going to fight some people who have been in a movie or two. Hell people are still kinda figuring out what Avengers teams even exist right now.

SkulkingSneakyTheifs2025-11-27 02:50

Yupp. If they kept showing different versions of him, played by different actors with the same name and he “won” in some scenarios it would be different but instead they stuck with one guy and just kept the ant thing and Loki S2 as his main bits. Can’t do that when one of them is literally ants.

Joranthalus2025-11-27 02:50

He was fantastic in Loki season 1. Such a waste…

Other_Gap_23272025-11-27 02:57

This is it!!!! Fool gets “killed” by Antman?? Silly.. he should have killed Antman in the first 20mins of the movie and the remainder of the movie have rest trying to escape the quantum by realm scared. With only Cassie surviving to tell the tale.

TheMightyHornet2025-11-27 02:58

Also, I read a shitload of Marvel comics from the late 80s onward, (mostly X-Men, Spidey) and I had no fucking idea who Kang was. Going from Thanos to Kang—at the same time we’re losing Tony, Cap, and Natasha—fucking sucked.

Mambo_Poa092025-11-27 03:02

How? He killed all those ants. How was he dunked on?

Rryann2025-11-27 03:04

And it’s really too bad, because I thought his whole intro at the end of Loki was pretty great. I just think it belonged in a movie and not a TV show that felt like extracurricular watching.

Vesanus_Protennoia2025-11-27 03:05

I beleve that would have been his sauce. Imagine if Kang was the villain to every Phase 4 show and movie and the heroes thought they won but to only learn they didn't and Kang change the timeline. Isn't that the point of Ant-man 3, Scott didn't win, he just ended up in a different timeline.

popnfreshbass2025-11-27 03:10

Exactly this. Thanos’ intro to the MCU was the post credits to the biggest MCU movie to date.

Kangs intro was a variant of himself, at the end of a disney + TV show. Which was also coming off of WandaVison and Falcon/Winter Soldier. So not great timing.

Lou-Shelton-Pappy-002025-11-27 03:11

I mean… yeah. He was introduced in a Disney+ show… under a COMPLETELY different name. The hype relied almost entirely on ScreenFeed and ComicBuzz or whoever making stupid clickbait articles like “Marvel Just Premiered the Next Big Bad and You MISSED IT.”

i_like_2_travel2025-11-27 03:12

There are gonna be people that say “wAtCH tHe mOVIe, hE waSN’t deFeatEd By antS.”

But honestly that doesn’t matter that’s how majority of the audience felt. They made him look weak by not getting a single W in his first appearance.

They even backed out of leaving Scott stuck in the Quantum Realm. Would’ve been the easiest somewhat W to give to him. But they didn’t even do that. Plus Scott’s voiceover at the end destroyed any sense of threat imo.

Had he been like Tony in IM3 that at least would’ve been another somewhat W for Kang but nope. They dropped the ball at every turn.

zmoeun7772025-11-27 03:14

He appeared in an antman movie, and antman who is a hero that marvel regularly treats as a joke.

Every time Scott appeared he was kinda there.. mostly.

justafanboy10102025-11-27 03:20

But that Disney+ show was a banger tho. And he acted the hell out of that scene with his zany ass

PhotoBonjour_bombs192025-11-27 05:16

I don’t think introducing him in antman was a bad idea, the writing or the execution was just meh

_Ian_W_G_2025-11-27 02:27

They did a really bad job solidifying his motivations, which made audiences not really care what he was doing.

sloogz2025-11-27 02:41

Exactly. We went from probably the most clear cut and easily understandable motivations in a villain, Thanos, who is a cosmic eco-terrorist with a twisted sense of morality, to this. It's whiplash. Not to mention their interpretation of Thanos for the infinity saga was probably one of the best, if not the best, motivation and backstory for a villain in a superhero movie ever. It was to the point that audiences were sympathizing and even understanding his point of view.

anononobody2025-11-27 03:08

Modern audiences like a sympatheic villain and Thanos is that. Kang, after two seasons of a show and a movie, is a bad guy who wants to conquer stuff, and a morally ambiguous guy who wants to prevent the bad guy version of him from conquering stuff... I dunno. On paper it's kinda interesting but everytime he's on screen he feels so inhuman (and boring). People keep saying he should've killed Michael Douglas to raise the stakes but killing Gamora wasn't the only thing that made Thanos interesting.

There has to be a better way of doing Kang but what we've seen so far just isn't it.

sloogz2025-11-27 03:09

You put it the best. Somehow a giant purple alien man with a nutsack chin feels more human than a guy in a suit 😅

jigglyjop2025-11-27 04:14

It’s the sack that does it.

deadlyghost1232025-11-27 03:16

It’s not about sympathetic always. For example High Evolutionary worked and he was not one bit sympathetic. But a villain should have goals apart from just showing up. I would say He Who Remains was a great character as his motivation was kinda clear but Kang is basically I want to conquer the world which is so one dimensional

Greyrock992025-11-27 04:25

Villains work best when they have a connection to the hero. Spider-Man taught us this.

