Let's roll the clock back a few years to when Disney decides that actually they should probably should have a strong solo female lead in the MCU.
>Pretty much every mutant is tied up with FOX rightswise and are mostly ensemble anyway.
>She-Hulk, whether rightly or not, is likely to be associated too much by the public to the lackluster Hulk franchise.
>Spider-Woman, again, is likely to be incorrectly tied to the Spider-Man movies by the public and given that Sony owns those rights this is even worse than She-Hulk.
>Almost every other female hero is a literal nobody.
Given all this, despite how poorly forced Carol's ascent has been, was there actually any better or more natural choice to push as Marvel's answer to Wonder Woman at the time? As much as I dislike how she's been handled, I can definitely see why Carol may have been the best of a shitty pool of options.
>Pretty much every mutant is tied up with FOX rightswise and are mostly ensemble anyway.
>She-Hulk, whether rightly or not, is likely to be associated too much by the public to the lackluster Hulk franchise.
>Spider-Woman, again, is likely to be incorrectly tied to the Spider-Man movies by the public and given that Sony owns those rights this is even worse than She-Hulk.
>Almost every other female hero is a literal nobody.
Given all this, despite how poorly forced Carol's ascent has been, was there actually any better or more natural choice to push as Marvel's answer to Wonder Woman at the time? As much as I dislike how she's been handled, I can definitely see why Carol may have been the best of a shitty pool of options.
