>Implying Kang won't be the main post-Thanos MCU villain

>>81788932
WE

>>81788932
He looks so happy.

>>81788932
Yeah, that's what we need. Another purple man as the villain.

>>81788932

>doing Kang instead of the Beyonder and Secret Wars.

If Marvel capeshit never ends, they should at least do the best shit

>>81789185
Secret Wars is the way to go. At that point, there will be so many characters to pit against each other.

>>81788932
what is he standing on?

>>81789613
the sun obviously

I don't think Marvel owns the rights to Kang.
I believe he's surreptitiously tied to Fantastic Four rights somehow.

>>81788932
Kang is not a villain that should be used unless you're going to commit to a convoluted plot ala primer

>>81789589
>pitting Marvel characters against each other
Yeah that worked out well last time

>>81788932

WE

>>81790402
Wait, it didn't?

>>81790402
Secret Scuffle

>>81790789
wait, it did?

File: 574.jpg (57KB, 609x675px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 609x675px

>>81788932
>Kang
Anon, he's a F4 character.
Fox holds his rights

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLXOkZtAkPw

>>81791882
Critically and financially. Not to mention publicly lauded.
What are you basing the fact that it didn't off of?
Meme threads on a taiwanese spreadsheet forum?