Thanos had lots of connections to a lot of different heroes. He was father to Gamora and Nebula, and Star Lord’s Father in Law. He had interactions with Loki and thru killing him, made it personal to Thor. They also emphasised how much Ironman and Dr Stranger had oaths to protect the world and stones from him. All these heroes cared about Thanos and through them the audience did too.

High Evolutionary had an intense connection with Rocket, as we saw in the flashbacks of his creation that tugged at the heartstrings that made him a very emotionally charged villain even though he had only a single movie.

Kang had nothing. He was just blue shouty man villain that did generic shouty villain speech about generic conquering. We never saw him actually do anything evil worth worry about, it was all ‘tell, no show’ than him.

They could have easily brought back High Evolutionary or even Cassandra Nova for the ‘big avengers punch up’ and it would have been more exciting than whatever Kang was planning to be.

majorpareidolia2025-11-28 03:08

Everything Thanos did was in his two Avengers movies, which should've been the formula again. I loved He Who Remains, but burying the main motivations of the saga villain in a two season TV show was their biggest fumble IMO. Doing a chicken-egg, Kang-sacred timeline thing could've been cool tbh. But needing to consume so much content purely for exhibition instead of dropping little organic hints and build up like Thaon just made it ... cheap? Convoluted? A bit of both.

latunza2025-11-27 04:31

High Evolutionary still gives me nightmares. There were so many levels to that performance. Educated the animals with classical music, the scene where he screams, "There is no God", and his crew turns on him. His presence in every scene was menacing yet made me curious where the character was going, his motives. etc. to the point I wanted to see more.

These post really nailed Kangs performance. The most I felt for Kang was his Victor timely background character. Kang himself from the Antman movie I would almost put up there with the Dark Elves, especially in a phase where there were so many forgettable villains (except for Kingpin). It's like day and night with Phase 4 (Green Goblin, Wenwu, Namor, Scarlett Witch) vs. 5 (Kang, Dar-Ben, Gravik, ZzZz)

deadlyghost1232025-11-27 05:23

Reading DarBen and Gravik, I was like who? I don’t think Kang is that bad lol

majorpareidolia2025-11-28 03:01

Holy, reading out that Phase 5 villains list.. yikes.

labbla2025-11-27 04:00

You put this so well. I could never figure out why we were supposed to care about Kang. I don't care how many of him there are if I can't care about him. He was really lacking something to give his character dimension. I could not care if he defeated some ants or not.

SmokinBandit282025-11-27 04:31

It’s crazy that you can go back some years to Avengers: EMH and Kang is one of the first big bads they encounter, his motivations are clear, you understand why he’s doing what he’s doing, and he’s immediately established as an avengers level threat.

It’s 100 times better than what they were doing with Majors and the council of Kang buildup stuff.

Heisenburgo2025-11-27 09:42

Yeah, the EMH version of Kang was badass, it really could have been the perfect base to do the MCU version of Kang as well. Tweak that storyline a little and it fits the movies perfectly.

Something like: When the Avengers took the Infinity Gems from other timelines and stopped Thanos, they inadvertedly de-estabilized the future timeline that Kang reigns over, destroying his empire and resulting in Queen Ravonna being frozen in time-stasis.

Maybe the alternate Thanos they killed in Endgame was the anchor being of his reality, and when he was snapped by Tony it ended up destroying that universe during Kang's era, forcing him to travel back in time using his capital ship (the only thing that survived the explosion) to confront the Avengers.

It would tie well into the consequences of Endgame. They stopped Thanos but unleashed an even greater evil in Kang. And you could even have the Council show up, deeming this Kang a renegade one and wanting to take Earth 616 for themselves right before the main Kang and his troops arrive to take over. And if they so wanted they can have him blame Captain America specifically, just like the EMH show did, for going out of his way to live in the past with Peggy which would also mess up with the multiverse.

They overcomplicated Kang for no reason, tying him into the universe and making him some weird stranded guy on the quantum dimension, while getting rid of his time travel gimmick. Should have done things simpler and it would have worked.

Galilore2025-11-27 03:54

Great response. Thanos was actually the “hero” of Infinity War.

chewywheat2025-11-27 05:32

I think this is partly due to taking too long to establish Kang as a thing in the movies. We only really learn about Kang from the Loki TV show and the Quantumania movie. The worst part is both versions were beat by the main character of the show/movie.

IMO it could have still worked if Kang from Quantumania won in the end, which would have established that this Kang is now free and plotting something but we didn’t get that.

CyberKitten052025-11-27 02:28

They made him lose to Ant-Man in his first movie appearance.

Imagine if Quantumania instead ended with the Quantum Realm collapsing and the Ant-Family barely escaping.

thelone_voyager2025-11-27 02:30

And that to after him being the baddest kang or something out of all other kangs.

HypnoKinkster2025-11-27 02:50

The Kangiest Kang!

repalec2025-11-27 02:34

Shit, or if they'd had Scott successfully trap himself in the Quantum Realm with Kang. Something bittersweet rather than a direct, decisive loss.

CyberKitten052025-11-27 02:35

I think they still would've wanted Scott to be an Avenger at that point. Maybe Hank and Janet don't make it.

repalec2025-11-27 02:39

Being an Avenger doesn't mean he shouldn't be able to lose, IMO. That being said, yeah - *some* member of the Ant-Family needed to bite it to really underline the fact that they were messing with something above (or below, technically) their pay grades.

SalvaPot2025-11-27 02:52

They could have trapped Cassie with Kang, that would have really upped the scales and give a true motivation to beat the Kangs.

UsidoreTheLightBlue2025-11-27 03:15

Hank and or Janet should not have made it.

If the movie was going to go as it did the end battle should have been a full ant family show down with them losing members and barely making it out.

Any-Transition952025-11-27 02:50

Scott being trapped in the Quantum realm again just like how it happened between Ant-Man 2 and Endgame feels kinda eh. They could just kill off Hank and Hope since Evangeline Lily and Michael Douglas were retiring.

carymb2025-11-27 03:02

Idk if we knew she was retiring at that point. I feel like she announced that after the response to the movie? But they might have known bts ...

Mamsies2025-11-27 02:29

Kang had an awesome introduction in Loki.

It was Quantumania that brutally ruined all hype and excitement for Kang. He was lame in the movie and that post credit scene was just beyond parody, what the fuck were they thinking with that?

However, I feel like Marvel COULD have salvaged things with a recast and a fresh direction for the character. They were extremely reactionary by pulling the plug on him entirely after one poorly received appearance.

It just feels weird now that Loki was setting him up as a Thanos-level threat and now it’s just like “never mind, the TVA dealt with him, let’s move on” - and now Doom is the new big bad with absolutely zero setup. Doom just feels super unearned to me now, and RDJ in the role is such cheap nostalgia-bait. It’s the primary reason why my hype for Doomsday is a tiny fraction of the hype I felt for Infinity War and Endgame. Zero buildup and several extremely sloppy, unfocused movies leading up to it.

I remember fan-casts for Denzel Washington as an older, more grizzled Kang, and I think that would’ve been pretty badass. Controversy aside, Jonathan Majors is a very good actor, but a veteran like Denzel would’ve brought a real gravitas to the role and would’ve made him feel worthy of being a Thanos-level villain.

Wtygrrr2025-11-27 02:40

The thing about Kang is that it’s all time travel based, so you can actually just pick up the story 10 years later exactly where it left off.

midasgoldentouch2025-11-27 02:57

Us three years from now in some movie: “Wait, are they saying that was all orchestrated by? Oh…**oh**”

AmaterasuWolf212025-11-27 03:40

And people will clap and weep saying it was all planned out since 2008

TaffyPool2025-11-27 02:43

Yep, he was outstanding at the end of the first season of **Loki** and having his “alt” as a big part of season two was almost as good. Quantumania however did nothing of interest with him at all. I didn’t *mind* the post-credits scene, it’s just that Disney’s decision to discontinue working with Majors just makes it all kind of “meh, what’s the point…”.

Past-Cap-18892025-11-27 02:47

They even laid the groundwork in Loki that alternate universe versions of you could look and be completely different characters. All they had to do was stick the landing in Quantumania.

TheMad_N1nja2025-11-27 03:13

It’s wasn’t reactionary based entirely on one flop, it was the combination with him getting a domestic violence arrest 3 weeks after the movie premiered. Marvel may have been on the fence, but after that they immediately took that as an out and went all in on doom instead, even reshooting Loki S2 before it premiered

eBICgamer20102025-11-27 02:29

Marvel specifically treated the multiverse as a way to destroy your previous assumption about power scale, and that's a dangerous practice in hindsight. Saying "I killed Thor" lacks all meanings when he's beaten by Ant-Man in the same movie.

It's pretty interesting this is how Marvel approached the multiverse for the rest of their Marvel characters, versus them approaching the Multiverse in the context of Spider-Man: exploring parallel lives between Tom, Tobey and Andrew; or having a parallel version of the MCU in Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man.

DragonFangGangBang2025-11-27 02:50

Yep. I think the MCU fanbase was pretty torn on the multiverse concept because of just how much can go wrong with it when they first announced that's the direction they were going to go with it, and they dropped the ball in nearly every conceivable way outside of Loki and Far from Home (and maybe Deadpool). Making Disney+ exclusive TV shows that are apparently both not important but also are important to the main MCU was already a problem, but introducing the MAIN VILLIAN on a TV show was a mind-blowingly big misstep. Not immediately capitalizing on the X-Men is another, then putting out mid-tier level fairly uninteresting movies for Phase 4 was another, etc.

Quantomania sealed the deal on that character, which made the most important show from Phase 4 completely meaningless.

nanobot0012025-11-27 02:52

Introducing the villain on a TV show would not have mattered if they made his appearance in a movie even more impressive.

eBICgamer20102025-11-27 02:57

Again, this needs to be said:

The multiverse works best when you sit down with that "same same but different" character and experience with them.

The-Scarlet-Witch2025-11-27 05:45

When "Everything Everywhere All At Once" was a better multiversal movie than Doctor Strange: Multiverse of Madness, Marvel had a problem on its hands.

flugglehorn2025-11-27 02:58

Exactly this. The power scale needs to be easily understood by the general audience. Thanos was this offscreen looming character and his first appearance in Infinity Wars was him defeating Thor and Hulk, which a casual viewer can quickly get how much of a threat he was going to be.

whodat_6172025-11-27 05:43

Last act of Quantumania should have been them frantically trying to escape the quantum realm after causing him to go on a warpath for trying to overthrow him. Not him being beaten by ants. But you know marvel and their one-movie villains...

Neveronlyadream2025-11-27 05:47

He shouldn't have been beaten. He should have been temporarily contained with the threat of his return looming.

Especially after Loki set up that Kang was dangerous and was locked away because he would destroy all of creation if he wasn't. When you hype your villain up that much and then have him taken out by ants, you fucked up.

But honestly I think Marvel realized quickly that Kang wasn't working and had tossed the idea out before the Majors controversy happened. I think Kang is too esoteric a villain to work in the way Thanos did or Doom could and Marvel jumped the gun trying to introduce the next Thanos.

gazow2025-11-27 06:26

I think the original Intent was for him to purposefully be beaten to escape the quantum realm

Neveronlyadream2025-11-27 06:30

Maybe, but I think it's kind of irrelevant. By the time the reshoots had been scheduled, I think they decided it wasn't going to work. That's all I can really think of when I watch the finished product.

But I definitely don't think what was in the movie was how they originally planned on ending that story. It really doesn't fit with anything that came before it.

SeekerVash2025-11-27 07:01

>Thanos was this offscreen looming character and his first appearance in Infinity Wars was him defeating Thor and Hulk, which a casual viewer can quickly get how much of a threat he was going to be.

More importantly, Thanos was in charge of Loki, in charge of a space army, and in charge of Ronin, and the heroes \*barely\* beat each of those. So how much stronger is Thanos if he's so strong all of those guys are afraid of him?

Then you have Kang, the most powerful thing we saw him do in Loki is a 5 minute speech about how Kangs are, and in Quantumania he gets beat up by insects.

AnOnlineHandle2025-11-27 04:21

If the multiverse had been difficult, a bit frightening, and rare, it could have been awesome. Kind of like the brief bits of outer space civilization or the infinity stones were in the early phases of the MCU, which were really fun to get hints of.

Instead all of a sudden everyone and everybody was falling into the multiverse for completely different reasons and being given completely different explanations and rules. None of it seemed coherent enough to even understand what was happening or what kind of rules there were in play for plots which were built off of this. Presumably Strange could just cast a spell and a multiverse threat is gone or something.

BambooSound2025-11-27 12:46

'Nexus beings' in WandaVision

then the 'sacred timeline' in Loki

then 'fixed points in time' in What If

then 'anchor beings' in Deadpool 2

and 'canon events' in Spider-Verse*

Changing the rules and nomenclature for timey-wimey stuff in each project makes it confusing and feel contradictory.

*I get that this is a slightly different franchise but they could have communicated better).

Sharkbait_O_aha2025-11-27 02:29

I don’t think people realize that Kang was never gonna be the big bad of the whole saga, he is like Loki or Ultron, I think Doom was always the plan for the multiverse saga version of Thanos. But they just had to rush it because of the circumstance

Solarpowered-Couch2025-11-27 02:32

So "The Kang Dynasty" was going to resolve the coliseum of Kangs and *also* introduce Doom, so that he could be the main bad guy in "Secret Wars?"

Seems like it's *less* rushed now if they're going to simply sweep Kang under the rug.

Remote_Nature_81662025-11-27 02:29

One weird thing is that he supposed to be the powerful big bad who conquers universes, but he could not overpower a swarm of ants.

Wtygrrr2025-11-27 02:41

Different variants though.

Wrong-Vermicelli47232025-11-27 03:07

Sure but the audience is still watching him lose

FewWatermelonlesson02025-11-27 02:29

He never recovered after they had him dragged away screaming by ants. Completely ruined any effort at getting people to take him seriously. I do not know how that was scene approved; he should’ve killed Hank then and there, especially with Michael Douglas wanting out of the franchise.

Im_Just_Tim2025-11-27 03:37

My cinema laughed at the ant defeat. It was just such a pathetic and silly way for a villain to go out. I get the 'but the ants were 5d' arguments, but it's about optics - if you have a guy taken out by a team of established strong characters, but dressed as Christmas elves, and they just keep stomping on him while he's down, it doesn't matter that the characters were established to be strong. It's going to make people clown on the villain for being curbstomped by Christmas elves.

Single-Pianist-22112025-11-27 02:29

He was all big talk but lame in action

TelenorTheGNP2025-11-27 02:31

What went wrong is Majors mixed his crazy with more crazy and ruined every opportunity to build out the character. If he hadn't done that, maybe the people who expected a character arc like Kang's to be mapped out in a couple of movies wouldn't be complaining that they didn't get the character right away.

Past-Cap-18892025-11-27 02:55

Yeah, I have to wonder if they'd have done something more/bigger with Kang outside of Loki and Quantumania. Because it seems more like it fizzled out right as all the news broke about Majors.

eagc72025-11-27 02:31

What rubbed some people the wrong way is either the fact he got beat by Ant-Man of all heroes or that he's been beaten twice in his first 2 appearances which to them makes him less threatening if you don't need the entire Avengers team to take him down. (But as i said i 100% think the the whole point is that no matter how many times you kill Kang, another one will raise to take its place)

mdavis87102025-11-27 02:31

I had to remind and explain to my wife that Kang in Quantumania was a variation of He Who Remains in Loki, and they were planning to make him an ongoing threat. The problem is feel is they really didn’t illustrate that to casual viewers enough. Most people who watched Quantumania probably had no clue about the connection, and that’s not a good start for a character you’re planning to make your big bad of the multiverse

Altruistic_Eye_11572025-11-27 02:32

I saw three problems:

1. The character was introduced in a Disney+ series (meaning that 90% of casual Marvel fans weren't even aware of him).

2. In the movies focused EXCLUSIVELY on the multiverse... he's nowhere to be seen and isn't even involved in the conflict (imagine if he'd made a small cameo in No Way Home or Multiverse of Madness).

3. In his most important appearance, he never really makes an impact and ultimately dies without any fanfare. Loki, who only saw him for a moment, seemed more fearful of Kang's power than Scott, who faced him directly.

The idea that "we'll see each version of Kang get stronger" was simply wrong; it was exactly the same thing that happened with Kingpin.

"If everyone defeats him, don't be surprised if people lose all respect for him."

BD4012025-11-27 03:12

This post sums it up best, in my opinion. They seemed to have the *concept* for Kang fleshed out, but made some serious execution missteps (even taking the Majors legal fiasco out of the equation).

I saw a post on here a while back that I really liked, where the author said that they should've really went all-in on Kang as the connective tissue of this saga by having a Kang variant be the villain (or be behind the villain) at least a couple times per phase, with building menace (have a variant occasionally kill off a beloved character). It would've helped gradually sell the whole "he's dangerous because he keeps coming back" concept, and then you deal with the "main" Kang at the end of the saga.

Instead, they TALKED about doing that, but as you noted... he doesn't actually show up hardly at all. Yeah, I know that technically neither did Thanos, but the idea here was they should've been differentiating him from Thanos by making him a recurring threat - since that's kind of the whole point of the character.

Even if they didn't do that, they at least could've given him a major victory in Quantamania versus being defeated.

Osric2502025-11-27 03:20

>"If everyone defeats him, don't be surprised if people lose all respect for him."

That was the key with Thanos. His minions could be defeated but he was such an unstoppable force and defeated everyone who he went up against directly. The saving grace for everyone prior to that was that he was just one guy and couldn't be everywhere himself.

Dull_Working50862025-11-27 02:34

Part of it is the timing maybe. The MCU had entered its "project factory" phase and people were checking out. The character himself, while he should have been solid, did get some poor writing. Specific examples that come to my mind: He got no buildup over the Multiverse Saga the way Thanos did before his big appearance. All of his variants who were featured as the main antagonist in their stories were defeated before Avengers: The Kang Dynasty could even happen. One could argue introducing all of his variants so quickly devalued him also because he could be killed with little consequence. Which Kang were we even supposed to have as the main threat for his Avengers appearance? Maybe there was something on the internet about it but I have no idea.

drntl2025-11-27 02:34

He had a cool intro in Loki and that’s it.

Dissidence8022025-11-27 04:07

I view Kang and He Who Remains as completely separate characters tbh.

StopEatingBees2025-11-27 02:34

I figured Quantumania would help his image by killing or at least trapping Paul Rudd or his kid, lo and behold he gets stomped without sacrifice and everyone ends up more or less where they started

aequitasXI2025-11-27 02:35

There was a Major(s) problem too

AchillesShort2025-11-27 04:52

^

All the people discussing how he was written/introduced/portrayed don't really matter considering Marvel won't properly develop him into a deeper character due to the actor issues surrounding everything and how Marvel has chosen to deal with it. IMO they should've just recast the moment he was found guilty. Marvel has recast for less. AND he's a multiversal villain, so the recast could've even been explained in-universe if they cared about that aspect.

eBICgamer20102025-11-27 08:43

At that point, who cares?

The fact this sub even argued over whether or not Ant-Man, or a whole Ant-Fam, or a swarm of ants defeating Kang in this thread said it all. I don't even need to explain it, but I'm way more invested in Tombstone variants than fucking time-travelling warlord Kang.

He failed, move on.

waaay2dumb2live2025-11-27 02:38

How he was introduced, for starters. His first appearance was in Loki which, while the show was good, is still a show, not a movie like Marvel is known for. His first movie debut was in Ant-Man Quantumania and while most of his scenes were great and frankly the highlights of the movie, the ending left a sour taste in people's mouths.

If Marvel went ahead with their original idea of having Scott trapped in the Quantum Realm and Kang escapes, I think people would've at least felt more threatened by Kang.

aquaflask090720222025-11-27 02:38

shoulda make him like ultron, just a passing villain

then doom would be like thanos

ew732025-11-27 02:39

Kang is a bad character. He's a bad guy that *always comes back* and you can never fully defeat, and everyone knows that he'll be back, eventually. Every victory is hollow, and audiences are always, instead of celebrating the victory, looking for "how will Kang come back for the next movie?"

Not only does it cheapen "this" Kang's appearance and accomplishments, but it makes any future villains inconsequential because Kang will be back.

Frankly, I'm glad the MCU just kind of dropped that hot potato and moved on.

UnrecognizedHero2025-11-27 04:09

This was my issue, Kang on his own is not interesting especially when there’s nothing that ties him to present day. You need that tie to him being someone’s descendant and also a reason for him to care about the time the heroes we know are in.

All we got was him outside of time and in a realm we have no real connection to, so why should we care?

I also think time travel and the multiverse fundamentally broke the MCU, like now nothing matters because it can just be erased or it can be retconed away that it happened on a different Earth.

MjnMixael2025-11-27 07:56

Honestly that has been my issue with the multiverse stuff all around. There are no stakes anymore. Villains and heroes can die and come back on a whim. Nothing means anything.

Substantial_Life47732025-11-27 02:39

Multiverse has no stakes. If Kang just keeps getting killed over and over again, that's genuinely kind of boring. Even the fact that our Loki isn't the version who died in the Avengers is frustrating. I know they were the same at one point, but that sucks.

BPeachyJr2025-11-27 02:42

Bingo. He just doesn’t seem enticing to me as a villain. His whole gimmick is lame

LochNessMansterLives2025-11-27 02:39

Qauntumania was filmed during Covid and it suffered because of it. My kids and I are Scott Lang fanatics, we watch 1, infinity war/endgame all the time and we watch 2 often…they haven’t asked to rewatch 3.

Unfortunately, Kang got caught in that storm and Major’s accusations were just the nail in Kang’s coffin. I wouldn’t mind seeing a variant back later at some point, (same with Black bolt, Medusa, Sersi and Ikaris) but cancelling the arc was the right move at them definitely

BlackJimmy882025-11-27 02:40

A good film could have turned people around on him.

People thought Thanos was a joke by the time we got his post credit appearance at the end of Age of Ultron, but then Infinity War comes along and he becomes iconic.

A bigger problem was that Marvel was fumbling it's films after Endgame, so people were just less excited for MCU films in general.

giftopherz2025-11-27 02:40

Too philosophical. I liked his entrance on Loki, but the majority of the fandom would rather a guns blazing baddie.

Thanos gave shorter speeches and longer fight sequences, that's that MCU fans at large want

tangodeep2025-11-27 02:40

You’re exactly right, OP. There was no build up, no purpose, no interest. His constant returning would be tiresome immediately. I’d argue it’s almost the same in the comics. He was probably never going to succeed.

ExLuckMaster2025-11-27 02:41

He’s supposed to be the strongest Kang but lost on his first big screen debut.

That end credit didn’t help either, it has no built up like Thanos. And the legion of Kangs just screaming like a bunch of rapid fans at a rave just make me laugh right after the other three talked how dangerous they are.

RedHawk_942025-11-27 02:42

Kang COULD have been great

Fallenjace2025-11-27 02:42

His inclusion in Loki was fascinating to me, but overall the magnitude of who he is and what he represents really is never given the gravity required for his on screen persona. He has literally defeated the likes of Thor, and other Avengers, Scott Lang as much as I love him should not of been able to do anything beyond aggravating him. The film tried to go too broad and it really hurt everyone involved.

Embarrassed_Word_5422025-11-27 02:44

TV villain supposed to carry an Avengers film. Nope.

SuspiciousDot5502025-11-27 02:47

for me, he wasn't really menacing like an avengers level threat villain for me. I mean I get that Kang is really really powerful but it's something about how he was portrayed or written, I guess.

velwein2025-11-27 02:47

Thanos was built up to be a threat. Kang is painted as a schmuck who happened to get lucky.

EyeScreamSunday2025-11-27 02:48

Quantumania did get a good amount of buzz leading up to the film off Kang being the villain, but the film itself seemed to let down expectations at a time when people were feeling more shaky on the MCU as a whole.

That said, I think the missteps were that Loki didn’t go further with telling Kang’s story, as pretty much the only other place he was established. He Who Remains was decided not a Kang nor was Victor Timely. HWR was good backstory for Kangs in general and the TVA, but he was a background mystery until the final episode of season 1. Ravonna’s backstory was still not very clear. Timely appeared to be some sort of precursor to Kang, but even that wasn’t made very clear his connection to Kang. Presumably they were setting things up but leaving them vague for possibly The Kang Dynasty to flesh out (imo) but it was a mistake. Kang’s variants are what makes him compelling, but it seems like his most notable variants were just shoved into the Council of Kang’s, which didn’t really do anything to make the character compelling.

Doc-11th2025-11-27 02:48

Difference between Thanos and Kang is build up

For one thing you got to see the heroes together before their intended face off against Thanos.

Avengers, Thanos's role in the movie is small, but his impact is big. You have Loki acting on behalf of him

Then in Phase 2 you start getting into the other stones, and again we have Ronan acting on behalf of Thanos.

By Infinity War, his presence and influence is well established in spite of little screen time and his goals are clear.

Kang?

He gets defeated by solo Antman and Loki.

His motivations and goals arent really clear.

He is going to be facing a bunch of unexperienced "Avengers" in their first actual team up.

TheTonyExpress2025-11-27 02:48

I would argue his introduction in Loki was very interesting and good. The problem is only hardcore fans watch most of the Disney+ shows. They tried to make the MCU too big and loop in streaming. It ended up feeling like homework.

Quantum mania was a good movie for what it was, imo, but it was very very weird. As big of a comic fan as I am, I find the microverse to be super weird and I generally skipped the comic arcs with it. That narrow slice of the comic universe just didn’t appeal to the general public. I’d argue that “killing” Kang wasn’t a massive deal per se. There’s 50 million versions in 50 million timelines - THAT is the threat as much as Kang Prime (which we maybe haven’t even seen portrayed).

phred_6662025-11-27 02:49

Poor writing. I loved the character in Loki. When they wrote him for Quantumania, he wasn’t as menacing or as big of a threat as he was made out to be in Loki. He was Nerfed dramatically and Scott was able to defeat him way too easily. For a villain that was supposed to be an Avenger level threat, he was pretty weak. If he had killed Scott (or at least trapped him in the Quantum Realm) and had escaped to the “real world”, then he had the stepping stone he needed to be a serious threat. Alas, another missed opportunity (and one of the biggest whiffs by Kevin Feige).

natedog632025-11-27 02:49

He needed to curbstomp Ant-Man & Wasp, not get rolled by ants. Quantumania's big win for the main characters should've been barely managing to stop his plans/delay him slightly at the cost of a major sacrifice.

redsandsfort2025-11-27 02:49

They never committed to the character. He wasn't even in Loki. The had to give him a different name and he was never in his classic costume.

In the Ant-Man trailers he was cool, got cheers when it premiered, then the movie came out and he was lame.

stallion84262025-11-27 02:51

Multiverse in general is more complicated than a large portion of movie audiences are able to follow. So it was always going to be a risky move to go with this villain.

Plus, Quantamania was all around a poorly received film in general that not a lot of people showed up for, and now youve got a villain No one but the diehard fans care about

BubbleDncr2025-11-27 02:51

To me, I lost interest when they showed the stadium full of Kang variants. They were just cringe.

CanaryOk72942025-11-27 02:51

I'm not buying RDJ as Doom, either. Especially since F4 flopped.

philovax2025-11-27 02:51

Im gonna put it this way, its fitting he ended on Ant-Man b/c even tho he is cool and OP in the comics him and Hank Pym have the same 27 readers that enjoy seeing them on page. They are important pillars but cant hold a solo.

franxxcisco2025-11-27 02:52

Not much build up like Thanos/ infinity saga did.

soundslikefun742025-11-27 02:53

He wasn't Thanos.

Slammogram2025-11-27 02:53

It sucks because actually, I liked Majors as Kang. Genuinely I loved how he could be super sinister one minute, kinda fruity the next. But the MCU kinda just shit the bed with him.

And you know… the actor wound up being a shit stain.

agreed2disagreee2025-11-27 02:53

How can you say you always got the feeling fans didn’t care for Kang, but then ask what went wrong with him?

People didn’t just voice their displeasure. They specified - ants taking him out was weak. Him getting solo’d by antman was weak.

I didn’t mind it because he wasn’t introduced as an all powerful. He was introduced as a relentless boss. You defeat one, 5 more will come. You defeat 5, 50 more will come.

Front-Advantage-70352025-11-27 02:53

He was talked about a lot and hardly ever present.

And the ONE variant of him that should’ve been kicking ass got killed in his first appearance

Significant-Jello4112025-11-27 02:53

Kang has like 2 good stories in 50+ years of existence. It was never gonna work

CanaryOk72942025-11-27 02:54

I personally think, Marvel/Disney intentionally undermined Kang the way they refused to recast T'Challa, trashed The Marvels (which was a great movie) and a lot of.other questionable choices like screwing up the Blade reboot. And yes, ok.sensimg a theme here.

Not_Jimmy_Carr2025-11-27 02:56

They played him way too small, and they should have kept him as a mysterious antagonist for longer than a few episodes in Loki. They could have had him pulling strings across the MCU to make Scott Lang's fear at the end off c Quantumania set the tone for that phase.

Kang could have easily taken apart all of the heroes after their easy going, low stakes, one off movies and victories of that phase. Like, I thought that period of time in the MCU was going to get dark for heroes. Not like turning to dust dark, but, bad beats, heightened stakes, isolation and fear dark. Kang would be behind it all, conquering and convincing the audience that he earned his overconfidence.

Then, Shang chi, she hulk, ant man, Cap and Bucky, hell even an old Steve Rogers could have had to really take back the momentum and defeat Kang. Forming an avengers team, giving them an opportunity to synergize and develop chemistry.

I thought that could have been cool.

viibeShane2025-11-27 02:56

He lost to Ants and I’m supposed to take him seriously? Even if he was supposed to come back as Beyonder Kang, I wouldn’t have cared then either.

He Who Remains, is a different story. They did that variant well

Sea_Entrepreneur62042025-11-27 02:58

He's not a well known villaon

And no one no one cares or likes a multi verse multi timeline story other than super nerds and Gate keepers.

phatboyart2025-11-27 02:58

I don’t think his motive was all that interesting tbh.

Chris-raegho2025-11-27 02:59

A lot of people are saying random things and so far I haven't seen the biggest thing yet. Kang is just not interesting. He's not even interesting in comic books. He has his fans, sure, but ultimately he's not an interesting character. We've seen what he is many times, even in the MCU. He's a man in a suit from the future. He's basically future Iron Man. So he doesn't even bring anything new to the formula.

Let's also not forget that since he's from the future, there are no stakes. So all his stories are boring. There's always a Kang, he always comes back. It's not even anything fun like a master plan to return, nope. It's always just another Kang from the future that's showing up just because. He's one of the most boring one-dimensional villains in Marvel, and he should have never been made the big bad.

ballinb0ss2025-11-27 02:59

I honestly don't believe kang is even done. I think they just realize they needed to pivot quickly tbh but I have no doubt eventually when they come up with a better idea he will be back.

JessicaDAndy2025-11-27 02:59

So let’s compare something different between Thanos and Kang.

The Infinity Saga had one Hulk, Doctor Strange, Black Panther, Captain Marvel movies, Two Guardians of the Galaxy, Spider-Man, and Ant-Man movies, Three Iron Man, Captain America, and Thor movies and four Avengers movies. (Going from memory.)

23 movies. Take away Infinity War and Endgame and you got 21.

Of those movies, 13 had nothing to do with Infinity Stones (Hulk, Black Panther, Spider-man 1, GotG 2, 2 Thor and Cap movies, all the Iron Man movies, one Ant-man kind of and one Avengers kind of.) But they all were clearly building up to Infinity War.

For the Multiverse Saga, I have no idea how everyone is supposed to be linked together. I don’t have a team, other than the New Avengers and the Fantastic Four. How does Monica fit in? Does Doctor Strange fit? What about Peter? Who is Sam leading? Is Kamala coming back or is she gone now?

But that also means out of Black Widow, Shang-Chi, Eternals, Spider-Man, Doctor Strange, Ant-Man, Thor, GoTG, The Marvels, Captain America, Deadpool and Wolverine, the Thunderbolts* and Fantastic Four in the theaters and Wandavision, FatWS, Agatha, Loki, Echo, Hawkeye, She-Hulk, Ms. Marvel, Daredevil and …ugh…Secret Invasion, only three things technically related to Kang. Ish.

There is this mess of other stuff going on that is also drawing our attention so that Kang is reduced in focus.

The stones all lead to Thanos.

Who knows if everything we have seen in the Multiverse Saga will be tied together ever. Kang just comes off as a tiny portion of what’s going on.

Edit: Forgot about Black Panther 2. It doesn’t relate to Kang at all but it still was released.

copperblood2025-11-27 02:59

I mean you’re not wrong. But it really would have helped if they had a good script. They did Kang so fucking dirty.

BarackaFlockaFlame2025-11-27 03:01

nobody except people who read or were knowledgeable of the comics knew what his thing was. So when they saw Ant-Man defeat him it really really hurt the villains image.

CruzAderjc2025-11-27 03:03

It seems like they were trying to do four different overarching storylines after endgame. On the one hand, they tried to go to the Eternals route, and introduced us to these giant celestials, which would have made for an interesting story if perhaps Thanos was just trying to cut the population in half to keep the celestials from hatching. This would have made a good continuation, possibly suggesting that Thanos may have been somewhat of a righteous villain.

But then they also went with the multi-verse thing with Kang. And then they were also trying to build a young avengers roster. And then also a dark universe woth werewolf by night and moon knight.

All of these things we’re not connected to each other at all, plus a bunch of other films that seemingly had no connection. If they had just stuck to one of these, and made every single project related to it, I think that they would have been successful. It was just too much disconnected stuff.